By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - LCD LED vs Plasma for gaming ???

 

LCD LED vs Plasma for gaming

LCD 44 9.95%
 
Plasma 195 44.12%
 
LCD LED 202 45.70%
 
Total:441
Cobretti2 on 24 April 2012
archbrix said:
Cobretti2 said:
1.  People need to stop calling LCD that are either back lit (top and bottom only) or edge lit by LEDs an LED tv.

2.  true LED tvs are OLED. These are the ones just coming out and cost an arm and a leg.

3.  saying that for me LCD edge lit LED is the way to go atm. Samsung is best looking so far.

1.  LCDs that are LED back-lit are NOT top to bottom only; the LEDs are behind the screen, hence the name "back" lit.  Both edge and back-lit LEDs ultimately pass the light through the LCD panel from behind.  The difference between them is where the LEDs are mounted; along the edges or behind the panel.  And yes, it is correct to refer to these TVs as LED because they ARE LED TVs, which brings me to your next point...

2.  No.  LED and OLED are not the same in that they work in different ways.  Unlike LEDs which rely on edge or back lighting, OLED displays emit the light themselves.  Those aren't even available for the consumer mass market beyond about 11 inches right now; we're talking about LED lit LCDs here, which yes, are referred to as LED TVs.

3.  Edge-lit LED-LCD screens can be thinner than back-lit, but back-lit (also known as full-array) screens have far better local dimming and offer a much better contrast ratio.  Most edge-lit models don't even feature local dimming (even some back-lit models don't).  Ergo, back-lit with local dimming offers the best picture. 


1. well what were the top and bottom only models that first come out? I know people use to describe them as back-lit (perhaps they used wrong terminology) and the edge-lit models were considered better as they went all around the screen. I must admit that having a full array back-lit  is fantastic. 

2. I never said they were the same, I said  OLED should be know as the true LED tvs, as they will be emitting the light thmselves. using LEDs to light up an LCD screen to me is still an LCD panel with better lighting tech.



 

 

Around the Network
d21lewis on 24 April 2012
archbrix said:
Cobretti2 said:
1.  People need to stop calling LCD that are either back lit (top and bottom only) or edge lit by LEDs an LED tv.

2.  true LED tvs are OLED. These are the ones just coming out and cost an arm and a leg.

3.  saying that for me LCD edge lit LED is the way to go atm. Samsung is best looking so far.

1.  LCDs that are LED back-lit are NOT top to bottom only; the LEDs are behind the screen, hence the name "back" lit.  Both edge and back-lit LEDs ultimately pass the light through the LCD panel from behind.  The difference between them is where the LEDs are mounted; along the edges or behind the panel.  And yes, it is correct to refer to these TVs as LED because they ARE LED TVs, which brings me to your next point...

2.  No.  LED and OLED are not the same in that they work in different ways.  Unlike LEDs which rely on edge or back lighting, OLED displays emit the light themselves.  Those aren't even available for the consumer mass market beyond about 11 inches right now; we're talking about LED lit LCDs here, which yes, are referred to as LED TVs.

3.  Edge-lit LED-LCD screens can be thinner than back-lit, but back-lit (also known as full-array) screens have far better local dimming and offer a much better contrast ratio.  Most edge-lit models don't even feature local dimming (even some back-lit models don't).  Ergo, back-lit with local dimming offers the best picture. 

Thank goodness you replied before I did.



thetonestarr on 24 April 2012

Plasma DOES give a better image, but they use far more power, generate far more heat, and are bulky as all hell.

Quality LED LCD screens provide comparable image (though still slightly inferior), but are vastly more expensive.

Cheap LED LCD screens don't really have any advantage over normal LCDs except that they're thin.

Traditional LCD screens are slightly thinner than plasmas, and use a lot less power, generating much less heat, but aren't the best when it comes to picture.

OLEDs are the best image, but are incredibly expensive.



I'd go with a mid-range LED. Still excellent quality, but affordable too, and super thin & cheap to operate as well.



 SW-5120-1900-6153

spaceguy on 24 April 2012

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+-+55%22+Class+-+LED+-+1080p+-+240Hz+-+Smart+-+3D+-+HDTV/2135045.p?id=1218310760434&skuId=2135045&st=Samsung D7000&cp=1&lp=1

LED by far is better. I Heard some talking about lag. Well where you using a high speed HDMI that cost about hundred bucks or did you cheap out because this well make all the difference. I own this tv and have not seen any tv look or play better. Plasma is junk and if you want to buy a product that dies rather quick, then I would go that route. I would say you pay for what you get. If you don't use the right cords with what you buy, your tv will look like sh-t. I have had no lag issues Accept when I forgot to change over the HDMI to the better I had bought. This is a great tv and I would stick with 240Hz.



toadslayer72 on 24 April 2012

Lol, spoken like a true fanboy ^^



I LOVE paying for Xbox Live! I also love that my love for it pisses off so many people.

Around the Network
piggychan on 24 April 2012
thetonestarr said:
Plasma DOES give a better image, but they use far more power, generate far more heat, and are bulky as all hell.


my 50" panny plasma runs about 350w which is much higher than my 12 year old 36" CRT screen.    But it generates much less heat than either of my old 32" toshiba LCD TV and LG 19" LCD monitor.. both of those LCD's broke down after a few years.

 

Not to bothered about the bulkiness.. because if someone broke into my house and stole my TV I would at least want them to struggle to get it out of the house rather than pick it up without a sweat...

 

In future I would have no problems buying a plasma again but also would consider LED, OLED and what else would be new on the market.



spaceguy on 24 April 2012
toadslayer72 said:
Lol, spoken like a true fanboy ^^

 I'm sorry you can't afford a tv like this but it's the truth. This is top of the line and you can't get much better then this. I have many friends with plasma or had plasma until they died. So every plasma I have seen is a piece. So maybe your the fanboy. Yes plasma looks great but also will die 10 X faster then a LED tv. Numbers don't lie and thats why plasma got the backsit to LED's. 



Turkish on 24 April 2012

PLASMA hands down

No other technology comes even close to Plasma, superior image quality, blacks, refresh rate, colors.

Only OLED will be able to beat Plasma, but it will take yeaaars before it gets to mainstram price.



spaceguy on 24 April 2012

I think only people who can't afford LED's are the people talking up Plasma's, I just do not see what your going on about with a tv that is bulky and will die rather quick. I have a LCD samsung that I bought 6 years ago. It started not wanting to turn on. Well, I went to radio shack, spent 10 bucks and bought new Compasitors. Installed them and the tv works great. Maybe if some of you knew what you where talking about then maybe I could understand. This tv I'm talking about is now a bedroom tv and I upgraded to a Samsung - 55" Class - LED - 1080p - 240Hz - Smart - 3D - HDTV. By far looked better then any plasma there and I have had no issue and games look amazing.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+-+55%22+Class+-+LED+-+1080p+-+240Hz+-+Smart+-+3D+-+HDTV/2135045.p?id=1218310760434&skuId=2135045&st=Samsung D7000&cp=1&lp=1  Look for your self.



Player1x3 on 24 April 2012
spaceguy said:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+-+55%22+Class+-+LED+-+1080p+-+240Hz+-+Smart+-+3D+-+HDTV/2135045.p?id=1218310760434&skuId=2135045&st=Samsung D7000&cp=1&lp=1

LED by far is better. I Heard some talking about lag. Well where you using a high speed HDMI that cost about hundred bucks or did you cheap out because this well make all the difference. I own this tv and have not seen any tv look or play better. Plasma is junk and if you want to buy a product that dies rather quick, then I would go that route. I would say you pay for what you get. If you don't use the right cords with what you buy, your tv will look like sh-t. I have had no lag issues Accept when I forgot to change over the HDMI to the better I had bought. This is a great tv and I would stick with 240Hz.


what on earth can a 100$ worth HDMI cable do??