Let’s be real—if you’ve ever used an interactive whiteboard for meetings, classes, or workshops, you’ve probably hit this frustration:
You’re in a team brainstorm with 5 people, but the whiteboard only supports 2 screen casts at a time. Everyone’s waiting around to share their slides, and the conversation grinds to a halt.
Or you’re a teacher trying to get 8 students to show their homework side-by-side, but the board maxes out at 4 screens. You end up switching back and forth, wasting half the class time on technical delays.
Or you’re in a design review, needing to compare 3 sets of mockups, 2 data reports, and 4 competitor references—only to juggle tabs because the screen can’t handle more than 4 casts.
It’s not you—it’s the screen sharing limit! Most interactive whiteboards on the market fall into two camps: “4-screen casting” (basic) and “9-screen casting” (professional). And then there are the “fake multi-screen” models that just mirror multiple devices without letting you interact. So what’s the real difference? Is 9-screen casting actually worth the upgrade? Which one fits YOUR real needs?
Today, we’re breaking this down with tech deep dives, real-world scenarios, and real-world test data—just like how you’d research a skincare routine (but for collaboration!). By the end, you’ll know exactly which one to pick.
| Comparison Criteria | 4-Screen Casting (Basic) | 9-Screen Casting (Professional) | Industry “Fake Multi-Screen” (Avoid!) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Definition | Wirelessly casts up to 4 devices (laptops/tablets/phones) for basic display | Wirelessly casts up to 9 devices with full interaction (annotation, zoom, drag) | Only displays multiple device screens—no independent interaction (just “picture stitching”) |
| Ideal Scenarios | Small meetings (≤5 people), basic classrooms (≤4 students sharing), home offices | Large workshops, hybrid classrooms (≤9 students), design reviews, executive briefings | Pure display use cases (e.g., trade show loops) with zero collaboration needs |
| Hardware Requirements | Mid-range CPU, standard Wi-Fi module, no special optimization | Multi-core high-performance CPU, dedicated video processing chip, hardware-accelerated decoding | Entry-level hardware—just enough for basic screen transmission |
| Network Needs | Works with standard Wi-Fi (2.4G), 5-10Mbps per screen | Requires dual-band Wi-Fi (5G preferred) + intelligent bandwidth allocation, 3-15Mbps per screen (dynamic) | Relies on stable networks with no optimization—prone to lag |
| Interaction Experience | Only 1-2 cast screens support annotation; switch delay ≥1 second | All 9 screens support independent annotation, zoom, drag; switch delay ≤0.3 seconds | No independent interaction—only full-screen zoom |
| User Experience | Occasional desync or minor lag with 4 screens | Smooth even with 9 full screens; supports “one-click focus” and “group comparison” | Screen tearing, audio-visual desync, no flexible controls |
| Ключевые преимущества | Affordable, easy to use, meets basic collaboration needs | High efficiency, wide scenario adaptability, stable performance, supports complex multi-way communication | Ultra-low price—only “checks the box” for display |
| Potential Drawbacks | Poor scalability, can’t handle multi-user simultaneous sharing | Higher hardware cost (slightly pricier than basic models) | No collaboration value—just a gimmick |
| 3rd-Party Test Data (2024 Global Interactive Whiteboard Report) | ≥3 lags in 30 minutes with 4 screens; annotation delay ~1.2s | ≤1 lag in 30 minutes with 9 screens; annotation delay ≤0.3s | Screen tearing with 3+ screens; no annotation function |
A lot of people think “9 screens is overkill,” but anyone who’s used it for professional collaboration knows:
4 screens = “good enough,” 9 screens = “game-changing,” and fake multi-screen = “waste of money.”
The value of 9-screen casting isn’t just “5 more screens”—it’s the technical innovation and efficiency gains behind it. Let’s break it down:
Why do most brands stop at 4 screens? Because upgrading from 4 to 9 is an exponential challenge, not a linear one. It requires solving 4 core technical hurdles—this is the real difference between basic and professional models:
✅ Network Bandwidth: From “Smooth” to “No Traffic Jams”
Casting 4 screens is like “4 cars on a two-lane road”—occasional congestion, but manageable. Casting 9 screens is “9 cars at once”—standard Wi-Fi can’t handle it, leading to packet loss (lag) and high latency (audio-visual desync).
Professional 9-screen casting (like Qtenboard) uses intelligent bandwidth allocation—think of it as “smart toll booths on a highway.” It prioritizes bandwidth for “active screens” (e.g., the device of the person speaking) and dynamically reduces bandwidth for static screens. This ensures all 9 “cars” move smoothly without jams.
✅ Encoding/Decoding: From “Barely Handling” to “High-Speed Processing”
Every cast screen goes through 4 steps: capture → encode → transmit → decode. A mid-range CPU can handle 4 streams, but 9 streams (each like a HD video) need serious power.
Professional models use hardware-accelerated decoding—it’s like having a “dedicated package sorting center” instead of “manual sorting” (software decoding). It’s 10x faster, ensuring zero frame drops even with 9 simultaneous streams.
✅ Real-Time Rendering: From “Watchable” to “Smooth”
4 screens are a 2x2 grid—low rendering pressure. 9 screens are a 3x3 grid—keeping every small screen clear and tear-free requires optimizing GPU pipelines and memory allocation.
Professional models use dynamic memory management, assigning independent memory to each screen (like “each room has its own power supply”). This prevents “tripping the breaker” (lag) when all “lights are on” (full-screen display).
✅ UI Interaction: From “Functional” to “User-Friendly”
With 9 screens, the biggest pain points are “mixing up devices” and “accidentally annotating the wrong screen.”
Professional models solve this with device labeling + precise touch mapping: Each cast screen shows the device name (e.g., “Lisa’s Laptop”) in the corner, and touch actions only affect the selected screen. You can also “one-click focus” (tap a screen to enlarge it) or “group compare” (drag 3 design screens together)—as easy as using split-screen on your phone.
When choosing 9-screen casting, the key is hardware + software + scenario adaptation. Qtenboard, a leader in professional collaboration displays, nails all three—perfect for teams and institutions that collaborate frequently:
Qtenboard doesn’t cut corners with generic hardware—it’s engineered for collaboration:
- 8-core high-performance CPU + dedicated video processing chip: Think of it as a “super brain” for casting—even 9 HD video streams run smoothly.
- Dual-band Wi-Fi 6 + wired backup: Automatically switches to wired if Wi-Fi fluctuates, ensuring zero interruptions.
- Large RAM + dynamic memory allocation: Each screen gets independent memory, preventing lag when all screens are active.
While basic models just “show screens,” Qtenboard focuses on collaboration efficiency:
- Intelligent bandwidth allocation: Prioritizes active screens and adapts to network conditions—no lag, even with 9 devices.
- Full-screen independent interaction: Annotate, zoom, or drag any of the 9 screens. You can even “copy annotations from Screen A to Screen B” for side-by-side comparisons.
- One-click layout switching: Preset 2x2 (4-screen), 3x3 (9-screen), and 1+8 (focus + 8 small screens) layouts—no manual resizing.
At the end of the day, multi-screen casting isn’t about “how many screens you have”—it’s about “how well you can connect, share ideas, and get things done.” Professional 9-screen casting, like Qtenboard’s, turns chaotic meetings and tedious reviews into seamless, productive sessions.
So—are you ready to ditch the “wait your turn” casting and upgrade to true multi-way collaboration? Your team (and your schedule) will thank you!
RU
EN 
ARM 
UKR 
LIT 
LAV 
BEL 
EST 
AZE 