• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF

thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
(09-12-2009, 12:55 AM)
thetrin's Avatar
So I'm buying another HDTV this weekend, specifically a 40" Samsung, 1080p (hopefully 120Hz).

I have had nothing but great experiences with Samsung LCDs, and that was going to be the pretty obvious choice, but I've been looking at Best Buy's prices on the UN40B6000 (40" LED), and I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with this tech. I've seen them in action, and find them terribly beautiful, and the deal with the UN40 makes it just $300 more than an LN40 i was looking at as well.

Does anyone have any advice? Go with the tried and true LN40, or take the plunge with the UN40 LED?

(Also, the LED has no composite or DVI inputs, but has 4 HDMIs and a single component in)

EDIT: I ended up picking up the 40" Samsung LED TV (LN40B6000). Great TV. Absolutely love it. Thanks for all the input, guys.
Last edited by thetrin; 09-14-2009 at 04:51 PM.
Sascha23
Banned
(09-12-2009, 12:58 AM)
I have the 40" Sony Bravia XBR 1080P from 1.5 years ago and I love it.

I think the LED sets have another year left before they standardize in price (and tech).

My vote would be for a nice Sony/Samsung LCD.

Sounds like you're on the right path.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
(09-12-2009, 12:58 AM)
Take the plunge and get the LED. I have the 55''. Trust me you will not regret it. Even my PS2 games look really nice on it because the colors are so vibrant. My previous tv was a Sony 50'' LCD.
HUELEN10
Member
(09-12-2009, 12:59 AM)
HUELEN10's Avatar
Both are laggy as fuck form what I've tested of them, so I wouldn't recommend either, but if lag is a concern to you, get the tried and true LN40 as it is a little less laggy.

Dammit, why do Sammys have to be so great, but so laggy?

Obviously LED will look better, but if you care about lag and are determined to get one of these 2, get the LCD. Tl;dr, scalers on these things kinda suck.
womfalcs3
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:00 AM)
womfalcs3's Avatar
I thought LCD monitors were backlit by either LED bulbs or CCFL bulbs. I didn't know there's a class of displays referred to as "LED"...
Durante
A Deadly Premonition hit his Dark Soul like a bolt of Lightning: "I can make their games better."
(09-12-2009, 01:00 AM)
Durante's Avatar
A LED TV is still a LCD TV, just with a LED backlight instead of a CCFL one. It's helpful for dynamic contrast adjustment, but that mostly sucks for games anyway. Also, all current 120Hz TVs just take a 60 Hz signal and try to interpolate additional frames from that -- that doesn't help with gaming either and increases input lag so it's usually turned off in game modes.

If you really care about contrast ratio and response time for gaming the best bet right now are Plasmas actually.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
(09-12-2009, 01:00 AM)
thetrin's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

Both are laggy as fuck form what I've tested of them, so I wouldn't recommend either, but if lag is a concern to you, get the tried and true LN40 as it is a little less laggy.

Dammit, why do Sammys have to be so great, but so laggy?

I think I am some sort of geriatric within an adult's body, because I never notice lag. :\

Originally Posted by womfalcs3

I thought LCD monitors were backlighted by either LED bulbs or CCFL bulbs. I didn't know there's a class of displays referred to as "LED"...

EDIT: Yeah, I'm honestly not completely and totally versed in what the actual tech is, just the visual difference that I've noticed. Thanks for clearing up the LED/LCD thing.
Sascha23
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:02 AM)

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

Both are laggy as fuck form what I've tested of them, so I wouldn't recommend either, but if lag is a concern to you, get the tried and true LN40 as it is a little less laggy.

Dammit, why do Sammys have to be so great, but so laggy?

Obviously LED will look better, but if you care about lag and are determined to get one of these 2, get the LCD.

Laggy?

I think not. At least not with the XBR 1080p that I have. Definitely not something I'm seeing visually whilst gaming or viewing blu-rays. Looks great.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
(09-12-2009, 01:02 AM)

Originally Posted by thetrin

I think I am some sort of geriatric within an adult's body, because I never notice lag. :\

The lag is noticeable on the LED if you don't activate "Game Mode". But once you turn it on you won't be able to tell the difference. I've played all sorts of games on the tv, including fighters, and I have not noticed the lag.
HUELEN10
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:03 AM)
HUELEN10's Avatar

Originally Posted by Sascha23

Laggy?

I think not. At least not with the XBR 1080p that I have. Definitely not something I'm seeing visually whilst gaming or viewing blu-rays. Looks great.

Sony XBRs usually have pretty decent scalers. I was talking about Sammys, they suck.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
(09-12-2009, 01:03 AM)
thetrin's Avatar

Originally Posted by Baron Aloha

The lag is noticeable on the LED if you don't activate "Game Mode". But once you turn it on you won't be able to tell the difference. I've played all sorts of games on the tv, including fighters, and I have not noticed the lag.

Is game mode on the LED like it is on the LN32 Samsung? The game mode on that blurs a lot. :\
demolitio
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:04 AM)
demolitio's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

Both are laggy as fuck form what I've tested of them, so I wouldn't recommend either, but if lag is a concern to you, get the tried and true LN40 as it is a little less laggy.

Dammit, why do Sammys have to be so great, but so laggy?

Obviously LED will look better, but if you care about lag and are determined to get one of these 2, get the LCD. Tl;dr, scalers on these things kinda suck.

I never had a lag problem as long as I turned off AMP. They even have a gaming mode to get rid of the lag.
HUELEN10
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:04 AM)
HUELEN10's Avatar

Originally Posted by demolitio

I never had a lag problem as long as I turned off AMP. They even have a gaming mode to get rid of the lag.

YMMV from my experience at least. It depends on what you are feeding it.

If you have the money and are anal about picture quality AND lag, I would strongly suggest getting the LED-backlit Samsung along with a DVDO EDGE.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
(09-12-2009, 01:06 AM)

Originally Posted by thetrin

Is game mode on the LED like it is on the LN32 Samsung? The game mode on that blurs a lot. :\

I don't have any experience with the LN32 but I've not noticed any blurring whatsoever on the LED. My best advice if you are still not convinced would be to take your system to the store and ask them to let you hook it up and try it out. Take a few games with you. Most stores will let you do that. If they don't then I wouldn't buy a TV from them. Just make sure you turn game mode on.
Durante
A Deadly Premonition hit his Dark Soul like a bolt of Lightning: "I can make their games better."
(09-12-2009, 01:08 AM)
Durante's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

If you have the money and are anal about picture quality AND lag, I would strongly suggest getting the LED-backlit Samsung along with a DVDO EDGE.

Why not get a Panasonic Plasma for much less and have better black levels and (practically) 0 ms response time?

(I'm not trying to sound like a Plasma commercial, it's just that I wouldn't even have to think about it if I had the right setup to accomodate a 40" TV)
HUELEN10
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:15 AM)
HUELEN10's Avatar

Originally Posted by Durante

Why not get a Panasonic Plasma for much less and have better black levels and (practically) 0 ms response time?

(I'm not trying to sound like a Plasma commercial, it's just that I wouldn't even have to think about it if I had the right setup to accomodate a 40" TV)

They use up more electricity, are susceptible to burn-in, and can flicker. You might as well get a cheaper CRT HDTV, since the drawbacks are similar, and with 95 percent of CRT HDTVs, lag is a non-issue. Also, there is one important little thing that I am going to bold for emphasis for everyone here, as it is very important.

RESPONSE TIME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAG!
Slayer-33
Liverpool-2
(09-12-2009, 01:16 AM)
Slayer-33's Avatar

Originally Posted by Durante

Why not get a Panasonic Plasma for much less and have better black levels and (practically) 0 ms response time?

(I'm not trying to sound like a Plasma commercial, it's just that I wouldn't even have to think about it if I had the right setup to accomodate a 40" TV)


Listen to the wise advice OP. Put your money in plasma, if you don't believe you want it walk into a showroom or something and compare.

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

They use up more electricity, are susceptible to burn-in, and can flicker. You might as well get a cheaper CRT HDTV, since the drawbacks are similar, and with 95 percent of CRT HDTVs, lag is a non-issue. Also, there is one important little thing that I am going to bold for emphasis for everyone here, as it is very important.

RESPONSE TIME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAG!


Yeah because plasma and burn in is such a HUGE issue nowadays /rolleyes
Last edited by Slayer-33; 09-12-2009 at 01:19 AM.
Liabe Brave
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:18 AM)
Liabe Brave's Avatar

Originally Posted by Durante

Why not get a Panasonic Plasma for much less and have better black levels and (practically) 0 ms response time?

(I'm not trying to sound like a Plasma commercial, it's just that I wouldn't even have to think about it if I had the right setup to accomodate a 40" TV)

Plasmas look great and play well, and on the whole that's what I'd recommend. But static HUD elements definitely have a tendency to burn in worse, which is not so great for gaming. Yes, I know the problem is exaggerated, that it's gotten better, that there's jitter algorithms to reduce it, it's usually not permanent, etc. etc. That doesn't mean that my friend with a plasma doesn't have faint Super Stardust icons visible on his screen a lot of the time.

Not trying to dissuade anyone from a plasma purchase, just pointing out that for gaming they do have a drawback over LCD (which also can suffer from image retention, I know, but are uniformly better at this one thing).
FoxHimself
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:20 AM)
FoxHimself's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

Sony XBRs usually have pretty decent scalers. I was talking about Sammys, they suck.

I have a Samsung 1080p and have never experienced any lag of any kind from any of the now-gen consoles.
BeEatNU
WORLDSTAAAAAAR
(09-12-2009, 01:21 AM)
BeEatNU's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

Both are laggy as fuck form what I've tested of them, so I wouldn't recommend either, but if lag is a concern to you, get the tried and true LN40 as it is a little less laggy.

Dammit, why do Sammys have to be so great, but so laggy?

Obviously LED will look better, but if you care about lag and are determined to get one of these 2, get the LCD. Tl;dr, scalers on these things kinda suck.

what? that's crazay.

Also, LED's are using 2yr old panels with LED lighting. Another drawback is the edges are always brighter.

Stick with an LN-40B750
http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/t...ype=prd_detail


I'm actually picking this one up.

http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/t...ype=prd_detail


also both links are just for info, you can obviously get this cheaper online.
TheExodu5
(09-12-2009, 01:21 AM)
TheExodu5's Avatar
One thing to note: the audio is usually the most effected by input lag in HDTVs. If your main concern is lagless play in GH/RB, hook up the audio to external speakers. Play is near lagless on my 720p 37" Sharp as long as I hook up some PC speakers instead of using the TV's sound. Same goes for my Panny plasma.
HUELEN10
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:22 AM)
HUELEN10's Avatar

Originally Posted by Slayer-33

Yeah because plasma and burn in is such a HUGE issue nowadays /rolleyes

It still uses up more juice, and it's a fact that phosphors lose luminosity over time.

Originally Posted by FoxHimself

I have a Samsung 1080p and have never experienced any lag of any kind from any of the now-gen consoles.

I wonder why...
WasteLand Soldier
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:22 AM)
i've been gaming on a sammy lcd and you literally have to look for the lag to notice it. the ONLY game i've noticed in it is geo wars 2 and once you get past that split second you CANT notice it anymore. LCD and LED are going to be the same. its just the light thats different. some people say the LED lighting is not as good due to the light being closer to the glass therefore washing things out.
H_Prestige
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:22 AM)

Originally Posted by womfalcs3

I thought LCD monitors were backlit by either LED bulbs or CCFL bulbs. I didn't know there's a class of displays referred to as "LED"...

Correct. Traditional LCD uses CCFL backlight, LED LCD uses LED. It's just Samsung marketing at work.

As for plasma, I think it's worth holding off until next year. Looks like we may see some Panasonic Kuros, or something of the sort. Hopefully CEDIA has some info.

The Pioneer 50" is $1199 at Costco and the 54" is $1299!

I love Costco.
Durante
A Deadly Premonition hit his Dark Soul like a bolt of Lightning: "I can make their games better."
(09-12-2009, 01:23 AM)
Durante's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

They use up more electricity, are susceptible to burn-in, and can flicker.

All true, but all of those are significantly reduced in current generation Plasmas. (eg. Panasonic NeoPDP)

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

RESPONSE TIME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAG!

They are not the same, but I wouldn't state it the way you did. Basically, to get the full amount of time until the image reaches your eyes you need to add up input lag and response time.
The thing is, Plasma's are usually better at both.

Originally Posted by Liabe Brave

Not trying to dissuade anyone from a plasma purchase, just pointing out that for gaming they do have a drawback over LCD (which also can suffer from image retention, I know, but are uniformly better at this one thing).

All true, there are drawbacks at either side, I just think that particularly for gaming and at larger sizes Plasmas currently come out quite a bit ahead.

Personally, I still hope OLEDs will at one point save us from having to decide between 2 sets of drawbacks.
DeadGzuz
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:24 AM)
I'm seriously thnking about Plasma after three years of with two LCDs.

The Pioneer 50" is $1199 at Costco and the 54" is $1299!
Slayer-33
Liverpool-2
(09-12-2009, 01:24 AM)
Slayer-33's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

It still uses up more juice, and it's a fact that phosphors lose luminosity over time.


They are worth it though my man just too beautiful :D
drizzle
Axel Hertz
(09-12-2009, 01:24 AM)
drizzle's Avatar
between LED and LCD for a gaming TV, i'd definitely go with Plasma.

Every single technology has a Drawback. And plasma is full of myths:

They use up more electricity

Only difference between plasma and LCD is that LCD has a constant usage of electricity, while plasma changes deppending on what's showing on screen. A white background fullscreen image will use lots of power, more than LCD, while a mostly black screen will use less power than a LCD (lcd has fluorescent lights which are always on). LED uses less electricity overall, but who the hel cares about a 3 dollar difference on your bill?

Also, when you see the electricity usage for a Plasma TV on it's specifications, that number is it's Maximum usage.. Like i said, the usage changes deppending on what's on screen, so it'll never be the max 100% of the time.

are susceptible to burn-in

LCDs have image retention as well. I have a 24 inch BenQ LCD monitor for myu computer, and the upper left area shows signals of image retention (usually the back/forward/refresh/stop/home icons of Firefox stay there forever), mostly because of Heat. It goes away if i leave the monitor turned off for a entire night (for it to cooldown), but when it heats up again, the image gets stuck again.

Also, newer (as in, made in the last 5 years) plasma TVs perform some sort of auto-retention-removal. So, if you turn on your plasma, for the first few seconds, there will be retention, but if you change the channel (or scene, or input), it refreshes the entire panel and the retention is gone - i know because i see it everyday on my plasma. The retention is there, but after 2 seconds it's gone and doesn't ever come back.

and can flicker

Plasma can flicker? Maybe a shitty 30hz one. Never seen flickering on my 120hz.

You might as well get a cheaper CRT HDTV, since the drawbacks are similar, and with 95 percent of CRT HDTVs, lag is a non-issue.

CRTs have their own drawbacks: They are huge, they are heavy, CRTs that show Hidef content IN high definition are harder to find, there's always the geometry distortion problem.

I've played Halo3 on my 24inch LCD. Since i have an older xbox, i can only go 720p through VGA cables. It looked horrible, with jaggies up the wazoo. I'm replaying it now on my plasma (Still through VGA), and it's like it's a different game. I don't know what the hell the Panasonics do, but their upscaling algorithm is awesome.

My only regret with my 42inch plasma is that I didn't buy the 50inch one.



Edit: Oh, we're talking about LED Backlight LCDs? Well, screw that. I though you were mentioning the Future LED TVs (demoed by Sony in Japan, I think?). Definitely go plasma.
Last edited by drizzle; 09-12-2009 at 01:29 AM.
TurtleSnatcher
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:28 AM)
TurtleSnatcher's Avatar
In regards to response times..

Plasma > LCD > LED in most cases.
FoxHimself
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:29 AM)
FoxHimself's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

I wonder why...

Wonder why what? I have the PS3, 360 and Wii hooked up, and haven't experienced any lag whatsoever.
Liabe Brave
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:30 AM)
Liabe Brave's Avatar

Originally Posted by Slayer-33

They are worth it though my man just too beautiful :D

That's the point, though: plasmas are not 100% better than LCD in every facet. I was simply trying to point out that your and Durante's choice is just that, a choice, and not the only reasonable one (though it's plenty reasonable).
edible_candle
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:31 AM)
edible_candle's Avatar

Originally Posted by HUELEN10

It still uses up more juice, and it's a fact that phosphors lose luminosity over time.

Yea, the new Panasonic plasmas lose half their brightness after 100,000 hours. If you used your plasma for 8 hours a day, every day of the year, it would take thirty-five years for it to reach half brightness. If you were to use it 24/7, it would take 11 years for it to reach half-brightness. Not exactly a problem.
mattp
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:31 AM)
mattp's Avatar
i hate that these companies are calling their tvs LED ugh
Goldrusher
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:34 AM)
Goldrusher's Avatar

Originally Posted by mattp

i hate that these companies are calling their tvs LED ugh

Same.
Samsung especially is simply using the OLED-hype.
Liabe Brave
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:38 AM)
Liabe Brave's Avatar

Originally Posted by drizzle

Every single technology has a Drawback. And plasma is full of myths: ...LED uses less electricity overall, but who the hell cares about a 3 dollar difference on your bill?

So it's not a myth at all, you just don't care.

Originally Posted by drizzle

LCDs have image retention as well.

Of course. So do CRTs. But plasma is uniformly worst about this, even though every technology has gotten a lot better over time. Also, saying, "Other stuff does too!" doesn't make "plasmas suffer from burn-in" a myth either.

Originally Posted by drizzle

Also, newer (as in, made in the last 5 years) plasma TVs perform some sort of auto-retention-removal. So, if you turn on your plasma, for the first few seconds, there will be retention, but if you change the channel (or scene, or input), it refreshes the entire panel and the retention is gone - i know because i see it everyday on my plasma.

This may be true for your panel, but it's absolutely untrue for "every plasma made in the last five years". I've seen burn-in last for hours on several different plasma models owned by friends, even after input changes.

So none of the "myths" you are debunking are actually myths. You just think they're so minor they don't matter. That's a fine choice (I happen to agree with you), but people who draw a different conclusion aren't deluded or being fooled by the powerful LCD lobby.
dralla
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:39 AM)
dralla's Avatar
I really hate how people refer to TV's by their artificial refresh rates, "120Hz Samsung!", ect. That is so deceptive and people constantly get suckered in, it's nothing but frame interpolation.

Anyway, best way to make your decision is go mess around with them in person. Bring in a blu-ray player or equivalent and see which you prefer.
Valkyr Junkie
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:39 AM)
Valkyr Junkie's Avatar

Originally Posted by mattp

i hate that these companies are calling their tvs LED ugh

Some consumer watchgroup just recently called out Samsung on their shady marketing of LED-backlit TVs, but now LG has started doing the same thing :lol
BeEatNU
WORLDSTAAAAAAR
(09-12-2009, 01:42 AM)
BeEatNU's Avatar

Originally Posted by Goldrusher

Same.
Samsung especially is simply using the OLED-hype.

exactly.

I am not paying for no LED until OLED's are released at a decent price. The LN52B750 LCD is awesome by its own accord.
thaOwner
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:43 AM)
thaOwner's Avatar
i like this thread.
Nemo
Will Eat Your Children
(09-12-2009, 01:45 AM)
Nemo's Avatar

Originally Posted by mattp

i hate that these companies are calling their tvs LED ugh

.
Liabe Brave
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:45 AM)
Liabe Brave's Avatar

Originally Posted by edible_candle

Yea, the new Panasonic plasmas lose half their brightness after 100,000 hours. If you used your plasma for 8 hours a day, every day of the year, it would take thirty-five years for it to reach half brightness. If you were to use it 24/7, it would take 11 years for it to reach half-brightness. Not exactly a problem.

Surely you understand that the brightness loss doesn't happen all in one big chunk, right? It's going on constantly while you use the TV. So after 3 years of 40 hours a week you've lost ~3% of the peak brightness. That may not be much, but it's not zero problems, either.

Again, I should reiterate that I personally think plasma is a better choice. It's just that display-tech warz, with all sides refusing to admit the other types are a perfectly reasonable option, are just as exasperating as console warz.
H_Prestige
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:46 AM)
To be fair, even today plasma isn't immune to image retention (though permanent burn in should be impossible with normal use). But after experiencing it on my 2008 model Panasonic, I don't see why anyone would even make an issue out of it, to the point of considering inferior LCD because of it. The left over image (in my case HP numbers from FFXII menu) goes away within a minute and you can only see it if you are in a completely dark room in the first place.
WasteLand Soldier
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:46 AM)

Originally Posted by g35twinturbo

exactly.

I am not paying for no LED until OLED's are released at a decent price. The LN52B750 LCD is awesome by its own accord.

i have the a model watching right now and the blacks are blacker than the bezel itself :D
Divvy
Canadians burned my passport
(09-12-2009, 01:47 AM)
Divvy's Avatar
We bought a 60 inch plasma recently and it looks fantastic when playing games. Colours are a lot better than most LCD's I've used in the past. I would definitely recommend Plasma, but only if you're not gaming in a brightly lit room all the time.
Sysgen
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:47 AM)
Sysgen's Avatar
I almost bought the UN40B6000 and then found that the LN40B750 looks just as good, has more features and a lot more ports for about the same price (actually cheaper at the time). Then I found out about the lag on both and decided to just wait.
soco
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:48 AM)
soco's Avatar

Originally Posted by edible_candle

Yea, the new Panasonic plasmas lose half their brightness after 100,000 hours. If you used your plasma for 8 hours a day, every day of the year, it would take thirty-five years for it to reach half brightness. If you were to use it 24/7, it would take 11 years for it to reach half-brightness. Not exactly a problem.

it's probably worth pointing out that those numbers are kinda bullshit numbers. they actually say 'can last up to 100K before they've lost half their brightness'.
MrVargas
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:49 AM)
MrVargas's Avatar
I have a 40 inch Samsung 1080p LCD and a 52 inch 1080p Sony Bravia XBR 4 and while HD games look nearly equal on both systems, Wii games look considerably better on my Bravia (even with it being a bigger screen). I honestly feel like I have a hidden secret with my Bravia and the way Wii games look so friggin crisp on it and that includes Virtual Console games.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
(09-12-2009, 01:52 AM)
thetrin's Avatar
The specific LN40 I was looking at was the LN40B640. What does the 750 have over that? I can't seem to find it on bestbuy.com to compare.

The 640 is on sale for $999 right now, which is what is really attracting me (combined with all my positive experiences with the LN32)
Vustadumas
Banned
(09-12-2009, 01:54 AM)
Both seemed the same to me. I had been using a 50" Sony SXRD for a few years, prior to buying a Samsung 55" 8800 LED. I used the Sammy for about 2 weeks, before returning it. Ended up getting a Pioneer Kuro (KRP-600M). Best decision I have ever made. Pioneer Elite Plasma's are above and beyond any LED or LCD. Not to mention you can find them fairly cheap now (just under 3K). Black's are just that, BLACK :D No lag, no burn-in.

Seriously, don't be scared about getting a plasma. I know plasma is a mostly dying tech, but it still delivers on PQ that LED or LCD can't match.
edible_candle
Member
(09-12-2009, 01:57 AM)
edible_candle's Avatar

Originally Posted by Liabe Brave

Surely you understand that the brightness loss doesn't happen all in one big chunk, right? It's going on constantly while you use the TV. So after 3 years of 40 hours a week you've lost ~3% of the peak brightness. That may not be much, but it's not zero problems, either.

Again, I should reiterate that I personally think plasma is a better choice. It's just that display-tech warz, with all sides refusing to admit the other types are a perfectly reasonable option, are just as exasperating as console warz.

Well, yes, but I do believe it is such a minimal problem to as not be mentioned. Especially since LCD backlights can and do suffer from the same problem. And by the time the brightness has dropped enough to be noticeable, most people would have replaced the set.

Edit: On a different tangent, it's pretty sad that when anyone asks for recommendations for LCDs (or plasmas) it always devolves into a debate between the merits of the two display technologies. I'm not helping :(
Last edited by edible_candle; 09-12-2009 at 02:04 AM.

Thread Tools