Why not plasma for PC/Xbox use?

G

gixser

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
108
I've been looking for a new TV that I plan to hook up to my computer mainly for movie watching. There will be some surfing (just to settle arguments during movies), some music playback and some gaming (PC/Xbox360). I constantly hear plasma's are a no no for hooking up to a PC. Why is that?

I'm looking at the 1080p Panansonic plasma (42") so I should think surfing looks fine. I understand burn in and image retention is no longer an issue. Is that really the case? If so, what is the issue with hooking a plasma up to my PC?

Thanks for any advice.
 
I will be going CRT (FW900) or plasma when I get back into gaming. Not happy with LCD's...

Panasonic has some neat technology for their plasma to reduce burn-in. There is a feature that shifts the screen by a minute amount every minute or so.

I wonder what the input lag on plasmas is like.
 
Alls I can tell ya is that I game on my plasma (5070 pio) all the time and while it does retain an image after several hours of game play it does go away. Same as watching ESPN all day. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is a difference between image retention and burn in.
 
okashira said:
I will be going CRT (FW900) or plasma when I get back into gaming. Not happy with LCD's...

Panasonic has some neat technology for their plasma to reduce burn-in. There is a feature that shifts the screen by a minute amount every minute or so.

I wonder what the input lag on plasmas is like.
Click to expand...

The input lag on plasmas is the best of any next-gen mainstream panel, its much closer to CRT then any LCD.

Those are two very dramatically different choices you have on the table. A small PC monitor and a large plasma screen - thats like saying for my next pet, I either want a dog or a polar bear.
 
The biggest thing is probably screen burn-in. (yes they will burn in as they use phosphor coatings just like CRTs) and the fact that so many of them have rectangular pixels. (think about it, 1024x1024 in a 16:9 format?)
 
People don't use plasma's for PC's because 1080p is not available below 40". If we had 24" plasma's at 1080p, I guarantee you I'd have one.
 
It seems the minimal amount of PC use this TV will see shouldn't pose a burn in problem....if I reading this correctly.

I'm going to get a large cup of coffee and go through the avsforum postings. I'll post back with what I find.

If anyone has a plasma hooked up to their PC please let me know if you have any regrets in doing so. Thanks.
 
Scyles said:
Added to my wish list. Do wishes ever come true?
Click to expand...

Well... You have two choices really. You can sleep with 100 fat chicks, for $140 each... Or you can sleep with 14 really, really fat chicks for 1000$ each. Your choice.
 
Plasma technology has been around close to 10 years now with improvements in each generation of panels. I have a 42" 720p plasma that is over 3 years old and has seen gaming from Xbox/Xbox 360 and recently a PS3 with no issues. As someone mentioned earlier..image retention is NOT the same as burn-in and modern plasmas don't really have a problem with either as long as common sense is used.

Plasma wouldn't be the best choice for heavy pc use, but a good 1080p shouldn't have any issues as long as break-in procedures are followed. The only case that would worry me is if children/young teens are going to be doing heavy console gaming on a plasma...most children seem to lack the common sense gene.;)
 
taylorwilsdon said:
The input lag on plasmas is the best of any next-gen mainstream panel, its much closer to CRT then any LCD.

Those are two very dramatically different choices you have on the table. A small PC monitor and a large plasma screen - thats like saying for my next pet, I either want a dog or a polar bear.
Click to expand...

You think so? :p Funny cause the FW900 and the 50" Panny I've been eyeing weigh about the same :D. Mabye i'll get both.. it's just a matter of how practical PC usage on a plasma turns out to be.
 
okashira said:
Those sets are both 852 x 480 resolution. Far cry from 1080p ...
Click to expand...

The statement I was rebutting was that there were not any plasmas under 40". My post had nothing to do with whether they were 1080p or not since I was only debating that one single point.
 
ryan_975 said:
The statement I was rebutting was that there were not any plasmas under 40". My post had nothing to do with whether they were 1080p or not since I was only debating that one single point.
Click to expand...


you're right. didn't catch that.
 
Saw a 50 inch Pioneer Kuro plasma at Best Buy. Sure looked nice...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top