Smart TVs have turned the living room into an all-in-one entertainment hub, but the box or stick hanging off an HDMI port still quietly does a lot of heavy lifting. Even as manufacturers cram more apps into their sets, the way those apps run, update, and age often lags behind what a dedicated streaming device can deliver. I see the modern streaming box less as a redundant accessory and more as the part that keeps your expensive screen feeling new long after the software inside the TV starts to creak.
That gap between “good enough” built-in apps and a polished, flexible streaming experience is not theoretical. From slower processors and patchy updates to missing formats and clunky interfaces, the compromises inside many smart TVs are now well documented by reviewers, home theater enthusiasts, and everyday viewers comparing notes online. The result is a simple, counterintuitive reality: if you care about how your streaming actually feels, a separate box still matters.
Smart TVs are computers, and most are underpowered
Under the glossy marketing, a smart TV is just a computer bolted to a panel, and in most living rooms it is the cheapest computer in the house. TV makers pour their budgets into the display, then bolt on modest processors and memory that are just good enough to boot a menu and open Netflix. Analysis of TV platforms earlier this year highlighted that the chips inside many sets trail far behind the silicon in even midrange streaming boxes, which are designed from the ground up to run complex interfaces and video apps smoothly rather than simply drive a backlight and pixels. When I compare the snappy scrolling and instant app switching on a recent box to the sluggish animations on a typical mid-priced smart TV, the hardware gap is obvious.
That gap shows up in everyday frustrations. A detailed breakdown of processing power in TV platforms notes that limited CPUs and memory can make basic navigation feel sticky, especially once several apps are installed and updated. Enthusiasts in one Streaming Devices discussion argue that “TVs are display-first” and that their internal hardware is rarely tuned for demanding tasks like high-bitrate local playback or advanced HDR tone mapping inside apps. A dedicated box, by contrast, is a purpose-built little computer that lives or dies on how quickly it can open Disney Plus, scrub through 4K video, and respond to your remote.
Software support and updates age out fast
Even if a new smart TV feels fine on day one, the software clock starts ticking the moment you plug it in. Manufacturers typically support their platforms for only a handful of years, and when they move on to a new interface or ad strategy, older sets can be left behind. A practical guide to what a Smart TV actually is points out that when app developers stop targeting a given platform, “you don’t get updates,” which can eventually leave you unable to access services at all, a risk spelled out bluntly in one Smart TV explainer. I have seen that play out in living rooms where a once-premium set can no longer run the latest version of a major app, even though the panel itself still looks excellent.
Streaming boxes, by contrast, are built around long-term software support because that is their only job. A recent analysis framed “Reason 1” to buy a separate device as Better software support, noting that these compact computers tend to receive new features and security patches for years after many TVs have stopped updating. That longevity matters as streaming services add formats like Dolby Vision, tweak their interfaces, or change login requirements. Instead of replacing a whole television because one app no longer works, I can usually plug in a new box at a fraction of the cost and keep the screen itself in service.
Real-world viewers keep choosing external devices
For all the marketing around all-in-one sets, usage data shows that a large share of people with smart TVs still reach for a separate remote. A US-based survey of viewing habits found that more than half of smart TV owners continue to rely on an external streamer, even when the same apps are available on the TV itself. The report ties that behavior to frustrations with platforms like webOS and Tizen and to missing features such as high-speed ethernet or Wi-Fi 6E on expensive sets, details that help explain why There is such a persistent market for boxes and sticks.
Individual viewers echo that pattern in less formal spaces. In one Comments Section thread, a Top 1% Commenter named sgee_123 describes the “general experience” as far better on a streaming device, citing smoother navigation and more reliable playback compared with TV apps. Another Jan discussion in the cord-cutting community has users like NCResident5 arguing that boxes are more reliable and receive more updates, while others note that replacing a small external device is easier than swapping out a whole television when software falls behind. Taken together, the data and the anecdotes point in the same direction: people vote with their HDMI ports when the built-in experience disappoints.
Interface, speed and reliability still favor boxes
When I compare the feel of a modern streaming box to most TV platforms, the difference is less about raw specs and more about polish. Dedicated devices tend to offer cleaner home screens, faster search, and more consistent behavior across apps, because their makers iterate on a single mission: make streaming feel effortless. A long-running explainer on why even smart TV owners should consider a box highlights how external devices can avoid the “wonky content system” and inconsistent layouts that plague some built-in platforms, arguing that a separate remote and interface can be more intuitive for late-night binge sessions, a point backed up in a Products-focused breakdown.
Users who live with these devices every day tend to notice the same things. In a Comments Section about why people still buy Apple TV hardware, one user named 187RobinBanks writes that “Mainly, for me, the Apple TV works like it’s supposed to, quickly,” capturing the appeal of a box that simply responds without lag. Another thread in the home theater community titled Why Streaming Devices Are Inherently Better lists “Hardware & Performance” as the first reason, arguing that external devices are tuned for high-bitrate streaming and complex codecs in ways that TV apps often are not. When I add in the fact that boxes usually recover faster from app crashes and handle background updates more gracefully, the case for relying on them as the primary interface becomes even clearer.
App ecosystems and formats are more flexible off the TV
Beyond speed, the breadth and depth of app support can be a deciding factor. Smart TV platforms are fragmented, with some sets favoring proprietary stores and others leaning on Android TV or Roku, and that fragmentation can leave gaps. A detailed comparison of Streaming Devices and smart TVs notes that external hardware often supports a wider range of niche apps, regional services, and advanced audio or video formats, while also making it easier to switch between ecosystems as your needs change. If a new platform like a sports-only service or a specialty anime app launches first on one box, I can add it without waiting for my TV maker to negotiate and integrate it.
Format support is just as important. Enthusiasts in the Hardware and Performance discussion point out that some TV apps struggle with high-bitrate local playback, advanced HDR modes, or lossless audio that dedicated boxes handle more gracefully. A video essayist in a Sep breakdown of why smart TVs can still feel “useless” in 2025 argues that even when the right app is present, it may not support the same codecs or frame rates as its counterpart on a box or stick. For viewers who care about Dolby Atmos, Dolby Vision, or smooth 24p playback, that difference can be the line between “it plays” and “it looks and sounds right.”
Cost, value and the upgrade path
One of the strongest arguments for relying on a streaming box is financial, not technical. A careful look at upfront pricing shows that you can pair a modestly priced “dumb” or basic smart TV with a capable external device and still spend less than a premium set that promises everything built in. A cost comparison framed around “4 Upfront cost” illustrates how a budget-conscious buyer could choose an average-sized TV and a separate streamer instead of stretching for a high-end smart platform, with the added benefit that the box can be replaced cheaply later, a point laid out in detail in an Upfront analysis.
That flexibility becomes even more valuable as the years pass. A recent explainer on whether to prioritize a smart TV or a streaming box notes that there are still plenty of households using standalone hardware like Amazon Fire devices, precisely because they can be upgraded at a fraction of the cost of a new television. Another video critic in a Nov smart TV teardown urges viewers not to buy a set for its “smart” functions at all, arguing that panels age more slowly than software and that it makes more sense to treat the screen as a long-term investment and the streaming hardware as a replaceable accessory. In my own calculations, that separation of roles is what keeps a living room setup from becoming obsolete every time a platform redesigns its home screen.
When a smart TV alone is enough
None of this means every viewer must rush out and buy a separate box. For some people, especially those who mostly watch a handful of mainstream apps in HD, the built-in platform on a recent TV may be perfectly adequate. A balanced guide to whether to rely on the TV’s own system notes that the “good news” is that many modern sets now ship with reasonably capable processors and decent app selections, and that for light users, the convenience of a single remote and interface can outweigh the benefits of an external device, a nuance captured in a Reasoned overview.
There are also scenarios where combining both makes sense rather than choosing one or the other. A detailed comparison of What the Difference is between smart TVs and streaming devices suggests that some households benefit from using the TV’s own apps for casual viewing while keeping a box connected for more demanding tasks like 4K HDR movies or gaming-focused streaming. In that hybrid model, the smart TV becomes a convenient baseline, and the external device is the performance mode you switch to when quality or flexibility matters. I find that framing helpful because it moves the conversation away from “either/or” and toward “what combination fits your habits.”
How to choose the right streaming box for your setup
For those who do decide that an external device makes sense, the next question is which one. The market now ranges from ultra-cheap sticks to premium boxes with powerful processors and generous storage, and the right choice depends on how demanding your viewing is. A shopping search for a midrange product shows how even relatively affordable boxes now advertise 4K HDR, voice search, and support for major ecosystems like Google TV or Roku. For many living rooms, that class of device will be more than enough to smooth out the rough edges of a TV’s built-in apps.
Power users, on the other hand, may gravitate toward higher-end hardware that can double as a gaming or local media hub. Another product listing illustrates how some boxes now tout advanced Wi-Fi, expanded storage, and support for formats like Dolby Atmos that may be missing or limited on a TV’s own platform. When I weigh those options, I look at three things: whether the device supports every app and format I care about, how long its maker typically provides updates, and how well it fits into the rest of my ecosystem, from smart speakers to phones. The right box is the one that makes your TV feel invisible and your shows feel immediate.
Why the “dumb screen plus smart box” model is sticking around
Stepping back, the persistence of streaming boxes in a world of smart TVs is less a quirk and more a reflection of how quickly software evolves compared with hardware. Panels can stay competitive for a decade if you choose well, but interfaces, codecs, and streaming business models shift every few years. A detailed explainer on what a Smart TV is notes that early “connected” sets commanded a premium and then quickly fell behind, leaving owners with outdated apps and no easy upgrade path, a cautionary tale captured in an When style breakdown. I see the current generation of smart TVs repeating some of those patterns, even as they improve.
At the same time, critics and enthusiasts keep circling back to the same advice. A video commentator in a Nov deep dive argues that you should not buy a TV for its smart functions, while another in a Sep piece bluntly tells viewers that a new smart TV with “all the apps” still may not be enough without a separate stick. Written guides echo that sentiment, with one analysis of Perhaps the best reasons to buy a box centering on software support, performance, and flexibility. As long as those fundamentals matter more than a tidy spec sheet, the humble streaming box will keep earning its spot under the TV, even in the smartest of living rooms.
More from Morning Overview