AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
For the past 4 years I have had my gaming PC hooked up to my Panasonic TH-50PH9 a 50in 60hz 720p plasma.


I've come here because I'm looking for a new monitor for my PC. I have a few options that I can't make my mind up on.


I am first and foremost a gamer and want the best performance I can get.


Is 600Hz greater than 120/240Hz?


Do PC monitors like the Dell Ultra-sharp perform as good as say a Sony XBR9?


Let say the Ultra-sharp and the XBR9 both had a response time of 2 m/s. Will both displays perform similarly when handling motion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
Go for an LCD (LED based preferably) not a Plasma. Plasmas are going the way of the dodo, and although not as bad as it used to be, they are susceptible to burn in.


An LCD display with LED backlighting is your best bet. No burn in issues, great black levels, great color rendition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I've been using my plasma as a computer monitor for years and never had a problem with burn-in.


I think this whole burn susceptibility of plasmas was fixed after the first generation of plasmas in like 2001.


My main concern is fast motion like in an FPS would a plasma's 600hz sub field drive perform better than a 240hz or 2ms response time LCD?


Anyone else tried both?


All the reviews I read say that plasmas don't suffer from the motion lag that LCD's suffer from. But a lot of these articles were written in like 2006,2007. So has LCD technology gotten that much better in the last few years at motion lag?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Maybe I'm the only one responding to my own thread, lol.


BUt after going to Best Buy today I have ruled out the Samsung line of LCD/LED/TV's


I absolutely cannot stand how motion looks on Samsung. The Sony's LCD's ability to display motion was much more natural looking. Everything on a Samsung TV looks flat to me, it looks more like video, less like film, and much sharper perhaps but to a point of being "fakeish" if that makes sense to anyone. Sports look better on the Sony when comparing 240Hz models, Sony seems to actually utilize the technology as opposed to Samsung where some reviews say to turn off the 240Hz for most applications.


SO NOW IT COMES DOWN TO either the


Sony XBR9-52in for 1900$(Amazon)

OR

Panasonic V10-50in for est 1800-1900.


Price is the same, just what is going to be a better PC monitor for gaming?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
What your describing has nothing to do with the LEDs in the Samsung. It is the "truemotion" effect or whatever Samsung calls it and it can be turned off in the tvs menus. I can't stand it either and I don't know why Best Buy insists on leaving it turned on, your right it makes everything look like overly sharp video.


i suggest getting an employee to turn it off (if any of them know how) and take another look at it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
728 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by NOOBZ1LLA /forum/post/18289240


For the past 4 years I have had my gaming PC hooked up to my Panasonic TH-50PH9 a 50in 60hz 720p plasma.


I've come here because I'm looking for a new monitor for my PC. I have a few options that I can't make my mind up on.


I am first and foremost a gamer and want the best performance I can get.


Is 600Hz greater than 240Hz?


I am leaning on getting either;


Sony XBR9 or Samsung 8500


or if Plasma is better for gaming a Panasonic V10.


OR I could wait until May for the 2010 models to be released and reviewed to make my decision.


It's tough because I feel if I don't decide soon I'll miss out on a good deal to get an old 2009 while dealers are making room for 2010 models.

Anything over 120Hz is a waste of money and their attempt to get you to spend more. If you aren't completely satisfied with 120Hz, then your eyeballs are superhuman. You do definitely need to upgrade to 1080p though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
600hz when it comes to plasmas is all marketing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,640 Posts
I would also add if you plan on EVER doing 3d gaming see if the TV has a port of it. New tech but would hate to spend more money in say a year if the bug bites ya.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
so 600Hz is marketing ploy and so is 240hz?


So is plasma better for PC gaming or LCD?


NOTE: Burn-in is not an issue with any modern plasma.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
Noob,


You've had 2 or 3 peple tell you that a 120hz LCD is the way to go, obvously you really want a plasma or you would not be ignoring our posts. Go buy your plasma and be happy with it if your just going to ignore the suggestions you've asked for.


-getme
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,218 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomfoolery_79 /forum/post/18309908


Anything over 120Hz is a waste of money and their attempt to get you to spend more. If you aren't completely satisfied with 120Hz, then your eyeballs are superhuman. You do definitely need to upgrade to 1080p though.

The same was/is said about 60hz though. I personally don't see the advantage with 120hz...everything typically looks so overly processed. It is all a gimmick since the source isn't 120hz anyway...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYGiants56 /forum/post/18364247


An issue that is unique to Gamers is input lag. Check out this thread.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1131464

Thank you...I was waiting for someone to post this.


Plasma is still considered the best when it comes to gaming because of the low input lag levels.


However, there are some LCD's that do very well with input lag.


The XBR9 and the 8500 are not on that list.


Generally speaking, Sharp LCD's have the best LCD input lag of any maker at this point. The E77 and their LED sets have 0-1 frame of input lag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
I think 240Hz is more legitimate than 600Hz.


I could not imagine upgrading myself without getting something 3D ready. I would probably get something that would work with nVidia's 3D vision, though it's a rather short list.


I like to imagine the 82" Mitsubishi, even though it is a DLP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,640 Posts
Plasma running 600hz is a gimick.

http://www.firstglimpsemag.com/edito...09%2F61f09.asp


The 480Hz and 600Hz “refresh rates” some plasma TVs boast actually refer to a technology that plasma sets use to display the picture, which is called sub-field drive frequency. Using a 60Hz refresh rate, a 480Hz plasma breaks the screen into eight sub-fields, while a 600Hz plasma features 10 sub-fields. Thus, a 600Hz plasma produces a 60Hz refresh rate in 10 different sub-fields, rather than the eight in a 480Hz model, to improve the set’s ability to smooth motion in video and improve the clarity of still images.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Thanks guys. I'm not really that big into 3d. It kind of actually bothers me that manufacturers are putting R&D money into 3d technology.


It's probably been almost a month since my post and I'm still not even one step closer to figuring out what I want to get.


Some articles/people say that plasma handles motion better. But as far as a computer monitor goes LCDs seems to provide sharper pixels at similar resolution. idk if that makes sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
879 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by noobz1lla /forum/post/18307837


but seriously guys lcd or plasma what does everyone prefer as a computer monitor?

led lcd
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top