![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Lcd or plasma ?
- Thread starter Dantrax
- Start date
Plasma. Far smoother image, real, deep blacks and no ghosting or any other weird glitches. The colours look a lot better too. I have seen PS3 games on a Panasonic 46" PDP and a random assortment of LCDs 
Even for regular TV/DVD/BD content I'd go with PDP over LCD, it's that big of a difference. Especially with action and very detailed scenes PDP just blows LCD away.
Even for regular TV/DVD/BD content I'd go with PDP over LCD, it's that big of a difference. Especially with action and very detailed scenes PDP just blows LCD away.
Zepher
[H]ipster Replacement
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2001
- Messages
- 20,946
I prefer gaming on my Plasma than the LCD's that my friends and family have.
Picture looks much better.
Picture looks much better.
Plasma any day of the week. That being said it depends on what you're using it for, PC Gaming or console gaming? I wouldn't use a plasma display for PC Gaming since that's likely not all that you will be doing on it. Burn in is basically a non issue with 'living room' content (read: games and video.) If ever you browse the internet for more than an hour at a time though then you really would not want to do that on a plasma.
The other thing to note is that the smallest 1080p plasma that you can get is 42" so you would not be able to replace your 32" directly.
The other thing to note is that the smallest 1080p plasma that you can get is 42" so you would not be able to replace your 32" directly.
Burn-in really isn't that much of an issue any more. The 46" Panasonic PDP I mentioned was left on by accident once for a number of hours and the built-in protection mechanisms against burn-in ensured that it was 100% fine after 5+ hours of displaying a static image.
Leaving a static image for x number of hours is hardly the same as continuous PC usage though. I can see some burn in on my Panasonic plasma even though I've always been careful about that. For gaming alone, it would probably be fine. For TV content it is generally superior to LCD, though ambient lighting does wash out the picture so in order to appreciate those deep blacks you have to use it in a dark-ish room.
MechanicalMan
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2011
- Messages
- 92
You probably should have stopped there. Burn-in is really a non-issue. I have a cheap LG plasma; extremely, ridiculously prone to image retention, and it would take some remarkably stupid behavior to cause burn-in on this or any plasma. I have, on several occasions, left high-contrast images on the screen for 8+ hours. The IR can be bad on mine, but burn-in is not a realistic concern.
As for using a plasma for browsing the internet, I think ABL and IR would be more legitimate concerns that burn-in.
mathesar
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,590
Easily plasma, smoother motion, amazing black levels, nice uniform screen (no backlight to worry about), unlimited viewing angles.
I haven't experienced any temp IR issues on mine and we've been gaming on it for 3.5 years now. (pioneer kuro plasma).
I haven't experienced any temp IR issues on mine and we've been gaming on it for 3.5 years now. (pioneer kuro plasma).
I disagree. I have never used my Panasonic plasma as a PC monitor and yet I can see in certain areas of the screen pixels are more "worn out" than the rest. Mainly where subtitles and TV logos are located. I can even discern letters of one of those logos if I get close enough. Burn in is a realistic concern for PC usage.
MechanicalMan
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2011
- Messages
- 92
....nm
It should be noted that PDP tech is improving rapidly, while prices are basically in free-fall. The Panasonic 46" PDP I mentioned was about 2,000 Euro back in late 2008, now you can get an even better and much more power efficient PDP for less than a thousand Euro. Burn-in and image-retention are being dealt with better and better with each successive generation, with better phosphors, new firmware tricks and so on.
There are huge differences between PDP manufacturers too. Samsung PDPs are generally cheaper and less advanced, while Panasonic are about the best, only eclipsed by the (now sadly RIP) Pioneer Kuro PDPs. It definitely pays to do some research before you settle on a particular screen
And on a sidenote, image-retention and burn-in are also possible with LCD TVs. Takes a fair bit of effort, but they're not immune despite common belief.
There are huge differences between PDP manufacturers too. Samsung PDPs are generally cheaper and less advanced, while Panasonic are about the best, only eclipsed by the (now sadly RIP) Pioneer Kuro PDPs. It definitely pays to do some research before you settle on a particular screen
And on a sidenote, image-retention and burn-in are also possible with LCD TVs. Takes a fair bit of effort, but they're not immune despite common belief.
lawless2142
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 253
Plasma. I use a Panasonic TCP42-S1 for occasional HPTC use and mostly XBox 360 gaming and it's very close to a CRT for response time without motion blur. You get some phosphor trails depending on the scene; but it's not unpleasant. If you have a choice and don't need LCD for the other reasons (efficiency; weight; power), go plasma.
CRT/PDP phosphor trails I have seen are only with black backgrounds and a very bright moving object (like a mouse pointer) and the trail is like a few mm if you try really hard
LCDs on the other hand seem to have this refresh lag which makes things like action scenes turn into a kind of blur. Very obvious when you're looking at LCDs and PDPs side by side in a store or so (I did so with a chase scene in I, Robot, the LCDs were pitiful).
Also, PDP power usage has been curbed significantly the past few years, they barely use more power than LCDs now and are nothing like the PDPs of 2008 (400-500 Watt for 46" Panasonic!). As for weight, above 32" they're all bloody heavy
Adreneline
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2008
- Messages
- 363
Like most people say, plasma.
I bought a fantastic 2011 Samsung model plasma 43". The reviews were right, the thing is stunning. No one will believe it's budget price.
Also, I was worried with 720p, but I directly compared it to my 1080P LED HDTV, and it looked even better. Sure, at 1 inch away, I could see the pixels a bit more, but after a foot, it looked the same, if not even better some how.
I bought a fantastic 2011 Samsung model plasma 43". The reviews were right, the thing is stunning. No one will believe it's budget price.
Also, I was worried with 720p, but I directly compared it to my 1080P LED HDTV, and it looked even better. Sure, at 1 inch away, I could see the pixels a bit more, but after a foot, it looked the same, if not even better some how.
mathesar
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,590
CRT/PDP phosphor trails I have seen are only with black backgrounds and a very bright moving object (like a mouse pointer) and the trail is like a few mm if you try really hard
LCDs on the other hand seem to have this refresh lag which makes things like action scenes turn into a kind of blur. Very obvious when you're looking at LCDs and PDPs side by side in a store or so (I did so with a chase scene in I, Robot, the LCDs were pitiful).
LCD motion blur causes a lot more loss of details on moving objects. Ive compared playing PS3 games on my 2ms TN panel vs. Plasma (both hooked via HDMI) and was surprised how much detail was lost during motion on the LCD. (I haven't tried a 120hz LCD yet tho).
I only PC game, but not all the time, I surf, pics, music, watch tv while I'm using pc. I've used both my 40" Sony lcd tv & my 32" sony lcd tv as my pc monitor. Both look dam good for everything & have 1080p with 120 Hz tech. I'm using the 32" now as my pc monitor. The picture makes me wonder why the switch to 3d is being considered. I haven't seen much if any blur or lag while gaming. I was just interested to see if plasma was that much more of an improvement over lcd. From your comments the plasma has no blur or lag, which is why I was thinking of switching, but might have a burn in problem. My situation right now is that I only have space for the 32" so a 42" plasma won't fit, I'm using my 40" as living room tv. But thanks all for your input & I think I'll look at plasmas next, when I have the space.
Last edited:
The problem isn't "motion blur" nor response times, the problem is "holding" the image, versus not "holding" it. For LCDs it is held for 16.67 ms for each frame on a 60 Hz panel, while a CRT holds it approximately for the time constant of the phosfor (if it can be put like that.. it's like an optical filter with a delay). Black frame insertion as some LCD TVs do, greatly reduces the holding effect apparent on LCDs.
If it causes a loss of detail, blame TN overdrive.
As Elledan also indirectly hinted at, 24p material looks even worse - especially if the LCD panel did not support 24 Hz, but uses 3-2 pulldown.
The problem isn't "motion blur" nor response times, the problem is "holding" the image, versus not "holding" it. For LCDs it is held for 16.67 ms for each frame on a 60 Hz panel, while a CRT holds it approximately for the time constant of the phosfor (if it can be put like that.. it's like an optical filter with a delay). Black frame insertion as some LCD TVs do, greatly reduces the holding effect apparent on LCDs.
If it causes a loss of detail, blame TN overdrive.
As Elledan also indirectly hinted at, 24p material looks even worse - especially if the LCD panel did not support 24 Hz, but uses 3-2 pulldown.
Erm, I believe both the sample and hold effect and the motion blur (or response time if you wish) matter. I mean, I find that there is more loss of detail on my IPS vs my TN during motion, yet both have overdrive but my IPS has much less of it and is running at a higher refresh rate (76.5 vs 60).
LED is usually just a normal LCD using LED lighting instead of CCFL...and most LED tvs are edge lit as well...so IMO other than thin-ness CCFL LCDs look better than LED-edge lit TVs.
But Plasma FTW, mid-range I don't think there is much difference between LG/Samsung/Panasonic, but for high end stuff, panasonic plasmas are hard to beat.
Full LED TVs (RGB LED) do exist (if you can afford them) and they have pretty good colours (& infinite blacks). Don't think the response time will be any better than regular LCDs though.
Adreneline
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2008
- Messages
- 363
Very wrong, depends on the brand.
My high end LED LCD is trumped by my newly acquired Samsung 2011 model plasma, which has an entry level price but performs at least mid-level. It's 1080p too vs 720p.
It completely puts my LED to shame, including other ones I've seen in the stores on display or at friends house.
rudy
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 8,704
All things considered Plasma is better for gaming. However it does have that one nasty draw back that you can get image retention or image burn in. I personally have a plasma and love it way more than any LCD I have experienced. But saw we are surfing netflix for a while then we choose a dark movie, we will see image retention on the sides that are annoying. I wish more companies would be considerate of plasma use.
Beyond that we do almost everything from an HTPC running windows 7, we have set it up so nothing stays on the screen if people are not around and we do not have any burn in issues. It was worth it. But there are lots of people whom are too absent minded for this and probably should just sacrifice the speed, and image quality and deal with a crappy LCD.
Another thing is plasmas are so cheap now that you can basically consider them wear items. In 5 years or so there will be a whole slew of new things the TV companies are trying to sell you and you will probably want to upgrade anyway so if you do have some uneven wearing on the screen I would not worry about it.
Beyond that we do almost everything from an HTPC running windows 7, we have set it up so nothing stays on the screen if people are not around and we do not have any burn in issues. It was worth it. But there are lots of people whom are too absent minded for this and probably should just sacrifice the speed, and image quality and deal with a crappy LCD.
Another thing is plasmas are so cheap now that you can basically consider them wear items. In 5 years or so there will be a whole slew of new things the TV companies are trying to sell you and you will probably want to upgrade anyway so if you do have some uneven wearing on the screen I would not worry about it.
MechanicalMan
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2011
- Messages
- 92
If anything, I feel the opposite is true. I think the plasmas that you can buy for $500 - $1,200 are generally superior to LCDs in that price range. But if you can afford them, local dimming LCDs are very compelling. The high-end is basically Panasonic VT plasmas vs local dimming LCDs, and for 2D image quality, local dimming LCDs are tough to beat. But with cheaper TVs, plasmas offer great value. Image quality (specifically black level) is still very poor on cheap LCDs.
Acer_Sheep
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,201
Burn-ins and retention happens only when displaying static image for very long time, wont happen with gaming.
Because no one ever plays games on their TVs that have static elements, like HUDs and life meters and such, for extended periods of time....
newer plasmas hardly have that issue anymore. i have one of those dirt cheap 50 inch zenith plasma and the TV station logos at the bottom would retain for the first 2 months then it stopped. never had a game interface leave a mark, the damn TV station logos are like solid white vs an game interface that would not have nearly the same contrast.
rudy
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 8,704
Ya most TV stations changed their logos so it would not be a problem, they are transparent and come and go. But some never figured that out. None of the stations I watched had that problem but if one did I would probably stop watching it. However it is another thing to consider if you watch stocks all day long on a finance channel you may want to skip a plasma.
A low end samsung or panasonic plasma will beat out most mid-end and challenge most upper-end LCDs. There is no way a mid-range lcd will beat out a mid-range plasma.
Last year the low end LCD's (samsung 550 and Sony ex400) were better than any of the low end plasmas in terms of black levels and color. Most people sit to far away (10+feet and think COD on consoles looks good) to see ghosting.
The horrible washout effect many plasmas have due to the screen coating in a normal day time enviroment (blacks become solid grey) should be considered, unless one like constantly being in a darkened room they can look terrible. Fortunately Samsung and now some Pannys use Glossy screens.
) to see ghosting.The horrible washout effect many plasmas have due to the screen coating in a normal day time enviroment (blacks become solid grey) should be considered, unless one like constantly being in a darkened room they can look terrible. Fortunately Samsung and now some Pannys use Glossy screens.
Last year the low end LCD's (samsung 550 and Son)y ex400were better than any of the low end plasmas in terms of black levels and color. Most people sit to far away (10+feet and think COD on consoles looks good
The horrible washout effect many plasmas have due to the screen coating in a normal day time enviroment (blacks become solid grey) should be considered, unless one like constantly being in a darkened room they can look terrible. Fortunately Samsung and now some Pannys use Glossy screens.
They all use glass with AG coating on them. So they are all glossy with anti-gloss coating to put it simply. Light getting into the screen will wash out the blacks a little, but unless you are watching it in a bright room, it is not a concern. It is NOT because of the screen coating that things will get washed out when you shine a light on the screen.
The screen coating is to prevent the glare. There have been plasmas without any AG coating, but, in recent years, they have been the budget plasmas to save money. They have been phased out this year as far as I know(the only except might be a panasonic BB only model which has been floating around for three years). The AG coating actually protects light from getting into the 'cells', a superior AG coating will provide superior performance in high-light settings and maintain the picture.
You are also mistaken about your black level measurements and in my opinion and most peoples opinion, the colors.
Motion blur does cause loss of detail in addition to trails. Lots of people do not care much about it. But LCDs inherently have problems handling motion.
Last edited:
mathesar
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,590
Last year the low end LCD's (samsung 550 and Sony ex400) were better than any of the low end plasmas in terms of black levels and color. Most people sit to far away (10+feet and think COD on consoles looks good
The horrible washout effect many plasmas have due to the screen coating in a normal day time enviroment (blacks become solid grey) should be considered, unless one like constantly being in a darkened room they can look terrible. Fortunately Samsung and now some Pannys use Glossy screens.
Our 2007 model Kuro plasma has a very glossy screen with surprisingly effective AG properties. Plasmas do look there best in a darker environment but black levels have never been a problem during the day.
Ive seen some digicam shots of washed out day time screens but they appeared extremely exaggerated vs. what it actually looks like in person.
Acer_Sheep
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,201
HUDs are transparent since the very old games already, there were very few rare situations where HUDs or some other UI elements were burned into screen.Because no one ever plays games on their TVs that have static elements, like HUDs and life meters and such, for extended periods of time....