1 of these guys (or a higher resolution)

http://www.amazon.com/Acer-S277HK-wmidpp-27-inch-Widescreen/dp/B00RN08ELC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1448467166&sr=8-1&keywords=acer+s7+monitor

or 3 of these guys
http://www.amazon.com/Acer-H257HU-smidpx-25-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B00VJUIXOU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1448467249&sr=8-1&keywords=acer+h7

Looking to upgrade my setup. I have never done a 3 monitor setup. I'm wondering if going with a 27" or 32" 4K (or higher resolution) would maybe be a better choice. You get more DPI for a crisper pic vs 3 monitors for a wider pic. I plan to use it mostly for developing and benchmarking my game.

Right now I'm thinking the 3x monitor setup is going to be best. Thoughts?

I like having the extra physical monitor space. Right now, I've got four monitors setup, 2x2, which are 27"x2, 23", and 32", all at 1920x1080. That's only as many pixels as the one high-res monitor, but I like having an almost 5' square display over my desk :-) And I actually end up using all of them most of the time when I'm working, especially for web stuff - one, or one and a half for Visual Studio, one for the browser, one for browser dev tools, NotePad++ viewing log files, Fiddler for looking at the HTTP requests, SQL Management Studio, a handful of console windows streaming output or running load-testing tools. It's so nice to just have everything up already and not have to cycle through to find what you want. I can't go back to doing actual work on my laptop now...

With three or more displays, you're probably going to have to invest in some usb-vga or usb-hdmi adapters, unless your graphics card has more than two outputs that can be used at the same time. If you do, make sure you buy all the same brand of adapters, as the drivers tend to conflict with each other.

If it's for gaming, I'd go for the big single monitor setup.

If it's for work, I'd go for the 3 monitors. The reasons are tools / desktop configuration & hotkeys. Both Windows & Linux (at least the major desktop environments) can move windows between monitors using hotkeys and arranging them via hotkeys.

For example in Windows use the Windows + Arrow keys to maximize, move to half of one screen, the next half, the next monitor's half, the next monitor's next half and so on.

In Ubuntu you use the Windows + Arrow keys to move between monitors, and Ctrl+Windows+Arrows to occupy the halves (and Ctrl+Alt+Numpad Keys to occupy a 3rd of the screen).

In a 3-monitor setup, this lets you have between 3 and 6 big windows on screen at once, comfortably out of the box in the major OSes.

With a single monitor setup, you can only have 1 or 2 windows on front comfortably, while the rest stay hidden in the background. To achieve the same results with one big monitor you would have to install 3rd party tools that can rearrange the desktop layout in a more useful manner.

I personally love extra monitors. I found though with 2 27" WQHD monitors that it is enough space for me. I don't actually maximize any application cause it doesn't need that much landscape. But if you feel like you are going to need 3 WQHD monitors go with that will give you a better separate and more space then the 4k ultra wide single or you can go with a 4k ultra and a 25" or 27" WQHD should be plenty of space. Really up to you on preference, developing it is usually handy to have 3 HD monitors. But we aren't talking HD so why I went with 2 WQHD's

My personal preference is for a central 'primary' display, which games and such are run in full screen mode, and then one or more secondary displays which are usually smaller and older units that are still in serviceable repair.

I also like easily adjustable arm support systems, so that I can quickly swap secondary monitors from landscape to portrait and back again as needed.

The other advantage of multiple screens it that they can also be configured with multiple systems. I've used Synergy for a virtual KM switch between my MacBook, my windows desktop, and different Linux boxes as tasks needed. If you only have the single monitor then it can make things a little more awkward if you ever need to involve another computer into the mix for something. (Plus, having smaller monitors on hand can be useful if you need to loan one out to a friend or something. I'm not a fan of having monitors just kicking around in storage, so why not put them to use?)

I don't like low pitch size especially when working on graphic design (I like to notice pixels). So I'd probably go with 4 x FHD IPS monitors.

Honestly, speaking as the owner of a 27" 1440p monitor, it's about as many pixels as are worthwhile at that size. You long since passed the threshold of not being able to see individual pixels, so any more are pretty much just for bragging rights.

I recently upgraded to one of these babies (4k resolution, but at 40"), and I have to say it was a fantastic decision. Thats the exact screen and pixel real estate of taking 4 of the 1080p at 21.5" monitors and mounting them in a 2x2 array, minus all the ugly bezels. It's enough space to keep everything you are working on up at once, and sitting a normal distance from it, the pixel density is still high enough that you can't see pixels.

Thoughts?

Otherwise I would pick : 3x(2560 x 1440). It sometimes useful to have the "youtube monitor"(let's be honest here...) free from the "Find in Files" window.

What Matias said -- 1 big one is good for gaming, but 2(+) screens for work is a must

The 1440p screen are also great for gaming, and amazing to code on if you rotate them 90º

I started using a 26" 1440p in portrait and a 22" 1080p in landscape, and can't go back now:

I hate multi screen for work, i'd always go with a single bigger screen even if the total resolution is much lower.