Whats a good 1080p tv for gaming

Sony Bravias are just about as good as it gets. S series is the newest line i believe. Target has the 40" [KDL 40S4100??] for 999.
 
go with the new samsungs. Side-by-side comparison shows they destroy any other brand LCD. They're a step above sony, sharp, etc. Go with the new 6 series tv's for a good balance of price vs. picture quality. the LN40A650 can be had for $1200-$1300 on amazon and probably the best LCD on the market right now without spending an arm and a leg. 50,000:1 contrast, 4ms, 1080p, 120hz AMP, and some of the deepest blacks of any LCD are just some of the features that put this tv on top. It's a good size for a small place, mine's in a studio apt. 1080p is overkill for this size, but it's the only way to get the high contrast ratio and other top end features the 720p's won't come with. They also have these models in 32-37" if you wanna go smaller and cheaper, but not lose picture quality.

Read Cnet's review here:
LINK

Buy Here:
LINK
 
[quote name='von551']go with the new samsungs. Side-by-side comparison shows they destroy any other brand LCD. They're a step above sony, sharp, etc. Go with the new 6 series tv's for a good balance of price vs. picture quality. the LN40A650 can be had for $1200-$1300 on amazon and probably the best LCD on the market right now without spending an arm and a leg. 50,000:1 contrast, 4ms, 1080p, 120hz AMP, and some of the deepest blacks of any LCD are just some of the features that put this tv on top. It's a good size for a small place, mine's in a studio apt. 1080p is overkill for this size, but it's the only way to get the high contrast ratio and other top end features the 720p's won't come with. They also have these models in 32-37" if you wanna go smaller and cheaper, but not lose picture quality.

Read Cnet's review here:
LINK

Buy Here:
LINK[/QUOTE]

LISTEN! LISTEN to him....................

46 inch Sammy A650 owner here and LOVING IT!
 
^^^^^^^ooooooh free white glove delivery, not bad if you need the help. I prefer opening my own packages for that 'new' electronics smell....ahhhhhh
 
Personally I almost bought an LCD for my 360, and after seeing one at my brother's, I'm glad I didn't. I've heard it's more noticeable to some people than others, but for me the motion blur during fast moving games on an LCD is way too annoying. For Lcds though, I would agree that Samsung 550 series and higher seems to be the best this year.

Personally I prefer the Panasonic Plasma I found, it's called the 42PZ80U. If you're willing to spend some time making sure you don't play the same game too much, and don't mind being careful about leaving games paused for too long (to avoid image retention), it's way better looking for sports games and action games, and is actually a little cheaper than an equal size LCD.

Anyway, just thought I'd confuse things a bit.

Alex
 
[quote name='Stealthfrog2004']Hahaha alright, samsung or sony. No vizio. What about a nice sound rig?[/quote]
I actually just bought a Vizio 37" 1080p LCD for $699.99 at Sears last Friday. So far, I am very happy with it. I was contemplating on spending more on a Sony and a Panasonic, but I am glad I went with this and saved my money.

I don't think you will be disappointed unless you are a videophile. The blacks could be a bit deeper, but definitely better than my 2 year old Sharp that is dying.

If you are still curious, the sale is still going on for this Vizio at Sears. Check it out if you have a Sear nearby.

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_05771558000P?vName=Computers+%26+Electronics&cName=Televisions&sName=Flat+Panel

And, if you have some more cash to spend, there is a very nice 42" Vizio 1080p LCD with 120Hz. Comparably, this TV would run you hundreds of dollars more if it has a Sony name on it.

http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_...lectronics&cName=Televisions&sName=Flat+Panel
 
[quote name='Alic']Personally I almost bought an LCD for my 360, and after seeing one at my brother's, I'm glad I didn't. I've heard it's more noticeable to some people than others, but for me the motion blur during fast moving games on an LCD is way too annoying. For Lcds though, I would agree that Samsung 550 series and higher seems to be the best this year.

Personally I prefer the Panasonic Plasma I found, it's called the 42PZ80U. If you're willing to spend some time making sure you don't play the same game too much, and don't mind being careful about leaving games paused for too long (to avoid image retention), it's way better looking for sports games and action games, and is actually a little cheaper than an equal size LCD.

Anyway, just thought I'd confuse things a bit.
Alex[/quote]



Refresh rate is a big issue for gaming! Blur can really suck. Try finding one with 7ms or less. =)
 
Fry's has/had a Philips 52" 1080P LCD TV for $1200 this weekend, and that price REALLY makes me consider getting a new TV. I'll go in tomorrow and see if they still have it, but I hope they don't. That'd be a nice upgrade from my 32".
 
All depends on how big you want the TV to be, of course. Figure out what size you want and what price you want to spend on it.

I had my heart set on a Samsung 750 or 850/860 and heard much too many people complain about input lag on them, so I went with an XBR6 and it's an amazing TV. Unfortunately, with a pricetag to match.
 
[quote name='FadeToOne']Fry's has/had a Philips 52" 1080P LCD TV for $1200 this weekend, and that price REALLY makes me consider getting a new TV. I'll go in tomorrow and see if they still have it, but I hope they don't. That'd be a nice upgrade from my 32".[/quote]

FYI, that tv's contrast is only 10,000:1 which is pretty low. try to get one with at least 30,000:1 for a picture worth the money. That is a huge tv though.
 
[quote name='von551']go with the new samsungs. Side-by-side comparison shows they destroy any other brand LCD. They're a step above sony, sharp, etc. Go with the new 6 series tv's for a good balance of price vs. picture quality. the LN40A650 can be had for $1200-$1300 on amazon and probably the best LCD on the market right now without spending an arm and a leg. 50,000:1 contrast, 4ms, 1080p, 120hz AMP, and some of the deepest blacks of any LCD are just some of the features that put this tv on top. It's a good size for a small place, mine's in a studio apt. 1080p is overkill for this size, but it's the only way to get the high contrast ratio and other top end features the 720p's won't come with. They also have these models in 32-37" if you wanna go smaller and cheaper, but not lose picture quality.

Read Cnet's review here:
LINK

Buy Here:
LINK[/quote]

Agree, Samsung is king of all the LCDs. Also, I have not been impressed with the S series, go W or better if you go Sony.


[quote name='von551']FYI, that tv's contrast is only 10,000:1 which is pretty low. try to get one with at least 30,000:1 for a picture worth the money. That is a huge tv though.[/quote]

Comparing Dynamic vs Static contrast ratios is not apples to apples. Even comparing one brands Dynamic vs Dynamic contrast ratios of another brand is difficult because of how various TVs modulate the back-light to achieve them.
 
[quote name='Stealthfrog2004']Hahaha alright, samsung or sony. No vizio. What about a nice sound rig?[/QUOTE]

how much you looking to spend? i love my Paradigm Cinema 90CT system and Denon receiver.
 
[quote name='h3llbring3r']Agree, Samsung is king of all the LCDs. Also, I have not been impressed with the S series, go W or better if you go Sony.




Comparing Dynamic vs Static contrast ratios is not apples to apples. Even comparing one brands Dynamic vs Dynamic contrast ratios of another brand is difficult because of how various TVs modulate the back-light to achieve them.[/quote]

i know it's not an exact standard from brand to brand, but they usually aim for the high end of contrast ratios, so if they're declaring 10,000:1, it must be alot lower, where as a 30,000:1 and up tv will hardly ever dissapoint and you can see a noticeable difference. just trying to help a brother out...
 
[quote name='von551']i know it's not an exact standard from brand to brand, but they usually aim for the high end of contrast ratios, so if they're declaring 10,000:1, it must be alot lower, where as a 30,000:1 and up tv will hardly ever dissapoint and you can see a noticeable difference. just trying to help a brother out...[/quote]

I would agree, that is generally good advice. I would just consider all contrast ratios as "ball-park." I can't tell much difference between those that claim 10K and those that claim 50K.

I wish advanced LED back-lighting was much more prolific and affordable I (it could make OLEDs irrelevant for all but specialty apps if it were the case), I lust after the series 9's the one at the magnolia near me makes me want to go into debt (18 months interest free . . . oh so tempting).
 
42" Philips 1080P at Target this week for $750. 3 HDMI ports, 5ms response, NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuners, 29000:1 dynamic contrast.
 
I'll second anything from Paradigm, just understand you can't get them at Big-Box stores, you gotta find a real audio shop near you.
 
plus they have great standard-def processing, they are impossible to beat in picture quality for the price (no lcd can come close, and the only better pictures are the high-end pioneer's)


fyi, contrast ratio is bs, there's no exact standard to measuring it (in terms of how they list results) so the way one company does it may be a lot different than other, plus many list dynamic, which is different than static (...i believe static is the other, its been awhile since going nuts on tvs, which is always a lower number)

go by your eyes, because a set with lower listed numbers may actually be better in general, or even just to you


you are the one buying it and watching it, so you have to go by what YOU see


but overall i'd recommend a panny 1080p plasma (not that the lower end 720p models are bad, but the price difference is negligible now compared to the past considering the improvements you get in their high end models)
 
I agree with all those recommending Panasonic Plasmas. If you go with LCD, go with a Samsung 550 - 650 if you can deal with the reddish frame and the glossier panel. Value for the dollar, Samsung is a better choice than Sony. If price is no object, Sony XBRs do the job.

However, for rich color, inky-dark blacks and smooth picture, I went with a Panasonic 42PZ85U (Plasma). Gorgeous in 1080p. Beats my friends Sony Bravia (W series) while spending under $1,000. If you have a room that's not too bright, as plasmas will pick up glare, it's a great choice for the money.
 
Maybe I'm just not a true videophile but my friends 32" Vizio looks pretty much identical most of the time to my 32" Samsung. And I spent about $200 more when Samsung was on sale.

To me, the slight difference (that you guys say, as I said, I see none) isn't worth it. I totally would've snagged a 32" Vizio and spent the other 2 bills on something else fun.

But to each their own. I have another friend who insists on buying the very very best of everything and so spends a sick amount on televisions etc. He also refuses to buy Used games because he thinks they're all junk. Some people like price tags and that status too I guess.
 
I see a lot of love for Panasonic Plasmas. Would you guys recommend a Panasonic TH-50PZ85U Plasma over a Samsung LN52A550 LCD?
 
[quote name='NoobHammer']Maybe I'm just not a true videophile but my friends 32" Vizio looks pretty much identical most of the time to my 32" Samsung. And I spent about $200 more when Samsung was on sale.
[/QUOTE]

The quality will come when you turn down the lights and watch a movie like ALIEN or play a Splinter Cell game, I'm guessing that Samsung will bring out details and give you an absolute black level far better than the Vizio could do. Its probably also got a much better scaler inside of it, so non-HD sources look better.

And lastly, I'm guessing the Samsung will retain the proper color throughout the entire gamma range. Many sets will lose their ability to hold accurate color depending on the brightness or darkness of the scene. Its more than just "Gee Spiderman looked good on both"...also the power supply or lighting electronics may be better or more reliable on the Samsung, etc. Lots of little things....

But to each their own. I have another friend who insists on buying the very very best of everything and so spends a sick amount on televisions etc. He also refuses to buy Used games because he thinks they're all junk. Some people like price tags and that status too I guess.
Click to expand...

Thats just plain stupid, the smartest shoppers in the world buy at the top of the bell curve...thats the one that gives you maximum bang for minimum buck. You can spend less, but the quality goes down quickly...Or you can spend more, but the quality goes up slowly.

So its up to you if spending $2,000 on a TV to get really nice results is what you want. OR, do you spend $8000 on a TV...to get a slightly better picture....etc.
 
[quote name='HeadRusch']The quality will come when you turn down the lights and watch a movie like ALIEN or play a Splinter Cell game, I'm guessing that Samsung will bring out details and give you an absolute black level far better than the Vizio could do. Its probably also got a much better scaler inside of it, so non-HD sources look better.

And lastly, I'm guessing the Samsung will retain the proper color throughout the entire gamma range. Many sets will lose their ability to hold accurate color depending on the brightness or darkness of the scene. Its more than just "Gee Spiderman looked good on both"...also the power supply or lighting electronics may be better or more reliable on the Samsung, etc. Lots of little things....



Thats just plain stupid, the smartest shoppers in the world buy at the top of the bell curve...thats the one that gives you maximum bang for minimum buck. You can spend less, but the quality goes down quickly...Or you can spend more, but the quality goes up slowly.

So its up to you if spending $2,000 on a TV to get really nice results is what you want. OR, do you spend $8000 on a TV...to get a slightly better picture....etc.[/quote]




Oh I agree it's more expensive for a reason, I'm just saying that the quality has not changed my life nor made me a better person because of it. So yes, I do appreciate it for my gaming needs but the vast majority of its use is television (HD of course) and on that scale the 2 are quite similar in most regards.


And to your second situation, that's what I tell them. Why buy the $2,000 projector set up with surround sound when the one for half of that is basically the exact same. But to each their own.
 
I know everyone is saying plasmas are much better than they used to be with burn-in issues but I just watched my father-in-law ruin his brand new plasma with just watching cable on it.

How you ask?

He watched lots of SD-TV and didn't put it on fill/stretch because he didn't like the distorted picture. Now he has edge burn left and right, which I didn't know was even possible. I thought static bright images were the problem, but apparently it can happen the other way.

Just an anecdotal FYI for all those touting plasmas as improved for burn issues.
Maybe this is just the exception. I think I'll put some pics in my gallery of it.
 
Another recommendation for the Panasonic plasmas. I have a 42" 1080p in my home office and a 50" in the living room and I couldn't be happier with them. Damn close to Pioneer Kuro performance for significantly less $$.

IMO, these sets are the best bang for the buck on the market.
 
you also have to pay attention to what you are doing and the make


pioneer, panny, and samsung are going to be your best bets against any IR in plasma's with Panny and Pioneer probably ranking significantly higher than the others


most have stuff to try to help if you acquire significant IR, secondly you have to know what you are doing, the first 100 hours or so (give or take) is when the plasma is most susceptible to IR


so going through the motions, if your father bought a cheap (especially the older the model the more IR problems it can have due to technology leaps) plasma, ignored the warnings, had the image settings through the roof, and did what he did long term, its likely some sort of image issues would happen


IR exists, but more or less now of days a smart user can never really see it



case point, i have last year's panny model (42-P700u), for the first 100-200 hours i had picture settings low, no real long static images during that time....not to long after breaking the barrier of the "break-in" period, i played super paper mario on the wii for 5 hours straight one night with pretty much no IR period even when I finally shut it off, i play my PS3 all the time, etc, i have no problems...if I even remotely think I see IR i just throw it to something with a lot of bright colors with a moving picture and it fixes it



to each his own
 
I have a Panasonic 720p 45" plasma that I got at BF a couple years back that I love. It's been a secondary set for me tho. I'm looking to pickup a new set soon, as I'm selling my old 55" mitsubishi rear projection set that I've had in the living room. I'm looking to pickup something comparable in size but 1080p, and from my previous experience w/ a Panny plasma & the recommendations for them I'm seeing here, I'm leaning in that direction.

Have there been any sales run on the 50" or higher models that put them really close to the $1k mark?
 
I just picked up a samsung 50" 720p plasma from bestbuy for my dad for 854 after tax. They price matched the local brandsMart. Just thought I'd add my 2 cents to help
 
[quote name='Alic']Personally I almost bought an LCD for my 360, and after seeing one at my brother's, I'm glad I didn't. I've heard it's more noticeable to some people than others, but for me the motion blur during fast moving games on an LCD is way too annoying.[/quote]

You need one with a fast response time.
 
[quote name='mitch079']Eh, I'd just bring a decent SDTV to college. Shit gets stolen or broken way too easily.[/quote]

Very, very true. Either that or your roommate invites some drunken friends over and you come back to find a broken tv.

I brought a really cheap tube tv to college and someone used it to put down a drink. The cup was knocked over and all the contents spilled onto the back. Stopped working for a week, then apparently tried out. :bomb:
 
[quote name='Malik112099']The burn in on that plasma isnt permanent. Just have him run a looped movie over night and it should be fine.[/quote]

No, it's permanent. We tried running 8-10 hours worth of wide-screen HDTV non-stop to try and clear it up. It's still there, and not covered under either the factory or extended warranty. It's FUBAR. For 90% of people on here it would never be an issue since most would never watch horizontal boxed SDTV daily like that. I still reccomend completely avoiding plasmas unless you are a casual gamer who plans on watching mostly HD movies.

Regarding LCD latency, just using both GH and Rockband's config as a guide; I have never seen anymore than 4-6 ms of display latency on any new LCD (not counting LCD projection TVs E.G. DLP . . etc.) which is about the same as the plasmas I have tried it on. This is actually the first I have ever heard of LCD latency ever being an issue (with the aforementioned LCD projection models excluded).

Also I agree with everyone else about AV stuff @ college: Don't dare bring your mack'ed out TV. I had and saw countless people have stuff stolen- TV's, DVD players, and car stereos especially.
 
[quote name='h3llbring3r']I know everyone is saying plasmas are much better than they used to be with burn-in issues but I just watched my father-in-law ruin his brand new plasma with just watching cable on it.

How you ask?

He watched lots of SD-TV and didn't put it on fill/stretch because he didn't like the distorted picture. Now he has edge burn left and right, which I didn't know was even possible. I thought static bright images were the problem, but apparently it can happen the other way.

Just an anecdotal FYI for all those touting plasmas as improved for burn issues.
Maybe this is just the exception. I think I'll put some pics in my gallery of it.[/QUOTE]

During the "break-in" period you're not supposed to have any static images... I forget how long they say to break in a plasma, something like 100 hours.

My parents have a plasma and I'm envious of their contrast ratio. I don't own a plasma, but they are undeniably the way to go if you're looking for a larger flat panel and want the best picture at an acceptable price. The only real downside is they use a lot of power.

For the OP, if he gets a panel, an LCD would make more sense... but plasma is definitely a great tech for displays.
 
Really I covered break-in before and well if you really are an informed consumer your father's tv LIKELY (not 100%) wouldn't' have ended up the way his did. It is plausible to maybe get a more defective model, but pretty much if he knew anything that would have been avoided.

I'm not sure, manufacturers maybe are now even outwardly telling people to break-in there plasma sets to now.


If picture quality is of utmost importance and you can control lighting fairly well, not even the top LCD (currently Sony's XBR8 LED model which is like 6+ grand) can touch the top plasmas (currently Pioneer's top model, which similar size would sell for likely 3+ grand).

If plasma's had no actual IR issues and could be made in a smaller format LCD would not exist in the TV marketplace because it would not even be remotely viable in the TV format (it'd still exist for computer's likely just because of weight reasons, that'd be the only benefit besides power consumption that they'd still have). All major manufacturers would be on plasma if that were the case. As it is it's basically split because both have there pro's and con's.
 
[quote name='h3llbring3r']No, it's permanent. We tried running 8-10 hours worth of wide-screen HDTV non-stop to try and clear it up. [/quote]

That isn't exactly how you clear up burn in. Doing a teeny tiny bit of research first helps a lot in the long run.

You need to play a LOT of video with bright white images. Like loop a movie that takes place in the snow for a while. Or turn off the default no signal screen in your menus (if you have that option) and just let black and white noise play on the tv for a long time. Everything I've read says that while burn in can still occur in newer tv's it isn't permanent and requires a bit of work to get rid of.

RESEARCH.
 
.....and when you do that, displaying white noise, you are essentially BURNING DOWN the other phosphors so that way they are back to neutral and none will display when the pixel is not lit (aka: removing the burn in), which is essentially wearing out the brightness of your set just a little bit to get rid of the trouble you caused with a certain color. Its the same that used to happen on CRT sets only there, because of the amount of energy they used to put out, burn in was usually permanant.

See guys, the idea is to have no IMAGE RETENTION at all...not "get a little and fix it, get a little and fix it"......

Plasmas can and do burn in.....even modern ones with image-shift....its inherent to the technology. Anyone who says "Plasmas do not burn in anymore!" is full of it. You can minimize the risk, but thats not a guarantee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top