Size of TVs for console gaming - How big is too big?

[GearSolidMetal]

Wanted different opinions on this, because I've played a PS3 on a 40" Samsung I bought in 2011.

I'm going to be buying a PS4 and a BIG TV in late 2019, but I'm cautious of how big would be too big for console gaming.

60" ???
70" ???

I've seen some Samsungs that are 85". Jesus Christ.

And which is the best kind of screen for console gaming? UHDTV? QLED? OLED?

Is screen burn-in still a thing? How about screen-shadowing?

I bet @Madmick will be all over this.

 

[jefferz]

Screen size selection is based on the distance you'll be from the tv.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Screen size selection is based on the distance you'll be from the tv.

I get that, but I'm more concerned with 'screen shadowing' for games.

Sometimes when watching movies and playing games on my old TV, it was pretty bad. And it was just a 40".

Just wondering what updates there's been in the technology between the PS4 and newer TVs.

 

[God_Emperor_Of_Mankind]

If you're buying a ps4 in 2019 you can go for the pro version which supports 4k.

 

[Madmick]

I get that, but I'm more concerned with 'screen shadowing' for games.

Sometimes when watching movies and playing games on my old TV, it was pretty bad. And it was just a 40".

Just wondering what updates there's been in the technology between the PS4 and newer TVs.

Unfortunately, with this, you've already voiced the only contribution I intended to bring.

It's very rare that I've ever met, heard, or read the testimonial of someone that got a TV so big that they felt it damaged the experience of the image once we hit 1080p: like they were seeing actual pixels. I can't recall a single specific example off the top of my head. But in the past the biggest problem with the really huge TVs was their terrible performance in terms of more obscure specs like input latency and (true, effective, not just quoted) response time. At one time it was anything beyond 36". Later on, things improved, as I was told, but the new cutoff had everything a mess beyond 55".

I don't keep up with bigscreen TV performance like I do with computer monitors, so I don't know where the new cutoff is. Sorry. It's 2018. I'm sure a huge page with tons of data is a Google away.

 

[SeefourDC]

Unfortunately, with this, you've already voiced the only contribution I intended to bring.

It's very rare that I've ever met, heard, or read the testimonial of someone that got a TV so big that they felt it damaged the experience of the image once we hit 1080p: like they were seeing actual pixels. I can't recall a single specific example off the top of my head. But in the past the biggest problem with the really huge TVs was their terrible performance in terms of more obscure specs like input latency and (true, effective, not just quoted) response time. At one time it was anything beyond 36". Later on, things improved, as I was told, but the new cutoff had everything a mess beyond 55".

I don't keep up with bigscreen TV performance like I do with computer monitors, so I don't know where the new cutoff is. Sorry. It's 2018. I'm sure a huge page with tons of data is a Google away.

I currently own 2 big screen TV's I've played games on and have been decently up to date on research as of december of this year cause I was thinking about buying another one. IMO unless you are competitive gaming the differences in most tv's on game mode is pretty non-noticeable. I have a 60 inch sony 1080p tv I mostly console game on and the latency is not noticeable for normal gaming. I don't mean that in a "just don't pay attention" kind of way but I think the MS is right at 20 input latency. I also have a 75 inch high end sony 4k tv and a 2k Gsync monitor in the same room. I have held 4 events at my house where all of these devices have been in use at this point between souls based games and monster hunter world and I honestly don't notice the difference.

I think that a lot of big screen tv companies have become aware that people are gamers and when they don't lock you out of dropping post processing most tv's have a very good response time even into the massive tv sizes nowadays.

To put this into perspective a friend of mine had a name brand "big screen" that was only 50 inches from 10 years ago and the response time was absolutely 100% noticeable. We'd both push a button at the same time and one person would be starting an action while another was close to finishing it on a souls type game. It was ridiculously bad.

I know for a fact that these product lines have great response times: Basically any sony, samsung 8000 series, and vizio M series. I can't comment on LG too much though. Personally dollar for dollar vizio M series perform really well when your primary focus is gaming. It isn't their bargain line of TV's, they are backlit which is really nice, and their response times are usually tops for gaming. I'm personally a sony fan but at this point I think it's more nostalgia. There was a period of time where Sony was the only brand that really didn't lock you out of completely turning off post processing so it was the obvious best brand of TV for gaming but everyone else has caught up over the last 6-7 years it seems.

 

[bandicoot]

I like TVs

 

[Treeloy]

The obvious choices are the sony xbr65x850e the sony xbr65x900e and the LG C7 OLED. Those are all good tvs.

The best 4k picture will be on the c7 OLED.

rtings had the c7 as the best TV of 2017 as well.

Different brands have different upscaling quality as well, but Ive heard good things about Sonys upscaling.

Burn in is not an issue on the c7, and I havent heard of anyone complaining about it.

OLED pixels can light up individually as well for more realistic lighting and perfect blacks.

The 850e has about 450 nits peak brigtness and the 900e is about 900 nits, so its much brighter.

The c7 has a better perceived brightness than both because of the darker blacks.

The c7 was rated the best gaming tv because of its low input lag, better viewing angles and overall better picture.

I have the C7, its worth it.

The sony 900e is a step down from the c7 and the 850e is a step down from the 900e.

If you can afford a c7 get it.

55 65 or 75 none are too big

So if you go shopping for a TV today you might be confused by all the different terms and technologies.

So the first thing you want to look at is the resolution. You have SD, HD and UHD. SD is 480p, HD is 720p/1080p and UHD is 4k or 2160p.

Youre going to want a 4k TV if youre buying a new TV today.

The next thing you want to look for is HDR (high dynamic range). HDR refers to the colour/contrast and brightness/black levels a TV has.

Normal TVs have 16 million colours but HDR TVs have over a billion. Resolution starts to have diminishing returns once you reach 4k and beyond, so instead of focusing on resolution for a clearer picture you can focus on colours and brightness for a more realistic image, closer to what you see in real life.

This is the most important new TV technology and imo you should not buy a 4k TV unless it has HDR. All HDTVs and even some 4k TVs only have SDR (standard dynamic range)

The next thing you will want to do is look at the refresh rate. 120hz or better is really what you want on a new 4K HDR TV. TV makers know this and so they have a new way of tricking people in to thinking they are getting higher refresh rates. Each company uses their own lingo for example.. A Samsung TV might be said to have Clear Motion Rate 240 when you look at the refresh rate spec.

Clear Motion Rate 240 is actually 120hz, but they use a technology called motion interpolation, which basically generates an image between frames that creates a smoother looking animation to minimize motion blur.


Now those are the main things you want to look for on a new TV. However there is tons of other important information that is rarely ever put on spec sheets.


Examples
HDR is not just HDR, there are different standards of HDR depending on what TV you buy and some only support certain content. You have HDR10 which is the industry standard but you also have Dolby Vision and HLG.

HDR10 supports 10bit colour and the brightness levels of 1000nits where as Dolby Vision supports 12bit colour and 10000nits.

So how many NITS does you TV have for brightness and black levels to take advantage of these technologies? Most TVs dont say. A regular 4k TV might be in the area of 600nits and a premium TV might have 1000 so you can see Dolby Vision is clearly better but technology has not really caught up to the capabilities of Dolby Vision yet.

Whats the difference between 8/10/12 bit colour? A lot actually.

To simplify things well say each pixel on your TV contains 3 subpixels of Red Green and Blue (RGB).
8bit = 256 shades per colour giving you a possible colour combination of 256 x 256 x 256 per each pixel. = 16m colours

10bit = 1024 shades per subpixel = 1024 x 1024 x 1024 = over 1 billion colours.

12bit = 4096 x 4096 x 4096 = 68 billion possible colours

Then you have to find out if your TV is capable of taking advantage of 10bit or 12bit colour.

You also need to understand the different WCGs (wide colour gamuts)

Then you have LED, LCD, OLED. But LED is not just LED. There is backlit LED, edge lit, local dimming, full array local dimming etc.

Beyond that you have colour enhancing technologies like nano cell, quantom dot, triluminous display etc etc etc.

How many HDMI ports? Are the HDMI ports 1.4, 2.0? How many USB ports? Does it have an optical audio output? How many watts per hour does the TV use? Is it energy star qualified?

Now you need to go buy an hdmi 2.0b cable to best support your 4k hdr tv. But wait hdmi 2.1 is coming out which supports scene by scene HDR. When do I buy? Should I wait? Are OLED prices coming down? AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Even for people who know technology this is becoming really complicated and buying a new TV can be a headache.

Your best bet might just be to go in to a store like best buy and look at the pucture qualities side by side, since there are so many variations of technology and they are hard to understand.

So... Who wants a new TV?

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/buying-a-new-tv-has-become-incredibly-complex.3593749/

 

[Hyperglide]

If you are going to get a new UHDTV make sure it has HDR and where are you going to be placing it? Living room, bedroom downstairs?

 

[MaureenCretis]

I like TVs

This man gets it.

 

[Drain Bamage]

I prefer a smaller screen for gaming

I use a 32 inch panasonic w ips panel, great for gaming because low input lag

I play better on a smaller screen, naturally because gaming on a huge screen your eyes have to scan a larger area to recieve all information coming in, you actually have to divert focus to different areas of the screen especially on fps i do way better on like a computer monitor than i do a TV

 

[Brandon Taylor]

I play on 120" projector. For me games look and feel the same as they do on my 45" Sony TV. I mostly play sports games though and they arent as troublesome with artifact and shadowing. But no input lag is noticeable and sports games make that pretty clear when it is an issue.

 

[Mookie]

I switch from a 32" 2k display, and a 70" 4k display. I prefer the 70". It's sharp at that DPI, and I sit a couple feel back from it when I deploy the rotating desk. No gaming TV is too big, and at times I wonder how fun it would be on a 75".

The input lag on my 70" is 12.3ms, and it has a 60hz signal @ 4k.

http://www.displaywars.com/

This link is fun for comparing the size ratio of products.

EDIT: Check out Vizio for bigger screens (they are cheap, low input).

 

[ScarHead]

Depends on game for me.

Sports games like NHL or 3v3 free style basketball i prefer on my big screen ( 70" ) but FPS games i use either the 44" or 32".

RPGs like Dragon Age Inquisition, Diablo 3 or even Fallout i play on bigger screen.

 

[Ice That Jaw]

Too big of a screen is not even a thing man!

I have a 150in currently, and at times I wish it were 180in. Only problem is, I would need a literal light cannon to project on a screen that size with decent brightness.

But seriously, 150in looks small as shit compared to my 8ft ladder. An 11ft wide screen is for plebs. If only my ceiling was 9ft in the basement.

Spoiler: With the lights off

 

[Brandon Taylor]

Too big of a screen is not even a thing man!

I have a 150in currently, and at times I wish it were 180in. Only problem is, I would need a literal light cannon to project on a screen that size with decent brightness.

But seriously, 150in looks small as shit compared to my 8ft ladder. An 11ft wide screen is for plebs. If only my ceiling was 9ft in the basement.

Spoiler: With the lights off

Projectors have come so far I dont think I could enjoy it any other way. I will give up 4k for a screen that makes me feel like i am in the game anyday

 

[Ice That Jaw]

Projectors have come so far I dont think I could enjoy it any other way. I will give up 4k for a screen that makes me feel like i am in the game anyday

Nice, a fellow projector gamer!

Which one are you using? I have the Sony HW45ES, which I chose for it's really low lag. I am building a home theater for my parents as I help my Pops finish the basement in their final home and I had them buy a 4K Epson.

Now granted, it's faux 4K. I believe Sony has the only true 4K projectors but the faux 4K ones still take 4K signals and produces sharper images so they are out there and they are more than affordable.

That said. Going with a projector comes with a huge sacrifice in brightness. You can see in my pic that I painted the ceiling and walls with a flat graphite and have a black rug on the floor. Even with that kind of room treatment, I am still not seeing anywhere near the brightness of an HDR LCD or OLED. But the image is 11ft wide. lol

And the motion and view angles of projectors are excellent. 2 things that plasma always had over LCD. I still have my Panny plasma upstairs. If Panasonic actually mass produces OLEDS, I will be buying.

 

[Mr. 4K]

I have a 50” UHD 4K Samsung for my Xbox won X and it’s just fine. I don’t play FPS anymore though but I always preferred playing FPS on 40”.

 

[Brandon Taylor]

Nice, a fellow projector gamer!

Which one are you using? I have the Sony HW45ES, which I chose for it's really low lag. I am building a home theater for my parents as I help my Pops finish the basement in their final home and I had them buy a 4K Epson.

Now granted, it's faux 4K. I believe Sony has the only true 4K projectors but the faux 4K ones still take 4K signals and produces sharper images so they are out there and they are more than affordable.

That said. Going with a projector comes with a huge sacrifice in brightness. You can see in my pic that I painted the ceiling and walls with a flat graphite and have a black rug on the floor. Even with that kind of room treatment, I am still not seeing anywhere near the brightness of an HDR LCD or OLED. But the image is 11ft wide. lol

And the motion and view angles of projectors are excellent. 2 things that plasma always had over LCD. I still have my Panny plasma upstairs. If Panasonic actually mass produces OLEDS, I will be buying.

I am just using a benq 2150st right now. Nowhere near 4k but I needed 120" at an 8 foot throw. The room I have it in is in the basement and pitch black so brightness isnt an issue.

I worry about input lag but honestly I dont see a difference between this and the 4k sony TV I use in my bedroom.

 

[SeefourDC]

The obvious choices are the sony xbr65x850e the sony xbr65x900e and the LG C7 OLED. Those are all good tvs.

The best 4k picture will be on the c7 OLED.

rtings had the c7 as the best TV of 2017 as well.

Different brands have different upscaling quality as well, but Ive heard good things about Sonys upscaling.

Burn in is not an issue on the c7, and I havent heard of anyone complaining about it.

OLED pixels can light up individually as well for more realistic lighting and perfect blacks.

The 850e has about 450 nits peak brigtness and the 900e is about 900 nits, so its much brighter.

The c7 has a better perceived brightness than both because of the darker blacks.

The c7 was rated the best gaming tv because of its low input lag, better viewing angles and overall better picture.

I have the C7, its worth it.

The sony 900e is a step down from the c7 and the 850e is a step down from the 900e.

If you can afford a c7 get it.

55 65 or 75 none are too big



http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/buying-a-new-tv-has-become-incredibly-complex.3593749/

This is a great post. It's good to hear OLED has come so far. I will also confirm Sony upscaling is the best. I can't really tell the difference between hd and sd when it's upscaled on my 4K Sony.

I'm terrified of burn in. I work a lot and have kids and probably once a month I accidentally leave my tv on for 8 hours on a gaming screen because I fell asleep or had to go do something important with my kids, forgot, and then went to sleep. Probably something I will always have to stay away from.