Monitor vs TV

[Gagnon39]

I'm curious how many of you play on a monitor as opposed to a TV. I remember playing on a monitor with either MLB 20 (or maybe 19) and I swear I felt like I hit better, primarily because I was just simply closer to the screen. I have 65" 4K TV and a PS5 and my monitor is only 2K capable. I wonder if there'd be much of a downgrade playing on 2K with a monitor. Maybe this could be my excuse to finally buy a 4K monitor.

[Archie56]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I'm curious how many of you play on a monitor as opposed to a TV. I remember playing on a monitor with either MLB 20 (or maybe 19) and I swear I felt like I hit better, primarily because I was just simply closer to the screen. I have 65" 4K TV and a PS5 and my monitor is only 2K capable. I wonder if there'd be much of a downgrade playing on 2K with a monitor. Maybe this could be my excuse to finally buy a 4K monitor.

Monitors are made more for gaming in my opinion. Except now I have a LG C1 and it blows away any monitor I've ever had. If you have a bigger TV, you really need to get one with the right kind of gaming specs. But you'll usually pay a good amount for one. I believe my 65" LG was $1800 and it was on sale from like $2300

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[kdutch98]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I'm curious how many of you play on a monitor as opposed to a TV. I remember playing on a monitor with either MLB 20 (or maybe 19) and I swear I felt like I hit better, primarily because I was just simply closer to the screen. I have 65" 4K TV and a PS5 and my monitor is only 2K capable. I wonder if there'd be much of a downgrade playing on 2K with a monitor. Maybe this could be my excuse to finally buy a 4K monitor.

I bought a Predator gaming monitor from Walmart, and switched to that from my TV, and it seems to have made a world of difference. It could just be a "placebo" effect, but I seem to be able to time the pitches much better.

[Gagnon39]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I bought a Predator gaming monitor from Walmart, and switched to that from my TV, and it seems to have made a world of difference. It could just be a "placebo" effect, but I seem to be able to time the pitches much better.

You switched, "to," the monitor?

[HozAndMoose]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I've been using monitors as my main display for about 10 years now. Like you my monitor is 1440p so I still use the TV to play single-player story games in 4k. Depending on what monitor you have it might accept a 4k signal and downscale to 1440p instead of just doing 1080 since Sony can't be bothered to give us a native 1440p like Xbox does.

[Archie56]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I've been using monitors as my main display for about 10 years now. Like you my monitor is 1440p so I still use the TV to play single-player story games in 4k. Depending on what monitor you have it might accept a 4k signal and downscale to 1440p instead of just doing 1080 since Sony can't be bothered to give us a native 1440p like Xbox does.

Or VRR support, but apparently that's coming which I'm really looking forward to

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Gagnon39]

Monitor vs TV

I've been using monitors as my main display for about 10 years now. Like you my monitor is 1440p so I still use the TV to play single-player story games in 4k. Depending on what monitor you have it might accept a 4k signal and downscale to 1440p instead of just doing 1080 since Sony can't be bothered to give us a native 1440p like Xbox does.

Ah, yes. I forgot that we can’t do 1440 on PS5. I guess I’ll just have to get a 4K monitor. I want one anyway. Any recommendations?

I just looked some up. Thoughts on this one? It’s actually cheaper than I expected.IMG_3993.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Firestorm]

Re: Monitor vs TV

It's more so about the input lag / response time than it is about resolution to an extent. We'll tackle resolution first. Naturally, a higher resolution will look better than a lower one, assuming the size of the display is the same. A 1080p monitor that's the industry standard size of 27 inches will look better than a 1080p tv that's 40 inches because there is a higher pixel density on the monitor, meaning there are more pixels squashed into an area of a given size.



TV's have gotten a lot better over the years, but typically speaking monitors have a lower input latency, the time it takes your button press to register on the screen. Monitors also typically have a faster response time, meaning the time it takes the pixels to go from grey to grey which results in an image with better perceived clarity, less ghosting and haloing. Monitors, generally speaking also have a better refresh rate.



In your particular situation, the PS5 doesn't currently support 2k (1440p) so from a visual perspective the tv is going to output native 4k and depending on the monitor in question or how the PS5 handles the situation (I'm not exactly sure) either the monitor is going to upscale a 1080p image to 1440p which for conversation sake will look worse than if your monitor can accept a 4k signal and downscale it back to 1440p, which would be the better option.

[Firestorm]

Re: Monitor vs TV

If you're in the market for a 4k monitor, or any monitor for that matter, I highly recommend you watch some videos on YouTube from a channel called Hardware Unboxed.

[HozAndMoose]

Re: Monitor vs TV

Ah, yes. I forgot that we can’t do 1440 on PS5. I guess I’ll just have to get a 4K monitor. I want one anyway. Any recommendations?

I just looked some up. Thoughts on this one? It’s actually cheaper than I expected.[ATTACH]199334[/ATTACH]


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

From what I can see it's a good monitor. If you care about the HDR though don't buy it. It's peak brightness is about 350 nits which isn't even close to a good HDR experience. Monitors haven't caught up with HDR as fast as TVs have so if you want good HDR its a lot more expensive. Everything else seems fine.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Monitor vs TV

Good TV ≥ Monitor. Monitor > Mediocre TV. The biggest difference is input lag. A monitor will have almost none (like 1 ms). A mediocre TV in game mode can still be around 25-30. A newer TV can get around 10.

And then you have my TV which is probably like 70. It's not good. Can't wait to get a better TV someday.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[tc020791]

Monitor vs TV

I have a 55” OLED, as well as a 28” 4K 120HZ monitor with HDMI 2.1. Both are Samsung.

Which is better? I think it really depends on the game and what you’re looking to get out of it. Something like GT7 that requires an insane amount of precision, I prefer the monitor. But for something like baseball that is a little more relaxed, I actually prefer the bigger TV. It definitely helps me see the ball better and I don’t play online so it really doesn’t matter if I have a small amount of input lag, it’s easy to adjust to when batting. I also don’t have any trouble switching between the two, so I’m not sure if there’s really much input lag at all on my TV, but I definitely see the ball way better on my big TV.

I’ve also heard some people say small monitors are really made more for first person shooters. The reason being you get the same amount of things on screen but in a much smaller space. In an FPS that’s very important, on a smaller screen you’re able survey your surroundings much quicker than on a huge TV.

If you’re going to be playing a lot of games on it then yes I think it’s definitely worth your investment. If you’re looking for something to mainly play MLB on, I’d stick with the big TV and just keep your eye on monitors in case something comes out you feel you need a monitor for.

[TheBrew101]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I'm not an expert on the matter but I thought I'd share my experiences. I used to game om a monitor exclusively. I thought response time better, I thought the smaller pixel density looked better, I didn't have to move my head to see action. The last monitor I had was a Samsung 4k 28" monitor.

I thought it worked well and enjoyed it. The thing it didn't do well is HDR. Though the monitor could do HDR in theory it was not good and needed to turn HDR off.

I upgraded to an LG C1 48" TV a few months ago. I really like this TV. It is good for gaming and watching TV. HDR is now playable (though to be honest I'm still not sold on HDR and I'm still not sure it really offers much in gaming yet in my opinion). Visually I prefer the LG C1 to anything I have had. I'm not sure I prefer the 48" over the 28" for gaming (I sit close when gaming anyway).

I also had a cheaper 4K 55" TV before monitor. This experience was the worst of the 3. HDR not good, needed to play on game mode to reduce input lag which hurt fidelity of image some.

So for me, it is LG C1, followed closely by gaming monitor, and a distant 3rd was the older 4K TV. I think the big thing with the monitor is to understand HDR may be poor even if the monitor is HDR capable.

And then there are things to consider like VRR. HDMI 2.1. You will want your TV or monitor to have this for future so you can play 120fps with variable refresh rate for supported games (my monitor and old TV did not have this).

[snaz16]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I'm not an expert on the matter but I thought I'd share my experiences. I used to game om a monitor exclusively. I thought response time better, I thought the smaller pixel density looked better, I didn't have to move my head to see action. The last monitor I had was a Samsung 4k 28" monitor.

I thought it worked well and enjoyed it. The thing it didn't do well is HDR. Though the monitor could do HDR in theory it was not good and needed to turn HDR off.

I upgraded to an LG C1 48" TV a few months ago. I really like this TV. It is good for gaming and watching TV. HDR is now playable (though to be honest I'm still not sold on HDR and I'm still not sure it really offers much in gaming yet in my opinion). Visually I prefer the LG C1 to anything I have had. I'm not sure I prefer the 48" over the 28" for gaming (I sit close when gaming anyway).

I also had a cheaper 4K 55" TV before monitor. This experience was the worst of the 3. HDR not good, needed to play on game mode to reduce input lag which hurt fidelity of image some.

So for me, it is LG C1, followed closely by gaming monitor, and a distant 3rd was the older 4K TV. I think the big thing with the monitor is to understand HDR may be poor even if the monitor is HDR capable.

And then there are things to consider like VRR. HDMI 2.1. You will want your TV or monitor to have this for future so you can play 120fps with variable refresh rate for supported games (my monitor and old TV did not have this).

I second this response from Brew. If you get a 4k or even a new tv for that matter,make sure to get Hdmi 2.1 and also the correct hdmi cable for it. You can get some good quality cable decently priced. I purchased an Aorus Gigabyte 32" 4k and I pretty much use that exclusively. It is HDR,but as previously mentioned it comes in a 350-400 nits,but getting color or brightness/contrast looking good is not a problem. 2.1's are still somewhat scarce but are getting more into the mainstream. Mine was pricey,but they have some more affordable options in the 400-600 range. Go to Rtings.com and look at their reviews on monitors(and tv's for that matter. They also spec which monitors,tv's etc. are good for the consoles,etc. I'll try to post some links in another post.

[NYJin2011tm]

Re: Monitor vs TV

I started with MLB 07 on a tv. Then when Dynamic difficulty started I was always stuck on Rookie for hitting. I thought man no wonder I was mostly losing because I was always hitting on AllStar. Then I got a gaming monitor and within a handful of games went up to AllStar+ while briefly touching the next level above. So it wasn’t me, it was my tv because of the input lag I guess. I’ve stayed on mostly monitor ever since. I did buy a LG 55 inch hdmi 2.1 for ps5 and seem to hit fine on it with MLB 21.