Suggestions for a 46-50" non-3D HDTV for use as a PC monitor?

[Refugee_ZA]

Where is Amurka and I thought Ice Age only went up to number 4.

I don't know which Ice Age it is. The one with the dinosaur I guess? Not big into the many sequel animations. Watched Capt America today. Many lulz. I've never seen a Luger with that much ammo in one clip.

 

[Mouse]

Went ahead and bought the PS51E550 this morning, and have spent some time watching stuff and playing around with it. It came with a couple of 3D blu-ray movies (thor, captain amurka and ice age 17). I've managed to hook up my PC successfully to the TV set and can run the blu-ray movies to the television via a blu-ray drive in the pc. Problem is at this point I can't seem to run anything in 3D from the PC and I suspect I would need something like Nvidia's 3DTV Play software along with some or other IR/glasses kit from nvidia. I am sensing failcaek. Any other suggestions from people on how to get the 3D working from the PC? Only other issue I'm having is getting sound from PC to TV. I've tried the PC audio out to the DVI audio in as well as PC audio out to component L/R in and neither seem to work. Not sure what to do about that, so am using speakers hooked up to PC in the meantime. Works fine as an interim measure. Very happy with the set, and will spend some time messing with the calibration tomorrow. Need to mess a bit with brightness/contrast.

The current 3D implementation by NVidia for PC's is made of fail IMO. You can't simply send a 3D signal over hdmi and have the TV's glasses figure out what to do. You need to have NVidia's 3D kit with their own glasses and transmitter to sync with the glasses. PS3 has no trouble working with 3D TVs (I'm assuming Xbox would also not have trouble, have never tried it)

But for PC, and since for around R500 - R1,000 extra, you can get Full HD 1920x1080, better for PC and most PC games run at 1920x1080 opposed to most PS3/Xbox games which run at 720p.

I sit 2 meters away from my 47" TV and resolution on games is not noticeable. If I didn't read that Wipeout in 3D is 1080p while GT5 in is 720p I wouldn't have noticed much difference, unless I went close to the screen.

I assume the OP will also be sitting further back while using a large TV.

 

[Refugee_ZA]

The current 3D implementation by NVidia for PC's is made of fail IMO. You can't simply send a 3D signal over hdmi and have the TV's glasses figure out what to do. You need to have NVidia's 3D kit with their own glasses and transmitter to sync with the glasses. PS3 has no trouble working with 3D TVs (I'm assuming Xbox would also not have trouble, have never tried it)

I sit 2 meters away from my 47" TV and resolution on games is not noticeable. If I didn't read that Wipeout in 3D is 1080p while GT5 in is 720p I wouldn't have noticed much difference, unless I went close to the screen.

I assume the OP will also be sitting further back while using a large TV.

Yeah, I can't say I'm impressed with the attitude displayed by nVidia. First of all you have to pay for them, and secondly, they don't support all resolutions one might game at. They say they'll unlock full resolutions 'later'. Oh, thanks. Assmunchers. In the meantime, I've found IZ3D which is a 3rd party driver for 3D movies/media and 3D gaming. Funnily enough, ATI/AMD have teamed up with IZ3D to make a driver for their cards. That's how it should be done. I'll give it a bash tonight and see if it works on my system.

I'm about 3+ meters from the set when I play games, and so far I've only played in 1080p, so can't really say I notice the resolution at all. One issue I did have while playing some Civ 5 last night was that the set switches to 30hz ingame instead of the 60hz I get when its just in windows desktop. For someone who's used to nice smooth motion, it's a bit jarring at times. Maybe it's a game setting though, so I'll have a look this evening and try a few other games. DayZ, diablo, some fps.

Anyone else tried the IZ3D drivers?

 

[PostmanPot]

I sit 2 meters away from my 47" TV and resolution on games is not noticeable. If I didn't read that Wipeout in 3D is 1080p while GT5 in is 720p I wouldn't have noticed much difference, unless I went close to the screen.

I assume the OP will also be sitting further back while using a large TV.

Yeah, pity many punt resolution over picture quality.

 

[Roman4604]

I sit 2 meters away from my 47" TV and resolution on games is not noticeable. If I didn't read that Wipeout in 3D is 1080p while GT5 in is 720p I wouldn't have noticed much difference, unless I went close to the screen.

Well, firstly FPR passive 3D with only 540 physical lines per eye will blur the whole situation.

However even in 2D you still wont notice a huge difference. Thats because in both cases you're looking at the same 1920x1080 resolution, one upscaled and the other native. If your TV is running in 1:1 pixel mode (no scaling), native 1080p should provide a crisper/sharper picture as the softening effect of scaling is eliminated.

The real test would be to compare to a native 720p (1366x768) TV of similar size. With decent eyesight at 2m you should perceive the difference in pixel size and spacing e.g. diagonal lines appear jaggered.

 

[Mouse]

Anyone else tried the IZ3D drivers?

Yes I tried that, and it worked very well with the test app they provided (basically a spinning logo with a 3D effect that can be adjusted)
Unfortunately they decided to drop support for my graphics card at the time, so I just used the 2D->3D conversion done by the tv instead. That ended up being a simpler way of getting 3D out of any content from the PC (such as any movie or game)
but the effect isn't as good as having proper 3D content

Well, firstly FPR passive 3D with only 540 physical lines per eye will blur the whole situation.

No, it doesn't.

 

[Roman4604]

No, it doesn't.

It doesnt what?

 

[Mouse]

It doesnt what?

Well, firstly FPR passive 3D with only 540 physical lines per eye will blur the whole situation.

I actually use this regularly, there is no blurring.

 

[Roman4604]

there is no blurring.

Not what I said ...

will blur the whole situation.

 

[Mouse]

Not what I said ...

Well then I have no idea what you are trying to say. What situation is blurred?

 

[Roman4604]

Well then I have no idea what you are trying to say. What situation is blurred?

The context of the converstion was comparing 1080p to 720p. Since there are no 720p passive FPR 3D TVs in existance you cant make the comparison using a passive 3D picture.

 

[Mouse]

The context of the converstion was comparing 1080p to 720p. Since there are no 720p passive FPR 3D TVs in existance you cant make the comparison using a passive 3D picture.

Now I get it.
I still think such a comparison doesn't matter,

However even in 2D you still wont notice a huge difference. Thats because in both cases you're looking at the same 1920x1080 resolution, one upscaled and the other native.

if even 720p upscaled to a 1080p tv doesn't make any huge difference.

These 3D formats remind me of VHS vs Betamax, where the supposedly inferior quality tech won due to having other beneficial features that consumers cared about,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videotape_format_war

While VHS machines' lower retail price was a major factor, the principal battleground proved to be recording time. The original Sony Betamax video recorder for the NTSC television system could only record for 60 minutes, identical to the previous U-matic format, which had been sufficient for use in television studios. JVC's VHS could manage 120 minutes, followed by RCA's entrance into the market with a 240 minute recorder. These challenges sparked a mini-war to see who could achieve the longest recording time.

while the quality difference wasn't really that big of a difference for anyone to worry about it.

When Betamax was introduced in Japan and the United States in 1975 its Beta-I speed (1.5"/second) offered a slightly higher horizontal resolution (250 lines vs 240 lines horizontal NTSC), lower video noise, and less luma/chroma crosstalk than VHS, and was later marketed as providing pictures superior to VHS's playback. However the introduction of B-II speed, 0.8"/sec (2-hour mode), to compete with VHS's 2-hour Standard Play mode (1.3"/sec) reduced Betamax's horizontal resolution to 240 lines.[3] The extension of VHS to VHS HQ increased the apparent resolution to 250 lines so that overall a Betamax/VHS user could expect virtually identical luma resolution and chroma resolution (≈30 lines) wherein the actual picture performance depended on other factors including the condition and quality of the videotape and the specific video recorder machine model. For most consumers the difference as seen on the average television was negligible.

Similar arguments are happening now for Active vs Passive 3D with vertical resolution being the quality issue
and headaches, crosstalk, darkness of the image, glasses [weight, cost, charging] being the issues consumers care about.