There was a time when a Monitor is vastly superior to TV....

Kroze

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2001
4,052
1
0
But now...can someone explain this bullshit of a scam?

A 55" 4K TV $599
vs.
A 28" 4K "Monitor" $699
-------------------------
Both have a maximum refresh rate of 30hzo_O

Untitled.jpg



Capture.jpg
 

deadlyapp

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2004
6,622
720
126
I wouldn't say you're comparing comparable brands, but 28" is also an odd panel size where you'll probably see a lot of disparity. the 24"-32" range is kind of odd.
 

Kroze

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2001
4,052
1
0
How do you even call it a monitor with a 30hz refresh rate? Unless you plan on using just for static excel sheet.

And a monitor having the same resolution as a tv.
 

Krazy4Real

Lifer
Oct 3, 2003
12,221
55
91
The Dell monitor is msrp on their own website, while the tv isn't and is on a third party site.

You can definitely get that monitor for less money if you really wanted it.
 

spacejamz

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
10,868
1,516
126
is that seiki any guuud?

check amazon reviews...the 39" model gets great reviews when used as a PC monitor...there several threads on Fat Wallet (I would assume slick deals as well) when these monitors go 'on sale'...
 

poofyhairguy

Lifer
Nov 20, 2005
14,612
318
126
But now...can someone explain this bullshit of a scam?

All of the advances in screen tech the last 5 years have gone into mobile devices and Macbooks. I couldn't easily replace my 1200p monitor even if I wanted to.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
How do you even call it a monitor with a 30hz refresh rate? Unless you plan on using just for static excel sheet.

And a monitor having the same resolution as a tv.

I am confused at your comments. Are you insinuating that a monitor can't have the same resolution as a TV? Or that some companies who choose to use the current HDMI spec (which doesn't allow for 4k @ 60hz) are scamming you by telling you the specs up front?

If you want a 4k screen @ 60hz, there is an Asus model coming out this Q2 2014.
 

Gooberlx2

Lifer
May 4, 2001
15,381
6
91
Not a scam. As mentioned, people are happily using that TV as a huge 4K monitor. Products like that will force other manufacturers, like Dell, to price theirs more competitively.

I just hope we keep improving color accuracy and wide viewing angels. I'd hate for the trend to regress back to TN panels for the sake of low cost, large 4K.
 

uhohs

Diamond Member
Oct 29, 2005
7,660
43
91
hurry up hdmi2.0 or whatever was necessary to give us 60hz at 4k resolutions
 

vshah

Lifer
Sep 20, 2003
19,003
24
81
simple - the smaller monitor with the same resolution has a denser, harder/more expensive to manufacture panel. not to mention probably being a higher quality panel.
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
Typically a monitor has more expensive electronics. More types of inputs, more refresh rates and resolutions supported. I wouldn't be surprised if input lag and scalers varied. Panel quality varies of course. However at 30hz...ick. The dell is just overpriced. I wouldn't buy a 4k yet anyways. Tech isn't ready yet.
 

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
Seiki 55" and Dell 28" are not 120Hz at 4K, only 30Hz.

from what i understand about panel tech the tv can likely drive 4k at 120 hz but there might not be any inputs to recieve such content at 4k at 120 hz
 

Vdubchaos

Lifer
Nov 11, 2009
10,408
10
0
Monitors are still better.

I can't really speak for that Seike brand but it seems WAY too good to be true. Most 4k TVs cost 5-10k no?

Difference between my monitors and 1080p TVs is HUGE. I just refuse to use the TV for gaming etc. Colors are just not there, pixles are too big and it's just not as vibrant IMO.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Isn't this an apples to oranges comparison, since you're not comparing the same brands/quality? I was just looking the other day at a 42" plasma that costs $1000 vs. a 50" plasma that costs $499. Other than size, refresh rate was the same, both were 720p, etc.
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
Hmmm good to know!

Well, it is supposed to be Q2 2014. When it is actually released, is sort of up in the air. However, it will do 60hz at 4k for $799. They have another model that is 1440p @ 120hz (which I believe supports G Sync) as well.
 

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
simple - the smaller monitor with the same resolution has a denser, harder/more expensive to manufacture panel. not to mention probably being a higher quality panel.


Ah I see, i'm going to buy a 90" for $300 then.
 

Imp

Lifer
Feb 8, 2000
18,828
184
106
I've been debating whether to buy a 32" 1080p TV or 27" 1080p monitor. Roughly the same price. Input lag was a concern I saw mentioned...
 

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
I've been debating whether to buy a 32" 1080p TV or 27" 1080p monitor. Roughly the same price. Input lag was a concern I saw mentioned...


Up to you but I will tell you one thing. When you see a TV rated at 4.5*/5* it is being rated a sa TV not a monitor. I have set up a few TVs as monitors for people and the results have varied greatly.
 

MixMasterTang

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2001
3,167
176
106
When it comes to LCD's and Plasma's a general rule of thumb is that if it does not have built in speakers or tuner it is considered a "monitor" and not a TV.