post pros and cons
them discuss
they are the same damn thing.
Monitors for color sensitive work like cg. tv or shitty monitor for everything else. Not a gamer so no idea about that refresh shit.
>>54311437
Monitor for color sensitivity and accuracy. Tv for going big for cheap.
>>54311437
more importantly how do we adjust the screen resolution to see an entire webpage instead of having everything enlarged with Minimal scrolling
>>54311569
This.
>>54311640
Only if you need professional monitors with color accuracy. Refresh only when you need more than 60hz or use Gsync.
>>54311437
>Monitor - Pros
Better colour accuracy
Lower input delay
No "700HZ SUPER MOTION TECHNOLOGY" bullshittery, only pure refreshed frames
Can have tilt, swivel and pivot due to size
Best connectors (DP > HDMI)
>Monitor - Cons
Fucking awful UI and controls, makes it an absolute nightmare to calibrate
Still widespread use of ancient connectors for muh legacy shit
Expensive as fuck vs TVs when it comes to size
>Television - Pros
Can be extremely large whilst still having a low price tag
More ports on one device
No problems finding a VESA compatible wall mount
Has a remote, makes interacting with the screen a lot easier
Has some cool technologies that monitors usually don't have / slow to adapt (Philips' Ambilight, OLED, etc.)
>Television - Cons
Worse colour accuracy than monitors
AIDS technologies like superficially high refresh rates as mentioned above
Lacks tilt, swivel and pivot, but a TV is a fucking TV, so it's understandable (not the intention, stationary device, etc.)
IPS monitor for color stuff
144Hz TN monitor for fast paced action
TV for big screen to chill with family/friends
>>54311437
>monitor
Pros:all
Cons:none
>television
Pros:none
Cons:all
Televisons are for watching television and nothing else
>>54311569
monitor lizard: Deadly
television lizard: Barney
>>54311909
>IPS monitor for color stuff
>144Hz TN monitor for fast paced action
why not both? 165hz IPS master race right here
>>54311569
/thread
>>54311437
barely any difference except maybe color rendering and freq, stuff that only gamers and designers care about , and we have boards for both groups (>>>/v/ and http://boards.4chan.org/lgbt/)
Now please go back to those with your stupid questions
sage
>>54311907
>tilt, swivel and pivot
the monitor does none of these
you're thinking about the stand
>>54311437
I used a monitor with my desktop to paint two different furry lewds. Worst idea ever, the Samsung 3dtv colors were so saturated with high contrast it fucked with my design. Never again.
>>54312022
Underrated
>>54311569
they aren't
the display drivers (the hardware in it that takes the signal and puts it on the screen) in televisions are generally much slower than in a monitor. Color reproduction is also generally poorer.
>>54311437
television = shit reponse time
>>54311437
>monitors usually have better quality panels, a wider array of panel types/resolutions, and usually a much lower response time with higher refresh rates
>TVs have size-over-quality, a different sizes from large to very large, and a higher response time with lower refresh rates because standard TV and cable broadcasts rarely go over 24-59 FPS
I personally use both, a monitor for my gaming computer and a TV for a light browsing computer and my consoles so I can switch between them.
>>54313850
which is typically included with the monitor
>>54311437
Televisions are designed for showing moving images. Static images will look blurry but motion will look smooth.
PC monitors are designed for static images.
>>54311569
TVs tend to have higher latency than monitors though.
they also tend to have HORRIBLE panels in them. and then usually have a pretty bad ppi.
>>54314548
not all monitors have this feature. Also you cant just switch the pros and cons and call it a day
>>54311907
my tv tilts and swivels and it's just a old standard LG 1080p LCD.
>>54311437
TV's draw a lot more power than designated monitor, for example my 22 inch TV draws 75w where as my 22 inch monitor draws just 22w.
>>54312022
topkek
>>54312424
because that 165hz ips probaly has
ips glow
shit input latency
over 23-24" size
cost
>>54311437
Monitor for under 32 inches and where text visibility is important.
TV for muh gaymz over 32"
Projector for anything over 65"
>>54312424
Does it have 1ms response time?
>>54314887
makes sense, the TV probably has higher viewing angles, brighter screen for seeing at a distance, and maybe cheaper less-transparent pixels that need more light blasted through them
>>54314954
Plus there are additional processing units inside the TV that are ready and waiting at all times such as the tuner.
And even when just being used as HDMI monitor for a dual monitor setup I find the TV definitely gets hotter, I've already had to replace the factory capacitors on the PSU even though it never gets used as a TV.
Granted its an older CCFL backlit thing but 22w vs 75w is still a lot when you consider it all adds up.
Pic related, practically all of the electrolytic capacitors tested bad on the ESR meter as they had been cooked from the heat. The thing would just sit there squealing until it eventually warmed up and came on.
>>54314701
Wrong: The post
Some TVs do not allow to disable superscan. I have a monitor and a TV connected to my PC and I have to use my video card driver's anti-superscan functionality which resamples the picture and hence affects its quality.
>>54311907
Don't forget that TVs come with their own sound drivers which may be better than your onboard sound card since they tend to be designed for quality sound.
>>54315161
>actually servicing the parts of your TV
nigger what the fuck
>>54313850
t. Autismo
>>54315935
>throwing something away and buying a new one when you know how to fix it and can do so with ease
i bet you buy a new macbook every year too faggot
>>54314701
>>54315935
Changing out capacitors is child's play.
$10 for new parts + 1 hour of time and it was up and running again. Its been working fine for 2 years now and its on for 12+ hours a day 7 days a week.
>>54311569
Wrong
>>54316084
this
>>54314926
>implying that number is anything but marketing-speak
>>54311569
>4chan.org
I connected my tv monitor to my laptop and saved $400+. I see no cons. I stream youtube videos off it and control my own content.
>>54317366
>connected my tv monitor to my laptop and saved $400+
Its probably less overall when you consider >>54314887
>>54317416
That's a good point, but I'm still ok with it. I stream youtube videos from it and get the "TV" experience with my flat screen. I can plug it in, hope in bed and control what I watch as if it were on TV. I'd rather view the streams on my 40+ inch flat screen across the room than a 27'' inch monitor.
>>54317433
>I'd rather view the streams on my 40+ inch flat screen across the room than a 27'' inch monitor.
Fair enough. I think that guy was using his TV in a permanent dual monitor setup rather than just as a large screen for watching stuff in bed.
>>54317456
>monitor setup rather than just as a large screen for watching stuff in bed.
yeah makes sense. I only use mind if I'm watching something in bed. Otherwise I don't connect it.
>>54315161
i see a little shitstain of overheating on the board
why so many blown caps???>.
>>54314924
>not gaming under 32" for high pixel density and low aliasing as well as low input lag
Full pleb
Monitor:
Better looks, usually smaller with larger dpi.
Shows perfect pixels. Usually no speakers inside.
You turn them on, they are on, no bullshit.
Matt screen, matt bezel unless you buy some designer shit.
TV:
Dumb computer with a screen. Can be connected to
the internet and do stuff by itself. Can understand stuff from sat cable.
You can connect everything to it including old consoles.
Shitty colors, if you look up close you often see imperfections.
Turns itself of, ask for updates, auto claibrates itself and other shit.
Hardware buttons either hidden or not there at all. Needs remore.
I would love to replace my TV screen with a monitor. The problem is, that it's still hard to find TV sized monitors that aren't made for 24/7 hotel lobbies or whatever. Those things are way more expensive than TV's.
I think there are a few models even above 40'', but if you want like 56'' you are basically still stuck with a stupid slow TV that reflects like a fucking mirror.
>>54311907
>but with 1000hz TVs i can get 1000fps in games XDDDDDDD
>>54317892
>56" pc monitor
why. Get a 24" one and move it closer to your face, you dumbfuck.
What does /g/ think of those TV/Monitor "hybrids"? They usually come up if you search for a TVs under 32". I don't know if they're just TVs without image processing and monitor inputs or what.
>>54320716
Considering the one you posted is a 27" 1080p PLS panel, with a 5ms response time, that kind of sounds like Samsung's popular S27D390H monitor. That kind of makes it sound like a S27D390H with more inputs, a TV tuner for freeview, and a VESA mount. Though the amount of actual documentation you find on the internet on these is tiny.
>>54311569
first post worst post
>>54311437
You mean apart from the display quality?
>>54312424
I'm still waiting for high-refresh IPS displays to actually have good stats apart from the refresh rate.
>Shit panel tech (e.g. TN or plasma)
>Shit resolution at a too high diagonal (i.e. shit pixel pitch)
>Shit refresh rates (often won't accept anything higher than 60 Hz or even 24 Hz)
>Shit “post-processing” (enjoy your motion artifacts)
>Shit native gamut
>Shit brightness range
>Shit native bit depth (enjoy your flickering FRC)
>Shit polarizers
>Shit backlights (e.g. cheap LED tech)
>Shit response times (either that or shit overdrive artifacts)
>Shit uniformity
>Shit color accuracy after calibration
tl;dr if you buy a TV to use it as a PC display either you're an ultra-poorfag who will justify all loss of quality in favor of getting a cheaper computer, or you're just a retard who's probably also legally blind.
>plasma
>shit
kekd
>>54320716
I've seen some LGs like that. If you search the model number of them you'll get like 5 results in foreign languages. They're usually the typical IPS 1080p 5ms affair, in either 24" or 27" form factor. They actually look pretty good though. Compared to normal monitors, they usually have much more inputs like multiple HDMIs, as well as VESA compatibility and a remote control. Alza have a section for monitors with TV tuners, and there's 16 of them.
https://www.alza.co.uk/lcd-displays/tv-tuners/18849635.htm
I used a TV as a monitor for a while. Even though it had that "gamer mode" that disabled a lot of the post-processing for computers, it was still a washed out piece of shit.
pretty sure the latency on it was 80ms.
compared to my phillips 144Hz monitor the only thing I miss are the deep blacks. but that's something I can live without.
would you guys rather have 1440 @ 60 or 1080 @ 120?
>>54311437
why_not_both.jpg
So there's a whole shitload of posts here and you're all missing one HUGE part.
All computer monitors down from the shittiest TN to the most cutting edge OLED is 4:4:4 chroma. input and output
Nearly all TVs, especially all the ones you people look at, are at best 4:2:0 chroma.
That is why, in many scenarios, detailed things like text look like trash on even a 4K TV compared to a "real" monitor. 4K does go a long way into bridging that gap though; at least at that point it's readable.
Only the high end TVs are 4:4:4 chroma generally, such as the 8500 and 9500 series of LG (both IPS and OLED). Some may take a 4:4:4 input, but it doesn't mean what it's putting out is going to be full chroma.
If you're looking at budget 4K TVs, forget the whole Linux vs. OSX vs Windows font rendering debate: your font will look like shit regardless, way more than the differences between the three OS font rendering techniques.
>>54325809
BTW, this is different from simple "color accuracy" that's been mentioned in this thread about 230498209358235 times, which is also a valid concern.
>>54325726
Sup, Green-vine-growing-nigga
>>54314250
False
>>54325646
I have 1080@144hz
I'm not spending extra money on a gpu when the display I use is perfectly fine
>>54314811
barely any TVs use TN panels (use VA isntead because it's a fucking TV and needs better viewing angles), whereas the majority of monitors are shitty TN
>>54311437
A TV is a shit monitor.
The colors are always shit and calibrated like ass.
they use image sharpening algorithms that make everything look like a soap opera.
The blur is horrible, sometimes lasting seconds.
The color range is often limited.
The control panel is always shit.
They use overscan when used with HDMI.
The input lag is horrible.
The new ones are connected to the internet, have cameras and have shit security adding an attack vector to your network.
The supported video in are scart, composite, VGA, HDMI, where HDMI is the only modern one and is already on life support.
You can watch TV easier by buying a tv tuner card for your pc or a set-top box.
You need to manage the TV with an infrared remote controller.
They have integrated DRM.
Buying a TV is like buying diamond plated HDMI cables, expect that you're buying useless shit instead.
The story is different with CRTs, but even then they're mostly shit monitors.
>>54314887
What the fuck. Add this to my list.
>>54325869
I am one with nature and technology
>>54325924
>image sharpening algorithms that make everything look like a soap opera
yeah you have no idea what you're talking about.
>>54325953
Well explain what I don't understand then.
>>54311569
Not true at all. There are many subtle differences.
With televisions sometimes you can't turn off certain forms of image enhancement, and they tend to push the color red more than other colors because dumb people think it looks better.
With some service menu tweaks you can usually turn a television into a monitor.
>>54325971
image sharpening algorithms creates a sharper image
interpolation creates soap opera effect
>>54325924
>The new ones are connected to the internet, have cameras and have shit security adding an attack vector to your network.
then don't connect it to the internet, jesus, is it really that fucking hard
>>54325994
Soap opera might not be the best wording, but every time you push shit through an algorithm you lose quality and add delay.
>>54317598
Because they were crap samxon caps and it gets hot in there, couple that with 6 years of heavy use and they get cooked over time. I think the scorch mark is from an SMD part on the other side.
>>54326033
>not having tv over fibre net
kek 3rd world casuals getting more privacy than people that has high speed internet and shit because goverments are assholes.
>>54311569
it's really hard to find TVs without extreme input lag.
>>54311437
I'm using a 40" samsung smart TV as main computer monitor now for more than 3 or 4 years, can't remember the date I bought it. I replaced it with an old LCD monitor back then which had some disgusting color shifts.
The reaction times and colors are fine, I'm able to turn every "enhancement" shit off in the menu and if I want, I can turn on motion interpolation, which surprisingly doesn't suck that much as you think. You can barely see artifacts and it works well for desktop usage.
The 40" are completely filling my field of view from a distance of roughly one meter, which is brilliant, since I have much more space for my keyboard and other stuff. I don't know the DPI and I'm too lazy to calculate this now, but it's ok, not much of a difference to my 2nd 24" LED monitor. I'm waiting for 4k displays with more than 60hz, which will come with the new DP. 1440p is just a meme...
Some cons are the backlight in the corners, which are not 100% correct, but it's just a subtle difference. I can also notice some very, very minor ghosting when scrolling on certain websites with the "right" background and text colors, but it's not too dramatic.
