Can a 3D TV to be used instead of a 3D monitor?

jamesd · 2 Aug 2012 at 15:33

I have been considering getting a 3D monitor for my PC so I can try 3D gaming. I have noticed that 3D monitors are quite expensive but I could get a 23" 3D TV which is cheaper. Can a 3D TV be used as a PC monitor. Are there disadvantages to using a 3D TV instead of a 3D monitor? The TV I was looking at was this one. Also I assume playing in 3D will drop the frame rate quite a bit so would adding another card in SLI compansate for the loss in frame rate? The card I have is an Evga GTX 550TI.

Martini1991 · 2 Aug 2012 at 16:01

That is a 3D monitor rather than a HDTV.
You'd need Nvidia's 3d kit and a 550Ti SLI will blow tbh.
Best off selling the 550Ti and getting a 7850, that'd work with Tridef.

craarc · 2 Aug 2012 at 17:11

running in 3d will half your normal frame rates normally approx but adding 2 cards doesnt double things to compensate it will give an extra 40-60 % i believe.

and i woukld of thought the 550 will stuggle if run anything at all with it

Nate Silvers · 2 Aug 2012 at 20:32

Please don't buy a TV as a monitor because it's a TV not a monitor.

jamesd · 2 Aug 2012 at 20:46

Ok Cheers for the replies, I think I shall give 3D a miss. I only have a QX6700 and a single GT550TI which I have recently upgraded to so new video cards as well as a new screen are out of my budget just now. Also I think the QX6700 will bottleneck a better graphics card. I know the GTX550 is a crap card but it was in my price range and it Plays Crysis 2 on full settings at 1280x1024 which is about the highest my current monitor goes.

Nate Silvers · 2 Aug 2012 at 20:51

I would sell the GTX550 and put the rest towards a used 5870, much better card that can be picked up for less than £85.

http://www.hwcompare.com/9735/geforce-gtx-550-ti-vs-radeon-hd-5870/

borley · 2 Aug 2012 at 20:52

Yeah think about it for a second, if 3d tvs were as good as monitors and cheaper no one would be buying monitors.
Regards

Nate Silvers · 2 Aug 2012 at 20:55

Yep I don't like TV's haven't used one for over eight years and don't plan to. I'd rather have my 22" Dell 2209WA than my friends 42" TV.

jamesd · 2 Aug 2012 at 22:16

Nate Silvers said:
I would sell the GTX550 and put the rest towards a used 5870, much better card that can be picked up for less than £85.

http://www.hwcompare.com/9735/geforce-gtx-550-ti-vs-radeon-hd-5870/

Hmmm interesting! Thanks for that link. I shall consider a 5870. I wish I had seen that before I bought the 550

borley said:
Yeah think about it for a second, if 3d tvs were as good as monitors and cheaper no one would be buying monitors.
Regards

I did think about it and thought the same thing hence why I asked the question. Whats the difference between using a 3DTV or a 3D monitor. Why are 3D tvs not as good a 3D monitors?

Nate Silvers · 2 Aug 2012 at 22:53

The pixels are engineered differently and are bigger on TV's so text looks crap.
The colours on TVs are nearly always over saturated so people see them and think wow much like the Dr.Dre beats headphones that have way too much bass.
Monitors like the ultrasharp line have better build quality than a TV.
Monitors have higher resolution meaning better picture quality and more screen estate.
TVs have big stupid ugly bezels (except the new thin ones)
TVs are nearly always glossy I hate gloss.
Monitors have better input speed.
TVs are usually too bright up close.
TVs are made more in bulk so cheaper production costs with SMT soldering.
Components of monitors are harder to source for PCB assembly
Monitors use 16:10 ratio instead of 16:9 (God I hate 16:9)
TVs use SPVA panels instead of IPS. IPS you get more color accuracy, gammut, and viewing angle.

3D Tvs usually don't actually accept a 120hz input but only have 120hz output so useless for gaming.

craarc · 3 Aug 2012 at 02:08

tvs are awesome.......................................................... for tv

chipachap · 3 Aug 2012 at 09:31

Nate Silvers said:
The pixels are engineered differently and are bigger on TV's so text looks crap.
The colours on TVs are nearly always over saturated so people see them and think wow much like the Dr.Dre beats headphones that have way too much bass.
Monitors like the ultrasharp line have better build quality than a TV.
Monitors have higher resolution meaning better picture quality and more screen estate.
TVs have big stupid ugly bezels (except the new thin ones)
TVs are nearly always glossy I hate gloss.
Monitors have better input speed.
TVs are usually too bright up close.
TVs are made more in bulk so cheaper production costs with SMT soldering.
Components of monitors are harder to source for PCB assembly
Monitors use 16:10 ratio instead of 16:9 (God I hate 16:9)
Wrong, majority of monitors are 16:9 and all 3D/120hz models are aswell
TVs use SPVA panels instead of IPS. IPS you get more color accuracy, gammut, and viewing angle.
True but for fast paced gaming such as FPS a TN panel with a high refresh rate beats all, IPS is good for MMO's etc.
3D Tvs usually don't actually accept a 120hz input but only have 120hz output so useless for gaming.
All tv's have a 60hz input since that's all they need to use, even when advertised at 600hz it displays the same frame 10 times rapidly but that doesn't give a better picture

That monitor only has HDMI as an input so you will need to play games at 720p for 3D. For the optimum 3d and fast paced gaming experience you will need a monitor that does 120hz and accepts DL-DVI. This will let you game in 3d at 1080p.