Computer Monitor or TV Screen?

custardy

WobblyDog wrote: »

I've got a 27" Samsung TV and a 27" Samsung monitor side-by-side attached to my PC, both have 1920x1080 resolution. I'm happy with the arrangement.


I think the dedicated monitor is slightly better for PC use, but not much. The monitor had the right brightness/contrast/gamma/etc. settings out of the box, whereas it took quite a lot of adjustment to get the right settings on the TV.


Most TVs are either 1920x1080 (not really enough above 27"), or 4K (not yet widely supported by PCs).

Really? I run 1920x1200 on my 24" monitor.

System

RumRat wrote: »

Definitely no to a any TV, I've never seen one that can match a good monitor.

My computer looks great on my professionally calibrated 55" LG OLED TV. But then again the TV was £2500 and the calibration was another £250.

If you've got a 27" 2560 x 1440 IPS screen monitor the chances are it cost a bit more than what most people spend on a TV so of course its going to be better. But to say no TV can match a good monitor is hyperbole.

RumRat

Tarambor wrote: »

My computer looks great on my professionally calibrated 55" LG OLED TV. But then again the TV was £2500 and the calibration was another £250.

If you've got a 27" 2560 x 1440 IPS screen monitor the chances are it cost a bit more than what most people spend on a TV so of course its going to be better. But to say no TV can match a good monitor is hyperbole.

You should re-read the post and see where you went wrong, instead of using it as brag catalyst.

wess_lawson

Computer monitor has more pixel density so the price is higher than a big screen tv. A 27 inch monitor produce more quality picture than 27 in tv. So the price is high. But you are a movie lover you should go for tv.

System

wess_lawson wrote: »

Computer monitor has more pixel density so the price is higher than a big screen tv. A 27 inch monitor produce more quality picture than 27 in tv. So the price is high. .

Rubbish. A 1920x1080 27" monitor has exactly the same pixel density as a 1080p 1920x1080 27" TV.

A cheap 27" monitor with a cheap LCD panel with poor gamma, contrast, brightness and colour accuracy will produce as bad a picture as a 27" TV with the same. Just because it is a PC monitor makes it no more special than a TV. Chances are if you opened both up and took out the LCD panel you may even find its the same model from LG or one of the other five panel manufacturers. The display technology is the same, its just that TVs have built in tuners and speakers which PC monitors usually don't come with.

RumRat

Tarambor wrote: »

Rubbish. A 1920x1080 27" monitor has exactly the same pixel density as a 1080p 1920x1080 27" TV.

A cheap 27" monitor with a cheap LCD panel with poor gamma, contrast, brightness and colour accuracy will produce as bad a picture as a 27" TV with the same. Just because it is a PC monitor makes it no more special than a TV. Chances are if you opened both up and took out the LCD panel you may even find its the same model from LG or one of the other five panel manufacturers. The display technology is the same, its just that TVs have built in tuners and speakers which PC monitors usually don't come with.

Pixel density is not the only consideration when choosing a monitor. I guess that Joe Blogs, who just does a bit of surfing and emails, could use anything and be satisfied.

booksurr

My experience in using 4 TVs as monitors confirms that there is undoubtedly grainness and loss of stuff at the edges if the TV will not support the resolution you need.

After failing with a 32" JVC and 42" Panansonic I now use a Panasonic 32" TV TX-L32C5B for my main screen (at 1366 x 768 resolution) and an LG 19" 19LS4D TV (at 1440 x 900 resolution) for the second screen. Both were second hand and cost £25 and £20 respectively. Both operate via HDMI cables

for use with Word and Excel and various accounting software both are fine.The JVC 32" TV was undoubtedly more grainy, still perfectly usable, but very noticeably grainy against the other two. The 42" was hopeless.

for playing the games I do both are also fine

dktreesea

I used to use a 32 inch TV and switched to a 27 inch Philips monitor. Much better quality picture but a bit small for me.
I'm in the process of upgrading to a Philips Brilliance BDM4350UC/00 43-Inch 4K Ultra HD LCD monitor, which costs around £560, give or take on somewhere like Amazon.

almillar

Overscan - there's often a setting on the TV, but even more often on the graphics driver settings. Bit of a minefield on the computer end with different drivers and everthing but you usually only have to sort it out once.
For any monitor or TV, you must make sure you're running at native resoltion ie: if it's full HD your computer should be set at 1920x1080, obviously with no overscan. Compared to broacast TV it's very easy to tell if you're overscanning, because you'll lose your taskbar!

Cycrow

Not all TV's call it Overscan.

On mine i have to set it to either PC or Exact Scan.

an old TV i had called it Wide/Super Wide mode.