Can a single nVidia 1080 card handle 3 monitors like this?

[Sokonomi]

I intend to run a single pascal 1080 card along with three monitors, but im not sure if I should. Would having two 1080p monitors on the side be noticeably detrimental for playing games on the center ultrawide? The two side monitors wouldn't participate in gaming, they are there purely for random desktop apps (browsers, streaming software).

I want a P-L-P setup with a 34" 3440x1440 ultra-wide in the middle, and two 20.7" 1080p screens on the side (not used for gaming). Would look like this: http://i.imgur.com/8ahbC0b.png

I assume im gonna be fine, just wanted to make sure im not gonna throw away a load of performance by just running 2 side panels.

 

[basroil]

Can you do that? Sure, especially if the monitors have DP inputs, but yes even without. When playing games all you have to do is press Windows+P and switch to single monitor and you'll see zero performance loss, or leave them on for a minor performance hit (basically nothing though)

 

[13thmonkey]

I'd run the side screens off an igpu, or a second very small a cheap GPU, GT710 or similar.

 

[joshmoyer]

Can you do that? Sure, especially if the monitors have DP inputs, but yes even without. When playing games all you have to do is press Windows+P and switch to single monitor and you'll see zero performance loss, or leave them on for a minor performance hit (basically nothing though)

Yeah the performance loss from having the gpu render a second monitor, on a webpage or something, practically nothing. Plus the 1080 is insanely powerful for a single card, and SLI is god awful anyhow..

 

[Sokonomi]

I'd run the side screens off an igpu, or a second very small a cheap GPU, GT710 or similar.

I will be running an intel 7700k, but I dont think you can tap 2 monitors off of that?

 

[basroil]

I'd run the side screens off an igpu, or a second very small a cheap GPU, GT710 or similar.

I will be running an intel 7700k, but I dont think you can tap 2 monitors off of that?

You can, but why bother when the 1080 is so powerful two extra 1080p monitors don't even phase it?

 

[Sokonomi]

I'd run the side screens off an igpu, or a second very small a cheap GPU, GT710 or similar.

I will be running an intel 7700k, but I dont think you can tap 2 monitors off of that?

You can, but why bother when the 1080 is so powerful two extra 1080p monitors don't even phase it?

You sure that nearly a whole 4k monitor worth of extra 2D desktop estate will have no discernible impact on gaming? If it would drag down performance of gaming by 5% or even more, I would have a problem with it.

 

[basroil]

You sure that nearly a whole 4k monitor worth of extra 2D desktop estate will have no discernible impact on gaming? If it would drag down performance of gaming by 5% or even more, I would have a problem with it.

1) 2x 1080p is HALF of a single 4K monitor
2) 2D operations are a joke, the GPU won't even register a single lost FPS due to it. The switch from exclusive to windowed will be a hundred times more of an impact

 

[13thmonkey]

The reason that I do it, is that historically 2nd(and 3rd) screens force nvidia into a higher power mode even on desktop and sometimes my machine is on for 16 hours a day 90% of 2d work. Also my main screen is g-sync 144hz and there were issues with refresh rates, I also just want to dump the load off the main card.

 

[basroil]

The reason that I do it, is that historically 2nd(and 3rd) screens force nvidia into a higher power mode even on desktop and sometimes my machine is on for 16 hours a day 90% of 2d work. Also my main screen is g-sync 144hz and there were issues with refresh rates, I also just want to dump the load off the main card.

That hasn't been true since the Kepler 600 series. My 660 and 970 both idle at the same amount regardless of 1 or 2 monitors. My old 560Ti did have the issue, but it's actually a driver problem that can be solved with manual underclocking, rather than a hardware reason.

Conversely, running two GPUs means double the driver overhead in the case of iGPU+dGPU, or a bit more than normal in the case of 2 nvidia products. That can have an impact on framerates, whether that affects FPS more or less than additional graphics load depends on what you are doing.

The only one I would agree with is the g-sync 144Hz issue, which seems to still be present in some situations.

 

[Sokonomi]

I looked it up, my new motherboard apparently has three monitor hookups to run off of the 7700K iGPU if desired.
So I definitely have the option to do it, but with the conflicting comments going on, im not sure what to do. :')

My ultrawide monitor will have 3440x1440@100Hz with G-sync, hooked up via displayport to the 1080.
My two sidepanels are run of the mill 1080p@60Hz, they only take DVI-D, but I assume DP>DVI-D cables exist.
Are there any mutual agreements in this situation?

Letting the 1080 dedicate itself to the ultrawide and offloading 2D desktop crap to my iGPU seems like the most logical thing to do. Putting in a second videocard other than the eventual second 1080 is out of the question though.

 

[Xtergo]

I run 3 screens from my HD 4000 (Not gaming) just remember this from my own tests and experiences each 1080p monitor causes 8-15 fps decrease on average fps on the gaming monitor so if you are running 3 monitors expect 30fps max, for 4K the story could change bit honestly i have never tested 4K so basically:

2 monitor setup: 1 for gaming 1 for desktop, 8-15 fps less in games.
3 monitor settup: 1 for gaming 2 others left for desktop, 15-30fps.

I usually like to disable the other 2 monitors if connected when gaming so that i don't get dips (Windows + P)

Take this with a grain of salt and these are rough estimates with a game so called minecraft only, the story gets worse when you have lets say a video opened or just normal google chrome,

Conclusion: You will be fine as long as you tweek the workload a bit when gaming and btw don't worry on 1080p x3 the mid monitor is gonna stay at 60fps locked if u enable vsync