6th Draft - 8/30/04
The sixth and probably final draft is now shown. I might occasionally update the document - but this
is about as far as I can take the comparison. Changes with this draft include consolidation of some of
the categories, and the an update regarding the soon or just released pricing data - which shows
some very aggressive pricing by LCD vendors in the battleground sizes of 40†to 46â€. Will the plasma
vendors fight back? I’ll leave that to the industry experts.
If some of the comments you read in this thread don’t make much sense don’t blame the poster -
blame me. Those posts were most likely directed at an earlier draft, and I have ultimately decided to
keep the current draft at the top of the thread. If you feel the information contained is inaccurate
please post a reply, and your data and supporting discussion will be considered in the next draft.
Comparison of LCD and Plasma Flat Panel Televisions
(categories are sorted alphabetically - and not in order of importance)
The sixth and probably final draft is now shown. I might occasionally update the document - but this
is about as far as I can take the comparison. Changes with this draft include consolidation of some of
the categories, and the an update regarding the soon or just released pricing data - which shows
some very aggressive pricing by LCD vendors in the battleground sizes of 40†to 46â€. Will the plasma
vendors fight back? I’ll leave that to the industry experts.
If some of the comments you read in this thread don’t make much sense don’t blame the poster -
blame me. Those posts were most likely directed at an earlier draft, and I have ultimately decided to
keep the current draft at the top of the thread. If you feel the information contained is inaccurate
please post a reply, and your data and supporting discussion will be considered in the next draft.
Comparison of LCD and Plasma Flat Panel Televisions
(categories are sorted alphabetically - and not in order of importance)
Code:
Category LCD Plasma Commentary --------- ---------- -------------- -------------------------- Black Level Compliments to john doran for -P Putman 2.2-2.6 nits 0.2-0.8 nits providing P Putman data. -HTMag O-IRE(blk) ? 0.44 nits** Interesting thread on (plasma only) black levels and why it’s - WSR/BruZZi NEC LCD4000 Panasonic 0.1-0.2 important. Numbers very dependent Lowest I’ve seen NEC 0.4-0.5 on brand. Panasonic plasma about 0.27-0.72 nits w/ Pioneer 0.7 the lowest whereas NEC appears to adj. Backlight(BL) lead the LCD’s by considerable margin. Brightness Measurements under different - actual ? 450-1000 nits conditions. In essence both - real world 350-450 nits ? have adequate brightness although - P Putman 150-350 nits 90-110 nits LCD appears brighter to me and - HTMag 100IRE(wht) ? 43-61 nits** recently supplied data from most - WSR*** 160-428 (BL) 53-212 nits sources appear to confirm. Burn-in Possible on some Somewhat sensitive With some precautions this is and very long dur during first 100 really no longer an issue. static images hours or high But LCD is much more resistant contrast settings for persons uninformed Color Rendering Vivid color Accurate color Pick your pleasure Plasma to me seem to be very accurate red, green, blue and thus has very lifelike facial tones. Current generation LCD are getting closer - but still seem to have slightly boosted color and there are a number of models that appear cyan-ish, magnenta-ish, and yellow but in either case the LCD’s are quite vibrant - and it’s oh so sweet to have choices. Contrast Ratios Contrast ratios are critical - mfg spec 350 - 800:1 800 - 4000:1 but the mfgs. have gone over - LG going 5000:1 to the dark side on what gets - ANSI (Putman) 130:1 (avg) 280:1 (avg) reported. Plasma appears to have 170:1 (peak) 400:1 (peak) a significant advantage on this - HTMag Contrast 97-155:1** spec. If you like movies shot in ANSI 173-268:1** dark lighting it would be wise to demo an LCD with such before - WSR (Dyn. range) 595 505 purchase. 4x4 chkrbd 586 475 HTMag & WSR data is for very few 9x9 chkrbd 577 477 brands/models see note below*** Did I hear 8000? Cost Kind of comparing apples to (Diag.In.) LCD($/sqin) Plasma($/sqin) oranges, because LCD’s are 21 5.30 primarily smaller and plasma 22 6.66 bigger (see screen size) 30 6.00 For two units of comparable size 32 6.86 5.25 plasma currently is less expensive 37 6.66 3.75 40 7.25 A few words of caution here. 42 (E) 3.15 (E) The results presented here are 42 9.00 3.60 of a mini-survey of AVS sponsored 42 (A) 4.40 (A) vendors with a lot of rounding. 45 9.00 and averaging - I generally chose 46 6.45 the least expensive of one of the 50 4.75 major of brands could be commercial 61 6.75 (no tuner) old or new models so 63 5.60 these should be relatively low costs. 71 x.xx Take it with a grain of salt. I’m just trying to get in the ballpark. If you feel the numbers are (E) - EDTV version unjustified they can easily be (A) - ALIS model changed if you provide some proof. False Contouring ? ? Not sure what else is involved (An artifact common to fixed-pixel displays) but this appears to be related to that produces splotchy, distinct sections the magnitude of bit processing. in what should be gradual gradations (10 bit being better than 8bit) and of color or shadows. Also referred to the algorithms being used by the as solarization and posterization mfg. (see **** below) or here Fan Noise Most don’t require fans Fans to cool screen Samsung is one vendor (little power=little heat) Fans to cool ext box making a fan free plasma One exception reported Noise has been deemed noticeable Toshiba 26HL83 on some plasmas - buyer beware. Subjective evaluation (unless someone can find some fan sound level data). Here’s a good thread to review concept further. Fill Factor I’m counting on KostyaNP to provide Some data here Graininess I have no idea, from simply store (Picture Noise) viewing -need help from experienced owners of both technologies. High Altitude Not susceptible Only certain brands Advantage LCD, some plasmas will Performance are designed for HA buzz excessively at higher altitude (did someone say NEC?) Most plasmas are rated to 5000ft Just saw an add for a Runco 50†plasma rated to 9000ft (only $16k) Lifespan 50 to 60k hrs. 30 to 60k hrs. Current generation essentially the same approx. 60000 hrs, if you are Are the lamps (Brightness buying used, it may be closer replaceable? degradation to 50%) to 20 to 30k it’s wise to know Do the glass what brand and what generation panels degrade ? you are buying Power Consumption 45†- 260 watts 50†- 530 watts Advantage LCD,but narrowing advantage 42†- 240 watts 42†- 290-395 watts actually was about 2:1 now on 25% 37†- 224 watts 37†- 225-325 watts It should be noted that Pioneer’s 32†- 150 watts PDP504PU 50†plasma rated at 363w but that is not typical. New range on plasma - low nos. are for 7th gen. Panasonic only Refresh Rates 16 to 25 ms About 6 to 7 ms Plasma is about as good as CRT’s (8 ms in develop.) LCD will show some disjointed (12 ms when Sharp 45†or blurred motion of fast moving is released soon) objects (i.e. tennis balls going over the net, thrown footballs) Reliability Haven’t read about much difference Am I uninformed? Is there a diff? Both seem pretty reliable! Resolution LCD density Plasma density LCD’s will get 1920x1080 pixels (Diag. In.) (pixels/sqin) (pixels/sqin) (a spec buyers nirvana) to market 21 4175 sooner but plasma will 22 4457 shortly follow. 30 2557 LCD however has a higher pixel 37 1794 1261 density and will do it in 45†42 (E) 543(E) whereas plasma will require 71†42 1392 1044 although technically they might 42 1391(A) eventually fit in about 60†45 2397 50 982 If the numbers seem a little crazy 55 1603 811 see below as to how they were 61 660 derived. 63 619 65 580 71 963 (E) - EDTV version, (A) -ALIS model Screen Size 13 to 42 inches 32 to 63 inches 42 inches is about the cross (45-46†very soon) (71 inches soon) over point or potential battle ground Thickness 2 to 3 inches 3 to 4 inches LCD’s are generally thinner by about an inch Viewing Angle Up to 170° Up to 160° Having just observed current LCD models, I don’t see significant differences in viewing angles I believe both are good up to 150°, and beyond that it’s not worth viewing the set because the picture at these angles is just too small to enjoy. Although I would be remiss in not pointing out that there are a number of LCDTVs still on sale that I don’t hold consistent pictures beyond 90° Weight 45†about 51 lbs 42†about 66 lbs LCD’s are typically lighter 37†about 41 lbs 42†cons. 92 lbs and easier to mount and to 50†about 97 lbs ship - consumer grade plasma can be considerably heavier Resolution Calculations pixels/sqin* Norm. ------------ Diagonal Width Height sqin @50†plasma LCD -------- ----- ------ ---- ------ ------ ---- 21 18.3 10.3 188 0.18 4175 22 19.2 10.8 207 0.19 4457 26 22.7 12.7 289 0.27 30 26.1 14.7 384 0.36 2557 37 32.2 18.1 585 0.55 1261 1794 42 36.6 20.6 754 0.71 543(E) 42 36.6 20.6 754 0.71 1044 1392 42 36.6 20.6 754 0.71 1391(A) 45 39.2 22.1 865 0.81 2397 46 40.1 22.5 904 0.86 2294 50 43.6 24.5 1068 1.00 982 55 47.9 27.0 1293 1.21 811 1603 61 53.2 29.9 1590 1.49 660 63 54.9 30.9 1696 1.59 619 65 56.6 31.9 1806 1.69 580 71 61.9 34.8 2153 2.02 963 (E) - EDTV version of 42†plasma (A) - ALIS models Click here to learn about ALIS * To determine the values in these two columns - the sqin value to the left was divided INTO one of the typical screen resolutions found in the table below. The one chosen was what I felt was common for the diagonal size for the respective technology. I generally chose the highest density I could identify if available in the marketplace - although I ignored ALIS units (note: just added 42†ALIS). Norm. (Normalization) column provided only because I find it interesting. It is much easier to see that a 71†model is twice (or 102% larger) as big as a 50†model, a 61†models is almost 50% larger than a 50†model, and a 50†is almost 30% larger than a 42â€. The square inch figure at 50†(1068) is simply divided into the sqin value for each of the diagonals shown. Width and Heights shown above were determined as follows: -------------------------------------------------------- (Assumed an aspect ratio of 16 by 9) a^2 + b^2 = c^2 a=16 b=9 a=16/9 x b b=9/16 x a solve for a or b shown above as a function of c Answer: (where c is the diagonal inches of an HDTV) a (width) = c / 1.1475 b (height)= c / 2.04 Here’s another method same result: Here's the formula to calculate the width & height of a 16:9 image based on the diagonal: Angle = arc tan 16/9 = 60.64 deg. Width = Diagonal x sin 60.64 = Diagonal x 0.87 Height = Diagonal x cos 60.64 = Diagonal x 0.49 Typical HDTV screen resolutions ------------------------------- Hor. Vert. Total pixels pixels pixels ----- ------ ------ 852 480 408960 1024 720 737280 1024 768 786432 1280 720 921600 1280 768 983040 1024 1024 1048576 (ALIS) 1366 768 1049088 1920 1080 2073600 ** Luminance - refers to the amount of visually effective light emitted by an extended source. Typically expressed in nits, footlamberts (fL) or candelas per square meter (cd/m2). Looking to convert units (nits, cd/m^2, fL (footLamberts) here’s the conversion factors 1 nit = 1 cd/m2 1 fL = 3.43 cd/m2 or 3.42626 nits 1 cd/m2(1 nit) = 0.292 fL I’m tracking Home Theater Magazine data in this thread. The numbers presented here are a composite of the detail shown in that other thread. Unfortunately this is a new process for HT Mag and not much data is yet available - so treat accordingly. *** Widescreen Review (WSR) data was provided from an article titled “Display Technology Shoot-Out Comparing CRT, LCD, Plasma(PLS), & DLP - Part I - The Primary Specs†(Sept 2004). Only one brand per technology was tested - thus a very limited sample and thus, like HTMag data, it does not provide enough data to derive conclusions. Here's the summary of WSR article: Black Level ------------------------------------------------- CRT - Sony PVM-20L5 - 0.01 cd/m^2 LCD - NEC LCD4000 - 0.72 cd/m^2 (Max Backlight) - 0.27 cd/m^2 (Min Backlight) PLS - NEC 61XM2 - 0.42 cd/m^2 DLP - Optoma RD-50 - 0.26 cd/m^2 Peak Brightness ------------------------------------------------ CRT - Sony PVM-20L5 - 176 cd/m^2 LCD - NEC LCD4000 - 428 cd/m^2 (Max Backlight) - 160 cd/m^2 (Min Backlight) PLS - NEC 61XM2 - 212 cd/m^2 (5% APL) - 133 cd/m^2 (25% APL) - 81 cd/m^2 (50% APL) - 53 cd/m^2 (100% APL) DLP - Optoma RD-50 - 359 cd/m^2 where APL = Averge Picture Level - in our case APL refers to the percentage of pixels that are set to peak white. Dynamic Range (Ratio of peak white luminance to black level luminance) -------------------------------------- CRT - Sony PVM-20L5 - 17600 LCD - NEC LCD4000 - 595 PLS - NEC 61XM2 - 505 (5% APL) - 317 (25% APL) - 193 (50% APL) - 126 (100% APL) DLP - Optoma RD-50 - 1381 Display Contrast --------------------------------------- 4x4 Checkerboard Contrast -------------------------- CRT - Sony PVM-20L5 - 219 LCD - NEC LCD4000 - 586 PLS - NEC 61XM2 - 475 (5% APL) - 305 (25% APL) - 188 (50% APL) - 124 (100% APL) DLP - Optoma RD-50 - 332 9x9 Checkerboard Contrast -------------------------- CRT - Sony PVM-20L5 - 75 LCD - NEC LCD4000 - 577 PLS - NEC 61XM2 - 449 (5% APL) - 294 (25% APL) - 184 (50% APL) - 122 (100% APL) DLP - Optoma RD-50 - 274 **** NEC has the latest video processing circuitry which uses a new algorithm to reduce false color contours plus a 10-bit conversion process for more precise reproduction of shades of black delivers dark scenes with details that are sharp and distinct Panasonic - 1536 Shades of Gradation (certain models) Plasma displays can suffer from an artifact called "false contouring", where transitions between different shades of the same color are too sharp. These transitions can appear as distinct lines between the different shades of color. Having 1536 shades of gradation helps minimize the false contouring artifact so color transitions take on a smooth, natural appearance.
