50" TV for Desktop Monitor (and Gaming) advice

[UserName]

Looking for some input and more technical information when it comes to selecting one of the LED Full Array, QLED, etc. newer 4K TVs as a monitor. I've got a 2070 Super (so no HDMI 2.1) with no immediate plans to replace it and am using an LG 34" 2560x1080 monitor (which works great for gaming and regular non-gaming tasks). Also, since I'm going to stick it on a desk, anything larger than 50" will be even more obscene. I don't play any of the online FPS games, mainly AC: Origins/Odyssey, Fallout 4, (and of course CyberPunk 2077 come November), etc.

That said - with the card only supporting 60Hz and DP inputs on the far more expensive TVs - does it make sense to spend the extra dollars on the true 120Hz TVs?
Also, if it can do the chroma 4:4:4 dance, 1440P@60Hz, low response time, and input lag - will that suffice?
Should I be concerned if the monitor isn't officially "G-Sync" supported? (fwiw, neither is my LG monitor and it runs all those GSync tests just fine)
I'd rather not spend $1K, if $600 will do the trick - and by the time I actually upgrade to the 3070 or 4xxx - they'll probably have a whole different range of screen options at that point.

Am I missing anything? Thanks!

 

[DXCHASE]

No, i would say stick with using a monitor as my suggestion, it would probably be cheaper to buy a high quality ultrawide or something with 144hz+ than a QLED tv that may or may not run at true 120hz-240hz. I just personally find that gaming looks better on monitors than tv's, and if its going to be your main display, yea stick with a good monitor.

No you dont need a gysnc compatible monitor to get that gsync quality, as long as your monitor has the gsync compatible approval by nividia, im actually using a monitor that isnt "officially supported" as a gsync compatible monitor and it works flawlessly.

 

[UserName]

@DXCHASE - thanks for the response.
Another reason I'm looking at doing this is to clear up desk space (going to mount TV on wall). I do have an additional 27" 2560x1440 monitor, but it's not suited for gaming at all - plus I do have my work computer connected to 27" (only the home PC is connected to both, but I game on the 34").

The other reason why I'm looking at the TVs to begin with is that my current monitors are both 60/75Hz and when gaming I don't notice a difference when it's set to either. But then, they are monitors so maybe that's why? So it's one thing to look at specs on paper, but there isn't a whole lot when it comes to explaining why other than personal preference. I get that a monitor will always be better, but wondering if there is a happy compromise with a 4K TV that won't break the bank.

 

[Oussebon]

Should I be concerned if the monitor isn't officially "G-Sync" supported? (fwiw, neither is my LG monitor and it runs all those GSync tests just fine)

Yes.

If by monitor you mean TV.

You should be a lot more cautious with gsync certification on a TV than with a monitor, certainly with a 20-series GPU.

A monitor that supports Freesync via DP will often, as you've found, play nice with gsync manually enabled even if it doesn't officially say 'gsync compatible'. And a lot of modern monitors have freesync over DP. i.e. adaptive sync via DP.

However, the picture is more complicated for TVs. Rtings only found that a handful of non-certified TVs played nice with 16 and 20 series Nvidia GPUs trying to use adaptive sync over HDMI:

Our TV Motion Tests: G-SYNC Compatible

Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) technology is designed to improve your gaming experience by reducing the amount of screen tearing that occurs when your game's frame rate doesn't match your display's refresh rate.

www.rtings.com

And even then it's not guaranteed - I think rumours were circulating that a firmware update disabled some of those, though I'm not sure of the details.

At the very least you'll want to exercise extreme caution if you do go for a TV and you want adaptive sync

 

[Oussebon]

Also...

What exactly is the plan here? You have a monitor you seem happy with. You're going to buy a 4k TV. Your GPU probably won't support adaptive sync on almost all TVs. And your GPU will also struggle to power modern titles at 4k at higher settings - so you're going to play below native res, which can look a bit 'wrong', certainly compared to playing at native res on a lower res screen.

The TV may also have a lower response time than your monitor, especially if you're trying not to shell out too much.

You're trying to 'futureproof' the TV a bit by buying a high refresh one - maybe. But you won't buy a GPU that can leverage that until much later. By which time, as you said, you may want to replace the monitor again for a new screen.

I'm thinking the best option is to stick with what you have, or to buy a gaming-focused monitor you know you'll be happy with and stick with it for a long time. If you want to avoid spending loads and loads on a monitor/TV, it's not any better to spend a certain amount and keep changing it either.

 

[UserName]

@Oussebon - that's kinda the reason for posting the question. On paper - it seems to reason that the 2070 Super should be able to have no significant issues as long as the TV supports Adaptive Sync/VRR - and yes, unless someone has done proper testing YMMV.

That said - my main goal is to see if there is a option for a 50" (max my desk space will allow) 4K screen that will work decently as a monitor for regular text/document usage and non-high FPS gaming. I have no real use for this as a TV at all.

Resolution wise, I plan on using 2560x1440 for games and the full 4K just for regular non-gaming use.

The one thing that isn't clear (which I believe you explained) is that with this video card - it doesn't make sense to pay any extra for the True 120Hz since the card can only push HDMI 2.0 which is 60Hz. However, getting that Adaptive Sync feature often isn't available on the lower tier models. Fortunately, I've got plenty of time as none of this is urgent - just doing some fact finding to minimize this not working at all and having to deal with a return because the "reviews" said it worked just fine.

 

[Oussebon]

I think the bottom line is that if you want adaptive sync with your 2000-series GPU, you'll need to get a TV that says it's gsync compatible.

Or one of a tiny, tiny handful of monitors that unofficially support it. Assuming a firmware update doesn't withdraw that. Which isn't a gamble I'd take.

Looking at the Nvidia site under the (multiple different) 4k entries and ruling out anything much smaller or larger than 50", that would appear to mean your menu is this:

NVIDIA GeForce G-SYNC Gaming Monitors

Search for GeForce G-SYNC gaming monitors.

www.nvidia.com

G-SYNC Compatible	Acer	CG437K P	Yes	43​	VA	3840x2160 (UHD)	48-120Hz	No	Display Port	436.48 or newer
G-SYNC Compatible	Asus	PG43UQ	Yes	43​	VA	3840x2160 (UHD)	48-120Hz	No	Display Port	Upcoming Driver
G-SYNC Compatible	Asus	PG43U	Yes	43​	VA	3840x2160 (4K)	48-120Hz	Yes	Display Port	442.29 or newer
G-SYNC Compatible	LG	2020 CX	Yes	48​	OLED	3840x2160 (UHD)	40-120Hz	No	HDMI	445.51 or newer
G-SYNC Compatible	Dell	AW5520QF	Yes	55​	OLED	3840x2160 (UHD)	48-120Hz	No	Display Port	441.66 or newer
G-SYNC Compatible	LG	2019 B9, C9, E9	Yes	55​	OLED	3840x2160 (UHD)	40-120Hz	No	HDMI	HDMI VRR Driver
G-SYNC Compatible	LG	2020 BX, CX, GX	Yes	55​	OLED	3840x2160 (UHD)	40-120Hz	No	HDMI	445.51 or newer

Assuming they keep the list up to date.

I'm not familiar with these so don't know which are technically TVs and which are technically monitors. I think everything except the LG listings there call themselves monitors.

As for 120hz, while it's not necessarily something you should chase for your current GPU, there are some arguments in favour.
1) you wouldn't need to replace the TV down the line once you get a 3000/4000 series card - which is valid as these things are probably going to stay relatively expensive and you'd usually aim to keep a monitor for 2-3 cycles of GPU replacement.
2) Going by Nvidia's list, the TVs that do what you want them to (be approx 50", have gsync certified to some level) are apparently all 120hz anyway.
3) The TVs may have other features that make them desirable with regards to future GPU purchases, for instance if they have HDMI 2.1 and support VRR via that, or DP input, or whatever other premium features that they have in addition to 120hz.

I'd say that a gsync low range of 48 is possibly higher than ideal. The options with a floor of 40hz look more promising.

I'm not sure why you're aiming for a TV if you're not also using it as a TV Not being critical, just wondering - if I've understood you right essentially because they're more likely to be big screens and (you were hoping) relatively inexpensive?

The range of screens that call themselves monitors doesn't look promising either. I checked a UK retailer and saw this

Buy the Philips Momentum 4K HDR display with Ambiglow 436M6VBPAB/00 4K HDR display with Ambiglow

Experience a new level of entertainment immersion with the new Momentum 4K HDR display with Ambiglow lighting. An expansive 4K UHD display with DisplayHDR 1000 delivers ultra-crisp and vibrant image quality that will get you in the moment.

www.philips.co.uk

for £530. It seems there are some US listings for ~$700 which sounds about right. While this has freesync, the range is only 48-60hz according to this. Which is not a very wide range at all. And obviously somewhat smaller than your ~50" target anyway

It also costs so much for the limited spec (60hz, narrow FS range) that you're in the territory where you should probably either pony up more for something with a better spec or save your $700 altogether.

Looking at other options:

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#F=1066800000,1651000000&sort=price&r=409602160,384002160

The LG LG 43UN700-B doesn't support freesync at all it seems. Dells' professional monitors in this size may not support it either.

So I'm thinking your best options may either be to buy something more expensive than you originally wanted, if it does what you want and supports things like VRR over HDMI 2.1 and so on. Or to stick with the current setup / consider alternative options.

 

[UserName]

Thanks for all the details - very helpful information.

So the one TV I was looking at was the LG Nano85 - which on paper appears to meet all the criteria... and yeah, basically looking to get a single large screen for the fraction of the cost if a similar size were an actual computer monitor given that I don't have the high performance needs. Clearly, the high end LG CX models will work, but I'd much rather spend $600 vs $1500 if it will do what I need it to do.

 

[Oussebon]

According to this:

LG NANO85 2020 Review (49NANO85UNA, 55NANO85UNA, 65NANO85UNA, 75NANO85UNA)

The LG NANO85 2020 is a 4k LED TV in LG's NanoCell lineup. It has decent overall performance with very good out-of-the-box color accuracy, but it doesn't perform...

www.rtings.com

No freesync and no gsync compatible.

So you wouldn't get VRR/adaptive sync outside of HDMI 2.1, and even then the 4k VRR range is 48-60hz only

So you'd be getting a TV with no adaptive sync on your current GPU, and poor adaptive sync on any future card if I've got that right.

 

[UserName]

Yeah, I saw that. What I really don't understand is how it how that same TV is also recommended as a great PC monitor and a great choice for video games. I suspect I'm going to have to visit a brick/mortar store, take it home, and find out for myself.
I'm hoping it's similar to my LG computer monitor that isn't G-Sync compatible either, but works just fine in games.

 

[Oussebon]

TV is also recommended as a great PC monitor

Because you don't need freesync if you're doing non-gaming PC things

and a great choice for video games

Because their criteria for assessing that presumably don't mandate adaptive sync

If you look at the review and the criteria in detail, they actually say:

Video Games

What it is: The TV will be used to play video games, directly in front, in a controlled light environment. Usually fast games, like online FPS, where motion blur and input lag are important.

PC Monitor

What it is: The TV will be used as a PC monitor, from 2-3 feet away, either for productivity purposes or gaming. Sharp text is important, as well as a high resolution.

Which I read as "it looks good and the input lag doesn't suck, and we didn't factor in freesync/gsync to our score."

 

[UserName]

Exactly! I went ahead and ordered it. Will report back my purely subjective findings.

 

[Oussebon]

So you're happy with a total absence of adaptive sync?

 

[UserName]

Even though the site did just remove the Nano85 from the Best 4K TVs for PC Monitors List 4 days ago, I think I'm willing to spend a little time and effort to see if the 2070 Super can still produce acceptable results despite the lack of it being G-Sync compatible.
Also, even though it doesn't affect my card, FreeSync is now available via firmware download.

 

[UserName]

Verdict: Glorious!
Desktop is in 4k x 2k (3840 x 2160) with Windows scaling up 200%.
Text is very crisp.
Current game I'm playing is AC: Origins - and I did have some issues with the black bars, but then realized I had the reshade mod installed - so once I removed that - whole thing appeared in full screen in 2160x1440p mode with all the settings maxxed and ran the built in benchmark test. 55-60fps.
Also, ran nVidia's Pendulum G-Sync test and it worked fine in G-Sync mode even though the control panel says "not validated."
Going to run a few more tests to see if HDR mode is better or not - but even running a quick tests of some older games - looks great.