how long will it take for people to realise that PAL (Europe and many other areas) is 50hz/625 lines and NTSC (USA, Japan, other areas) is 60hz/525 lines as standard...it was the same with the snes, CRT's etc.

http://www.diffen.com/difference/NTSC_vs_PAL

This is all true, but the bottom line is that despite all that 120/240 hz nonsence LCDs advertise and 600 hz nonsence plasmas advertise with...in general plasmas have better refresh rate and faster response time. Thats what the thread is about.

Superior picture quality is arguable depending on purpose.

Also, anyone that says 60 HZ LCD tvs are worthless are full of themselves. They are still kickass as long as they don't have something like 8 ms response time...

This thead is about response time, lol? I had no idea. In that case, he should be looking for a LCD with a 2ms response time, instead of something with 120hz, no?

Also, for those wondering, response time is not the same thing as input latency.

I totally agree, but obviously some think that 50Hz/60Hz is fine.

That looks AWESOME!!!!!!!!!

When it comes to Plasma TVs, Zen is still stuck in 2005.

Please, no one listen to him.

Please, no one listen to the only AV nerd in the thread who owns a brand new Veria, and realizes that even the 2009 Pannys(like mine) still have issues with phosphor trailing, and all Plasma's still have problems with burnin, they just incorporate counter measures which themselves, often damage your set over time.

Man, out of all the ignorance in this thread, and there is a TON, the basic premise of using the amp to improve gaming is completely ignorant, you point out one of the ONLY valid posts and tell people not to listen to it, WTF bro?

The truth is, explaining television technology is very complex, and nearly impossible to bullet point.

With LCD, you have to deal with issues in screen uniformity. Clouding and flashlighting and the most prominant, but also viewing angle, black levels, and a few other issues. However, Veria(really the only plasma that anyone should buy in 2009 for under 2000 bucks) also has issues, like, I dunno, glare, phosphor trailing(already reported by many gamers), screen brightness, energy usage(still pretty high). For all intents and purposes, the LN52B750 is still a better(though more expensive) option for gamers. Great screen uniformity, deep blacks with only a small crushing issue. 2ms latency, no burn-in(though all LCD's can have image retention), super bright, no flashlighting(like the superthin series), 240hz true colors under 200 bucks.

The technology is debatable, the models available are too....just not as much. Whitewashing your screen over and over will reduce the half-life of your Plasma. Your Veria will burn-in just like all other plasmas do. Especially if you play games with BLACK BARS, and you will have to take counter measures(I burned in my Veria for the first 100 hours). Your Veria will eventually have phosphor trailing(and if you are a plasma fan, you might claim that you can't see it). Your TV is not made for static HUDs, and just because burn-in doesn't bother you doesn't mean it doesn't bother your set and your PQ for people who know what they're looking at.

For god sakes man, most people don't know that they have poor PQ. They think everything in HD looks great. They've never had a calibrated Veria or B7xx+ model Samsung LCD. Truth is Plasma vs LCD is very debatable, but there is NO DOUBT that LCD is more versatile and more suitable to gaming.

I am typing this through my gaming PC on a 52" samsung LCD. You can't use your Plasma as a computer monitor, because you will ruin it over time, that is now what it was meant for. If you care for it properly, you can game effectively on a Plasma, but that does not mean that a Plasma is meant for gaming. The technology has improved, but green phosphors still age differently than other colors. Burn-in still occours on Plasma monitors. Why should people not accept that? Where did you read that burn-in is no longer an issue for Plasma TVs and gamers? Who told you that?

yeah 60hz is the lowest ive seen guess the measure them diff in diff areas

response time also plays a role i believe that tv ur talking bout has a 8ms

same happen to me bought a few hdtvs to replace the SD one you can tell a diff right away compared to the SD b/c the SD have a near instant refresh rate theres like a blur involved wen moving to fast and we know how games move fast after a short period of time it may hurt ur eyes

i return them all i refuse to pay the top $ for the good ones wen i know in a few months usually march the price comes down by alot b/c new models replace the older ones plus all these current tvs will be obsolete wen led and oled come out and even better tec to the current lcd

This is why I say not to listen to you.  You sound like someone who wants to be an AV nerd but doesn't take proper care of your toys and ends up unhappy with them.  In the first 200 hours (some mfg'ers recommend 50 or 100, but I'd say 200), you should have the contrast/bright turned  down and avoid fixed images.  The reason is that this is the time frame where you are most susceptible to permanent IR as the phosphors are at their peak in display.  After that timeframe and they've aged a bit, you'd likely need upwards of 48 hours on a fixed picture to see permanent IR.  Of course, this is a moving target.  The older the set, the harder it is to end up with permanent IR.

As for the rest of your points...

• Glare - Can be annoying but some $15 curtains solve the problem nicely.
• Screen brightness - There are adjustments for this, you should consult your manual.
• Energy usage - If you have issues with an extra dollar on your monthly energy bill, you shouldn't be buying a $1,000+ TV.
• Phosphor trailing - I haven't seen this up close so no comment.
• White washing reduces PQ - No shit.  White noise is what you do after you've screwed up so if you don't screw up it's not an issue.  Pixel/Picture shifting and using grey bars instead of black ones are what you do to avoid issues (before you screw up)

You like LCD.  Cool.  It doesn't change that you're getting a better PQ with a plasma TV that makes for much nicer everything from movie-watching to gaming.  The only hitch is that it requires some actual care.  If you want a giant computer monitor or are too lazy to properly care for your TV then LCD is the way to go.  For everyone else, there's plasma.

A few things.

A. When I say I "burned-in" my TV, I mean, I used static changing jpegs in torch mode to increase the rate of initial phosphor aging. It's an advanced but common technique, but it is efficient, and believe me, my Veria is fine.

B. Your bullet points don't actually refute, but confirm everything I've said. You did catch me using a generalization, which is that on average, plasmas aren't as bright as LCDs.. Truth is, for a bright room, you don't want a plasma as often as a LCD for this reason, along with the glare issue.

C. You have also made a generalization. You say that PQ is better with a plasma. That's incorrect. That VASTLY varies depending on the model. The LNXXB750 model from Samsung, for isntance, is superior in PQ to nearly any plasma on the market, except the afformentioned Veria and a few other exceptions. The assumption that Plasmas always have deeper blacks and thus better contrast ratio, is a VAST generalization that doesn't hold true in a multitide of cases, even if your LCD isn't locally dimmed. All things equally, you would usually be right, and thus the description "generalization." Did I mention I'm typing this on my new 52" Sammy right now with no thought(worry) to proper care?

If you do want to use your 52" TV as a computer monitor for gaming, PC and otherwise, get a damn LCD, end of story, imho.

The PS2 is a great console. It was built with overscan in mind, and thus, black bars are inherant to the console on the left and right hand side of the screen, depending on screen size about 1-3 inches thicker than regular black bars. Without cropping these black bars will still appear even when stretched to 16x9 mode on most televisions. If you bought a plasma to mainly play PS2, then you bought the wrong type of television.

The PC is a fantastic invention. It has stating images that appear on screen during use. If you want to use your TV to mainly use for PC, then you bought the wrong type of television.

Sunlight is a fantastic invention. If you want to use your TV in a room filled with sunlight, then you bought the wrong type of television.

I'm not saying that LCD is better than plasma, really....I'm just saying that Plasma TVs are not made for long term static images or long term gaming, due to the nature of phosphor trailing, my arch-nemesis. You should know that just because the display CAN do something, doesn't mean it was made with that in mind. With proper care, it will be fine, but by your own inference, without proper care.....it won't be fine. So yeah.