So I’m in the market looking at 52" t.v.'s to hang on the wall either plasma or LCD and want a comparison on 'em.
Whats better and whats consumer smart?
Re: Plasma vs LCD
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CocoNut: *
So I'm in the market looking at 52" t.v.'s to hang on the wall either plasma or LCD and want a comparison on 'em.
Whats better and whats consumer smart?
[/QUOTE]
wtf! plasma? r u kidding. bhai a plasma is like 15thousand! and thats for a 50'. a 52' is probably atleast 500bucks more.
anyway i personally wouldnt go plasma, but LCD instead if it was my money...maybe ur some kinda billionaire and dont mind buyin a 15thousand dollar tv. if thats the case go for a plasma.
Plasma has a lot higher power consumption than LCD, typically in the region of two-and-a-half to three times. And a lot of that gets translated into heat. Along with the higher utility costs associated with the higher power consumption, there’s the potential for increased levels of noise. “Most of the larger plasma displays have fans,”
If you’re in an airport concourse, it really doesn’t matter, because there’s a lot of ambient noise anyway. If you’re in a home theater situation, then it may matter to you depending on how loud you like the audio portion of the video.
While plasma’s noise levels are beginning to decrease, plasma’s hefty power requirements aren’t likely to change. **“Typically with plasma, you’re switching 200 to 300 volts, and you’re switching it very fast” “In LCDs, you’re switching 5 to 12 volts. That’s a very big difference.” **The heat and voltage requirements directly affect the size of the cabinet and its internal electronics. “The electronics that drive an LCD weigh a small fraction of the electronics needed to drive a plasma, partly because of the high power and high heat dissipation.”
Other comparisons stem directly from the fact that these are *radically different display technologies. Plasma is a phosphor-based device, while LCD is a transmissive device. *
“The light is actually reflected through the LCD, where with plasma, the phosphor is ignited and that causes the colors for your display.” It takes longer to light up a liquid-crystal pixel than it does to light up a phosphor, so *a plasma monitor has a faster response time than an LCD monitor. When displaying moving images, “plasma is going to have fewer artifacts, LCDs, even the best on the market today, will have some degree of trailing edge blur, because the response time of the liquid crystal is relatively slow.” *
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by salman_2you: *
Plasma has a lot higher power consumption than LCD, typically in the region of two-and-a-half to three times. And a lot of that gets translated into heat. Along with the higher utility costs associated with the higher power consumption, there’s the potential for increased levels of noise. “Most of the larger plasma displays have fans,”
If you’re in an airport concourse, it really doesn’t matter, because there’s a lot of ambient noise anyway. If you’re in a home theater situation, then it may matter to you depending on how loud you like the audio portion of the video.
While plasma’s noise levels are beginning to decrease, plasma’s hefty power requirements aren’t likely to change. **“Typically with plasma, you’re switching 200 to 300 volts, and you’re switching it very fast” “In LCDs, you’re switching 5 to 12 volts. That’s a very big difference.” **The heat and voltage requirements directly affect the size of the cabinet and its internal electronics. “The electronics that drive an LCD weigh a small fraction of the electronics needed to drive a plasma, partly because of the high power and high heat dissipation.”
Other comparisons stem directly from the fact that these are *radically different display technologies. Plasma is a phosphor-based device, while LCD is a transmissive device. *
“The light is actually reflected through the LCD, where with plasma, the phosphor is ignited and that causes the colors for your display.” It takes longer to light up a liquid-crystal pixel than it does to light up a phosphor, so *a plasma monitor has a faster response time than an LCD monitor. When displaying moving images, “plasma is going to have fewer artifacts, LCDs, even the best on the market today, will have some degree of trailing edge blur, because the response time of the liquid crystal is relatively slow.” *
[/QUOTE]
so which one u prefer? btw coconut u have a budget or r u spending all out?
Technology differences also affect the rate at which costs go down. “Plasma uses tiny little light bulbs, as opposed to LCD which uses tiny little transistors.” You can make transistors very, very small. The industry has a very good expertise in doing that, from microprocessors and now LCD technology. But it’s more difficult to make very, very small light bulbs.” Because of this difference, LCD prices are likely to fall faster than plasma prices. Over time, LCD screens could drop to the same price—or even become less expensive—than same-size plasma screens.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by hskhan: *
so which one u prefer? btw coconut u have a budget or r u spending all out?
[/QUOTE]
Khan,
I have bought LCD projector and hooked upto ceiling and have a large canvas screen. Both these items were less than 5 grand US. So now I enjoy my PC/Laptop/TV/DVD/VHS/PlayStation etc. by selecting different input and that's why I was looking for wireless 5.1 system.
I would go with LCD if my budget is low, if not then Plasma will be my 1st choice with atleast 3 years extended warranty on it :D
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by salman_2you: *
Khan,
I have bought LCD projector and hooked upto ceiling and have a large canvas screen. Both these items were less than 5 grand US. So now I enjoy my PC/Laptop/TV/DVD/VHS/PlayStation etc. by selecting different input and that's why I was looking for wireless 5.1 system.
I would go with LCD if my budget is low, if not then Plasma will be my 1st choice with atleast 3 years extended warranty on it :D
[/QUOTE]
yea id also get a lcd projector...but i think coconut is looking for a tv system. oh yeah u brought a good point up...plasmas have a tendency to go flop in their first few months. so get warranty.
I think we have couple of Philips Plasma screes at work - expensive stuff but never liked watching movie on them - I actually bought a Tele on Tuesday - there was one Sony (dont know the model) for 8000 Euros - Screen was really impressive but price was not. I just bought a JVC AV32X-somethin EU - I dont think that I am rich - so cant afford a tele for 8000 Euros (Dollars).
I would say - what screen & picture quality u can get from traditional Tele u cant get it from plasma or LCD yet.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Najim: *
I would say - what screen & picture quality u can get from traditional Tele u cant get it from plasma or LCD yet.
[/QUOTE]
I don't agree with you my brother Najim, most of the time I have to explain my customers what's the difference between an ordinary picture tube television vs. Plasma or LCD. There is no way you can get more resolution out of ordinary TV as compared to plasma or LCD.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by salman_2you: *
I don't agree with you my brother Najim, most of the time I have to explain my customers what's the difference between an ordinary picture tube television vs. Plasma or LCD. There is no way you can get more resolution out of ordinary TV as compared to plasma or LCD.
[/QUOTE]
same..i dont agree with you najim bhai, sorry. :)
but id never get plasma, if i was to get a tv right now..id get a lcd..its just more economical.