Anyone game on a Plasma?

[Dice144]

Debating plasma vs LCD, both should be 1080p. Main games I play are BC2 and Starcraft 2. Switched from my 24" Asus to my 32" LG LCD HDTV this month and cannot stand to use the TN panel Asus anymore (it's under my desk now)

With my yearly bonus coming up debating 47" vs 50" Plasma both in the under 1k price range. Looking for any possible feedback of good TV you guys recommend.

P.s. I cannot afford the LED or I would possibly go that route.

 

[Skurge]

You could get an IPS.

 

[mnewsham]

Plasma is good for dark rooms while LCD's work better (compared to plasma) in lighted areas. (form my experiences)

 

[Dice144]

Well my LG is IPS it looks SOOO much better as many of you with IPS knew for awhile. The thing is I am not into spend $1000 on a dell IPS panel that is only 30". Yes I would LOVE the higher res but for the price I want a bigger screen.

This TV will double as the center of my HTPC/movie station. I have a custom 8' x6' (was 8x8 before I cut some off when I moved). It was built for a corner desk. I planed on modding my current desk and getting a huge 47" or 50" to place in the corner where the 32" now sits.

My friend that sells TV can get me a pretty sick deal on a Plasma. He keeps claiming they look better plus for the 2% chance I will use the 3d tech it seems cheaper to get 3d in Plasma then LCD right now.

 

[NoQuarter]

I prefer plasma for gaming. Much less motion blur, and deeper blacks. There's another thread we were just discussing the same thing in:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2141984

I ran a readability test on plasma vs LCD to measure the ghosting that uses scrolling text to help you determine clarity. I was able to read text on plasma moving 3-4 times faster than text on LCD because the motion blur breaks down the text so quickly.

http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/testsoftware/pixperan.html

I'd be interested to see what kind of results someone with a 120hz LCD can get. I could get the speed up to 8 on my 2ms LCD, and 23 on plasma.

 

[djnsmith7]

I've been playing BF2 on a 58" plasma for 2 years now & have no complaints. I also browse the web & do everything on this display that I do on my 24" LCD monitor.

I would definitely pick a plasma over an LCD, no question.

I suggest you do what I did & go to the retail stores & compare them yourself. Reading reviews & what not will only go so far. My .02.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Plasma aint good for a PC. LCD wins in that vs battle. But in other ones plasma and LCD are neck on neck.

For IPS. Well its pixel response.sucks. Thats why a lot of people is seeing Green Green lalalala

Anyways IPS you got to fork out a lot you dont get cheap IPS ones those that are cheap are Green Green lalalala

 

[NoQuarter]

Plasma aint good for a PC. LCD wins in that vs battle. But in other ones plasma and LCD are neck on neck.

For IPS. Well its pixel response.sucks. Thats why a lot of people is seeing Green Green lalalala

Anyways IPS you got to fork out a lot you dont get cheap IPS ones those that are cheap are Green Green lalalala

Plasma only "loses" for PC because they can't be made small enough to be considered monitors. But if you're going to use a TV as a monitor I can't think of a reason plasma would be worse than LCD. Plasma has better color representation than cheaper LCD's, and better response time (ie no ghosting) than any LCD.

Ghosting may not seem as big an issue on LCD's as it used to be, but it's still there. The only reason you can't read the text on a window as you drag it is because of the ghosting from poor response time.

 

[Illyusha]

How close will you be sitting to the new gaming monitor? LCD lacks color depth and has shallow black levels. I can't use one to game unless it's on my PC and I'm sitting close.

 

[ArchAngel777]

IIRC, Plasmas have phosphor lag and it tends to look like green ghosting. It has been a while since I was reading about that (2 years maybe). I don't notice it on my TV, but I am also not sensative to regular LCD ghosting. In fact, when people talk about ghosting I can barely see it except in still shots found in reviews.

Edit ** Found a quick link as to what I am talking about. I have an LG Plasma, I don't notice phosphor lag, but as stated above, I also don't notice LCD Ghosting.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1048539/what_is_plasma_tv_green_ghosting_and.html

 

[jacktesterson]

Plasma is way better.

I've got an ips LG 1080p screen and I like my LG plasma better.

 

[djnsmith7]

IIRC, Plasmas have phosphor lag and it tends to look like green ghosting. It has been a while since I was reading about that (2 years maybe). I don't notice it on my TV, but I am also not sensative to regular LCD ghosting. In fact, when people talk about ghosting I can barely see it except in still shots found in reviews.

Edit ** Found a quick link as to what I am talking about. I have an LG Plasma, I don't notice phosphor lag, but as stated above, I also don't notice LCD Ghosting.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1048539/what_is_plasma_tv_green_ghosting_and.html

I've been gaming & doing all sorts of PC activities, if you will, for over 2 years now & not once experienced any sort of lag, ghosting or anything that would prompt me to say anything negative about using a plasma as a PC monitor. Heck, even the text looks great, which I was very skeptical of early on.

 

[tweakboy]

Plasma first came out then LCD


LCD is newer technology, end of story! LCD is better then Plasma IMO

 

[snuuggles]

I'd be interested to see what kind of results someone with a 120hz LCD can get. I could get the speed up to 8 on my 2ms LCD, and 23 on plasma.

I am very curious if anyone has been able to compare plasma vs 120hz LCD. I'm considering the new Acer 27" 120Hz panel, but it's going to be about $700(!).

A 42" panasonic plasma would be about the same price - or less! Wish I could know that going for the 120hz lcd was "worth it" (I'm not interested in the 3d at all, just the improved motion resolution).

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Only reason I won't make the switch to plasma over my current lcd is burn in with plasma. All I've read or heard is it is very possible to have burn in if it is used as a primary pc monitor.

 

[NoQuarter]

IIRC, Plasmas have phosphor lag and it tends to look like green ghosting. It has been a while since I was reading about that (2 years maybe). I don't notice it on my TV, but I am also not sensative to regular LCD ghosting. In fact, when people talk about ghosting I can barely see it except in still shots found in reviews.

Edit ** Found a quick link as to what I am talking about. I have an LG Plasma, I don't notice phosphor lag, but as stated above, I also don't notice LCD Ghosting.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1048539/what_is_plasma_tv_green_ghosting_and.html

I can see it but only going from black to white.

As for LCD ghosting I don't see it directly in games but I realize the lack of clarity when strafing an object is due to ghosting. You won't notice it in things you're running directly toward but anything moving across your screen loses a lot. Having to stop the camera to read the NPC names in town or taking a split second to turn or stop the camera to id friend/foe in an FPS.. if you really examine what detail you lose while in motion compared to standing still, that's all due to ghosting.

It may feel like that's just the difficulty of seeing objects in motion, but side by side with a plasma/CRT and maybe 120Hz LCD it's clearly a display limitation.

 

[Ross Ridge]

LCD is newer technology, end of story! LCD is better then Plasma IMO

LCD and Plasma displays were both invented in 1964. The first commericially available LCD TV came out in 1988, the first Plasma TV almost ten years later in 1997.

Plasmas came to dominate the large screen TV market before LCDs because they were cheaper to make in large sizes, and that may be why you think they came first. The cost of manufacturing large LCD panels has since come down a lot and that situation has almost reversed. Both however are based on very old technologies, and both have had various dramatic improvements made over the years. But as far their relative market share is concerned the only two technical improvments that have really mattered over the last decade are those affecting their size and price.

 

[djnsmith7]

Only reason I won't make the switch to plasma over my current lcd is burn in with plasma. All I've read or heard is it is very possible to have burn in if it is used as a primary pc monitor.

Most, if not all of Samsung plasma displays have technology built in to combat this. My display is almost 3 years old & it has it. I don't have any burn in & mine gets used a lot for everything, ranging from gaming, surfing, Blu Ray movies, Comcast HD, you name it.

 

[HumblePie]

Only reason not to use a plasma for a monitor is because of 2D static images tend to burn into the plasma screen. Meaning if you spend 90% of your time at your computer surfing the internet, like so many do, you'll get image burns from having the same pieces of the screen constantly being displayed.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Plasma first came out then LCD


LCD is newer technology, end of story! LCD is better then Plasma IMO

Sugar came out, then artificial sweeteners. Therefore, artificial sweeteners are newer technology, and must be better!

Not everything that is newer is necessarily better. Sometimes they just come out to fill a niche market (low / zero calorie foods for artificial sweeteners), or to lower costs. Newer does not mean better technology from every standpoint.

Plasmas are superior for movies and gaming from across a room, IMO. Better colors (especially black), better uniformity, far more vivid, etc. However, if you're planning on sitting at a desk staring at a screen up close, or looking at a lot of still images (web pages for example), I'd just grab a normal LCD computer monitor rather than a TV of any type.

 

[Dice144]

Sugar came out, then artificial sweeteners. Therefore, artificial sweeteners are newer technology, and must be better!

Not everything that is newer is necessarily better. Sometimes they just come out to fill a niche market (low / zero calorie foods for artificial sweeteners), or to lower costs. Newer does not mean better technology from every standpoint.

Plasmas are superior for movies and gaming from across a room, IMO. Better colors (especially black), better uniformity, far more vivid, etc. However, if you're planning on sitting at a desk staring at a screen up close, or looking at a lot of still images (web pages for example), I'd just grab a normal LCD computer monitor rather than a TV of any type.

Yeah I like the black levels more from the limited amount of times I have seen Plasma. I really need to just go to the store and check some out. I was worried about possible burn in but alot of people say Samsung etc have "fixed" it unless you burn an image in the first 200 hours.

 

[Mr. President]

I've been running my HTPC/game box on a 42" Panasonic G20 since it came out and I would fully recommend it. My previous TV was an IPS and, while image quality was excellent, the plasma has it beat in most areas. Its biggest fault is the slightly more obvious banding but I wouldn't call it a deal-braker as the better black levels and motion go a long way to make up for that. In addition, the plasma cells are round(ish) rather than square which makes jaggies in games less pronounced.

Plasma burn-in is basically a non-issue nowadays; it can happen but it's unlikely unless you're displaying a super-bright image for an extended time. I once left a Windows folder open by accident for a couple of hours without a hint of burn-in.

That said, I'd be cautious if you intend to use it as a desktop monitor for extended periods (hours of browsing, for example). Plasma buzz (which is basically inaudible at normal seating distances) might also be an issue if you have it seated on your desk less than a meter away from you. While I would consider plasma the superior technology, it does come with caveats.

 

[wahdangun]

plasma hands down, because i can't stand the black level on lcd, its annoying.

 

[Elfear]

Plasma looks a little better but is a bigger pain in the butt to use IMO. I had a Samsung plasma for six months or so and used it for gaming and as a computer monitor. It had technology to combat burn-in but it required you to leave the TV on for awhile after you got done gaming. It used a rolling pattern that worked well to erase the burned in HUD and other static images. Problem was you had to run it for awhile and you had to decide whether to sit around and watch the image disappear or leave it and potentially forget it was on (did that a few times). I felt like I had to babysit my fragile TV which is stupid.

Power consumption was also very high. Using a Kill-O-Watt meter I measured over 300W from the wallplate. An LCD uses much less, especially when you consider you don't have to leave it on after gaming.

 

[jacktesterson]

Plasma looks a little better but is a bigger pain in the butt to use IMO. I had a Samsung plasma for six months or so and used it for gaming and as a computer monitor. It had technology to combat burn-in but it required you to leave the TV on for awhile after you got done gaming. It used a rolling pattern that worked well to erase the burned in HUD and other static images. Problem was you had to run it for awhile and you had to decide whether to sit around and watch the image disappear or leave it and potentially forget it was on (did that a few times). I felt like I had to babysit my fragile TV which is stupid.

Power consumption was also very high. Using a Kill-O-Watt meter I measured over 300W from the wallplate. An LCD uses much less, especially when you consider you don't have to leave it on after gaming.

Burn in is almost a non factor in new Plasma TV's.