I would lean the opposite direction. I switched from a Vizio TV to a 144hz ViewSonic monitor and the difference in gaming is night and day. It's not only a better image with better colors, deeper blacks, better looking sharpness and stronger brightness where it counts, but the ability to render up to 144hz is a gamechanger.

I never realized that 1080p60 would look better on a 144hz monitor than a television but everything is so crisp and smooth in games, it's honestly breathtaking with the right scene. I didn't realize that having a panel that can handle 144hz means that vertical sync is pointless, and for the games that I can actually render at 144hz, the effect is magical by comparison.

I find myself replaying more cinematic games (like say Witcher 3) on the new panel and it's like experiencing the magic of these scenes all over again for the first time.

I couldn't ever imagine going back to a television for gaming.

Sure, a bottom of the barrel TV vs a highly rated PC monitor is going to have a different outcome - no surprise, since that’s not a fair comparison.

Compare high end models in similar price ranges (as I have) and you’ll see what I’m talking about. For example: Compare an LG OLED in a dark room to any modern PC monitor, and I would be surprised if you were anything but blown away by the OLED, and appalled by how expensive these gaming monitors are compared to what a similarly priced OLED is capable of (especially now that LG OLEDs are capable of 120hz and variable refresh rate with input lag lower than many gaming monitors).

Of course, the main reason we don’t see everyone using OLED PC monitors are concerns about burn in effects from long term use. But for most people for TV and movie viewing, it’s not a concern. My 3 year old LG B6 OLED is still going strong with no signs of burn in, and has picture quality that still puts the best of the best non-OLED TVs to shame.

My experience with PC displays is almost the complete opposite... its the computer display that has the most accurate colors -- all the TVs I've played with ride the contrast waaay too hard, and if all the extra processing isn't disabled the picture looks worse

By any chance is your experience with TVs from Samsung, or bargain brands? Among the top tier brands (LG, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung) only Samsung is notorious for intentionally bad out of box calibration (because oversaturated colors is a cheap a easy way to impress, though in extended use you will tire of it quickly). I don’t know about the bargain brands like Vizio but I heard their latest stuff is pretty capable, though I don’t know if they have good calibration by default like the above mentioned brands do (minus Samsung).

Color calibration isn’t everything BTW. The contrast ratio modern TVs are capable is pretty much unrivaled by any modern computer monitor until relatively recently, and even now the only ones that come close cost many times the price of an equivalent TV.

But no monitor on the market can hold a candle to the image quality experience of an OLED TV for HDR movies and TV shows. This is not really under any dispute btw among audio video forums: virtually everyone admits that emissive technology like OLED has inherent quality advantages. The main debate centers purely around whether or not OLED burn in is likely to occur for various use cases.

If you haven’t experienced modern HDR content on a flagship TV (particularly OLED), you are missing out on something really special. No current PC monitor can even come close, except those that cost >2x the price of a modern 55” OLED TV.

Color accuracy is more important for me, I guess, and I have 99% sRGB coverage desktop LCDs to prove it. As for TVs I had a mid-tier 2013-ish Vizio 42" and a newer mid-tier 2017-ish Samsung 60" and both of them required a lot of tuning to get the color right. The Samsung does HDR and it does look nice, but again my priorities are color accuracy, low latency, and good contrast ratio (I do a lot of photo editing) and don't watch many movies or much TV.

I'm curious as to how a 10-bit display measures up, isn't HDR just a fancy standard for high-bit-rate color? Other than the backlight I imagine they'd still be superior.

I'd still prefer a giant computer display over a TV, if anything to avoid the various "smart" features and other value-adds, but to each their own I guess. I'll check out OLED TVs when I can but the demo reels they play are almost always blown-out contrast-wise and I can't stand images that feel like the saturation is set to max.

Yeah it’s hard to know how amazing modern OLEDs are from Best Buy demo reels, sadly. It’s something you have to experience in a dark room at home with good content to appreciate to the fullest.

BTW I highly recommend you do some research into HDR, and color gamut. I don’t think you know just how much you’re missing in terms of HDR, color gamut, contrast ratio, etc, that comes with modern TVs. Color gamut goes way beyond sRGB. Modern HDR TVs are far, far more than just “10 bit color”, and allow an express-able color gamut and color volume far beyond sRGB. A LG C9 achieves sound 99% DCIP3 color gamut and 75% REC2020.

To make a crude example, it’s kind of like 150% sRGB coverage, over a range from perfect black to extremely bright for each pixel individually, with enough precision for smooth gradients across these colors. These TVs can display colors that your sRGB monitor is physically incapable of reproducing, and they can display pixel by pixel contrast radios that allow realistic details and specular highlight brightness levels that cannot be done on regular LCD monitors or TVs. And it all absolutely shows in the picture quality when viewing recent movies/TV that are mastered well.

P.S. Stay away from Samsung if you care about color accuracy as I do. Sony and LG and Panasonic all have excellent color accuracy, and likely will be better than any PC monitor within twice it’s price. But Samsung not only comes out of box with horrible defaults, but actually CANNOT be correctly calibrated due to always-on tone mapping. Among videophiles, it’s well known that Samsung is not the way to go. But please don’t let Samsung’s overly flashy demos turn you off to the amazing technical abilities of modern TVs in general. Just because Samsung made arguably greedy marketing-driven design choices that cheapen and destroy the artistic accuracy of the content does not mean everyone else does too. Only Samsung does this as far as I’m aware, among the top brands.

If you want color accuracy, picture quality perfection, superior color gamut, contrast, HDR, AND low latency (0.1ms response time and overall input lag on par with dedicated gaming monitors), LG OLED is THE way to go.