# TV or Monitor?



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

Someone wants me to help them setup a new system.
They want a 32" display. Is there any advantage of using a monitor over a HD TV?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Marlin Guy said:


> Someone wants me to help them setup a new system.
> They want a 32" display. Is there any advantage of using a monitor over a HD TV?


Where would you buy a "monitor" these days. Serious question. In my mind, a monitor is a TV that doesn't have speakers or things like that. In fact, I'd like to buy monitors rather than these 3D "Smart" TVs. They gotta be cheaper, no?

Rich


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

This is a computer desktop setup. Not a TV setup.
I'm just wondering if a 1080P HD TV is going to display as well as a computer monitor.


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

In searching computer monitors, it would appear that they only go up to 27" or so. So a 32 inch would have to be a tv.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Marlin Guy said:


> This is a computer desktop setup. Not a TV setup.
> I'm just wondering if a 1080P HD TV is going to display as well as a computer monitor.


Understood. Don't know the answer, but I'll leave this thread now and leave you in the hands of someone better versed to help than I.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Marlin Guy said:


> In searching computer monitors, it would appear that they only go up to 27" or so. So a 32 inch would have to be a tv.


Perhaps I won't leave. I tried a Vizio 32 or 37 inch LCD TV a couple two three years ago and it was a poor TV, but a helluva nice monitor. Awfully expensive for a computer monitor, tho. Probably a lot cheaper now. I think I paid over $500 for it and if it would have been $300, I'd have kept it and used it as my desktop computer's main monitor. I do have a nice 1080p 24" LCD monitor now. I'd think any small TV would do for a monitor. LCD of course.

Rich


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Marlin Guy said:


> Someone wants me to help them setup a new system.
> They want a 32" display. Is there any advantage of using a monitor over a HD TV?


 Apple makes the best (and most expensive) one around but it is 30" not 32". Dell also makes a 30". That is the largest PC desktop monitor these days.

A TV would be WAY cheaper ($250 and up) but the resolution is not really made for a computer unless all they want to do is watch TV and moives. It maxes out at 1920 x 1080 so the fonts would be huge (unless that's what he wants). If the guy wants a large montor for graphics work a TV won't come close. The "native" resolution on my 27" monitor is 2560 x 1440. He should really try out a 27" on a computer and see if he likes it. The jump to 30" gets VERY expensive.

Edit: He's also need a fairly high-end video card to get even up to 1920 x 1080 non-interlaced resolution for the TV. If hos card won't go that high the fonts on the TV will be 5" tall.  A TV is not a good solution for "everyday" computer use.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Marlin Guy said:


> In searching computer monitors, it would appear that they only go up to 27" or so. So a 32 inch would have to be a tv.


The Samsung UN32D4000 has a PC input.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Marlin Guy said:


> In searching computer monitors, it would appear that they only go up to 27" or so. So a 32 inch would have to be a tv.


 30" is the biggest "PC" type desktop monitor. Apple & Dell and a couple other Graphics oriented companies make them. VERY expensive. TV's are horrible for long term use (for other than games or watching videos).


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

MysteryMan said:


> The Samsung UN32D4000 has a PC input.


 Virtually every recent LCD and plasma TV up to 72" does. Great for showing photos off your laptop or a movie but not much else.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

MysteryMan said:


> The Samsung UN32D4000 has a PC input.


Current video cards has HDMI output(s).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

TBlazer07 said:


> Virtually every recent LCD and plasma TV up to 72" does. Great for showing photos off your laptop or a movie but not much else.


Slide shows are not a popular application for modern computers. The display latency on many LCD TVs will drive a computer user batty. TVs are equipped to handle TV images and often don't do well with text rendering and scrolling.

Of course if the computer operator is vision impaired, I suppose it doesn't much matter if the finer details get lost in the translation.

It is also important to note that not all TVs will accept random resolutions through their analog inputs and not all display cards are equipped to output all panel resolutions (especially the odd resolutions used by some plasma displays).


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

P Smith said:


> Current video cards has HDMI output(s).


 Most of the top end ones do but hardy any of the cheaper ones. So? The resolution limitation is the TV. If you like to do word processing with 5 foot high fonts at 1920x1080 (i or p) that look like fuzz balls that fine. Bottom line is TV's are NOT made to be computer monitors (other than for photos, movies or some lo-res games) or we would be able to buy 32" computer monitors for $249 rather than the $1500 to $4000 "real" monitors cost.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

harsh said:


> *Slide shows are not a popular application for modern computers.*


Huh? Why would a computer have anything to do with it, it's the display? . Not as great as on a nice monitor of course but for family viewing on a large screen TV are perfect (as are movies). Of course if the TV or monitor has lousy latency a movie will look worse but most new LCD & (in my case) plasma look really good for a photo display.


----------



## Inkosaurus (Jul 29, 2011)

TBlazer07 said:


> Most of the top end ones do but hardy any of the cheaper ones. So? The resolution limitation is the TV. If you like to do word processing with 5 foot high fonts at 1920x1080 (i or p) that look like fuzz balls that fine. Bottom line is TV's are NOT made to be computer monitors (other than for photos, movies or some lo-res games) or we would be able to buy 32" computer monitors for $249 rather than the $1500 to $4000 "real" monitors cost.


Over exaggeration at its finest.
Its definitely not that difficult at all to configure a tv to work well with PC and the results are far from " If you like to do word processing with 5 foot high fonts"

I have my pc hooked up to a 42" inch panny plasma tv from 05 and it works fine, yeah it needed some tweaking but even then it wasnt so bad prior to the tweaks.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

TBlazer07 said:


> *Most of the top end ones* do but hardy any of the cheaper ones. ...


Seems to me you should look at middle range cards too.

What the matter do over exaggeration in simple things. Doesn't matter how you want screw your opponent - the market is show: you are far from real life.


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

One of the reasons this person wants such a massive display is that do want everything to be larger. They currently have a 27" monitor and the resolution is something like X900 or so.
I can't stand to look at it, but they like it.

I tried to convince them to go with 2 24" screens, but they wouldn't have it.
Anyway, I guess we're going to try a 32 LCD TV (1080P) and see how it looks.

Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

P Smith said:


> Seems to me you should look at middle range cards too.
> 
> What the matter do over exaggeration in simple things. Doesn't matter how you want screw your opponent - the market is show: you are far from real life.


 Obviously English is your second language so I can't blame you for your cryptic messages but unfortunately I have no idea wtf you are talking about but whatever it is congratulations on being the 1st person on my ignore list.


----------



## Inkosaurus (Jul 29, 2011)

P Smith said:


> Seems to me you should look at middle range cards too.


Just because the middle/low range cards have HDMI ports on them does not mean they can handle it especially on the larger resolutions.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Inkosaurus said:


> Over exaggeration at its finest.
> Its definitely not that difficult at all to configure a tv to work well with PC and the results are far from " If you like to do word processing with 5 foot high fonts"
> 
> I have my pc hooked up to a 42" inch panny plasma tv from 05 and it works fine, yeah it needed some tweaking but even then it wasnt so bad prior to the tweaks.


 OBVIOUSLY it was a bit of hyperbole, the fonts are only 3 feet high. 

If you want to use your TV as a monitor all the power to you. You can say what you want but compared to 27" or 30" computer monitor it looks like crap for anything but the most basic use or else you would see thousands of 32" (and up) TV sets advertised as 32" computer monitors and reviewed all over the web. I have never seen one so it must say something about the commonality of it's use.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Marlin Guy said:


> One of the reasons this person wants such a massive display is that do want everything to be larger. They currently have a 27" monitor and the resolution is something like X900 or so.
> I can't stand to look at it, but they like it.
> 
> I tried to convince them to go with 2 24" screens, but they wouldn't have it.
> ...


 If it works for what they are using it for ie: no serious graphics apps or heavy duty gaming but just basic stuff like web surfing, email etc it should be sufficient.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TBlazer07 said:


> If it works for what they are using it for ie: no serious graphics apps or heavy duty gaming but just basic stuff like web surfing, email etc it should be sufficient.


Not looking for an argument, but I thought the Vizio I tried several years ago (must have been in early 2007) looked good when I hooked it up to my computer. I'm not a gamer or have anything to do with graphics and I fit the category of "surfing, email etc".

Your arguments against using a TV for a monitor are well thought out and interesting.

Rich


----------



## PokerJoker (Apr 12, 2008)

A bit of advice when using a TV as a monitor - go into the TV setup and turn OFF every automatic "feature" and adjustment you can find, particularly auto color adjustments, motion enhancement, and noise reduction. Also, if it's offered, turn on the "dot by dot" mode. This will eliminate the overscan and also sharpen the picture a lot.

I had a TV that I tried to use as a monitor. Out of the box it was HORRIBLE when used that way. After laboriously tweaking the set, it has improved to "usable". (A TV will never be a great monitor.)

Keith


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Rich said:


> *I'm not a gamer or have anything to do with graphics and I fit the category of "surfing, email etc".*
> 
> Your arguments against using a TV for a monitor are well thought out and interesting.
> 
> Rich


 That's why it looked fine.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TBlazer07 said:


> That's why it looked fine.


Truthfully, I didn't have it on the computer that long, just a short time. The price of that thing bothered me and all I wanted to do was get it back to the store and get a good set. I did go on the forum and look around. That seemed pretty good.

Rich


----------



## Inkosaurus (Jul 29, 2011)

TBlazer07 said:


> That's why it looked fine.


To be fair you do have a valid point in this regard.
I work in digital art and photography, editing photos and drawing up art on the PC is a must and having the resolution to nitpick over every single pixel is also a must and this is something that TV just couldnt pull off well enough.

I still have the TV hooked up to the pc so i can use it to double check things on a larger screen when im working with something that isnt as important or if im feeling to lazy to zoom with my tablet and mouse lol
But i asbolutely pass on looking at the TV when i need to cut something out and im working with a stock that has alot of particles or loose hair around lol.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

I use a Viewsonic 24" monitor. Its sold as a computer monitor, but has a ATSC HD Tuner built in. Looks as good as any of the "monitor only" monitors I have used. I think this is the reverse case of using a TV for the computer


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

For such purpose someone should have Apple Cinema HD 23" or 30" monitor. Or both.

[These are sit on my table now.]


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Davenlr said:


> I use a Viewsonic 24" monitor. Its sold as a computer monitor, but has a ATSC HD Tuner built in. Looks as good as any of the "monitor only" monitors I have used. I think this is the reverse case of using a TV for the computer


 Yes, a 24" monitor as a TV would make a better TV than a 24" TV would make as a monitor. 

I have an HR34 hooked up to my 27" Dell through component and it looks great. The Dell has PIP and I can watch TV (well, really listen) in a 3" box in the corner or watch it as a 27" TV. I can actually have "double PIP" (PIP PIP?) because the HR34 is pip'able as well.The Dell also has HDMI input but the Dell PIP doesn't work with HDMI only the component and composite inputs.


----------



## dmspen (Dec 1, 2006)

One of my friends bought a Panasonic business plasma monitor for his TV. Instead of going through the Panasonic Consumer web site, he went through the Business section. He was able to pick and choose what options it came with. All the connectors are plug-in modules. He opted to NOT get a tuner and went with just several HDMI ports. The TV actually came out a bit cheaper than an equivalent consumer TV.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dmspen said:


> One of my friends bought a Panasonic business plasma monitor for his TV. Instead of going through the Panasonic Consumer web site, he went through the Business section. He was able to pick and choose what options it came with. All the connectors are plug-in modules. He opted to NOT get a tuner and went with just several HDMI ports. The TV actually came out a bit cheaper than an equivalent consumer TV.


Huh. Didn't know you could do that.

Rich


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

dmspen said:


> One of my friends bought a Panasonic business plasma monitor for his TV. Instead of going through the Panasonic Consumer web site, he went through the Business section. He was able to pick and choose what options it came with. All the connectors are plug-in modules. He opted to NOT get a tuner and went with just several HDMI ports. The TV actually came out a bit cheaper than an equivalent consumer TV.


 My very first flat-screen was one of those Panny's. Removable modules for everything. HDMI, composite, BNC etc. Not sure they even made a tuner back then as they were (are?) primarily for commercial displays.


----------

