hello all.

should i buy 4k tv to be used as a monitor ?
anyone using their tv as a monitor, what specs should i look for ?

thank you in advance.

I think, it should be better to buy a monitor, since a TV is constructed to watch films.

I've hooked up to a TV a couple of times, old VGA & HDMI ones, but I prefer a regular monitor.
I don't like huge screens, even 19" are too big for me, I prefer something around 13", but use 11.6" netbook & laptop when not on my main computer, which is either hooked up to a 4x3 15" XGA or a 5x4 17" SXGA.

////, may i ask why you would prefer a TV over a monitor?
are they cheaper?
bigger?

you got it, 40" 4k tv costs roughly 400 €.
my 30" 1920x1080 monitor were 300ish €

i saw sometime ago article about tv's as a monitors. they actually were kinda positive about tv as a monitor.

EDIT: found the article.

https://www.techspot.com/article/143...op-pc-monitor/

I never knew the difference. There must be something to justify the price difference, maybe refresh rates or something. Long time ago I bought a 32inch 1080p tv and played world of warcraft on it. Loved it, had zero problems. Cost half as much as an equivalent dedicated monitor.

1 members found this post helpful.

nice to hear that someone has experience, i think what is needed from the 4k tv is 60hz refresh rate.

I just researched this exact thing. I'm building a computer for trading. My initial plan was to buy a 55" 4k TV and use that with DisplayFusion software to divide it up into four virtual monitors. A 55" 4k TV would be the equivalent of four 1920x1080 27" monitors in both combined size and resolution.

Eventually I scrapped the TV idea. Admittedly, without ever testing it. I believe HDMI 2.0 on a TV goes up to 4k resolutions at 60Hz. You can get matching video cards to do 60Hz, but be sure to look closely - many only go to 25-30Hz at this resolution on their HDMI ports. DisplayPort might be better with it's higher bandwidth, but you'll probably only see DisplayPort on better monitors, and probably not on TVs at all.

What finally killed the "TV idea" for me was the ergonomics of using a 55" screen (even if divided up into virtual monitors of smaller size). It would be flat, so you couldn't tilt/turn virtual screens like you could individual monitors. And while 60Hz is fine for me on my smaller 27" 1920x1080 monitor, there were questions if that would hold up on a giant 55" 4k TV screen (for computer use - watching movies would be fine of course).

Now, if you're looking at something smaller than the giant 55" panel I was looking at, a 4k TV might be just fine. For all I know, I might have been just fine with a 55" 4k TV divided up into virtual monitors as well. But I'll probably never know, since I'm now planning on multiple individual monitors instead. But I haven't bought those individual monitors yet, so there is still a chance that I might reverse and try the TV idea. We'll see.

1 members found this post helpful.

Mostly look for the 4:4:4 colorspace (most have it these days). But without it, your fonts will at best, be fuzzy. A large contrast ratio will help keep things sharp too.

From $HOME/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't have any experience of using a TV with a PC but the YouTube videos I've seen suggest that, for gaming, the input lag is too much to play properly -- though that will be mainly for FPS gamers who are into being quick. Apparently there's also a lot of picture processing that goes on on modern TVs that can't be switched off properly which, in addition to the above-mentioned lag, can cause things to look odd from a PC.
The videos I watched were, alongside one I don't remember, by Linus Tech Tips.
I think the reason large TVs are cheaper than monitors may be a pixel density thing -- the pixel density on a huge TV will only be that of a normal HD monitor so the panel is cheaper. Add to that the fact that most PC users don't want huge monitors and you get a situation where monitors are smaller and more expensive and TVs larger and cheaper. I believe that the refresh rate and similar also come into it in some cases.

1 members found this post helpful.

yeah, that i know, im not going to play at 4k, just coding / web browsing / movies. 4k playing would require nvidia 1080 and im not ready to buy one.
i play cs:go with my 30" 1920x1080 monitor.

& thanks for haertig and shadow for their input.

yea, i played diablo 2 lod with fedora 25-27, but all my accounts were banned for botting/hacking items/trading

I believe it only requires Nvidia 970 - somewhere around that. I went looking for the least expensive Nvidia card that would support 4k over HDMI 2.0 (meaning at 60Hz), preferably passive cooling (no fan), and this is the one I found on Amazon ($75):

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B072HRD3CY...ILIEMTH8&psc=0

Manufacturer info:
https://www.gigabyte.com/Graphics-Ca...N1030SL-2GL#kf

The meeting room that my LUG uses has a big 4k television which we use as a monitor during meetings.

The full 4k display is unusable as a monitor--we have to dial back the resolution for it to function properly. I agree with those that you would do better to stick with a monitor.

I have a 20" Asus that I'm quite happy with. I can't speak to other brands.

There are a number of low end TVs that LIE about their specs. I have a SANYO 1080p lcd from close to the digital / HDMI change over. As a monitor it can only do 1776x1000, which worked out of the box (after an update) long long ago with a video card that failed eventually. None of my current gen GPUs does the resolution right on it without a lot of trial and error -transform attempts in xrandr. Good enough to watch media, but not so great as a monitor. Although it does 720p like a champ. And other quirks like needing to velcro your remote to the display, as some software things can trigger a monitors overscan which can only be undone with the remote. Overscan is when a TV only shows PART of the image (to hide the dirty edges). A monitor would definitely be less quirky. Like on said LCD, after just 3 days of gaming, the games HUD was basically burned into the TV. Not much as I caught it early. But it certainly ruled out using it as a monitor. Plus it draws 450W which doesn't play well with 1970s era housing when on the same plug / circuit as a 450W computer. Perhaps adding 2x 225W studio monitors, and other should have had more math in school things.

1 members found this post helpful.