text: One of the most important factors, that nobody else ever seems to care about (and it pisses me off to no end), is the RESOLUTION of the monitor. And I've never seen an LCD tv that has a resolution higher than 1280*1024 (an "amazing" performance, achieved in the last millennium by over 99% of the common 17" CRT monitors and many 15" monitors too).\n\nThe 27" beast you mention makes no exception; its resolution is even lower: 1280*720. My Viewsonic VA1912w (19") already beats it (1440*900) and my (older) 19" CRT totally humiliates it (1600*1200). Even my 15" laptop screen has 1400*1050.\n\nWhat this means (having a HUGE monitor with a low resolution) is that you won't have more pixels on the screen (actually, you'll probably have less), but the pixels will be larger.\nJust like zooming into a low-resolution image. It gets bigger but it doesn't look any better.\n\nNow, 1280*1024 is plenty enough for TV (and HDTV), so that display is perfectly good for watching TV, from a comfortable distance. And this is the key: it is a TV, not a computer monitor! It's probably good enough for games too, because games don't need very high resolutions. What matters for games is the low latency for fast and impressive action.\n\nHowever, if you want to do serious graphics, don't settle for anything less than 1600*1200. It's just not worth it. And you can find that resolution (or higher) in LCD monitors (not TVs!) starting from 20".