This thread is permanently archived
Random gaming monitor question
| Elona
| Flat screen TVs have slow refresh rates, but good colour accuracy.
| Interesting. Imma give it a shot myself although i dont own a desktop yet. also sorry for the double post, came across some error and i didnt see it at first so i thought it didnt post the first time
| Sure why not. I had a TV hooked as my desktop monitor a while back. It wasn't very good, but I think that's just because it's not a good TV, not because it's hooked to a computer. It does its service.
> i dont own a desktop yet.
So, what, you own a laptop instead? You can just hook it to your laptop first to see if it's any good as a monitor.
| >>878828 is correct in the assumption that it'll have a low refresh rate. You may not have this issue if it's anything higher than a minimum-budget set though. The bigger issue will be latency. The majority of flatscreens designed to be home televisions see anywhere between 50 and 300ms of latency (that's speaking off experience, not any statistics), so you may find it rough at times when you move your mouse or press a button and can feel the delay between that and the response.
| Some are designed with features that you can enable to increase the response time at the cost of a lower refresh rate. If you can, do it. FPS is not as valuable as response time.
| Keep in mind that if you don't already have a monitor and are looking at the TV as a way to save some money, you can probably find some used monitors at local thrift stores. Arc and Goodwill don't tend to have them in stock in my experience, but local places may. I've never seen them sold for more than a $20, all of mine have been used purchases.
| You can also get converters for VGA or HDMI to output RF signals (some also have latency issues, but...), which will let you hook up to a CRT. It's bulkier, but using a CRT as a monitor is a lot more practical than you might imagine if you're broke.
| >>878876
The Goodwill thing is very true. A coworker tipped me off and now I have an extra screen for referencing stuff and it cost me like $18. It's certainly not the best monitor, but I'm sure it'll outperform a TV screen by miles.
| >>878813 depends on the tv, I have a flat tv one from almost 12 years ago and even with brightness at the lowest, being near it hurts for some reason or another, but I believe TVs these days use the same tech that a monitor so it wouldn't be a problem. Also the space that you have in your room it's a major point to consider.
| Latency will be ass, especially if it's cheapo. It's nice for watching stuff as you probably expect.
| Dang, well i do have a laptop but too lazy to move it on over and i felt like trying it out with a desktop instead. I do have a raspberry pi but ive only used it once on the tv. Havent touched it since then
| Without any extension cords its kinda awkward to look at the tv that way
| These informations are just general, every tv, and pc monitor can have different characteristics, construction and can he designed differently..
Usually are PC Monitors IPS with lower resolution and with better or similar frame rate than TV with same price which are usually (O)LED/QLED or whatever.. but why is gaming on TV not recommended is thing called "input lag".. https://www.coolblue.nl/en/advice/what-is-input-lag.html
| But if you doesn't play FPS or anything competive you should have be ok.. also, your brain usually can't process less than 300-200 ms, 160 if you was superhuman and you would being able to react instantly on input.. technologies are paradoxically able to show framerate faster than can human brain process it
| ..i just talk about modern tvs after 2010, crt should have safely provide 59-60 hz without input lag in theory, there are frames "redrawed" over, so you always see half of old frame and half of new frames.. https://m.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=3BJU2drrtCM
I'm sorry if i spam.. i feel little bored
| >>879320 Humans have the capacity to change the frequency at which they can SEE. This makes it possible to see things that shouldn't be possible. Each eye sees things at 200-300fps, but the brain processes the images overlapped. This makes it so it is possible for you to see things at an impossible 600fps if you are operating at maximum capacity. Most people, will be able to sense changes in a display up to around 400fps, since we aren't coked up and running on adrenaline 24/7.
| CRT is power hungry and cannot provide a decent resolution unless you fill an entire room with the electromagnetic ray gun.
| >>879771 "yes", eyes are able to see it, but they can't process it at the moment how say it. Human eyes are able to recognize whan image is not natural, but 60 hz is standart which can be enough for eyes even when you play action games.. but if you play cs:go, i don't think that 60 hz or 144 hz will make you better..
>>879772 yes, originally i posted about televisions after 2010, but honestly 4K CRT would be awesome xdd
| I'd seriously advise against it, monitors will get you higher refresh rates and less latency. I've had a lot of screen tearing issues with TVs, but that may just be the ones I've used. Get a 144hz monitor and you'll never want to go back to 60hz
This thread is permanently archived
| I have a tv in my room thats just been sitting there. Ive always wondered if its a good idea to hook up a desktop pc and use the tv as a monitor. Has anyone tried this? Has it left a good experience?