I am looking for accurate knowledge on using a 4k tv for a monitor.

[Vuulgar]

I have dont a bit of searching and am finding much conflicting info on whats important or even if its really a good idea. I am looking for a trustworthy source.

[Cock Sucker]

Is a 4k monitor worth getting now? as there arnt many "4k" games personally i'd say no as you'd also need a gfx card that can easily do 4k as well (assuming we are talking pc games here)

 

4k is overhyped I got a 1920x1080 monitor and it does the job 

[zzz72w3r]

For PC users, refresh rate is probably the biggest difference between TV and monitor.  If you want to play above 60 fps then monitor is the best route to go.  Some TV could be as low as 30Hz which you want to avoid.  The issue is that TV makers have not been transparent with their marketing materials.  All TV makers throw around words like 120Hz, 240Hz or even 960Hz when the LCD "panel" is only 60Hz or below, which nearly all of them are.  On the other hand when a computer monitor says it's144Hz you know the panel is capable of displaying 144 fps.

 

Color accuracy is second but the kind of precision is probably important only for graphics or photo artists.  Consumer TV usually don't provide that kind of information in their spec.

 

Ports could be an issue but only in the el-cheapo brands or models.

 

Not sure if you are getting OLED but it's too early to tell if image retention will be an issue.  I use two late model Panasonic plasma TV as monitors.  I will not trade them for any 1080P LCD but despite whatever plasma lovers claimed extensive Civ4 gaming has left marks on both sets.

 

EDIT: Didn't realize you are looking for a source of reviews.  The best indicator is whether the reviewer lists the TV's true "panel" refresh rate.  Also if TV makers use tricks to jack up the "TV" refresh rate any competent reviewer will check if the TV has some kind of computer/gaming mode (but you still need to be careful because gaming mode could mean 30 fps).

 

EDIT2: Just did a quick check apparently TV makers have up their games and most '16 4K models are now 120Hz panels with only low end models at 60Hz.

 

[gregathit]

I'm using one for my gaming rig.  I have a 42" and I have to tell you, games look fantastic.  I also have a slightly older, but still power rig with a 24" gaming monitor.  The 24" setup feels like I'm trying to play on my phone after using my 42".  Bigger isn't always better, as you have to figure out spacing back from the screen, where you can see the whole thing, but also be able to read dialogue.  

 

Like anything, you get what you pay for, so look at sites that give you the nuts and bolts breakdown on all the must have elements (input lag and so on).  Keep in mind that you do need a powerful GPU.  I have dual Titan X's powering mine.  Not something most folks are willing to throw down that much cash for.

 

Here is a balanced opinion that might help:  https://www.cnet.com/news/should-you-get-a-4k-tv-for-gaming/

 

A vid that talks about it in general terms and references several sites to get info from:  

[Executaball]

If you're going for the TV market be sure to double check the specifications. Many times TVs will use completely fake or "boosted" refresh rates. They use frame interpolation to get the extra refresh rate, which is fine for TV motion but not okay for gaming.

 

 

Beyond that one important thing - I use a 4k monitor and in my experience you cannot play Skyrim in 4k with the standard graphic mods and textures. I too run a Titan X SLI both overclocked and on watercooling. The main thing is you cannot use all that power because of -> 32 bit skyrim, old engine, old direct X, windows 10 4GB VRAM limit, ect. 4k is just undoable regardless of the hardware you have it seems (Hitting 20,30fps). I usually downscale to 1440p and can get a decent 50,60fps with alot of graphic mods and a med tier ENB