LCD Monitor/TV Question
- Thread starter Demure
- Start date
i thought LCD TVs were more expensive!! hmm
You can get like a 42" LCD TV for cheaper than a 30" LCD monitor. I was just wondering why.
For Example:
Sony Bravia 40" LCD HDTV: $829.98
Dell Ultrasharp 3007WFP 30" LCD Monitor: $1,049.00
Prices taken from NextTag.com
Partly because 30" monitors are 2560x1600 resolution while a TV (regardless of the size) maxes out at 1920x1080 resolution. Also partly because they are price gouging, there's nothing better than a 30" LCD monitor so they'll milk it for all its worth...
Last edited:
madstork91
The One, The Only...
Fun experiment:
Go to an electronics store that sells both.
Pay attention to size and resolutions of monitors.
Go look at the TV section and look for a monitor with the proper connections and look for something of a similar resolution are you found in the monitors.
You may be surprised.
Go to an electronics store that sells both.
Pay attention to size and resolutions of monitors.
Go look at the TV section and look for a monitor with the proper connections and look for something of a similar resolution are you found in the monitors.
You may be surprised.
It all comes down to panel quality, and although some TVs look amazing, it's doubtful they'll look as good as a quality computer monitor. One thing to consider, is that on a large TV, the actual resolution is lower than what a decent computer monitor will provide, usually 1920x1080 or less. Because it's so much larger than a computer monitor though, it's pixel width increases drastically, which will degrade the crisp image.
Thing is though, when you sit 10ft back from the TV, you're not really going to notice this. But running a PC on the same TV, you probably would. I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but that's how I've come to understand things. Ideally, the smaller the pixel width, the crisper the image. You just can't get a small pixel width on a large TV though, unless the resolution actually scales (and on the computer side, we don't have any consumer products that exceed 2560x1600 yet).
Thing is though, when you sit 10ft back from the TV, you're not really going to notice this. But running a PC on the same TV, you probably would. I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but that's how I've come to understand things. Ideally, the smaller the pixel width, the crisper the image. You just can't get a small pixel width on a large TV though, unless the resolution actually scales (and on the computer side, we don't have any consumer products that exceed 2560x1600 yet).
Don't forget response time. You'll be hard pressed to find a TV with a 2ms delay. TVs usually have 8ms - 5ms response time still. If you're anal like me about images, you'll notice ghosting with even 5ms.
Take a TV and a computer monitor of the same size and resolution( a 16:9 monitor), response time, contrast ratio, and outputs, and the computer monitor will only be slightly more expensive.
Take a TV and a computer monitor of the same size and resolution( a 16:9 monitor), response time, contrast ratio, and outputs, and the computer monitor will only be slightly more expensive.
2Tired2Tango
Tech Monkey
Also don't forget the sheer amount of electronics needed to drive a computer monitor... Unlike a Television you are dealing with different refresh rates, different pixel rates, very high pixel counts, lots of rows and columns... all of which takes electronics to drive it.
Beyond 1080p when a TV set gets bigger so do the pixels on the screen. Computer manufacturers are working with a more or less standard pixel size and adding more pixels as the screens get bigger...
Beyond 1080p when a TV set gets bigger so do the pixels on the screen. Computer manufacturers are working with a more or less standard pixel size and adding more pixels as the screens get bigger...