derp. this was meant for other people; ... any amd card can do it... (maybe except amd 6350) but newer ones should do just fine.
if he doesn't mind not going 4k then he should go with ATi FirePro 2460... it can only do 1600p; though it does quad dp or dvi. Just FYI this is dedicated card for multi-display environments.
here's nice doc
http://www.amd.com/Documents/AMD_FirePro_Digital_Signage_Solutions.pdf
That looks like a step down from the cheaper W4100.... Less powerful and much less VRAM; TBH it doesn't look like much of an upgrade from my two Nvidia cards and appears just as old.
its not dedicated for gaming, but displaying independent 2d environments.
current one of the best at 2d environments... that powers wall st
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195115
here's some features
http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/graphics/workstation/firepro-display-wall#
Ok, makes a bit more sense now after reading up on them. Still is there any reason that the W4100 wouldn't perform as well or better? It's less expensive and has 4k support in case I ever decide to upgrade to 1 or more 4k panels. The only negative I see is that it has a fan and a higher TDP(neither are a issue in my case; my workstation has plenty of power and airflow).
W4100 is kind of a balance between 2d&3d. Its a good card, it will do its due.
If you don't need 4 displays and can survive on 3, an AMD R7 250X can drive 3 displays and do well in games if you would play anything. As soon as my new one gets here (my first one was DOA) it will be driving 3 displays.
Thanks, but I gotta have my 4 screens. I don't need any gaming performance on this machine; it's strictly my work computer. I have a gaming rig at home with a 4690k and a gtx 980 so I'm good in the gaming department.