I know that I'm a pain in the butt with the monitor posts on unplugged, but it really seems like you guys are giving poor advice here. In a multi-monitor setup, the three most important charactersitcis to look for in a monitor are viewing angles, ergonomic functions of the stand (unless you have an aftermarket stand), and connectivity options. When you are getting a second monitor, you want to make sure that you can position it in a way that is useful, so that you don't have to strain to incorporate it into your workflow.

None of the above options are remotely decent by this score. An LED backlight, as I've mentioned before, is nice for energy consumption and heat production, but has a middling impact on picture quality. There aren't many wide-gamut LED panels available, so if you're working outside the sRGB colorspace, you should avoid any LED backlight south of a grand; only the few models with full RGB LED backlights, like discointinued models from NEC and Samsung, provide wider gamut options. Some LED monitors also have backlight uniformity problems, as the edge-lit LED can be misconfigured to produce significant color discrepancies across the panel. CCFL backlights aren't immune to this by any stretch, but the more mature technology is generally going to provide superior results.

None of the above monitors rotate into portrait mode. With a dual display, it's often better to have one monitor in landscape and one in portrait. Many people prefer working with text and code on portrait monitors.

All of the above monitors use TN panels, with limited viewing angles. TN panels display significant color shifting and experience significant contrast reduction when viewed off angle, to the point where they can be difficult to position properly in multi-monitor configurations. Prices on IPS/PLS and PVA monitors have dropped precipitously in the past several months; it almost always going to be better to get a monitor with more image stability when setting up a multi-monitor configuration.

The dynamic contrast ratio figures you cite are nonsense; you really should avoid posting them, as it just encourages more garbage from manufacturers. The dynamic contrast functions almost never produce satisfactory results, and should be turned off. Static contrast ratios are important, but should be considered in context of viewing angles.

When it comes to connectivity, the general issue is whether you need displayport or not. Displayport works best with Macs, and is necessary for AMD video cards to drive more than two monitors. HDMI's cross compatibility with DVI makes it somewhat irrelevant, unless you are also using your monitor's audio for some reason.

The best monitors for multi-monitor setups at the moment are:

HP ZR2240w
HP ZR24W
HP ZR2440w
Dell U2312
Dell U2412
ASUS PA246Q
Samsung s24a850
NEC EX231Wp
NEC EA232WM

There are others from LG and Viewsonic, but you get the basic picture. Unless you are gaming and want either 120hz or are acutely sensitive to lag, you will be better off with one of the above monitors.

The NEC EX231Wp will use less energy, has a better contrast ratio, provides more ergonomic options, and better connectivity options than anything you've got listed. It costs around $270.

Thank you David! I was thinking many of the same things when reading the article. I have a pretty solid multi-monitor set-up at work, but cheaped out when buying for home and am a little less satisfied (I still love my set-up at home, just when compared it's slightly lacking).

You should have wrote this article David.
I agree 100% with everything.

HDMI can be useful for a cleaner cable setup - run HDMI out of your graphics card and use the 3.5 mm out on one of the monitors. This also allows you to keep that output separate from your main sound card outs