Help me pick a 32-37" computer display.

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:32 pm

90% of what I do on a computer can be done while sitting on a couch instead of at a desk. In the interest of moving computing out of the study and into the den, I'd like a very large monitor. I think a 32", 1920*1080 LCD television should work fine.

I do need:
*inexpensive. >$500 is out of the question, and cheaper is better.
*high resolution, with small text rendered very legibly
*usable in a very dim room.
*modest power consumption. My PC uses 23W, my monitor uses 10W with the backlight at 0% brightness. I'd like to stay under 60W combined, if possible.

I don't need:
*picture quality. I plan to run it in a dim room with Contrast set to 100 and Brightness set near zero. That's how I roll.
*utter silence. I can accept a scarcely perceptible humming from a CCFL.

I'm having a really hard time finding hard numbers on TV power consumption. There doesn't seem to be any way to get hard numbers short of buying a Kill-A-Watt, taking it to BestBuy, and asking to plug their display models in to it while I adjust the Brightness settings.

Any thoughts? Am I right to want to use a TV? Are any 1080p TVs better at this than others?

mark19891989 · Post by **mark19891989** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:35 am

i dont think your gona get a screen that size with <40w.

my 32" Hanspree LCD tv (not sure of the model) uses about 150w when playing xbox

Big Pimp Daddy · Post by **Big Pimp Daddy** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:55 am

I am very doubtful you will get that size screen at that power rating.
Not sure how much power my 40" 1080p Samsung uses, but it kicks out enough heat to keep my room warm (even with the backlight turned down) - in comparison, my gaming rig doesn't make a difference to room temp when it's on.
I believe the new OLED screens use a lot less power, but that would blow your budget out of the water, several times over.
Your best bet may be an Optoma Pico Projector or similar, not 1920x1080 by any means, but undoubtedly low power and cheap enough that you could get a handful of them with your budget.

Vicotnik · Post by **Vicotnik** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:02 pm

My 40" Sony 1080p LCD consumes ~100W when I use it as a "computer display" - that is with speakers, sharpening and such disabled. According to the official specifications it consumes up to 162W.
My 24" Dell LCD consumes ~44W with brightness set to zero.

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:17 pm

mark19891989 wrote:i dont think your gona get a screen that size with <40w.

my 32" Hanspree LCD tv (not sure of the model) uses about 150w when playing xbox

My 19" HannsG is rated for something like 60W, and it draws 30W at maximum brightness, 10W at minimum brightness. So I'd much rather compare actual power readings instead of specs.

The backlight dominates power consumption of an LCD display, and the higher maximum brightness means TVs can draw much more power than the same sized computer monitor. One of my requirements in a TV is an unusually large range of brightness settings.

Maybe I will buy a projector instead of a TV. Sadly, only a dim LED projector fits within my power and noise guidelines. The Optoma does 480*320, but there are similar projectors at 640*480 in the $200 ballpark.

mark19891989 · Post by **mark19891989** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:08 pm

Brian wrote:
mark19891989 wrote:i dont think your gona get a screen that size with <40w.

my 32" Hanspree LCD tv (not sure of the model) uses about 150w when playing xbox
My 19" HannsG is rated for something like 60W, and it draws 30W at maximum brightness, 10W at minimum brightness. So I'd much rather compare actual power readings instead of specs.

The backlight dominates power consumption of an LCD display, and the higher maximum brightness means TVs can draw much more power than the same sized computer monitor. One of my requirements in a TV is an unusually large range of brightness settings.

Maybe I will buy a projector instead of a TV. Sadly, only a dim LED projector fits within my power and noise guidelines. The Optoma does 480*320, but there are similar projectors at 640*480 in the $200 ballpark.

i just got my killawatt out of the draw, im watching a video from hdmi input, and its drawing 131w with the brightness on 50 (default settings)

speakers are not in use atm as im useing external speakers

drjunk · Post by **drjunk** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:29 am

Sharp have brought out a new range of tvs (le600 and le700 series), which are supposed to be the most efficient out there. Has full LED lit screen (not edge lit). Off the top of my head, the lc32le600 uses about 50 watts...and cost about Â£600. The 52" version uses about 100 watts

.

mark19891989 · Post by **mark19891989** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:58 am

drjunk wrote:Sharp have brought out a new range of tvs (le600 and le700 series), which are supposed to be the most efficient out there. Has full LED lit screen (not edge lit). Off the top of my head, the lc32le600 uses about 50 watts...and cost about Â£600. The 52" version uses about 100 watts .

those usage figures sound cool, woldnt heat up the room like mine does lol

electrodacus · Post by **electrodacus** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:01 pm

I think that 32" and up TV's are using more power than you will want.
Maybe using a dual 24" or so monitor setup will fit in your max power consumption. I have a 20 inch wide Acer X203W and it uses about 22W at 50% brightness is not to usable at 0 or 10% since is a TN panel
I also have a NEC (just got this last week) 2090UXi 4:3 20.1" that can be used at 0% brightness and it uses only 14W and about 35W at 100% brightness. I use this at 10% in a dark room and during the day at 30% using about 21W.

You can also download the the energy star list exel or pdf with power consumption on LCD TV Link they measure the power consumption at standard settings usually this standard settings are 80% or even 100% brightness so is not very helpful but you can get an idea you can find the same list for monitors.
If dual monitor is not OK for you you can see the Panasonic Viera LCD they have only 32" and 37" the 32" is TC-L32S1.
They use ISP panels the best you can get and you may be able to get this at 500-600$.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:02 am

Why does one care about wattage of a screen?

It doesnt make anything louder. Unless like you are in a bunker in Pakistan hanging out with extremists. Then I could see wanting to keep wattage below 100 total. 100 is the 100watt lightbulb theory of Nazi Germany, they used them to test to see if their bunkers' ambient temperatures could be adequately controlled as 1 person was about equal to a 100 watt light bulb.

The department of homeland security has red flagged this concern.

lm · Post by lm » Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:09 am

Brian wrote: *high resolution, with small text rendered very legibly

If you buy a 1080p TV, then 1920x1080 pixels is the resolution you get. It does not make any sense to build a full HD capable TV with any other resolution than that.

The thing to look out for is overscan. Some TVs can't show a PC display 1:1, but will instead scale it so that some number of pixels from each border are cut off and the rest looks blurry.

So make sure the model you buy does not force overscan on PC input.

I don't really understand the point of overscan but that's how it is. Basically it decides if a TV model is usable as a PC display device or not.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:10 am

Well, there are specific models that allow the choice of 1:1 pixel ratio.

Overscan was designed for the cheesey, homebrew digital stations that might possibly have lines and crap at the very edges of their images. It is an utter waste as I have NEVER seen this transpire on any of the 100's of dvd's or broadcast channels ever. It makes your picture look permanently fuzzy for no reason other than marketing (the chance your screen might show lines on 1 out of 10000 shows would cause for the average idiot to call up their tv manufacturer and complain)

This is why I dislike TV's. bad pictures, poor control, if below 1500 dollars.

1080 vertical on anything bigger than like a 30 inch screen looks icky for computer use.

at 37 inches you need to hit around 1800 verticle to read text normally and not see pixelized images.

Also a note on reading google at that distance: You will need like a 42+ inch screen to equal the ratio of how a normal computer experience is. Also note that your eyeball's ability to read text is best when items are using the focusing lens. At far distances your brain has trouble. Also, it has trouble keeping up line by lines, its just not a big vs tiny thing its a distance thing like holding a rifle steady at 200 yards.

I personally would go to a refurbished place and look up Sharp, LG, or Mid to upper end Sony's. Go bigger and used with more advanced features. If it doesnt have 1:1 ratio setting, it cannot be used to read text. text relies on each pixel being perfectly aligned.

I know all of this deeply as I have done this! Real mode aspect or 1:1 is hard to find. It doesnt matter if you pay a lot or a little. I have seen some ultra crapper brands have it and 2500 dollar Sony's not.

Help me pick a 32-37" computer display.

Help me pick a 32-37" computer display.

Re: Help me pick a 32-37" computer display.