While this is possible and I think you have some good points, I think that ultimately the advantages would be offset by the disadvantage of having to manage a host operating system as well as the virtual machines. As for power usage, in theory yes, running 3 GPUs and one motherboard would be less power and thus more effecient than 3 GPUs and 3 motherboards. Hypothetically say your GPUs use 100W and your motherboard(s) use 5w, you would have either 3x100W + 3x5W or 3x100W + 1x5W for a total savings of 10W, sure you're saving power but not much, and your adding more complexity to the system. In addition, you would be limited to one powerful CPU, which might be powerful enough to handle all 3 users, or it might prove to be a bottle neck. Hypothetically, if you found that the CPU was a bottle neck for one user, you would have to buy a more expensive CPU capable of supporting multiple users, since I assume such a system would use a server class Xeon/Opteron/Threadripper CPU. I think this is a fun idea, and I think it is definitely very doable, but I do not believe it is the "make life easier" option. I think it would be a fun headache, I would love to try it with some of my old hardware, but I couldn't realistically recommend this as a smarter option compared to 3 separate systems. I think the other thing to pay attention to in Linus' crazy projects is that he uses actual dedicated GPUs hard-wired (DVI, DisplayPort, etc) instead of "streaming" over ethernet or even worse, WiFi. I think WiFi could probably handle a stream or two IF you have a fast enough WiFi router ($), good adapters ($$), and short enough range with no obstructions ($~priceless~$). If you already have ethernet ran, does it support gigabit or higher? Can your router actually serve a fast enough link to 3 PCs?