Question Are TV's Good enough For PC Gaming Now Day's?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Deleted member 2947362

The input difference is very real and an easy way to see it is if you have multiple screens hooked up run one at 60hz and one 120hz+ then just running your mouse back and forth you will see the difference.
This true because if I put my TV in 1080p 120hz mode (albeit black frame insertion) there is a massive difference in mouse pointer speed and response of the mouse pointer on the screen

If I game in that mode 120hz 1080p you get that 120hz feeling in response (and at only £350) but is it going to make me a better player? when most of the important timings are decided by the games server and it's load at any given moment, let alone your own internet connection and your service suppliers network load at any given time.

when it comes down to hand and eye coordination and you just get used to your setup if you have had it a while and your hand and eye coordination would of naturally adjusted to what ever your display gives you

If your used to playing games at 60hz on your display doesn't matter if its a Monitor or TV and you have played that way for years but then you start playing at 120hz you will probs find you play worse until your adjusted to the new speed but once you have adjusted to 120hz you prob's don't get anymore kills than you did when you played at 60hz.

You would have to go really cheap brand to get the kind of crappy feeling of an LCD TV screens offered 10 years ago.
Last edited by a moderator:


I don't think @Zerk2012 was necessarily saying that NZXT was lying or incorrect, its just the way they presented those "Facts" made it seem as if their monitors are the only one's it applies too, especially when its on their own website and the blatant product placement at the end of the article.
it's just I cant help but feel like "I see what your doing" :cautious: you know?
Perhaps me linking the NZXT article wasn't the best move. Though, it was one of the simpler one, facts wise, for to read, rather than going in deep with long explanations as of why (people usually doesn't want to read long, in-depth articles). Also, when i read the NZXT article, i only read the facts part. I even didn't read the advertisement part at the end of that article since to me, that is irrelevant.

But i also linked 3 other articles saying the same facts. And here, i'm not advocating for monitors only. Instead, my idea is to give you info about the pros and cons of both, so that you are well informed and can make a decision on your own, based on your personal needs. :)
I think your right when it comes to burn in, although it definitely is a thing, as you say I think it's over blown.
iv been reading up on it latterly and from what iv read unless your playing a game that has a fixed HUD that doesn't move for 1000's of hour's day in day out, I think you'll be fine.

Again thanks for the reply.
Older OLEDs were certainly more susceptible to burn in; my B6P burned the Windows taskbar in after a year, and a few years later full-ime WFH did a ton of lasting damage. By contrast, my C2 shows zero signs of burn in over a two-year period despite seeing a heavier workload then my B6P did over the same timeframe.

Granted, some care is still necessary: Turn the backlight down a tad (you really don't need it blasting at max brightness), turn it off when away for more then a few minutes, and so on. But burn in shouldn't be a problem on the timespan of years.