Using 32" tv for pc gaming monitor 1080p vs 720p

[pcnoob1911]

I have just built my first computer and i hooked up my 720p 32" tv to it. (native resolution=1366x768) I sit a little over 2 feet away from it. I was going to get a 24 inch monitor, but i actually quite like having this big of a screen, so will i see any difference playing games and such if I did buy a 32" with native resolution at 1080p? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889102667 Or would i just be better off with the 24" monitor? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824014350

Answers are very appreciated

 

[MapRef41N93W]

The worst thing is that you are gaming on a 720p TV. That is kind of like gaming on a 600p monitor. Not to mention the fact that the TV probably has a 30 ms+ response time. TV's have far lower quality pixels than a monitor and to get them to fit on that 32" screen they are blown up to be larger reducing the quality more.

+1, once you get a monitor you'll see a HUGE difference.
If you want to go cheap and get a 24" (or exactly 23.6") monitor with 2ms response at 1080p with an HDMI port, the one I have (Asus VS 247H-P) can be found at around $130 (bought mine from Amazon warehouse open box).

Decisions.....Decisions...

Kyle via 'Awesomesauce News' just gave a review of a 27" 1440p monitor not too long ago..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtR8UFU-b9k
On Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2RY0X59885

Wow, not bad reviews either on newegg. Maybe I need to pick up one of these. Its tough to find 1440p monitors under the 400$ range that are actually good.

Yes it is the best 1440p Korean monitor on the market. Overclockable to 120hz as well. Does have problems with bezel causing backlight bleed and 8ms response time though. Also most come with 1-3 dead pixels.

 

[Quakemz]

The worst thing is that you are gaming on a 720p TV. That is kind of like gaming on a 600p monitor. Not to mention the fact that the TV probably has a 30 ms+ response time. TV's have far lower quality pixels than a monitor and to get them to fit on that 32" screen they are blown up to be larger reducing the quality more.

+1, once you get a monitor you'll see a HUGE difference.
If you want to go cheap and get a 24" (or exactly 23.6") monitor with 2ms response at 1080p with an HDMI port, the one I have (Asus VS 247H-P) can be found at around $130 (bought mine from Amazon warehouse open box).

Decisions.....Decisions...

Kyle via 'Awesomesauce News' just gave a review of a 27" 1440p monitor not too long ago..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtR8UFU-b9k
On Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2RY0X59885

Wow, not bad reviews either on newegg. Maybe I need to pick up one of these. Its tough to find 1440p monitors under the 400$ range that are actually good.

Yes it is the best 1440p Korean monitor on the market. Overclockable to 120hz as well. Does have problems with bezel causing backlight bleed and 8ms response time though. Also most come with 1-3 dead pixels.

Well backlight bleed is to be expected, but you really only notice it on a black screen. Also, I read all the newegg reviews and even though there was only 20, none complained of dead pixels, and 4 out of 5 was the lowest rating. 8ms is a little rough though. :/

 

[Guest]

The human eye can't really tell the difference when it comes to response time. The response time is also measured differently pending the manufacturer.
Response time is usually just a spec manufacturers add in to attract customers but you shouldn't really pay much attention to it.
You should never really pay attention to response time, but look at refresh rates.

 

[MapRef41N93W]

The worst thing is that you are gaming on a 720p TV. That is kind of like gaming on a 600p monitor. Not to mention the fact that the TV probably has a 30 ms+ response time. TV's have far lower quality pixels than a monitor and to get them to fit on that 32" screen they are blown up to be larger reducing the quality more.

+1, once you get a monitor you'll see a HUGE difference.
If you want to go cheap and get a 24" (or exactly 23.6") monitor with 2ms response at 1080p with an HDMI port, the one I have (Asus VS 247H-P) can be found at around $130 (bought mine from Amazon warehouse open box).

Decisions.....Decisions...

Kyle via 'Awesomesauce News' just gave a review of a 27" 1440p monitor not too long ago..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtR8UFU-b9k
On Newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2RY0X59885

Wow, not bad reviews either on newegg. Maybe I need to pick up one of these. Its tough to find 1440p monitors under the 400$ range that are actually good.

Yes it is the best 1440p Korean monitor on the market. Overclockable to 120hz as well. Does have problems with bezel causing backlight bleed and 8ms response time though. Also most come with 1-3 dead pixels.

Well backlight bleed is to be expected, but you really only notice it on a black screen. Also, I read all the newegg reviews and even though there was only 20, none complained of dead pixels, and 4 out of 5 was the lowest rating. 8ms is a little rough though. :/

The Newegg ones are apparently the best batch. Most who buy from ebay (from basically the same 2 sellers as Newegg) get ones with a few dead pixels.

 

[pcnoob1911]

The worst thing is that you are gaming on a 720p TV. That is kind of like gaming on a 600p monitor. Not to mention the fact that the TV probably has a 30 ms+ response time. TV's have far lower quality pixels than a monitor and to get them to fit on that 32" screen they are blown up to be larger reducing the quality more.

+1, once you get a monitor you'll see a HUGE difference.
If you want to go cheap and get a 24" (or exactly 23.6") monitor with 2ms response at 1080p with an HDMI port, the one I have (Asus VS 247H-P) can be found at around $130 (bought mine from Amazon warehouse open box).

Decisions.....Decisions...

I use two of these:
http://www.amazon.com/Asus-VS248H-P-24-Inch-Full-HD-Monitor/dp/B0058UUR6E/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1386924716&sr=8-1&keywords=asus+vs248h-p

You get great performance for the price. OR you could go with the slightly older but cheaper model which is also a solid choice:

http://www.amazon.com/Asus-VS247H-P-23-6-Inch-Full-HD-LED-Lit/dp/B005BZNDS0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1386924766&sr=8-1&keywords=asus+vs247h-p

Both are about the same size and offer 2ms response time as well as an IPS panel, HDMI input, etc.

I have the older 247H-P.
Both are basically the same, just get whatever is cheaper at the time because the prices seem to always jump.

Thoughts on this monitor? http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-c750-series-27-34-led-hd-monitor/8585136.p?id=1218879338068&skuId=8585136#tab=overview Or is ips kind of mandatory? When I type the product # into newegg it shows a slightly different monitor, but i assume they use the same panel, which is an ad-pls?

 

[MapRef41N93W]

PLS is Samsung's inhouse IPS technology. You won't notice much of a difference.

 

[pcnoob1911]

How about http://www.bestbuy.com/site/lg-27-34-ips-led-hd-monitor/7979086.p?id=1218863183326&skuId=7979086 VS http://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-c750-series-27-34-led-hd-monitor/8585136.p?id=1218879338068&skuId=8585136#tab=overview I've pretty much narrowed it down to these 2, simply because they're currently in my local best buy and if I have any problems I can take it back to the store instead of shipping it back to newegg or amazon

 

[MapRef41N93W]

According to Best Buy that Samsung has no DVI-D port, which would be a deal sealer for me. Personally I would recommend you just buy the QNIX at that price point, as they only take about 3 days to ship from Korea anyways. Also you get matte coating with the QNIX which is fantastic if you have bad glare issues like I do.

 

[Quakemz]

The human eye can't really tell the difference when it comes to response time. The response time is also measured differently pending the manufacturer.
Response time is usually just a spec manufacturers add in to attract customers but you shouldn't really pay much attention to it.
You should never really pay attention to response time, but look at refresh rates.

I completely disagree, to a point. I noticed a MASSIVE difference when I went from 23ms TV to a 2ms monitor. 8ms isn't bad, but it's still not ideal for gaming. Now I do agree that people probably won't notice a small difference, say 8ms to 5ms, but its possible to feel a difference from 8ms to 2ms. Depending on eye sensitivity maybe. When I played on a TV it was horrendous compared to a monitor. I could literally see a gap between when I entered a command, and it got executed.

 

[Quakemz]

I'd also probably get the Qnix 1440p monitor if you're planning on spending 300$+ anyway...seems almost like a waste not to.

 

[pcnoob1911]

According to Best Buy that Samsung has no DVI-D port, which would be a deal sealer for me. Personally I would recommend you just buy the QNIX at that price point, as they only take about 3 days to ship from Korea anyways. Also you get matte coating with the QNIX which is fantastic if you have bad glare issues like I do.

So, what's the overall difference between hdmi and dvi, audio right? whats the difference between dvi and dvi-d? I've always just used hdmi, so i really don't know much at all about dvi...

 

[Guest]

The human eye can't really tell the difference when it comes to response time. The response time is also measured differently pending the manufacturer.
Response time is usually just a spec manufacturers add in to attract customers but you shouldn't really pay much attention to it.
You should never really pay attention to response time, but look at refresh rates.

I completely disagree, to a point. I noticed a MASSIVE difference when I went from 23ms TV to a 2ms monitor. 8ms isn't bad, but it's still not ideal for gaming. Now I do agree that people probably won't notice a small difference, say 8ms to 5ms, but its possible to feel a difference from 8ms to 2ms. Depending on eye sensitivity maybe. When I played on a TV it was horrendous compared to a monitor. I could literally see a gap between when I entered a command, and it got executed.

Sorry, forgot to mention the fact that if its a change from like 5ms to like 30ms, it's noticeable.
but 2ms compared to 8ms doesn't really matter.

 

[Quakemz]

The human eye can't really tell the difference when it comes to response time. The response time is also measured differently pending the manufacturer.
Response time is usually just a spec manufacturers add in to attract customers but you shouldn't really pay much attention to it.
You should never really pay attention to response time, but look at refresh rates.

I completely disagree, to a point. I noticed a MASSIVE difference when I went from 23ms TV to a 2ms monitor. 8ms isn't bad, but it's still not ideal for gaming. Now I do agree that people probably won't notice a small difference, say 8ms to 5ms, but its possible to feel a difference from 8ms to 2ms. Depending on eye sensitivity maybe. When I played on a TV it was horrendous compared to a monitor. I could literally see a gap between when I entered a command, and it got executed.

Sorry, forgot to mention the fact that if its a change from like 5ms to like 30ms, it's noticeable.
but 2ms compared to 8ms doesn't really matter.

I think it might be dependent on the person viewing it. but you might be right. The competitive gamer in me kinda just took over.

 

[Quakemz]

According to Best Buy that Samsung has no DVI-D port, which would be a deal sealer for me. Personally I would recommend you just buy the QNIX at that price point, as they only take about 3 days to ship from Korea anyways. Also you get matte coating with the QNIX which is fantastic if you have bad glare issues like I do.

So, what's the overall difference between hdmi and dvi, audio right? whats the difference between dvi and dvi-d? I've always just used hdmi, so i really don't know much at all about dvi...

Generally you need DVI to attain higher than 1080p. So for a 1440p screen, I think its a necessity.

 

[Guest]

Up to 1080p it doesn't matter which one you use, but above that like 1440p DVI comes into place.

 

[pcnoob1911]

How would an r9 280x handle 1440p? idk if that would be optimal for gaming for me, i guess i could always just set the resolution to 1080p, but would it fit on the screen correctly then?

 

[MapRef41N93W]

Correct there is no real difference. It's just a personal preference.

 

[MapRef41N93W]

How would an r9 280x handle 1440p? idk if that would be optimal for gaming for me, i guess i could always just set the resolution to 1080p, but would it fit on the screen correctly then?

It depends on the game obviously. A 280x would handle decently at 1440p and allow you to play most non graphically intensive games at max settings 60 fps. For more intense must play games like Metro: LL and BF4 I think it gets around 30 fps at ultra 4x aa. You could always turn down or off AA (though why build a pimped out PC and not run AA...) and get up to 50-60 fps.

 

[Guest]

How would an r9 280x handle 1440p? idk if that would be optimal for gaming for me, i guess i could always just set the resolution to 1080p, but would it fit on the screen correctly then?

It depends on the game obviously. A 280x would handle decently at 1440p and allow you to play most non graphically intensive games at max settings 60 fps. For more intense must play games like Metro: LL and BF4 I think it gets around 30 fps at ultra 4x aa. You could always turn down or off AA (though why build a pimped out PC and not run AA...) and get up to 50-60 fps.

BF4 actually isn't as graphically intensive as people think. It's a bit like BF3.
The 280x is a rebranded 7970 GHz ed. I have a Sapphire 7950 (a bit overclocked) and I run BF4 on ultra with 4xaa at ~60fps (obviously can only see 60fps).
This was a bit unnecessary but thought I'd point that out .

 

[pcnoob1911]

How would an r9 280x handle 1440p? idk if that would be optimal for gaming for me, i guess i could always just set the resolution to 1080p, but would it fit on the screen correctly then?

It depends on the game obviously. A 280x would handle decently at 1440p and allow you to play most non graphically intensive games at max settings 60 fps. For more intense must play games like Metro: LL and BF4 I think it gets around 30 fps at ultra 4x aa. You could always turn down or off AA (though why build a pimped out PC and not run AA...) and get up to 50-60 fps.

Alright, you pretty much talked me into it , just hope it doesn't crap out shortly after 90 days, because there's no warranty

 

[MapRef41N93W]

How would an r9 280x handle 1440p? idk if that would be optimal for gaming for me, i guess i could always just set the resolution to 1080p, but would it fit on the screen correctly then?

It depends on the game obviously. A 280x would handle decently at 1440p and allow you to play most non graphically intensive games at max settings 60 fps. For more intense must play games like Metro: LL and BF4 I think it gets around 30 fps at ultra 4x aa. You could always turn down or off AA (though why build a pimped out PC and not run AA...) and get up to 50-60 fps.

Alright, you pretty much talked me into it , just hope it doesn't crap out shortly after 90 days, because there's no warranty

Newegg allows you to buy a warranty from their department don't they? Even at like 40$ that is about the same price as the other 2 monitors you are looking into.

 

[pcnoob1911]

How would an r9 280x handle 1440p? idk if that would be optimal for gaming for me, i guess i could always just set the resolution to 1080p, but would it fit on the screen correctly then?

It depends on the game obviously. A 280x would handle decently at 1440p and allow you to play most non graphically intensive games at max settings 60 fps. For more intense must play games like Metro: LL and BF4 I think it gets around 30 fps at ultra 4x aa. You could always turn down or off AA (though why build a pimped out PC and not run AA...) and get up to 50-60 fps.

Alright, you pretty much talked me into it , just hope it doesn't crap out shortly after 90 days, because there's no warranty

Newegg allows you to buy a warranty from their department don't they? Even at like 40$ that is about the same price as the other 2 monitors you are looking into.

I actually don't see an "extended warranty" option.

 

[MapRef41N93W]

You can buy a warranty from Squaretrade's website. They are showing a price of 49.99 for a monitor priced at 339.99.

 

[pcnoob1911]

You can buy a warranty from Squaretrade's website. They are showing a price of 49.99 for a monitor priced at 339.99.

never heard of squaretrader. Thanks for the tip

 

[pcnoob1911]

You can buy a warranty from Squaretrade's website. They are showing a price of 49.99 for a monitor priced at 339.99.

under tvs?