|
03-04-2017, 03:00 PM | #46 |
Lieutenant Colonel
745
Rep 1,700
Posts |
There's so little avail for 4k that it seems premature to me to jump to it.....I suspect there will still be quite a bit of change/evolution of the "standard" before there is much content avail
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-04-2017, 04:09 PM | #47 |
Captain
426
Rep 887
Posts |
If the OP went with the Samsung UN65KS9000FXZA, he didn't really ignore everyone's advice. Since the OP was hell bent on buying a 65" 4K TV right now, he made a good choice. He listened to those that said buying a $1000 65" 4K TV was a waste of money because they are crap...and they are. He went for the upper end of LED TV's. My dad has one of these and I think it's an excellent TV. That said, I am still holding out for OLED since the price of a TV like this one is, from my POV, way too close to OLED $$$ for me to want to buy one.
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-04-2017, 07:13 PM | #48 |
Lieutenant Colonel
815
Rep 1,986
Posts Drives: 2014 335i xdrive, 2014 X5 3.5d Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Owen sound, Ontario, canada
|
Right now the best picture on a TV belongs to LG OLED , waiting on Samsung to bring theirs and I'll get one...
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-04-2017, 08:02 PM | #49 |
Major
430
Rep 1,056
Posts |
Picture quality is pretty good these days. Tech is ahead of content.
I would prioritize size over features at this point. I think you get more wow for your buck with size than some obscure performance number that you can't really discern. 75"+ you'll like it. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-06-2017, 01:55 PM | #51 |
Lieutenant
607
Rep 534
Posts |
If you are into gaming and can afford to run a 4k rig, then a 4k set is well worth the money... other than that I would say hold off.
Also if you are gaming make sure to get a TV that has low lag and high hertz rate. check here: http://www.displaylag.com battlefield1 in 4k =
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-16-2019, 06:48 PM | #53 | ||
Banned
7778
Rep 2,601
Posts Drives: MW Vespa w/pink racing stripes Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Peeing in your garden
|
Quote:
To answer your question though, TVs have larger pixels than monitors, and lower refresh rates with stronger backlights. They're designed to be looked at from several feet away. Also good monitors tend to have a higher consistency of quality among the pixels. Monitors are also designed to have lower input lag, which is really obvious when you move a mouse and there's a delay on the screen. It's possible to use TVs as monitors but it'd get uncomfortable after a while. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|