|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Mar 15, 2014 19:48:38 GMT -6
Soooo...I have a 720p LED that I hooked up just to get an idea...and it was pretty awful...I mean baaad. I assume that's because it was 720? I bought a USB to HDMI/DVI connector and now I'm able to free up the Tbolt slot for the Apollo... BUT - the USB to DVI don't worky too great. I get glitches and interference occasionally and I SWEAR it slowed my computer down a little. Sigh...I could use it - it doesn't happen all the time...but it is definitely not an elegant solution. So, cowboycoalminer you think the 720 is what made it look so bad? Do you know what equivalent 1080 is? Is it like 1920x1080? I'm really tempted to just say screw it and get the Thunderbolt display...but I'm not sure I would like that as much as two monitors... 2 Thunderbolt displays would solve all of your problems. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 15, 2014 19:56:16 GMT -6
That would be sick...
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 16, 2014 10:43:29 GMT -6
Man...I don't know if this is gonna work. Major distortion. I'm reeeeally considering dropping the coin for the Apple Display.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Mar 16, 2014 12:36:24 GMT -6
It's more the adaptor then the 720p display causing the problem.
You could chain two thunderbolt adaptors together... not sure if it would work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 16, 2014 13:35:24 GMT -6
It's more the adaptor then the 720p display causing the problem. You could chain two thunderbolt adaptors together... not sure if it would work. Not sure I was making myself clear...I was using the USB to DVI adapter for my second computer monitor...was having distortion with it... The terrible picture on the 720p was via HDMI. After searching around, I found out the 720p was only a screen resolution of something like 1200x900...baaad. I've found a "new" Apple Tbolt Display on CL. Might be too much to stand.  I see that there's a Dell Ultrasharp 27" that can also get the 2560x1440 number...but there's no thunderbolt. I could connect it HDMI and still get the same resolution (according to the all-to-eager Dell sales rep) but after tax, it's only $100 less than the Apple Tbolt. |
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Mar 16, 2014 14:44:55 GMT -6
I'm using a Mac Mini with a 37" - 1080p - 120Hz refresh rate,
Samsung T.V. connected to the HDMI port.
Looks beautiful, on problems.
P.S. I'm posting on a 3rd computer, still working on my connection problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 16, 2014 16:00:43 GMT -6
Screw it...it's just money, right? (Time to clean up my desk...yes, that was spilled day old coffee)  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2014 17:41:57 GMT -6
you need more outboard gear!! lol
|
|
|
|
Post by mobeach on Mar 16, 2014 18:09:11 GMT -6
I love you red solo cup, I lift you up,
Proceed to party, proceed to party..
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 17, 2014 8:22:09 GMT -6
Soooo...I have a 720p LED that I hooked up just to get an idea...and it was pretty awful...I mean baaad. I assume that's because it was 720? I bought a USB to HDMI/DVI connector and now I'm able to free up the Tbolt slot for the Apollo... BUT - the USB to DVI don't worky too great. I get glitches and interference occasionally and I SWEAR it slowed my computer down a little. Sigh...I could use it - it doesn't happen all the time...but it is definitely not an elegant solution. So, cowboycoalminer you think the 720 is what made it look so bad? Do you know what equivalent 1080 is? Is it like 1920x1080? I'm really tempted to just say screw it and get the Thunderbolt display...but I'm not sure I would like that as much as two monitors... That's what I'm talking about. it's not really that it's just 720p, which in monitor resolution terms would be 1280x720, it's that TVs are built around providing a balance between motion and size. The pixels are MUCH larger than those of a computer monitor because people tend to sit a lot farther away. Because of that, when you sit closer, the lines look a lot more aliased (jagged lines because of the square pixel edges). Also, the TV has circuitry designed around motion, so all of the hardware is about pumping frames out to the LCD panel quickly without judder or flickering, but not pure resolution. Also, the refresh rates are much lower since film and tv are mostly 24FPS and 30FPS. Very few channels are actual 60FPS like the refresh rates of monitors. To use a TV for a computer would make the mouse movement feel lazy and sluggish. Newer TVs are built more like monitors, with 60hz native refresh rates, but you'd still have to test them out. If you used a 1080P (1920x1080) TV, it would probably look better. Don't be fooled by 1080I, which means "interlaced". Interlacing is a way to send half as much data through the channel. On old tube TVs, the picture was made up of scanning lines, not full pictures like today. The lines would scan all EVEN lines then come back and do all ODD lines. Since this was done 60 times a second, the human eye would put this together and you'd see a picture, although at any point in time, there would only be a single dot of light on the screen.. So when HD first came out, they still didn't have the bandwidth to send whole frames, so they sent even and odd lines, so at any single point of time, you'd only get half resolution. In the case of 1080I, the true resolution was only 540 lines. For a time, 720P (P for progressive) was higher in resolution than 1080I.. My 24in monitor runs at 1980x1200. I might move over to a 29" monitor that does a super wide screen, like 2560x1080, since most of what I do needs wider rather than taller. EDIT: I forgot to mention that LCD monitors and TVs need to be run at their native resolution for best results. Up and down rezzing on LCDs is generally horrible. So if your TV is 720, run your computer output at 1280x720 and try to change the refresh rate to a multiple of 24hz, like 72hz. That will be the best it can possibly look, unless your adapter is screwy. I'm not sure I trust the USB adapters for this.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 12:58:54 GMT -6
I have a fairly new LG tv, used as monitor over HDMI.
None of the problems mentioned appearing. Older TVs *have* these problems, it is crucial to read and understand the specs before buying...
It actually behaves better than most monitors i ever own. It can do 60Hz incoming besides the typical tv low refresh rates but refreshes at much higher framerate (SRC) internally, making an excellent picture, far away from sluggish behaviour when used as a monitor, it is actually good enough for fast gaming. Full HD 1920x1080 makes the point of usability complete. Even running it downscaled to 720p it looks great.
It wasn't even the latest series, so it was ~500 bucks at a sale. Which actually made the decision complete, because it is huge, no way you get a computer monitor at this pricing and size.
Times are changing fast regarding home consumer electronics, especially TVs....
Well, and i did not hear much good things about usb video cards. Not at all....
|
|
|
|
Post by adogg4629 on Mar 19, 2014 11:31:53 GMT -6
Hi John, I hope this post can help you and give you another option to mull over. It's more in line with the big ass monitor solution you originally brought up. The issue I've had with the TV as the monitor is that it still scales as essentially 1920 by 1080, so you don't get more desktop space, you just get bigger icons. Here it is: Dell U2913WM
The desktop space you get is 2560 by 1080, so its a significant increase in desktop space. It's like have two older less wide monitors side by side. It's spec'd fine for the Mac Mini display port (from 2011 and later). The tradeoff is that you'll be pulling GPU performance from the CPU, but I wouldn't think you'd be pulling any more then you were when running 2 1920 by 1080 monitors. A smarter computer person then me would be able to tell you if you'd get less of a CPU hit on this then you would running two monitors. Then again you could always go with a Magma Thunderbolt Chassis and a new PCIe video card with enough on board processing if you are really worried about CPU hits running big monitors on the Mac Mini. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 19, 2014 19:58:14 GMT -6
I already pulled the trigger on the Thunderbolt Display. And I have to say - I absolutely don't regret it! I did see that Dell monitor and it lolls really nice. I bought this Tbolt display for $750 used, so it was only $100 more than the Dell. I wanted the Tbolt connectivity too.
|
|
|
|
Post by adogg4629 on Mar 20, 2014 10:42:14 GMT -6
I already pulled the trigger on the Thunderbolt Display. And I have to say - I absolutely don't regret it! I did see that Dell monitor and it lolls really nice. I bought this Tbolt display for $750 used, so it was only $100 more than the Dell. I wanted the Tbolt connectivity too. You really can't go wrong with that Display AND for that price! |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 20, 2014 11:27:22 GMT -6
Wow. I just bought a 29" for 300. You mac folks are suckers. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 20, 2014 14:50:51 GMT -6
Does it have Thunderbolt and 2550x1460? Didn't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by sceneofdarhyme on Mar 20, 2014 15:42:01 GMT -6
No Thunderbolt, but 3840x2160 ;-) My Seiki 39" Ultra HD  |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 20, 2014 16:28:21 GMT -6
Well shit fire...I bow to you...That wasn't cheap I saw a 55" UHD at Best Buy the other day and it was freaking AMAZING. Honestly, it was cheaper than I thought it would be - $2999 |
|
|
|
Post by sceneofdarhyme on Mar 20, 2014 16:39:47 GMT -6
Well actually it is ridiculously cheap at 499$ from amazon.com. It is limited to 30 fps so not much there for gaming. I wouldnt say it is completely useless for watching tv, but upscaling from HD to 4K is pretty bad. It is a decent monitor. But you better have good eyes, pretty small fonts at this resolution . |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 20, 2014 17:16:21 GMT -6
So - what can you use it for besides a monitor? Is there no ultra HD content yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 20, 2014 17:20:25 GMT -6
Does it have Thunderbolt and 2550x1460? Didn't think so. It's 2560x1440, yeah. No thunderbolt though. I have USB3.0. No need for strange proprietary transfer protocols, nor need to pay excessive prices for such things! |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 20, 2014 17:23:56 GMT -6
Where is the eyeroll emoticon
|
|
|
|
Post by mobeach on Mar 20, 2014 18:01:59 GMT -6
"I live how I wanna live
Buy what I wanna buy
Do what I wanna do
Try What I wanna try
Fear nothin, take chances
Not afraid to fail, always makin advances
So when I ride on the Grim Reaper Highway
No regrets bitch, I did it my way
Yeah (yeah, yeah, yeah)"
John Cena on the Mac/PC debate.
|
|
I see that there's a Dell Ultrasharp 27" that can also get the 2560x1440 number...but there's no thunderbolt. I could connect it HDMI and still get the same resolution (according to the all-to-eager Dell sales rep) but after tax, it's only $100 less than the Apple Tbolt. 
