Large sized gaming display

aeonrevolution

aeonrevolution

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
2,577
I poked around in the Display section of the forums and got dizzy from my lack of knowledge of what everyone was talking about. I figured I would post here because my question is solely related to PC Gaming.

I've had a 42" Hitachi LCD for at least like 5 years now. I couldn't tell you what the response time is, but I'm sure it isn't low. It has never really bothered me all that much, but I was just curious what other options are out there around this size that would be an upgrade. I've been hearing a lot about 120hz as far as gaming and being able to spot people out etc etc in FPS games.

I poked around on Amazon and can't seem to find much above 27" and their filters don't include response time or hz so it is a huge pain to find what I'm looking for.

Thanks in advance.
 
I recently bought a new monitor, but only because my old one broke down after about five years of use. I suggest waiting until all the first-generation G-Sync monitors fully release and see how the rest of the market responds. Even if you decide not to get a g-sync monitor, other products might come out to better compete with them in other ways.

With that aside though, if you want your games to have the best overall image quality and colors, you are going to want an IPS monitor. RPG, RTS, 4X, Creative/Thinking Sim, MMORPG, any slow paced games and/or non-first-person games like that are going to be best on an IPS.

But if you want your games to have the best clarity of movement where you can see the most detail in moving objects (and see the movements as rapidly as possible) with no blurring or tearing, you are going to want a 120hz+ G-Sync TN monitor w/Lightboost (or lightboost equivalent). That will come at the cost of overall image quality and color accuracy. FPS, Racing, Flight Sim, etc... games are going to be best on these kind of monitors.

Individual models vary drastically in capability/quality, so unless you are ok with throwing money away, don't just go out and buy a monitor once you see it belongs to one or the other category you want. Once you cannot wait anymore (g-sync is potentially a major shakeup though, it is not one of these "incremental" annual increases like in other PC hardware...so it is worth waiting for), research (or ask) what specific models are best for your budget and usage.
 
Last edited:
Right on. Looks like there still isn't a solid replacement.

As for the 27" suggestion, why on earth would I do that? I have a 24" already. I'm trying to replace the 42".
 
aeonrevolution said:
Would something like this have a low response time? All these screens at 120hz don't seem to post the ms response time anymore...

http://sellout.woot.com/offers/samsung-40-1080p-120-cmr-smart-tv-w-wi-fi
Click to expand...

i dont see why people want huge monitors with a 1920x1080 resolution.
unless you're planning on sitting far from the monitor.

maybe look at something like this, if you have the hardware to back it up.
http://www.sears.com/seiki-39inch-c...1x000001&kpid=05703146000&kispla=05703146000P
 
The draw to a monitor is the ppi. 1080 on a big tv isn't made to be used as a monitor. The response times are low, the pixels are big, and things don't look anywhere as good as even a mid range tn panel. Right now there isn't much middle room for either. 1080 monitors max out around 27" before they start looking like shit. Anything larger than 27 and you should start boosting resolution.
 
lloose said:
The draw to a monitor is the ppi. 1080 on a big tv isn't made to be used as a monitor. The response times are low, the pixels are big, and things don't look anywhere as good as even a mid range tn panel. Right now there isn't much middle room for either. 1080 monitors max out around 27" before they start looking like shit. Anything larger than 27 and you should start boosting resolution.
Click to expand...

I think its a matter of personal opinion/perception on this. Also distance you will be from the larger monitor. I have a 1080p Samsung 40inch LED TV I use for most of my PC gaming. (I have two 23in monitors attached also) You are right about the pixels being larger (response time I'm not noticing anything terrible at all) and while yes there is a difference than gaming on a 23in monitor at 1920x1080 it isn't a deal breaker or very noticable at all. Major difference is a 23in monitor you're going to be a few feet from while gaming.. A 40in you will be 5-6ft away normally (who sits right in front of 40in monitor?) Where the larger pixels do make a visual impact is aliasing is much more noticeable at the same AA levels that on a 23inch you wouldn't notice them at all.. So I'm usually forced to use higher levels of AA then I typically would on a smaller monitor. Hence I run SLI to compensate. I do occasionally switch to one of my 23in monitors for gaming though but I game from my PC desk on those and game from my couch on the 40in.
 
aeonrevolution said:
Would something like this have a low response time? All these screens at 120hz don't seem to post the ms response time anymore...

http://sellout.woot.com/offers/samsung-40-1080p-120-cmr-smart-tv-w-wi-fi
Click to expand...
First of all, I don't think that's a 120Hz screen. It's "120 CMR", which is Samsung marketing BS for "Just as good as 120Hz, I swear...". But even if you get one with a real 120Hz screen, that's no guarantee that it will accept a 120Hz input. Most of these TVs still take 60Hz signals and just interpolate the other 60 frames. Make sure you do your research.

I'm guessing pixel response times aren't advertised any more because they were originally taken as a measure of motion blur, and with all the anti-blur features built into TVs these days (like backlight strobing or frame interpolation), they don't tell the whole story. But instead, we get manufacturers inventing nonsense like "120 CMR"...

You also need to pay attention to input lag, since the image processing software in modern TVs makes this significantly worse. At the very least, make sure there's some kind of "gaming mode" built in (which disables this extra processing to improve latency). I've never known manufacturers to publish the numbers, but there are a few resources out there.

Last of all, another vote for just buying a 2560x1440 27'' and sitting a little closer :) . TVs are designed for TV; monitors make better monitors. And having nearly twice as many pixels more than makes up for the smaller panel (as long as your GPU can handle it).
 
What is your system like in particular your video cards? I'd wait for the new 4K TV's with proper connectors to come out. Look in the Display section to see what the current problems with the Seiki TV's to see why I think you should wait.
 
I would go for a true 27 inch 120hz monitor(not a TV). The refresh rate is great and is very noticeable. If you set the card to do 60hz and move the mouse around, and then to 120hz and move the cursor around its easy to notice how much smoother it is.
 
xnikx said:
i dont see why people want huge monitors with a 1920x1080 resolution.
unless you're planning on sitting far from the monitor.
Click to expand...

This is the route I went.. just got a Benq W1070 1080p projector hooked up this weekend. NFS:MW was pretty awesome at 120+ inches.
 
i have no problem gaming on a 50" LCD tv for my main pc display at 1920x1080. I only sit about 3 feet away, maybe 4 if im being super casual. Of course i can see thats not par for the course.
 
4saken said:
i have no problem gaming on a 50" LCD tv for my main pc display at 1920x1080. I only sit about 3 feet away, maybe 4 if im being super casual. Of course i can see thats not par for the course.
Click to expand...

That's about how far I am from the 42. I played a lot of cs go and did really well. Might just be what I'm used to though.

I have a 4770k, 16gb mem, solid state hd, and a 7950 over clocked to 1100/1400. Not really 4k ready Haha.
 
I have to cram All my stuff in my room with my living arrangements, ha. So this is the view from my bed. Desk crammed in between and wires all over. Class for days.

2pyni49.jpg
 
magnetik said:
about 11-12 feet. With a short throw projector you can get 120" in less than 6ft.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. I got a new man cave (11ftx15ft) in the making and trying to get ideas for what big screen TVs people are using and what space is needed. Currently using a LG 39LN5300 tv and thinking maybe go bigger. I have looked into using a short throw projector too. So many choices out there. Trying to decide what's best for my situation.
 
This is my view from about 5-6ft away w/ a 40in LED.. When I need a K&M I just pull it over to the couch.. I could never go back to standard Twenty some inch gaming..

Fruqu4O.jpg
 
Last edited:
Skott said:
Thanks for the reply. I got a new man cave (11ftx15ft) in the making and trying to get ideas for what big screen TVs people are using and what space is needed. Currently using a LG 39LN5300 tv and thinking maybe go bigger. I have looked into using a short throw projector too. So many choices out there. Trying to decide what's best for my situation.
Click to expand...

That's about the size of my room. Here is a pic of the initial setup. The flash sorta washes out the colors but it looks great when the lights are out. The screen is on a frame and has removable legs so I can have movie/game night outside if needed.

This room never had a tv so that's why the speakers are so close together. (I sat in front of them to listen to music.) They have since been put on stands.

as far as people saying that 40" is too big to sit in front of.. need to go check out the old Ikea Jerker thread.. I would say 42" is my limit (sitting right in front of the monitor) since I find that's the point that I am starting to turn my head vs turning my eyeballs... but 40" is fine once you get used to how large it is. It's actually easier on the eyes imo.

as far as my reasoning in getting a projector instead of a flat panel... it's portable and can be used outside or moved from room to room, affordable 4k just around the corner so didn't want to splurge, under 1k for screen and projector, and Superbowl in HD at 1080p @ 120" (up to 300") is better then @ 60" :) (3D BR is cool too)

P1180214.JPG
 
Last edited:
magnetik said:
as far as people saying that 40" is too big to sit in front of..
Click to expand...

More of a personal opinion/choice.. I don't think anyone (at least I'm not) saying it's a rule per-say.. I tried it when I first bought mine and it was just too much to handle right in front me of. I didn't like having to "scan" my monitor when focusing anywhere but center. Clarity wise right up front my 40inch is fine and can't even see any pixels. It was just overwhelming with all that screen overlapping my immediate field of view.
 
Last edited:
styckx said:
More of a personal opinion/choice.. I don't think (at least I'm not) saying it's a rule per-say.. I tried it when I first bought mine and it was just too much to handle right in front me of. I didn't like having to "scan" my monitor when focusing anywhere but center. Clarity wise right up front my 40inch is fine and can't even see any pixels. It was just overwhelming with all that screen overlapping my immediate field of view.
Click to expand...

When I first moved to the larger screen I found myself sitting towards the monitor (probably cause I was used to the 24") Once I got used to putting my back in the chair, it put me far enough away while putting everything into my peripheral vision. It also was more comfortable as a bonus. It did take a bit to get used to though using the computer this way.
 
Wow, great pics guys.

@Styckx: That's a beautiful picture on that tv. What model is it?



@Magnetik: Great set up you got. What model projector are you using?



Thanks for the replies guys. Good food for thought. Wife and I got an update on new house and they moved up the completion date to 3 weeks. Can't wait to get in and see what I can do with my new room.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top