Televisions as monitors: What are you using, and why?

Pradeep

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,845
Location
Runny glass
Did you ever get one? I'm thinking I want more pixels than 1920x1200.

No, and the newer 30" Dell model with scaler suffers from shocking input lag:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4070/dell-u3011-review-dells-new-30-inch-flagship/7

If money weren't an object the NEC PA301w looks like a winner, too much for me at $2300:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4196/nec-pa301w-review-the-baddest-30-inch-display

Though at this point in time I won't be buying anything that doesn't support 120Hz input via HDMI for 3D support.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
I ogled a Dell U2711 just the other day; it was pretty impressive. The U2410 next to it paled in comparison. Locally, you can get one for as little as $700. I really, really, really doubt that you can buy anything else anywhere near that good for that kind of money.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,916
Location
USA
I'm not a huge fan of 3D and from the few in-store TV's I've watched that have 3D, the glasses were annoying, they flickered, and it was dark. All of which distracted me from the limited 3D experience.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,257
I don't see it. It's one thing to be go to a movie, and watch a 3D movie, it's another to sit in front of a monitor, or TV, and fool your brains concept of depth perception, with no knowledge of the long term effects.

I've tried the various setups at Costco, and, been seriously underwhelmed. Some of the Blu-rays I've got are pretty close to 3D in depth on the Vizio 37" already.

I'm not real convinced that 120MHZ is much more then a marketing gimic.

Even if you have 120MHZ, you need drivers and Nvidia testing to work with their 3D, and, that means Mitsubishi.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,245
Location
SC
Pretty convinced the whole faking depth perception while having your eyes focus on the same plane tends to not work really well.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,454
Location
USA
Edge lit LED? I thought they still sucked. The corners are too bright in the dark scenes.
 

Pradeep

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,845
Location
Runny glass
I don't see it. It's one thing to be go to a movie, and watch a 3D movie, it's another to sit in front of a monitor, or TV, and fool your brains concept of depth perception, with no knowledge of the long term effects.

I've tried the various setups at Costco, and, been seriously underwhelmed. Some of the Blu-rays I've got are pretty close to 3D in depth on the Vizio 37" already.

I'm not real convinced that 120MHZ is much more then a marketing gimic.

Even if you have 120MHZ, you need drivers and Nvidia testing to work with their 3D, and, that means Mitsubishi.

3D can harm developing eyes. It's not recommended for under 2s and watch them till 5 and older. Mine are 10+ so no issues there.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,454
Location
USA
What are your thoughts on 50+? I'm happy enough if my eyes both focus on the same general area now. :spiderman:
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,719
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Then just watch your regular TV cross-eyed and pretend ;)

Honestly, I don't feel 3D contributes significantly yet. Give me some real VR goggles and some decent content and we'll talk.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,454
Location
USA
Most content sucks in any format. :(
But hey, I added 3 new LCD TVs in less than two months. That's as modern as I get. ;)
I have not tried to use one as a monitor. I would not have a place to put one that is not too close.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,865
Location
Michigan
So, I'm on the fence about purchasing a Dell U2711. There is coupon right now that takes it down to $825 w/ free shipping (but 6% sales tax :( ). It's been cheaper before, but not in the past 6 months or so. The forthcoming Samsung SA850 sounds interesting with PLS, but I think it's a glossy monitor and I don't do glossy.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,865
Location
Michigan
So, apparently the SA850 is not glossy. But, it's LED edgelit which wouldn't be my first choice. Of course it's not out yet, so it's all still sort of nebulous.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
The specs say that's a TN panel with a claimed 160° vertical viewing angle.

I don't think I could live with the color inversion crap on such a large screen - my head would almost never be in the right place.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,719
Location
Horsens, Denmark
So, I'm on the fence about purchasing a Dell U2711. There is coupon right now that takes it down to $825 w/ free shipping (but 6% sales tax :( ). It's been cheaper before, but not in the past 6 months or so. The forthcoming Samsung SA850 sounds interesting with PLS, but I think it's a glossy monitor and I don't do glossy.

That is a great looking screen, I've been happy with all my Dell UltraSharp monitors. I want one of those for home, but don't think I could justify it at the moment.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,257
I was at Costco today and learned a bit. The lady was thrilled to death with the Panasonic 50 inch Plasma for about 649., and the 52 inch with 3D support for about 800.00
She argued the refresh rate was so very fast, faster then 120hz,
and the screen was pretty much unbreakable.

Also, she mentioned Toshiba is making LCD/LED tvs with 14 bit
screens, versus Vizios 10 bit screens for 120Hz panels.

The saving grace I have for the P2770 is the dynamic setting, which takes it to black when not in use, and adjusts very well to whatever I'm doing on it. Important for a second monitor.

I wonder how two P2770's would work flanking the 37" Vizio,
using a 3 TV setup? What video card would one use to drive three screens these days?
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
8 bits per color channel is adequate for photographs and more than enough for video. 10 bits allows smoother rendering where one color predominates, eg sky. Most people aren't going to notice.

14 bits is for scanners, where they process the image before you even get to see it. Also helps with grayscales. No idea what the point is with display monitors or TVs, although HDMI has a 16-bits per channel mode. I've read that it can help meet gamma profiles, but that would only be an issue if your panel was intrinsically poor in this regard to start with.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
I don't have very much to add, but at this point every monitor I have that is not a TV is a Dell Ultrasharp. My particular 27" Ultrasharp has been out of production for a while though.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,865
Location
Michigan
I think I will hold off on buying the Dell for now. It's not a spectacular deal, and the Samsung SA850 is close enough to market that it's probably worth waiting to see how it stacks up.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,257
"52" plasma with 3d for $800? Watch out, they might be 720p panels. Pony up for 1080p. "

They are 1080, but out of stock. LCD/LED are dropping the prices big time on the plasmas. They are cool, use little energy, and weigh a ton.

I'm not really convinced LED edgelit is really that great yet. LCD's seem very good. I'm going to keep watching prices...Our costco manager will take a return,
drop the price a couple hundred dollars, and put it back on the floor, and sell it as open box, with the same warranty.

Waiting to see if I can find one of those...
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,719
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Samsung Series 6 6000 32" = piece of crap.

I have it side-by-side with my cheap ASUS VW246 24", and the Samsung is unusable.

1. Doesn't have 1920x1080 pixels. If you set the screen to "16x9" and give it 1920x1080 it runs way over on the sides. According to the nVidia scaling program, it is closer to 1850x975. If you set the TV to "fit" mode the scaling is obvious, and makes even large text painful to look at.

2. Nasty pixel pitch. Not really pitch per se, but the pixels are tiny, and the space between them massive. Almost as bad as plasma screens, like tiny lightbulbs evenly spaced on a black background. Your eyes can easily distinguish the grid, and it is distracting.

3. Terrible color quality. I don't have my X-Rite i1 with me, but it is clearly massively wrong. There is no vignetting, it is evenly wrong all across the screen.

More complaints are coming, I'm sure, but this will do for now.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,257
I'm on my 4th or 5th 27" Samsung Monitor.

So far, at Costco the Price has dropped from 320 to 259.00. This last one P2770 with 1ms
is fine for a second monitor.

Had a scare at Costco today. The entire shelf was filled with generation 3 A350 27" monitors, except for one. The A350 had no price, but, it appears the 350 is supposed to indicate the price, since that's what they charged me.

I went back and got the last one at 259.00.
The starline "buttons" are better on this one then others.

Dynamic contrast nearly turns the monitor black, making it so dark you can't read the folders, if they are only a couple on that screen. That is perfect for me, since I don't want it on when watching a movie or TV show on the Vizio.
Getting tempted by Plasmas. The LG 50" is 550, 1080P, and the Panasonic 50" 720 is 600. 600mhz refresh, I wonder if it's stand alone if you can notice the difference from LED, and, if you can brighten up the settings
on the plasmas to make them appear brighter, since the default, at least at costco, is a bit less bright then the LED or LCD tvs?
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,865
Location
Michigan
1. Doesn't have 1920x1080 pixels. If you set the screen to "16x9" and give it 1920x1080 it runs way over on the sides. According to the nVidia scaling program, it is closer to 1850x975. If you set the TV to "fit" mode the scaling is obvious, and makes even large text painful to look at.
It has 1920x1080 pixels. You need to find the mode on the TV that gives 1:1 pixel mapping instead of overscan.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,454
Location
USA

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,348
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
there isn't one. believe me, I'm familiar with that setting. the options are:

16x9
4x3
fit
dynamic 1
dynamic 2

i tried them all.

My gut feeling is that:
1. The EDID information from the TV is fubar, hence the card can't set the right mode.
2. The gfx card, doesn't understand the latest version of EDID, which the TV may be giving out.

To confirm 1, can you dump the EDID information and see if 1920x1080 modes are present? For the 2nd, update the video drivers and/or video BIOS.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
Bleh, they are 16:9 with very small pixel pitch. Why not get a proper 30" monitor?

The fact that they cost five times more than a 30" TV might have something to do with it.

My Sharp TV takes a 1920x1200 input and apparently squishes it a little to display on 1920x1080 pixels. But the TV definitely accepts the video mode.
 
Top