Support NeoGAF

[Airbus Jr]

 

[Larsowitz]

This is probably the best answer. LG OLED's have excellent input lag and the best picture quality thus far, while Sony tv's are generally accepted as having the best upscaling/motion processing. Hard to give a definite answer as Samsung is starting to put FreeSync/Variable Refresh rates in most of their tv's. I think LG might be doing it with the 2019 OLEDs but not sure. If you're on a budget though, it's hard to pass up on the pricing of the TCL tv's. I'm playing on a new 75" TCL 6 series and on game mode i have had no issues so far. Granted, i'm not playing anything that would really cause the tv to struggle. TMCC matchmaking for life lol.


I completely forgot about Panasonic. Not available in the US, unfortunately.

This is probably the best answer. LG OLED's have excellent input lag and the best picture quality thus far, while Sony tv's are generally accepted as having the best upscaling/motion processing. Hard to give a definite answer as Samsung is starting to put FreeSync/Variable Refresh rates in most of their tv's. I think LG might be doing it with the 2019 OLEDs but not sure. If you're on a budget though, it's hard to pass up on the pricing of the TCL tv's. I'm playing on a new 75" TCL 6 series and on game mode i have had no issues so far. Granted, i'm not playing anything that would really cause the tv to struggle. TMCC matchmaking for life lol.


I completely forgot about Panasonic. Not available in the US, unfortunately.

Yep Panasonic might be best, a shame that they don‘t sell their OLEDs in the US.

 

[CyberPanda]

Best TV Brands for Gaming: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/by-usage/video-gaming

Best TV Brands for HDR Gaming: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/by-usage/hdr-gaming

Best TV's on the Market as of April,2019: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/tvs-on-the-market

These guys are legit, and do the best thorough analysis and reviews for all televisions. I high recommend their site.

 

[sublimit]

I have been a huge Panasonic fan for the last 10 years.I have 2 models. They were more expensive than the similar models from their competitors but they had the lowest input lag,best blacks and colors and even my very old model (HDReady 27" Viera) that i bought in 2008 still (dis)plays perfectly as if it is brand new after countless hours of gaming.It's the perfect tv to connect my PS3 and Vita tv through HDMIs and the Wii and PS2 are connected through component cables and the games also look great. Even the built in speakers are incredible and this comes from people who really know about audio.
My other newer 42" model that i bought in 2014 for my PS4/WiiU combo has incredible picture quality and very low input lag.

Next gen when i move to 4K i will definitely only look for Panasonic.

 

[Mistershine.]

Panasonic plasma. Fuck the eco taliban for getting them banned.

 

[CyberPanda]

Panasonic plasma. Fuck the eco taliban for getting them banned.

Oh yes, those are great tvs. My dad still has one and its still working to this day.

 

[Chozofication_]

Panasonic plasma. Fuck the eco taliban for getting them banned.

Is that really what happened? I thought they weren't selling compared to LCD.

 

[CyberPanda]

Is that really what happened? I thought they weren't selling compared to LCD.

1. Bright showroom conditions put plasmas at a distinct disadvantage versus LED-lit LCDs that can output much more light, allowing them to stand out in bright environments.

2. Aesthetics may have played a role in hastening plasma's demise. There are limits to how thin you can make a plasma, and edgelit LCDs (and OLEDs) are thinner than that. Unfortunately, high-end LCDs didn't just outshine plasmas in the showroom—they also looked sexier.

3. UHD/4K caught on quickly, and it's difficult—if not impossible—to build UHD/4K plasma TVs in popular screen sizes. Panasonic developed a few giant UHD plasmas, but they were not consumer products.

4. Screen-size limitations also played a part in plasmas plight. The vast majority of 1080p plasmas came in sizes ranging from 42 to 64 Inches, while 1080p LCDs were—and continue to be—available in a much wider variety of screen sizes.

5. You can't bend a plasma. I hate to think that being flat contributed to the death of the technology, but the last two companies to produce plasma TVs were LG and Samsung. Both companies are committed to selling UHD/4K curved-screen TVs.

6. Plasmas were harder to deal with than LCDs. They are heavier and yet more fragile than many LCDs. Shipping a plasma requires a large box that must remain upright. Plus, plasmas developed a reputation for being susceptible to image retention and screen burn-in, which was much more of a real problem in the early days of plasma, but the reputation stuck.

7. While OLED is still in the early stages of development, there's no question it offers greater potential than plasma. OLED is the future of emissive display technology. It should not come as a surprise that LG and Samsung stopped building plasmas—which are also emissive—shortly after OLED debuted.

8. Energy efficiency may have played a part in putting plasma out to pasture. Both LED-lit LCD and OLED are more energy-efficient display technologies than plasma.

9. Plasma was the original flat-panel technology, and that worked against it. It did not matter that it was a mature technology capable of offering superior performance. People just thought of it as old technology.

10. Projectors improved in quality and prices dropped. With LED-lit LCDs being well suited to bright rooms, the existence of decent 1080p projectors for under $2000 may have affected sales of flagship plasmas.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-o...s-general/2080650-10-reasons-plasma-died.html

 

[Mistershine.]

Is that really what happened? I thought they weren't selling compared to LCD.

1. Bright showroom conditions put plasmas at a distinct disadvantage versus LED-lit LCDs that can output much more light, allowing them to stand out in bright environments.

2. Aesthetics may have played a role in hastening plasma's demise. There are limits to how thin you can make a plasma, and edgelit LCDs (and OLEDs) are thinner than that. Unfortunately, high-end LCDs didn't just outshine plasmas in the showroom—they also looked sexier.

3. UHD/4K caught on quickly, and it's difficult—if not impossible—to build UHD/4K plasma TVs in popular screen sizes. Panasonic developed a few giant UHD plasmas, but they were not consumer products.

4. Screen-size limitations also played a part in plasmas plight. The vast majority of 1080p plasmas came in sizes ranging from 42 to 64 Inches, while 1080p LCDs were—and continue to be—available in a much wider variety of screen sizes.

5. You can't bend a plasma. I hate to think that being flat contributed to the death of the technology, but the last two companies to produce plasma TVs were LG and Samsung. Both companies are committed to selling UHD/4K curved-screen TVs.

6. Plasmas were harder to deal with than LCDs. They are heavier and yet more fragile than many LCDs. Shipping a plasma requires a large box that must remain upright. Plus, plasmas developed a reputation for being susceptible to image retention and screen burn-in, which was much more of a real problem in the early days of plasma, but the reputation stuck.

7. While OLED is still in the early stages of development, there's no question it offers greater potential than plasma. OLED is the future of emissive display technology. It should not come as a surprise that LG and Samsung stopped building plasmas—which are also emissive—shortly after OLED debuted.

8. Energy efficiency may have played a part in putting plasma out to pasture. Both LED-lit LCD and OLED are more energy-efficient display technologies than plasma.

9. Plasma was the original flat-panel technology, and that worked against it. It did not matter that it was a mature technology capable of offering superior performance. People just thought of it as old technology.

10. Projectors improved in quality and prices dropped. With LED-lit LCDs being well suited to bright rooms, the existence of decent 1080p projectors for under $2000 may have affected sales of flagship plasmas.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-o...s-general/2080650-10-reasons-plasma-died.html

A 4K plasma would probably run at about 1kw, meaning they would be illegal to sell in the EU and some US states where the limit for a 55 inch screen is less that 200w

 

[michaelius]

Stupid question - it changes every year with new batch of models released and will vary depending on price point.

Generally Samsung, LG and Sony are safer bets since they put more emphasis on low input lag modes.

 

[llien]

Sony is using LG's OLED panels to my knowledge, but secret sauce used in electronics is different. (akin how Nikon was able to squeeze more out of Sony's matrices)

I'd punish Samsung for highly misleading inventing misleading QLED name.

 

[CyberPanda]

This is fairly recent, but worth a watch.



And this should end up being better than OLED.

 

[Chozofication_]

1. Bright showroom conditions put plasmas at a distinct disadvantage versus LED-lit LCDs that can output much more light, allowing them to stand out in bright environments.

2. Aesthetics may have played a role in hastening plasma's demise. There are limits to how thin you can make a plasma, and edgelit LCDs (and OLEDs) are thinner than that. Unfortunately, high-end LCDs didn't just outshine plasmas in the showroom—they also looked sexier.

3. UHD/4K caught on quickly, and it's difficult—if not impossible—to build UHD/4K plasma TVs in popular screen sizes. Panasonic developed a few giant UHD plasmas, but they were not consumer products.

4. Screen-size limitations also played a part in plasmas plight. The vast majority of 1080p plasmas came in sizes ranging from 42 to 64 Inches, while 1080p LCDs were—and continue to be—available in a much wider variety of screen sizes.

5. You can't bend a plasma. I hate to think that being flat contributed to the death of the technology, but the last two companies to produce plasma TVs were LG and Samsung. Both companies are committed to selling UHD/4K curved-screen TVs.

6. Plasmas were harder to deal with than LCDs. They are heavier and yet more fragile than many LCDs. Shipping a plasma requires a large box that must remain upright. Plus, plasmas developed a reputation for being susceptible to image retention and screen burn-in, which was much more of a real problem in the early days of plasma, but the reputation stuck.

7. While OLED is still in the early stages of development, there's no question it offers greater potential than plasma. OLED is the future of emissive display technology. It should not come as a surprise that LG and Samsung stopped building plasmas—which are also emissive—shortly after OLED debuted.

8. Energy efficiency may have played a part in putting plasma out to pasture. Both LED-lit LCD and OLED are more energy-efficient display technologies than plasma.

9. Plasma was the original flat-panel technology, and that worked against it. It did not matter that it was a mature technology capable of offering superior performance. People just thought of it as old technology.

10. Projectors improved in quality and prices dropped. With LED-lit LCDs being well suited to bright rooms, the existence of decent 1080p projectors for under $2000 may have affected sales of flagship plasmas.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-o...s-general/2080650-10-reasons-plasma-died.html

Yeah, all of this for sure. Oled is a straight upgrade, but LCD has also massively caught up in terms of black level/motion handling (if not better in the former). Plus as you said, were dim. I don't think Plasma had a place anymore.

 

[CyberPanda]

Yeah, all of this for sure. Oled is a straight upgrade, but LCD has also massively caught up in terms of black level/motion handling. Plus as you said, were dim. I don't think Plasma had a place anymore.

OLED is good for now. But, MicroLED is going to take it to a whole new level. Expect the market to get interesting in the next 5 years or so.

 

[Chozofication_]

OLED is good for now. But, MicroLED is going to take it to a whole new level. Expect the market to get interesting in the next 5 years or so.

Indeed. I might rock my sony lcd until micro led hits also by then Oled will be far cheaper too, i'd imagine.

 

[Fake]

OLED is good for now. But, MicroLED is going to take it to a whole new level. Expect the market to get interesting in the next 5 years or so.

This. Can't wait for microLED too.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I have been a huge Panasonic fan for the last 10 years.I have 2 models. They were more expensive than the similar models from their competitors but they had the lowest input lag,best blacks and colors and even my very old model (HDReady 27" Viera) that i bought in 2008 still (dis)plays perfectly as if it is brand new after countless hours of gaming.It's the perfect tv to connect my PS3 and Vita tv through HDMIs and the Wii and PS2 are connected through component cables and the games also look great. Even the built in speakers are incredible and this comes from people who really know about audio.
My other newer 42" model that i bought in 2014 for my PS4/WiiU combo has incredible picture quality and very low input lag.

Next gen when i move to 4K i will definitely only look for Panasonic.

I hope you live in Europe because as of right now, Panasonic has no plans to reenter the US market.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

OLED is good for now. But, MicroLED is going to take it to a whole new level. Expect the market to get interesting in the next 5 years or so.

This. Can't wait for microLED too.

MicroLED has a ways to go before it's remotely viable or affordable. You're going to be waiting a while before you will be able to afford to buy one of those.

There are a lot of people who seem to think MicroLED is right around the corner and that is simply not true at all. Samsung was very very secure with how they showed it off at CES.

By the time MicroLED is an option, OLED will probably be so drastically cheaper, not to mention improved that it will be a tough to resist.

 

[Larsowitz]

1. Bright showroom conditions put plasmas at a distinct disadvantage versus LED-lit LCDs that can output much more light, allowing them to stand out in bright environments.

2. Aesthetics may have played a role in hastening plasma's demise. There are limits to how thin you can make a plasma, and edgelit LCDs (and OLEDs) are thinner than that. Unfortunately, high-end LCDs didn't just outshine plasmas in the showroom—they also looked sexier.

3. UHD/4K caught on quickly, and it's difficult—if not impossible—to build UHD/4K plasma TVs in popular screen sizes. Panasonic developed a few giant UHD plasmas, but they were not consumer products.

4. Screen-size limitations also played a part in plasmas plight. The vast majority of 1080p plasmas came in sizes ranging from 42 to 64 Inches, while 1080p LCDs were—and continue to be—available in a much wider variety of screen sizes.

5. You can't bend a plasma. I hate to think that being flat contributed to the death of the technology, but the last two companies to produce plasma TVs were LG and Samsung. Both companies are committed to selling UHD/4K curved-screen TVs.

6. Plasmas were harder to deal with than LCDs. They are heavier and yet more fragile than many LCDs. Shipping a plasma requires a large box that must remain upright. Plus, plasmas developed a reputation for being susceptible to image retention and screen burn-in, which was much more of a real problem in the early days of plasma, but the reputation stuck.

7. While OLED is still in the early stages of development, there's no question it offers greater potential than plasma. OLED is the future of emissive display technology. It should not come as a surprise that LG and Samsung stopped building plasmas—which are also emissive—shortly after OLED debuted.

8. Energy efficiency may have played a part in putting plasma out to pasture. Both LED-lit LCD and OLED are more energy-efficient display technologies than plasma.

9. Plasma was the original flat-panel technology, and that worked against it. It did not matter that it was a mature technology capable of offering superior performance. People just thought of it as old technology.

10. Projectors improved in quality and prices dropped. With LED-lit LCDs being well suited to bright rooms, the existence of decent 1080p projectors for under $2000 may have affected sales of flagship plasmas.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-o...s-general/2080650-10-reasons-plasma-died.html

Thanks for the summary, very interesting!

 

[Fake]

MicroLED has a ways to go before it's remotely viable or affordable. You're going to be waiting a while before you will be able to afford to buy one of those.

There are a lot of people who seem to think MicroLED is right around the corner and that is simply not true at all. Samsung was very very secure with how they showed it off at CES.

By the time MicroLED is an option, OLED will probably be so drastically cheaper, not to mention improved that it will be a tough to resist.

In the same way OLED and 4k TV was I think. 4K tvs start to reduce the price just now. AMOLED tech so...

 

[EmilOmegaStrife]

Sony tv's have 30ms+ of input lag in game mode, that is way too much compared to Samsung which is 15-20ms. I think Samsung also has freesync now.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

OLED is good for now. But, MicroLED is going to take it to a whole new level. Expect the market to get interesting in the next 5 years or so.

In the same way OLED and 4k TV was I think. 4K tvs start to reduce the price just now. AMOLED tech so...

OLED was a mature technology far before it became mainstream. It just needed a lot of work to become bigger and higher resolutions. MicroLED is still in the prototype stage and has a ways to go. CES proved that. Samsung was very restrictive in how they showed it off.


The point is that nobody should be holding off buying a TV due to waiting for MicroLED. The wait will be very very long.

MiniLED on the otherhand could go a long way and won't be anywhere near as expensive as MicroLED.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

7. While OLED is still in the early stages of development, there's no question it offers greater potential than plasma. OLED is the future of emissive display technology. It should not come as a surprise that LG and Samsung stopped building plasmas—which are also emissive—shortly after OLED debuted.

It's important to note that Samsung currently does not use OLED. I think you are getting them confused with Sony.

 

[Chozofication_]

MicroLED has a ways to go before it's remotely viable or affordable. You're going to be waiting a while before you will be able to afford to buy one of those.

There are a lot of people who seem to think MicroLED is right around the corner and that is simply not true at all. Samsung was very very secure with how they showed it off at CES.

By the time MicroLED is an option, OLED will probably be so drastically cheaper, not to mention improved that it will be a tough to resist.

Well, yeah. That's one reason why micro led will be great, drive oled prices down. I could definitely see myself getting an oled instead of the "probably" more expensive micro led.

 

[01011001]

who the f voted Sony? they usually have among the highest input lag... LG and Samsung are by far the best TVs for gaming, low input lag and good picture.

if you want a TV specifically to be good for gaming Sony should be avoided

 

[Vasto]

I dont know which is the best but I buy Samsung.

 

[Chozofication_]

who the f voted Sony? they usually have among the highest input lag... LG and Samsung are by far the best TVs for gaming, low input lag and good picture.

if you want a TV specifically to be good for gaming Sony should be avoided

10ms extra does not make a Sony x900e worse than 6/7 series Samsung.

Also, Sony 950g is as low lag as anything else.

 

[sgurschick]

Best bang for the buck is likely a TCL LED if all you're using it for is couch gaming and not worried about perfect color representation (though can be pretty good with calibration). Input lag on my model is around 20ms. Not sure of my model number am at work.

I wouldn't spend $2K on an OLED just to game on. If I was going to spend that much I would just get a nice ass 4K monitor with sub 2ms response

 

[Shai-Tan]

Don't use brand as a guide - look at rtings reviews?

 

[EGOMON]

I have only used Sony TVs so I can't comment on the others but Sony TV have never disappointed me so I keep buying them

 

[CyberPanda]

MicroLED has a ways to go before it's remotely viable or affordable. You're going to be waiting a while before you will be able to afford to buy one of those.

There are a lot of people who seem to think MicroLED is right around the corner and that is simply not true at all. Samsung was very very secure with how they showed it off at CES.

By the time MicroLED is an option, OLED will probably be so drastically cheaper, not to mention improved that it will be a tough to resist.

Oh I know it’s gonna be awhile, but I’m excited for the technology. And, OLED will still be a good tech especially with the prices going down. It should be very interesting how the pricing is done for both technologies.

Don't use brand as a guide - look at rtings reviews?

Yes, look at rtings reviews. They are not brand loyal, they will just simply test the TV and tell you if it’s good or not.

I hope you live in Europe because as of right now, Panasonic has no plans to reenter the US market.

Which is unfortunate. I like Panasonic.

 

[chaseroni]

Anyone have a recommendation for a good 1080p set? I'm looking for one with low input latency and excellent picture quality.

 

[Chozofication_]

Anyone have a recommendation for a good 1080p set? I'm looking for one with low input latency and excellent picture quality.

I wouldn't worry so much about upscaling vs. Native. Quality of the set is far more important. But, what size and budget?

1080p sets are inherently going to have more lag, because they're lower end and being phased out.

 

[chaseroni]

I wouldn't worry so much about upscaling vs. Native. Quality of the set is far more important. But, what size and budget?

1080p sets are inherently going to have more lag, because they're lower end and being phased out.

Anything under $1000, I currently have and old LCD set from 2012 so anything is an upgrade at this point lol

 

[CyberPanda]

Anyone have a recommendation for a good 1080p set? I'm looking for one with low input latency and excellent picture quality.

What size are you looking for?

 

[chaseroni]

What size are you looking for?

55 inch

 

[CyberPanda]

55 inch

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/by-price/under-1000

Best rated TVs for your budget.

 

[Chozofication_]

55 inch

Get a Samsung 6 or 7 series 55 inch, and save some money. The nu7000 series for 500 bucks is a great value.

I would recommend sony, but their current mid range sets are much more expensive than their 2017 x900e, which I doubt you can find anymore. The 900f (1100) isn't great and 950g (1400)is pretty pricey. At that point, might as well go oled.

 

[EmilOmegaStrife]

10ms extra does not make a Sony x900e worse than 6/7 series Samsung.

Also, Sony 950g is as low lag as anything else.

I was actually disappointed that Sony's tv had high input lag when compared to Samsung. 10 ms does make a significant difference in action games, I do hope Sony one day makes a competitive game mode because right now Samsung is nailing it and Sony just don't care which makes no sense since they make Playstation.

 

[michaelius]

Anyone have a recommendation for a good 1080p set? I'm looking for one with low input latency and excellent picture quality.

It's impossible to get good 1080p TV anymore. No one makes high end models below 4k ever since Sony dropped their W9xx series

 

[Chozofication_]

I was actually disappointed that Sony's tv had high input lag when compared to Samsung. 10 ms does make a significant difference in action games, I do hope Sony one day makes a competitive game mode because right now Samsung is nailing it and Sony just don't care which makes no sense since they make Playstation.

Their current top sets are equal or marginally lower than Samsung.

And no, 10ms is not some massive difference. It's noticeable sure, at least to me but I have cyborg eyes.

The difference isn't so big that you can't adjust, and having gamed on 20ms ish sets vs. The x900e, it isn't an issue at all. The 900f and that series in general, yes its an issue at 40ms.

 

[chaseroni]

Get a Samsung 6 or 7 series 55 inch, and save some money. The nu7000 series for 500 bucks is a great value.

I would recommend sony, but their current mid range sets are much more expensive than their 2017 x900e, which I doubt you can find anymore. The 900f (1100) isn't great and 950g (1400)is pretty pricey. At that point, might as well go oled.

So something like this would be good? You're right about the upscaling thing, I have a lot of 1080p content I',m still hoping to use so I want something that doesn't make it a blurry mess.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07FGJ1YRM/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[Jayjayhd34]

Love my sony xe90 but it has big issue some would consider a deal breaker.

It can crash and when it does you have turn it off and takes a few minutes come on. This happens a lot too. Mostly it's the Freeview that crashes won't change channel etc.

My previous TV was Samsung and that never ones crashed.

 

[CyberPanda]

Love my sony xe90 but it has big issue some would consider a deal breaker.

It can crash and when it does you have turn it off and takes a few minutes come on. This happens a lot too. Mostly it's the Freeview that crashes won't change channel etc.

My previous TV was Samsung and that never wants crashed.

Try doing a factory reset on the TV. If the problem persists so recommend calling Sony customer service.

 

[Chozofication_]

So something like this would be good? You're right about the upscaling thing, I have a lot of 1080p content I',m still hoping to use so I want something that doesn't make it a blurry mess.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07FGJ1YRM/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Yes that's that's a good set for the money. Super low lag.

 

[VincentMatts]

Im very happy with the Samsung KS8000

 

[SlaughterX]

LG OLEDs are the best on the market so... those.

 

[Ascend]

1) OLED
2) Samsung
3) The rest

I'm surprised by the amount of people that pick Sony. Sony TVs generally have atrocious input lag.

And yes, 10ms can matter, although mostly it's much worse than that. If it's still under 20-25ms, it's still acceptable. But generally, Sony TVs have closer to 40ms of input lag, especially if the TV is required to do scaling from 1080p to 4K for example. How people don't feel it is beyond me.

 

[Chozofication_]

Love my sony xe90 but it has big issue some would consider a deal breaker.

It can crash and when it does you have turn it off and takes a few minutes come on. This happens a lot too. Mostly it's the Freeview that crashes won't change channel etc.

My previous TV was Samsung and that never ones crashed.

I have the 55 inch, never crashed once. I never use the smart features and its on factory firmware though.

Damn near any OS functions on any device can crash.

 

[Larsowitz]

who the f voted Sony? they usually have among the highest input lag... LG and Samsung are by far the best TVs for gaming, low input lag and good picture.

if you want a TV specifically to be good for gaming Sony should be avoided

I think the latest Sony OLED and 950G were about 21ms, that is pretty good I think.