LED or Plasma for Gaming
I went into
richersounds the other day looking for a demo of the 50” GT50 (wishful thinking
I know) but they didn’t have any. The
sales guy asked what I wanted a Plasma TV for and I advised gaming, sport and
films. He advised I should definitely go
for an LED and recommended the LG 47LM670T.
I questioned this on the basis that I was always lead to believe that
Plasma, although some issues with burning, were so much quicker at refreshing
than LED TV’s and so for gamers and sports fans its Plasma all the way? Have I missed a break through somewhere or
are Plasma’s still better for games and sports than LED.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" />
I did demo
the 55” they had upstairs (although to big for me) with Underworld Awakening
and it looked very impressive, my only concern is gaming lag. Anyone got any thoughts at all?
Cheers
I've owned a plasma for over 3 years. My OH is an avid gamer, & has played games for hours at a stretch. I'm yet to see an IR or screen burn. We have a PS3 in the upstairs bedroom as well (Samsung C6510) which suffers from input lag when playing games. So she tends to play more downstairs on the plasma (besides enjoying a bigger screen & much better sound).
Generally, plasmas are considered better for sport etc. because of their fast response times, but like everything, there's exceptions to the rule. Some LED / LCDs (all LED is a type of LCD btw) may well look better for sport than some plasmas and vice versa. Certainly plasmas need not avoided for gaming - screen burn is always possible, but it happens very, very rarely nowadays. I've had some image retention (IR) on my older Panasonic plasma, but never screen burn (the big difference being IR is temporary). I've never had either on my Pioneer.
Whether he's advising that because that LG is particularly good for gaming / sport, or whether it's because they were out of stock of the TV you wanted is difficult to tell. Best bet is obviously to try and find somewhere that stocks the Panny so you can demo it against the LG and see what you think.
Cheers guys, I thought generally speaking Plasma was better for lag.
I didn't even think to google it, so I did and it was about 70ms on the LG and 30ms on the Panny
Ta
Lord & behold, there was me looking for a thread on what would be more ideal for 'gaming' purposes. Then up came this insightful and intuitive responses from experts.
There was a thread somewhere in regards to input lag between the Panasonic GT50 series vs Sony HX853
Whom is able to provide accurate measure input lag times between these two sets as this is imperative to my final choice in getting either TV.
If I recall the GT50 just beat the Sony on input lag so the Sony is really good for it this year (just google lag for the TV and you will get a list). As I'm a Plasma man I opted for the GT50, and its being delivered today!
Someone correct me if this is wrong, but this is how I understand it (from memory)
CRT is by far the best for gaming...zero lag.
Plasma is generally better than LCD (most LED screens are LED-LCD)
But there is a chance of burn-in with Plasma as many games have permanently on HUDs. So you sit annd play for hours on one game, which is quite "normal" and you risk that...
Having said that, I have never owned Plasma (I am one of the few that prefer the picture on LCD), so these worries may be unfounded.
I have an LG 55" LED-LCD screen and it lags on standard settings, but switch the input to "PC" and the screen mode to "Game" and the lag is unnoticeable. (I play a lot of FIFA on thePS3).
Either way, whichever TV you investigate, Google for its "input lag" rating ...the lower the number the better, and anything above around 50ms is starting to get high.
“Out beyond ideas of wrong and right, there is a field.
I'll meet you there."