perfect size tv/monitor

Community General Discussion
1

I’m looking to upgrade my display, and would like some input on everyone’s preferences. I currently game on a 50 inch Emerson Walmart black Friday special from 2015. I bring in a chair from the dinning room and sit about 5 ft from the screen, I play a lot worse sitting on the couch about 17 ft away.

Do you think I should go with a 4k 65 inch and break the bank, or go for something like the new Samsung cfg70 27 inch curved quantum dot computer monitor for considerably less then a 4k TV. I’m sure either one would have a great picture, which isn’t my biggest concern.

Anybody have any input on which would be the route to go? What do pro gamers prefer?

2

> 2533274875774786;1:
> I’m looking to upgrade my display, and would like some input on everyone’s preferences. I currently game on a 50 inch Emerson Walmart black Friday special from 2015. I bring in a chair from the dinning room and sit about 5 ft from the screen, I play a lot worse sitting on the couch about 17 ft away.
>
> Do you think I should go with a 4k 65 inch and break the bank, or go for something like the new Samsung cfg70 27 inch curved quantum dot computer monitor for considerably less then a 4k TV. I’m sure either one would have a great picture, which isn’t my biggest concern.
>
> Anybody have any input on which would be the route to go? What do pro gamers prefer?

I don’t have many suggestions, but I agree. Sitting on my couch, which is way farther makes it harder to see. That is why I bring a chair about 3-5 feet away from the TV.

3

If you play single player only get whatever you like. Multiplayer only and your a competitive person 24 - 27 inch (that is what pros play on, no more, no less) Both modes of play, 24-32 inch.

4

I vote for the 27 inch. it’s big enough to see detail but small enough you can see the whole screen without a lot of eye movement.

5

I’m up close to my setup, maybe being a foot and a half away from the monitor. I have a 23in monitor that works great for both my Xbox and PC. The 27in will probably suffice at 5ft distance.

6

Thanks for the replies, I think smaller is what I’m going to go for.

7

Keep your current TV, buy a monitor, they are pretty cheap. You don’t want one over 60hz because that would be a waste, just find a cheap 1080p 60hz one. I recommend any of the RL series monitors from BenQ, they are designed for consoles. I’d personally go for the 27".

8

If you really only use the TV for gaming, like you don’t actually watch TV on it, get a monitor. Way cheaper.

9

Everyone is different. I play on a 32 inch Samsung from about 4 feet away and my girlfriend plays on a 60 inch Samsung from 12 feet away and the comfort of our couch

10

If you get a TV, then makes sure that you set it to gaming. This will reduce the lag. I play on a 55 inch Samsung, pulled up to four feet from the couch. Problem is, I find not easily seeing the radar. Do your research on the speed and frame rates, to reduce any lag on your side.

11

> 2535468812026872;4:
> I vote for the 27 inch. it’s big enough to see detail but small enough you can see the whole screen without a lot of eye movement.

This is a very good answer.

12

I think that playing on a smaller TV works best because you don’t have to make your eyes travel around the screen as much and they generally have less frame rate drops and output lag (can’t remember if that’s the right term, but it’s how long the TV takes to take the info that it has received and output it onto your screen). Having these qualities as low as possible makes for the best gaming experience. Hence why pro leagues use small screens during their tournaments.

It is also best to have a wired controller instead of a wireless controller. Wired controllers will have the lease input lag, the time it takes your controller to send infromation to your console. And again, hence why tournaments use them.

I currently use a 19" computer monitor that I use for both my computer and my Xbox, and no wired controller.

13

I play on a 65 inch which is badass. But not ideal for a budget lol

14

I’d probably do a ~48" size with the best HD I can find lol

15

> 2533274925727172;12:
> I think that playing on a smaller TV works best because you don’t have to make your eyes travel around the screen as much and they generally have less frame rate drops and output lag (can’t remember if that’s the right term, but it’s how long the TV takes to take the info that it has received and output it onto your screen). Having these qualities as low as possible makes for the best gaming experience. Hence why pro leagues use small screens during their tournaments.

Input lag is the term you’re looking for, but smaller TVs don’t necessarily have less input lag than larger TVs. The large input lag on many TVs is generally caused by the fact that the TVs try to do as much processing as they can to the image to make it look as good as possible (because the manufacturers are primarily focused on people who watch the TV, not on people who need low latency). But this processing is independent of size, and so is input lag, largely. For example 60" TVs can have anything from 20 to over 100 milliseconds of latency.

If you care about input lag, what you really want is a computer monitor, specifically, one built with low input lag as a goal. Or if you really care about input lag, you want a CRT display, because those have virtually none, unlike LCDs. But then again, if you don’t really care about input lag, there are many obvious downsides to getting a CRT. Therefore if you just kind of care about input lag, “gaming” branded monitors are a safe bet these days, though you can get reasonably low input lag displays in almost any size if you do your research carefully, e.g., use the input lag database.

Pro leagues use computer monitors partly due to input lag reasons. Partly probably also due to logistics reasons, and partly perhaps driven by the “less eye travel” myth. But the reality about eye travel is that, first of all, it’s not about the absolute screen size, but about the ratio of screen size to viewing distance. If you’re concerned about eye movement, you want this ratio to be less than 0.4 (corresponding to a 16" display at 1 meter). Anything bigger, and you need to move your eyes. And as soon as you need to move your eyes, it doesn’t matter whether the ratio is 0.5 or 1, you only save about 3 milliseconds going from the latter to the former.

My advice to display size: get what you feel comfortable with. The most significant effect size has on your performance comes from what you’re used to. If you’ve played close to large screens your whole life, and you’ve never felt you have problems with that, then that’s probably the best for you. If you’ve always played on small screens, and don’t have a problem with that, then that’s probably the best for you. Doesn’t matter if you’re competitive or not; the subjective experience has more impact on your performance than any objective metric.

16

> 2533274825830455;15:
> > 2533274925727172;12:
> > I think that playing on a smaller TV works best because you don’t have to make your eyes travel around the screen as much and they generally have less frame rate drops and output lag (can’t remember if that’s the right term, but it’s how long the TV takes to take the info that it has received and output it onto your screen). Having these qualities as low as possible makes for the best gaming experience. Hence why pro leagues use small screens during their tournaments.
>
>
> Input lag is the term you’re looking for, but smaller TVs don’t necessarily have less input lag than larger TVs. The large input lag on many TVs is generally caused by the fact that the TVs try to do as much processing as they can to the image to make it look as good as possible (because the manufacturers are primarily focused on people who watch the TV, not on people who need low latency). But this processing is independent of size, and so is input lag, largely. For example 60" TVs can have anything from 20 to over 100 milliseconds of latency.
>
> If you care about input lag, what you really want is a computer monitor, specifically, one built with low input lag as a goal. Or if you really care about input lag, you want a CRT display, because those have virtually none, unlike LCDs. But then again, if you don’t really care about input lag, there are many obvious downsides to getting a CRT. Therefore if you just kind of care about input lag, “gaming” branded monitors are a safe bet these days, though you can get reasonably low input lag displays in almost any size if you do your research carefully, e.g., use the input lag database.
>
> Pro leagues use computer monitors partly due to input lag reasons. Partly probably also due to logistics reasons, and partly perhaps driven by the “less eye travel” myth. But the reality about eye travel is that, first of all, it’s not about the absolute screen size, but about the ratio of screen size to viewing distance. If you’re concerned about eye movement, you want this ratio to be less than 0.4 (corresponding to a 16" display at 1 meter). Anything bigger, and you need to move your eyes. And as soon as you need to move your eyes, it doesn’t matter whether the ratio is 0.5 or 1, you only save about 3 milliseconds going from the latter to the former.
>
> My advice to display size: get what you feel comfortable with. The most significant effect size has on your performance comes from what you’re used to. If you’ve played close to large screens your whole life, and you’ve never felt you have problems with that, then that’s probably the best for you. If you’ve always played on small screens, and don’t have a problem with that, then that’s probably the best for you. Doesn’t matter if you’re competitive or not; the subjective experience has more impact on your performance than any objective metric.

I recently moved from a 48" flat-screen to a 19" computer monitor and I’ve experienced a big difference from the switch. For one, on my 48" I had to move my eyes around and sometimes had to take moments to search for things on my screen even though I’ve known exactly where they were for a long time. So it would give me a slight annoyance looking for my health bar or ammo count or something again and again. But now on my smaller screen, I don’t have to look as far and I can find things much easier. Before it was perhaps caused by me sitting too close to my screen because I played in a small room and still had to make room for other things.

Also on my old 48" it often times would split the screen in half (again, don’t know if that’s the right term) and I would get weird graphical glitches and sudden frame rate drops would occur. I don’t know if that was because of a manufacturing problem or what, but on my new monitor I’ve never had this problem.

For these reasons, that’s why I recommended making the switch. Not only is the monitor better at performance, but it also cost less, only $98.

But again, like you said it’s mostly based on preference. If you play alone all by yourself then I would make the switch, but if you often have friends over, it may be best to have a larger TV so that everyone can play and see what’s going on.

17

> 2533274925727172;16:
> I recently moved from a 48" flat-screen to a 19" computer monitor and I’ve experienced a big difference from the switch. For one, on my 48" I had to move my eyes around and sometimes had to take moments to search for things on my screen even though I’ve known exactly where they were for a long time. So it would give me a slight annoyance looking for my health bar or ammo count or something again and again. But now on my smaller screen, I don’t have to look as far and I can find things much easier. Before it was perhaps caused by me sitting too close to my screen because I played in a small room and still had to make room for other things.
>
> Also on my old 48" it often times would split the screen in half (again, don’t know if that’s the right term) and I would get weird graphical glitches and sudden frame rate drops would occur. I don’t know if that was because of a manufacturing problem or what, but on my new monitor I’ve never had this problem.
>
> For these reasons, that’s why I recommended making the switch. Not only is the monitor better at performance, but it also cost less, only $98.
>
> But again, like you said it’s mostly based on preference. If you play alone all by yourself then I would make the switch, but if you often have friends over, it may be best to have a larger TV so that everyone can play and see what’s going on.

The subjective experience is the biggest factor on your performance, or at least how you perceive things anyway. I’ve personally always moved to bigger and bigger screens (in terms of field of view coverage, that is; not in terms of absolute size), and have most of that time felt like I could do with more. Currently I’m on a 32" monitor with a viewing distance of about 0.6-0.7 m, and as far as I’m concerned, this is probably the sweet spot for me. Any time I play on a smaller screen, I just feel kind of miserable. Not that I can’t play, and after adjustment I don’t probably even perform any worse, but I ultimately always feel better on a bigger screen. That’s why I always recommend people to go with what their gut says. Of course, if you have the chance to try out multiple different options, it helps to see what best suits for you, but ultimately there’s no one universally applicable guideline for display size.

Price may of course be a big factor. But again, that comes down to how big an investment you’re personally ready to make, and what features you value. I’d struggle to find myself anything in the 100$ range. But then again, I have a very specific feature set that I want. That’s really why, again, to each their own.

18

Ive got a refurbished BenQ RL2755HM 27" 1ms GTG Gaming console monitor on its way directly from BenQ. I saved about $100 going refurbished, and comes with a 1 year warranty. It’s not today’s top of the line monitor, but in 2015 it was the MLG official monitor, I figure if it was good enough for the pros, then it will be more then adequate for my needs. I’ll post an update after I get some play time on it.

19

Also take into consideration how you will be sitting. If you are going to be more comfortable on a couch, try and make that work, but if you will be more comfortable in a chair, try and make that work. I recently moved my xbox to my computer monitor and I have been enjoying it. My computer chair is definitely not as comfortable as my couch though, so i tend to take more breaks from game play than I otherwise would have. I am actually getting some HDMI switches and some long cables so that I can switch back and forth from my tv and monitor when I feel like it.

20

Been using the new monitor for about a week now. I played a lot of halo reach on it, and started playing halo 5 again friday. So far so good. Overall I think my performance has improved quite a bit using a smaller screen, with the exception of me trying out different sensitivity settings.