My next monitor....

[blueonblack]

Or maybe not. But LOOK at this thing (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001305).

I'm really confused on the screen size/resolution issue here, though. Will some resolution expert explain to me how this wouldn't look like a huge version of the Atari 2600?

[BuzzKillington]

I lol'd at the review.

[Dualtagh]

Tiny..

[d_stilgar]

My dad has this TV (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889248052). Screen size really is about viewing distance. At about 12' from the TV (where we sit) it looks just fine. 1080P is 1080P and generally is going to look like 1080 no matter how big the screen is. The only exceptions to that are going to be at really far distances (I don't think you care what the resolution is on a 13" tv if you are viewing from 40') or really close up (like an inch).

[Luke122]

"built in AMD 3400+"

Yes, for public displays, that would be handy.. one cord, computer built in, etc. Otherwise, ugh. There are larger displays out there...

[dr.walrus]

Or maybe not. But LOOK at this thing (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001305).

I'm really confused on the screen size/resolution issue here, though. Will some resolution expert explain to me how this wouldn't look like a huge version of the Atari 2600?

Considering you're happy with a 42" 720p TV (;)), it basically means you've got a screen with 4x the area and 2x the pixels, so half the pixel density. This is still significantly better than the pixel density of standard TV.

The real answer is, you'll be a million miles away from it, so you won't see any pixellation.

[x88x]

The real answer is, you'll be a million miles away from it, so you won't see any pixellation.

/\ This. I think the standard recommendation for optimal viewing distance is 2-3 times the screen diagonal, so with this TV you would want to be ~14-20 feet away. At that distance the pixellation is probably not going to be noticeable for 1080p content. 480p and less content on the other hand...

[Twigsoffury]

*cough*

55' 240hz LED/LCD tv

I bust nuts in my pants every time i get to use my friends tv as my computer monitor.

image tracing is as good if not better then CRT's

No more blur in FPS games, No blur in racing games, No ghosting no trailing.

blacks are deep black, whites are nuclear bomb white. I'm impressed and want one.

I get a :( face whenever i come back and use this monitor now hahahahahahha

[x88x]

55' 240hz LED/LCD tv

55'?!?!?! Holy socks, Batman! Where is this magic TV manufacturer; I must talk with them about their groundbreaking techniques!

;) :P

[Twigsoffury]

55'?!?!?! Holy socks, Batman! Where is this magic TV manufacturer; I must talk with them about their groundbreaking techniques!

;) :P

hahah oops 55" two ' ' of them sorry

haha when its 4 inches from your face sure does feel like 55 feet.

[artoodeeto]

55'?!?!?! Holy socks, Batman! Where is this magic TV manufacturer; I must talk with them about their groundbreaking techniques!

;) :P

It could be literally groundbreaking here in sunny CA if there's an earthquake :P

[Luke122]

I have a friend who uses a 42" 1080p tv as a monitor... to play WoW.

What a waste.. I could see if you were into FPS's or racing or something, but WoW? At 1080p and 42", the relatively low resolution makes your character almost a foot tall. Which is cool I suppose.. but really, it just seems like overkill to me.

If I was using a screen that size, I would want a much higher resolution.

[Twigsoffury]

hey i found something out with these new 120/240hz tru-motion televisions.


they aren't 120/240hz at all, they still use 60hz refresh and use a scaler of some sort to push the panels to a "fake" 120hz

tried my buddies 3d glasses, and they didn't work. went to nvidias website and they said his type of television isn't supported since it isn't a true 120hz refresh rate.



it looks great still, no blurs and all that, just no 3D as expected. Guess thats what makes them real 3D televisions 3d...true 120hz.

I'm happy with my 28" HANNS-G monitors. not the most superb image quality. but its good enough for me (was on cRT's before this) plus a 56" total desktop is pretty cool.

want a third monitor though to enable this triple display for mah ati card lol.

[x88x]

Interesting point about TV refresh rates...


I'm happy with my 28" HANNS-G monitors. not the most superb image quality. but its good enough for me (was on cRT's before this) plus a 56" total desktop is pretty cool.

want a third monitor though to enable this triple display for mah ati card lol.

Actually it's 'just' a ~46" total desktop. ;) With 3 it'll be ~66". To get 56", you would need 4 in a square.

[dr.walrus]

With 3 it'll be ~66"

Sort of. Diagonal sizes mean nothing without an aspect ratio, and i doubt 32*10 will take off soon!

Otherwise, yes. My 2x24" and 2x22" neatly add up to 46"...

[x88x]

Sort of. Diagonal sizes mean nothing without an aspect ratio, and i doubt 32*10 will take off soon!

Otherwise, yes. My 2x24" and 2x22" neatly add up to 46"...

Three 28" panels side-by-side (ignoring bezels) == 48:10 ratio. Based on that ratio, and the diagonal of one of the panels, you get ~66"..if you ignore bezels.

[Twigsoffury]

Interesting point about TV refresh rates...



Actually it's 'just' a ~46" total desktop. ;) With 3 it'll be ~66". To get 56", you would need 4 in a square.

well sorry, a 56 inch "span"

i've got access to two more hanns'g 28" monitors, bud's and bud's mom both have the same monitors as i do.


Gonna grab his monitor and try the triple ATi eyefinity with this new video card i got.
http://i41.tinypic.com/fzc1vn.jpg

[x88x]

Gonna grab his monitor and try the triple ATi eyefinity with this new video card i got.

Niiice. Portrait or landscape? (ie, 5760x1200 or 3600x1920?)

[Twigsoffury]

Niiice. Portrait or landscape? (ie, 5760x1200 or 3600x1920?)

probably landscape for now, theres no twist on these monitor bases.

something tells me though, i'll be turning the overall graphics down at 5000+ resolutions hahahaha.