Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Which of these two TV's would you choose?

  1. Dec 26, 2011 #1

    Dotini

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    My 35" Sony CRT TV died a couple of days ago.

    I've done some research and arrived at two choices:

    1) Samsung 46" UN46D6000 LED/LCD 1080p 120 Hz @ $765

    2) Panasonic 46" TC-P46ST30 plasma 1080p @ $800

    Both are highly rated for gaming, which would be my primary consideration. I'm not too interested in 3D or apps at the moment.

    Any advice or recommendations?

    Respectfully submitted,
    Steve
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 26, 2011 #2
    It depends on what kind of gaming you do and how much you want to spend. In general for fast paced games like FPS or watching sports the Samsung is the better choice, while for slower RPGs the plasma will produce a superior picture. Cost wise plasmas tend to leak limiting their lifespans, while the new LED backlighting can use 1/3 less power and last almost twice as long as the older CCFL models.

    If it were my choice I'd definitely go for the Samsung. They are also the eight hundred pound gorilla of display technology and specialize in low latency internal circuitry for gaming.
     
  4. Dec 26, 2011 #3

    Dotini

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I play GranTurismo 5. I'm willing to spend up to $850 or so.

    Respectfully,
    Steve
     
  5. Dec 26, 2011 #4

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I agree with the notion of choosing LED/LCD over plasma. Beyond the cost/maintenance issues, there has been talk of banning plasma TVs due to their high energy usage. I think the UK may already be doing so.
     
  6. Dec 26, 2011 #5
    Definitely the Samsung LED. I recently got one of these and it looks amazing, best colour reproduction I have ever seen with a TV and the high definition makes everything crystal clear. It works amazingly well with Gran Turismo 5, although I have noticed that very rarely, you will see a ghosting issue in the game, but that is a small, rare issue against a world of awesome.
     
  7. Dec 26, 2011 #6

    Dotini

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    My research indicates the marginal additional energy cost of the plasma would be about $40-50/yr. That is not so much if the motion/gaming experience of the plasma were superior. I have spent literally hundreds of hours "TV racing", and expect to continue to do so; it is a big deal for me. I'm accustomed to the near-perfect response of the CRT, but those are definitely obsolete!

    Respectfully,
    Steve
     
  8. Dec 26, 2011 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    In that case I would take a good look at the lifespan. We too got the Samsung LED TV, I think 52"???? and the LEDs are supposed to be good for 100K hours, or about 11 years of constant use. [GREAT TV btw, but I don't game, so I don't know how it would perform for you. We do get a fantastic picture with no noticable pixelation due to motion]

    For me the energy consumption was enough to make the call. By rumor only, I have heard that you may only get a few years from a plasma TV with high use. [then a big bill to get it working again]
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2011
  9. Dec 26, 2011 #8

    Dotini

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Ivan, I'm 63. It's questionable what will last longer, the TV or me!

    Once TV's lasted a looong time. But my dear old Sony turned its CRT red after only ~6 years, and developed other spendy issues as well. Which raises the issue of the extended service contract. Did you buy it?

    Respectfully,
    Steve
     
  10. Dec 26, 2011 #9

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I never buy the extended service contracts, with the exception of computers, and cars.

    I had one TV for more than 20 years. And I bought it used.
     
  11. Dec 26, 2011 #10

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Dotini, I realize that being an X Boeing guy, you probably have a seven-figure retirement plan, but just in case: Do you really want to be paying for big repairs at 66? Buy a good one now and it may last the rest of your life.

    That aside, if money is no object, then I have no useful input regarding picture quality for gaming.
     
  12. Dec 26, 2011 #11
    Of course, if money isn't an issue and you're willing to wait LG has a 55" 5mm thick OLED coming on the market.
     
  13. Dec 26, 2011 #12

    Dotini

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Money is always an issue, even though I have indeed benefited greatly from my long association with the great Boeing Company. Long ago, it was made great for and by engineers. Recently, more about being for and by businessmen. Sic transit gloria mundi!

    The Panasonic plasma ST30 set that has the 3D; 46" for $800, 42" for $700.
    https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-VIER.../dp/B004M8SCHO
    This set has very good reviews.

    The Samsung also has very good reviews, but for the same size and (actual) price, lacks the 3D, for whatever that is worth.

    In general, it is supposed that plasma sets wear out faster. But in reality, I think it depends upon the individual set in question.

    But for me, the real question is image motion quality and input lag time, which in times past the CRT and plasma were generally rated higher than the LCD. It may be that times are changing with improved LED/LCD technology. But that is the question.

    Respectfully submitted,
    Steve
     
  14. Dec 26, 2011 #13

    True 120hz 3D LCDs aren't just a gimmick. They use two 60hz screens to achieve the 120hz and it makes for significantly better viewing and gaming in 2D as well. If you're worried about input lag I'd definitely get the plasma if the the Samsung isn't 120hz.
     
  15. Dec 26, 2011 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    A brief aside: I do a lot of work with Boeing. It is a tricky business but they are still a great company; quite a different company than I knew 15 years ago, but still great. I have managed to capitalize on the outsourcing.
     
  16. Dec 26, 2011 #15

    dlgoff

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I've been checking into getting a bigger HDTV. I currently have a 46" Philips, which has specs as good as the 46" Samsung when I purchased it a couple of years ago. The main concern I had back then was that it supported S-video inputs as my satellite providers receivers doesn't support HDMI; only S-video for highest quality picture (I don't have a HD package). So I've been paying attention to the inputs as well as their outputs. You can find HDTVs with good picture quality specs without being able to interface your equipment. :grumpy:
     
  17. Dec 27, 2011 #16

    jtbell

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    What do you use for HD sources? Blu-ray and/or game consoles?

    I've been reading that S-video inputs are becoming harder and harder to find as devices with S-video outputs become less common.
     
  18. Dec 27, 2011 #17

    dlgoff

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Of course the over-the-air antenna displays HD which I use a lot, a DVD player that uses a HDMI input (Blu-ray will come later), and at times my PC on a HDMI input. I don't game but when my daughter was still living here, she used one HDMI input for her Play Station. I've had DirecTV for years and if you don't have a HD programing package, the receivers outputs are either S-video or A/V inputs; S-video being the best quality. I know. I need to upgrade (>$).

    But yes. S-video is old technology. I'll have to bit the bullet if I want a new larger TV.
     
  19. Dec 27, 2011 #18

    rhody

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Dotini,

    I have a 40 inch Samsung LCD 1080P, 60 hz, a couple years old and if your real issue is "image motion quality and input lag time" then get the fastest refresh rate you can. People think I am crazy when I say that peoples faces (shape shift while they move and talk, etc...) and only I seem to notice it. Don't get me wrong I like my TV, but my brain had to do some adjusting to the morphing like quality effects you see in faces at slower refresh rates, etc...

    If the image motion quaility is a deal breaker for you and you care about 3D down the road, I would look into 240 hz TV's as well. The only way to be sure is take your favorite Blu ray movie with you and watch the faces carefully, if you are happy with what you see, then that is the one you should buy. Good luck...

    Rhody...
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2011
  20. Dec 29, 2011 #19

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    does anybody make one that's maintainable? that is comes with a partslist and troubleshooting guide?

    i'm trying to fix daughter's 47 inch Vizio that died a month past the 1 extra year warranty.

    the autoparts industry is booming, you'd think there'd be a chain like OReilly's for TV parts.

    anyhow - the world needs more VW Beetles and less throw-it-away engineering.

    grumpy old jim
     
  21. Dec 29, 2011 #20

    dlgoff

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You give up to early grumpy old ma... Jim. What's the most power hungry component in it?.........Light Source maybe? Anyway, from the longevity spec of the for my TVs back light tube, that would give me a place to start trouble-shooting.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Which of these two TV's would you choose?
  1. Which would you fund? (Replies: 3)

Loading...