AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am very confused about the new chips in the DLP TVs from Toshiba. The 52HM84 has a HD2+ DMD DLP chip and the new 52HM85 has the HD3 chip. Which produces a better picture or more importantly which TV produces a better picture as there could be other enhancements in the TV's as well? I keep hearing that the HD2+ DMD DLP chip is better than the HD3 chip but I have not actually seen both the 52HM85 and the 52HM84 side by side to compare.


Second question: Do you know what chip is in the 52HM95 and is it any good? I know the sets are only available in the US but I can still get one.


Thank you for your help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,822 Posts
The HD2+ chip gives a sharper PQ than the HD3 chip, and many do prefer it. However, some prefer the HD3 chip since it gives a smoother, more filmlike PQ. You really need to see them for yourself to decide which is best for you. Some have posted that the Tosh DLPs do not have the best implementation of the HD2+ chip, so you might want to compare the Tosh versus other DLP brands to see which you prefer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,691 Posts
The '05 isn't using the HD4?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by george danton
I am very confused about the new chips in the DLP TVs from Toshiba. The 52HM84 has a HD2+ DMD DLP chip and the new 52HM85 has the HD3 chip. Which produces a better picture or more importantly which TV produces a better picture as there could be other enhancements in the TV's as well? I keep hearing that the HD2+ DMD DLP chip is better than the HD3 chip but I have not actually seen both the 52HM85 and the 52HM84 side by side to compare.


Second question: Do you know what chip is in the 52HM95 and is it any good? I know the sets are only available in the US but I can still get one.


Thank you for your help.
The soon to be released 2005 Toshiba 1080P's all use the HD4+ wobulated chip, as do all manufacturer's 1080P models. It's a trade-off. The HD2+ seems to be the best, least noise-producing chip as it is a full chip. The new, "wobulated" 1/2 chips are not "true" 1080P chips. They introduce some picture artifacts that are not present with HD2+ sets, but 1080P DLP sets still have a much better PQ than the older 720P models. It's a trade-off as to what you personally prefer, you have to look and compare. If you want the best of all worlds, you'll have to wait for the LCoS models with full, natural, 1080P chips: Sony SXRD's, JVC D-ILA's, LG & Hitachi LCoS models. All due in the next few months. On the bright side, if you insist on 1080P DLP, Toshiba models should be at the top of the class for this year's models due to superior electronics, workmanship, and enhancement features. At least that's the "buzz" on the street:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,691 Posts
I agree as most here (at least the ones that don't prefer that soft 'film' look) that the HD2+ WAS the best chip.

Notice the emphasis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce
I agree as most here (at least the ones that don't prefer that soft 'film' look) that the HD2+ WAS the best chip.

Notice the emphasis.
Agreed for sure! Not at all impressed with the Sammy or Mits 1080P's i've seen so far. Contrast is better but added noise and picture artifacts are bothersome. Guess we still have to wait a while for a decent 1080P set. Those out so far are laughable at the prices they're trying to sell them at. Attempting to scam consumers with high-priced betas, but i guess some people have plenty of disposable income to dump on this garbage. you can get very nice prices on the superior 720P DLPs with the HD2+ chips though while waiting for real, watchable, non-beta 1080P sets to come out if you look around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,822 Posts
SammiK, why don't you tell us what you really think? The first 1080p sets to come from every manufacturer will likely be a beta, so waiting for the 2nd generation is probably a good idea (early adopters often get burned). With 1080p's coming out, 720p's should be heavily discounted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillP
SammiK, why don't you tell us what you really think? The first 1080p sets to come from every manufacturer will likely be a beta, so waiting for the 2nd generation is probably a good idea (early adopters often get burned). With 1080p's coming out, 720p's should be heavily discounted.
That's what i said. You can get great deals on 720P sets with the HD2+ chips and wait for decent 1080P sets to arrive either late this year or next year. You would have to be nuts to buy the 1080P garbage that's out now at these ridiculous prices.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,822 Posts
Agreed, except that what's coming out later this year is still beta (the 1st generation from everyone, Sony being the only exception).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SammiK
That's what i said. You can get great deals on 720P sets with the HD2+ chips and wait for decent 1080P sets to arrive either late this year or next year. You would have to be nuts to buy the 1080P garbage that's out now at these ridiculous prices.
Lets see..buy a sony 55" "3LCD" 720p television for $3k or 61" Sammy 1080p for $3.4k...ridiculous I say...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
830 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gazelle
The soon to be released 2005 Toshiba 1080P's all use the HD4+ wobulated chip, as do all manufacturer's 1080P models.
» Texas Instruments DLP chip (1920 x 1080 pixels)


Now I'm confused. The 1920x1080 line is lifted directly from the specs offered by Toshiba as listed on the Crutchfield website for the 56hm195. It indicates that the chip is 1920, not a lesser number that is wobulated to achieve the resolution of 1920.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by toenail
» Texas Instruments DLP chip (1920 x 1080 pixels)


Now I'm confused. The 1920x1080 line is lifted directly from the specs offered by Toshiba as listed on the Crutchfield website for the 56hm195. It indicates that the chip is 1920, not a lesser number that is wobulated to achieve the resolution of 1920.
The new chip is reported to have only HALF the number of mirrors, 960x1080. Sellers should make that clear that in the marketing. Anything less is misleading at best.


The chip was developed to reduced costs, and it results in a softer image than if the chip used the full resolution in mirrors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
830 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackLT
The new chip is reported to have only HALF the number of mirrors, 960x1080. Sellers should make that clear that in the marketing. Anything less is misleading at best.


The chip was developed to reduced costs, and it results in a softer image than if the chip used the full resolution in mirrors.
That's what I had thought, but seeing it in print as 1920 was VERY misleading. I've seen it listed as 960, or completely omitted from the spec sheet in the past.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,691 Posts
Quote:
With 1080p's coming out, 720p's should be heavily discounted.
:D :D

Quote:
Lets see..buy a sony 55" "3LCD" 720p television for $3k or 61" Sammy 1080p for $3.4k...ridiculous I say...
Yea, but it doesn't have that status symbol name to it. :p

Quote:
The new chip is reported to have only HALF the number of mirrors, 960x1080. Sellers should make that clear that in the marketing. Anything less is misleading at best.
But you forget, this is retail. The customer doesn't need to know this. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkaStp
Are you perhaps getting confused by the number of pixels and the number of mirrors that are used to produce those pixels. The 1080p sets (using the wobbulated 1080p chip) produce full 1920 x 1080 pixels using 960x1080 of mirrors.
Stop while your ahead.... you'll have a hard time explaining this important distinction. :)



They would argue a 2.8 ghz Pentium 4 is faster than an 2.2 ghz Athlon FX51 *because* it has a higher clock rate.


They would argue a 500 hp farm tractor is faster than 30 hp motorcycle *because* it has more horsepower.


For some reason, they think the only way to display a 1920x1080p resolution is to have the same number of mirrors. (BTW, how many mirrors do CRT's have?)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
830 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trancethereal
Stop while your ahead.... you'll have a hard time explaining this important distinction. :)



They would argue a 2.8 ghz Pentium 4 is faster than an 2.2 ghz Athlon FX51 *because* it has a higher clock rate.


They would argue a 500 hp farm tractor is faster than 30 hp motorcycle *because* it has more horsepower.


For some reason, they think the only way to display a 1920x1080p resolution is to have the same number of mirrors. (BTW, how many mirrors do CRT's have?)
Wow. Feeling a litle condescending today? Perhaps you could dumb it down for the rest of us peons.


The confusion for me stemmed from the verbage quoted relating to the specs of the chip, not the display resolution. Not only am I familiar with the difference between the two, but I understand how they are implemented. It was the first time I'd seen the chip spec'd in print using that particular verbage. It's fairly vague for obvious reasons. This conclusion had already been drawn when you decided to add your "constructive" input.


Believe it or not I DO understand the relationship between HP and torque and how they equate to acceleration times. Most people who engage in that debate are ultimately interested in how something accelerates (quick), not what the top speed is (fast).
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top