or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › How long is the life span for the Samsung LN55a950? Is it better or worse than curren
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How long is the life span for the Samsung LN55a950? Is it better or worse than curren

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
So I have been saving up money for an awesome TV and I am looking at getting the Samsung LN55a950. However, last time I bought something that was top of the line (Sony LCD projection TV) it backfired since the life span was very short and the picture began to deteriorate noticeably pretty rapidly. So anyways I would like to keep the next tv I buy for at least 7 years. Do you think that current LED technology is reliable, or should I just get the Sony XBR6? I have heard that the 950 is supposed to get a crazy 100,000 hours, but then again I also read that you have to change out the LEDs out every few years. Price is obviously important, but since I am going to be keeping the TV a long time I want to go with something that will be somewhat current down the road, but I am not interested in sending in the set for maintenance to keep the picture quality up.

LN55a950 (~$4k) or the Sony kdl-52xbr6 (~$2600)

Thanks
post #2 of 16
Samsung LN52A650 or 750.
post #3 of 16
if you can afford the bucks my a950 is really nice...Localized dimming is worth the extra 1000 bucks.
post #4 of 16
I'm pretty sure that the 950 has a half-life of 50,000 hours, which is a bit short compared to the half life ratings of standard CCFL bulbs (60,000 hours) and Panasonic Plasma sets (100,000 hours) These are estimated levels from the manufacturers and will probably be different based on your picture settings.

(and remember, LED local dim brings uneven wear from black bars into the equation so remember that when looking at various TV sets)
post #5 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

I'm pretty sure that the 950 has a half-life of 50,000 hours, which is a bit short compared to the half life ratings of standard CCFL bulbs (60,000 hours) and Panasonic Plasma sets (100,000 hours) These are estimated levels from the manufacturers and will probably be different based on your picture settings.

(and remember, LED local dim brings uneven wear from black bars into the equation so remember that when looking at various TV sets)

How do you figure CCFL is supposed to last longer than led , ive heard thee opposite. Can you also post the source on this uneven wear from localized dimming you speak of.
post #6 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

I'm pretty sure that the 950 has a half-life of 50,000 hours, which is a bit short compared to the half life ratings of standard CCFL bulbs (60,000 hours) and Panasonic Plasma sets (100,000 hours) These are estimated levels from the manufacturers and will probably be different based on your picture settings.

(and remember, LED local dim brings uneven wear from black bars into the equation so remember that when looking at various TV sets)

Yup, I heard that the half life is around 50,000 to 60,000 thousand which is more than I will need. However, I was looking at the Elite since the half life is rated around the same and supposedly the IR and burn in are things of the past... Never thought I would go plasma but that seems like a real possiblity right now!
post #7 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by aggie2010 View Post

Yup, I heard that the half life is around 50,000 to 60,000 thousand which is more than I will need. However, I was looking at the Elite since the half life is rated around the same and supposedly the IR and burn in are things of the past... Never thought I would go plasma but that seems like a real possiblity right now!

Burn in is. IR depends on how you use it.
post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carled View Post

Burn in is. IR depends on how you use it.

I remember the first HDTV i bought after high school was a 47 inch panny projection. I played GranTurismo on that thing for like 300 hours. Man was i ever pissed to have the tachometer burned into the bottom right hand corner.
I wouldnt buy a burn in tv after that.
post #9 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by epcortek View Post

I remember the first HDTV i bought after high school was a 47 inch panny projection. I played GranTurismo on that thing for like 300 hours. Man was i ever pissed to have the tachometer burned into the bottom right hand corner.
I wouldnt buy a burn in tv after that.

Did you get the tubes replaced?
post #10 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carled View Post

Did you get the tubes replaced?

Nope,gave it to a friend for 100$ and i went DLP only to find out the color wheel whines like a mutha Fu$%R after the first year.

Since then ive gone LCD and so far am pleased with thier performance
post #11 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by epcortek View Post

How do you figure CCFL is supposed to last longer than led , ive heard thee opposite. Can you also post the source on this uneven wear from localized dimming you speak of.

Those are the numbers that have been quoted by the TV manufacturers, so you will have to take that up with them. (using Samsung's quotes for the LCD numbers, Panasonic's quotes for the plasma numbers)

As for the uneven wear from local dimming, anytime you have a lightsource (LED, Phosphor ect....) and it is dimming sections for black bars, you are going to have part of the screen aging faster than the rest. These newer LED sets haven't really been around long enough for them to show it yet. However, in a previous thread where I brought this up (and I was heavily flamed for lack of proof on my theory, which if you think about it, has all the evidence needed in plasma displays (which operate similarly to LED backlights) But a owner of a Sony LED display from a few years back reported that he did indeed have uneven wear of his LED backlight. (thread died right after he posted that)

LED backlighting has a ton of potential in the LCD market, but just hasn't been around long enough for this to no longer be an issue. (for one, we don't know how these LED bulbs age, whether it is a slow decrease in luminance or a rapid drop (I've seen proof for both theories so far) LED local dim sets are thicker than standard CCFL backlit sets (which don't have these issues with uneven wear) they currently use more power, and have worse viewing angles over CCFL backlit displays as well. LED sets do have better motion and much better black levels over their CCFL cousins, and that is what has me most excited about this form of backlighting. I will admit that since this is a new tech in the display industry so it has a lot of room for improvment, but it just isn't there yet. (give it a few more years to work out some of the kinks, look how far both plasma and LCD have come in the last three years)
post #12 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

However, in a previous thread where I brought this up (and I was heavily flamed for lack of proof on my theory

I wasn't trying to flame you about that. I was just trying to sepperate hypothesis from fact. You may well be right, but until we start getting LED LCDs with reasonable useage times it's still unhatched chicken counting.
post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by aggie2010 View Post

So I have been saving up money for an awesome TV and I am looking at getting the Samsung LN55a950. However, last time I bought something that was top of the line (Sony LCD projection TV) it backfired since the life span was very short and the picture began to deteriorate noticeably pretty rapidly. So anyways I would like to keep the next tv I buy for at least 7 years. Do you think that current LED technology is reliable, or should I just get the Sony XBR6? I have heard that the 950 is supposed to get a crazy 100,000 hours, but then again I also read that you have to change out the LEDs out every few years. Price is obviously important, but since I am going to be keeping the TV a long time I want to go with something that will be somewhat current down the road, but I am not interested in sending in the set for maintenance to keep the picture quality up.

LN55a950 (~$4k) or the Sony kdl-52xbr6 (~$2600)

Thanks

That was a projection TV. LCDs have a lifespan of at least 50,000 hours. If you watch about 5 hours a day, then your TV should last about 27 years. That should be long enough. LCDs don’t lose as much brightness as CRTs and projection TVs when they age. So, buy an LCD and enjoy it without fear of it backfiring.
post #14 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carled View Post

I wasn't trying to flame you about that. I was just trying to sepperate hypothesis from fact. You may well be right, but until we start getting LED LCDs with reasonable useage times it's still unhatched chicken counting.

I'm just saying, this is very much an issue when looking at these sets, and one that most people don't even think about since it is an LCD. Until we know the luminance drop off rate of these LED backlights, we won't know how long it will take for it to become noticeable. (and hopefully LED backlights are quite different from LED home lighting, which has been confirmed to have a very quick drop off in luminance)

Once these hit 100k hours to half-life then we shouldn't really worry about it as it will take at least 5 years of black bars for the difference in luminance to be visible, and by then something much better will be out anyway.
post #15 of 16
I have a samsung 81f and the rate on it is 100,000 and so far nothing has gone wrong
post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by aggie2010 View Post

However, I was looking at the Elite since the half life is rated around the same and supposedly the IR and burn in are things of the past... Never thought I would go plasma but that seems like a real possiblity right now!


sounds like the best thing you could do.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › How long is the life span for the Samsung LN55a950? Is it better or worse than curren