I recently bought my first gaming PC with a Ryzen 9 processor and Nvidia RTX 5070, and gaming has been great so far. However, I'm still using an older 45-inch Insignia TV that only seems to support 60Hz. Games running at 1440p or 4K don't look nearly as sharp or smooth as I expected, so I suspect the TV is holding the system back. I sit about six feet away and would prefer something around 40–50 inches, with a budget near $500 USD. I mainly play RPGs and single-player games, with occasional casual competitive shooters. Should I buy a gaming monitor or TV, and what specifications should I look for? Is HDMI 2.1 necessary for 4K at high refresh rates?
4 Answers
Don’t focus only on the refresh-rate number. Check reviews for measured input latency in game mode, whether VRR works properly, and whether the HDMI ports actually support 4K at 120Hz. A TV advertising 4K HDR can still be limited to 60Hz or have noticeable lag. LG’s C-series OLEDs and newer Samsung QD-OLED models are excellent if your budget stretches, while TCL’s better mini-LED models are usually more realistic near $500. Your RTX 5070 should be fine for a 4K TV, though demanding games may need upscaling or frame generation to maintain high frame rates.
Around $500, check current sales on TCL mini-LED or QLED models with 4K 120/144Hz support. They can offer excellent HDR and gaming performance without OLED pricing. A 42-inch or 48-inch OLED would look even better if you find an unusually good deal, but OLED panels can suffer burn-in if the same static desktop elements, taskbars, or HUDs stay on screen for very long periods. Using screen-saving features and varied content reduces the risk.
For 4K above 60Hz over HDMI, HDMI 2.1 is the important specification. It provides enough bandwidth for 4K at 120Hz or higher, assuming the TV and graphics card both support it. For your use, look for a TV with a dedicated game mode, low input latency, VRR, and 4K 120Hz support. OLED gives the best contrast and motion quality, but good mini-LED or QLED models can be much cheaper.
That helps a lot. I mostly play RPGs and single-player games, so 120Hz and good image quality matter more to me than having the absolute lowest competitive latency.
The main difference between a TV and monitor is usually size, viewing distance, and features rather than image quality alone. Monitors tend to offer DisplayPort, higher refresh rates, easier PC wake behavior, and sometimes better latency or calibration. TVs are generally better for couch gaming and home entertainment, especially at 42–55 inches. Since you’re about six feet away and also want to use the screen for movies and general living-room use, a TV makes sense.
That’s probably the direction I’ll take. The PC is also going to be our home entertainment system, so the TV’s size and convenience are more useful than having a super-high-refresh monitor.
I didn’t realize burn-in was still something to consider. I’ll keep it in mind since the screen may sometimes be used as a regular PC display, not just for games.