32 inch TV vs 30 inch monitor.

[speednugget]

hey guys, i just got 1300 dollers from my auntie for my birthday (AWESOMEZORS!!)

i want a new monitor/tv to replace my 22 incher.

im looking at the 305T samsung

or a 1080P 32 inch. (save some cashzor.)

im just asking, is there a MASSIVE difference from 2560x1600 to 1080P?

i got a 5850, Amd x6 1055T.

thx

[azmothman]

Happy Birthday! Samsung monitors have always worked well for me!

[L85A2]

Stick with a 30" as it will work out the best.

[HL2-4-Life]

Originally Posted by L85A2

Stick with a 30" as it will work out the best.

Bear in mind the OP has a single HD5850, which while being a powerful card, would be pretty good @1200P/1080P. For 1600P, you'd need at least two of these badboys to do 1600P any justice.

[speednugget]

yea, im leaning towards the 32 inch TV. im just asking IF the quility will still be OK on 1080p.

[HL2-4-Life]

Originally Posted by speednugget

yea, im leaning towards the 32 inch TV. im just asking IF the quility will still be OK on 1080p.

I have a HTPC - Q6600 + 4GB RAM + HD3870 X2 + 9600GT (PhysX) + 64bit Win7 HP - hooked up to an older 37" HD ready TV (Benq DV3750) which does 1360x768, looks good enough for me (even though I usually use a 24" monitor for gaming, I have three now for EyeFinity goodness). The TV rated response of 8ms IIRC, is good enough for me, I don't see any ghosting whatsoever.

[Lavans]

If you get the TV, you will find you won't have to upgrade your computer as often since the maximum resolution is fairly average for gaming. The monitor will put out a much nicer picture since it's a higher resolution, but at the cost of requiring more CPU/GPU power.

[L85A2]

Originally Posted by Lavans

If you get the TV, you will find you won't have to upgrade your computer as often since the maximum resolution is fairly average for gaming. The monitor will put out a much nicer picture since it's a higher resolution, but at the cost of requiring more CPU/GPU power.

You have that mixed up.

A 30" monitor has a bigger resolution then the TV he is thinking of buying.

[Lavans]

Originally Posted by L85A2

You have that mixed up.

A 30" monitor has a bigger resolution then the TV he is thinking of buying.

That's exactly what I said.

Originally Posted by Lavans

The monitor will put out a much nicer picture since it's higher resolution

[T Rush]

I don't see how the "CPU"(in the "requiring more CPU/GPU power") would have any relationship with the size or resolution of the display...the video card's(GPU) frame rate capabilities might be effected somewhat by the resolution, as it only can render so many pixels so fast, so comparing 2,073,600pixels per frame(1920x1080) to 4,096,000pixels(2560x1600), and say your video card can draw 120,000,000pixels a second, that would be almost 60fps @ 1080p but maybe down towards 30fps @ 2560x1600...if anything, the CPU might become more of a limitation in lower resolution gaming(if you had a monitor capable of displaying beyond 60Hz/fps) if the video card was able to render every frame faster than the CPU could do the processing to produce what is in/what is happening in that 3D game world(where the video card just draws what those things look like from certain view points, one view point for 2D, and two simultaneous view points for 3D "depth of field" representation)

personally I would(and am) hold off until at least this summer when a few new lines of 120Hz+ capable HDTV will be out, the main new difference will be that while computer monitors are oddly slow to catch on, these new TV will be able to accept a 120Hz input signal so that they can do 3D, even if you don't use them with 3D Stereo shutter glass, likely this will quickly become a new standard for high performance gaming(being able to display back up to 120fps like CRT monitors might have, vs limited at 60fps like LCD were) and I would hate to make a large investment now, and not have that right as it is being intorduced

[Scared]

I found going from 1680*1050 to 1920*1200 to have a minimal effect on my FPS when I changed so going from 1080p to 2560*1600 might not kill performance as much as you think.

[kdawgmaster]

from whatt iv seen the typical computer monitor has a better contrast ratio then a TV monitor so my beat is on the comp one.

[HL2-4-Life]

Originally Posted by DarkDamo

I found going from 1680*1050 to 1920*1200 to have a minimal effect on my FPS when I changed so going from 1080p to 2560*1600 might not kill performance as much as you think.

Well, 1680x1050=1,764,000 pixels vs 1920x1080=2,073,600 pixels. That's a difference of 'only' 309,600 pixels. Now, 2560x1600=4,096,000 pixels, that's almost TWICE the pixels pumps out @1080P, now, are you seriously going to tell me that that that's not going to impact performance?

[T Rush]

Originally Posted by DarkDamo

I found going from 1680*1050 to 1920*1200 to have a minimal effect on my FPS when I changed so going from 1080p to 2560*1600 might not kill performance as much as you think.

but
1680x1050 = 1,764,000pixels
1920x1080 = 2,073,600pixels (just alittle wider really)
2560x1600 = 4,096,000pixels much harder to do..etc. previewing my post, I see that HL2-4-Life beat me to it

Originally Posted by kdawgmaster

from whatt iv seen the typical computer monitor has a better contrast ratio then a TV monitor so my beat is on the comp one.

if anything, I would say the opposite, and that HDTVs have higher native, and more advanced dramatic/effective contrast ratios

I think the market for high performance TVs is much greater and more lucrative than for gaming computer LCD

[madpistol]

Originally Posted by T Rush

if anything, I would say the opposite, and that HDTVs have higher native, and more advanced dramatic/effective contrast ratios

I think the market for high performance TVs is much greater and more lucrative than for gaming computer LCD

Agreed. TV's generally have better picture quality than monitors simply because of what they're designed to do. The contrast on TV's is generally very high, and the performance is just as good.

If you've got your heart set on a 32" Samsung LCD TV, that's the better option. Making your video card drive more pixels isn't always the answer... that, and the TV is going to be cheaper.