LG 40UB800T 4k TV for a monitor???

VK30061H

Honorable
Jan 3, 2013
12
0
10,510
Hi, wanting to make the jump to 4k gaming. I have the graphical power (I think!) in a GTX 980 SLI setup. Currently have a 27" Samsung SA850T PLS and wont something a bit bigger than 27" 30"+ IPS 4k Monitors are not worth the coin at the minute for gaming. Thinking about grabbing an LG 40" 4K TV, http://www.lg.com/au/tvs/lg-40UB800T as a temp monitor until prober gaming 4K IPS monitors become "mainstream". I can get one here for around $750 AUD and then use it as a TV later down the track.
Now after a bit of waffle, the question is: LG claim that via HDMI 2.0 port on the TV will run at 60Hz. Is this true? Will games look as good on the TV as a dedicated monitor and is it completely overkill in size to be used as a monitor?
Andy input would be appreciated
 
Solution
If this is the TV that you're talking about, it has pretty bad reviews for some reason, only 3 stars. As for HDMI 2.0, you'll have to ask LG that question, unless someone has it and can tell you about it perhaps read the reviews in the link below. Unless you're a hardcore gamer that needs super fast response time, then getting a TV that's 40+ inches won't be an overkill. If you just play some casual to to some heavy games, then it isn't a problem, as long as it is like a super fast action game like racing or fps, then using a TV as a monitor is nice. I use a 58 inch UHD TV to play my games at 4k max settings, I rarely get any lag at all while playing my games, so if you're just a casual gamer like me, a TV would be better than a...

-Lone-

Admirable
If this is the TV that you're talking about, it has pretty bad reviews for some reason, only 3 stars. As for HDMI 2.0, you'll have to ask LG that question, unless someone has it and can tell you about it perhaps read the reviews in the link below. Unless you're a hardcore gamer that needs super fast response time, then getting a TV that's 40+ inches won't be an overkill. If you just play some casual to to some heavy games, then it isn't a problem, as long as it is like a super fast action game like racing or fps, then using a TV as a monitor is nice. I use a 58 inch UHD TV to play my games at 4k max settings, I rarely get any lag at all while playing my games, so if you're just a casual gamer like me, a TV would be better than a monitor. To answer your last question, I think a TV is much better than a monitor, you get so much more features like UHD upscaling so you can watch movies at above 1080p. I changed from a Samsung 28 inch UHD monitor to a Panasonic 58 inch UHD TV, the depths of the colors and sharpness are sooooo much better in my opinion, it's like another upgrade for 4k. I hope this info helped :)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00N45QF8Y/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1418491968&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX200_QL40
 
Solution

VK30061H

Honorable
Jan 3, 2013
12
0
10,510
Thanks for the replies. As an Aussie I don't even think of using Amazon. Thanks for the link. One reviewer states they don't use HDMI 2.0. Prob give it a miss now. Just gonna pull the trigger on the new Philips bdm4065uc 40" 4K monitor. Getting released next week and i can get 60hz out of it.