Yet another Plasma Thread.

[Sarkster]

Do you mind letting me in on what you paid for your screen Scott?

[007]

Sure, PMs away.

[Pij]

Sarkster, i find plasma's great for PC games but not for using in windows. The resolution is a bit pap on all Plasma's for normal desktop use.

best thing to do imo is if you can spend an extra ?165 wire your PC upto the plasma through DVI, then a 17" TFT for desktop use through DSUB/VGA.

You could wallmount both if theres a lack of room.

[mr_fantazmo]

If you're getting a screen purely for PC/gaming use then i highly suggest going down the LCD route, ok they are a little bit more expensive nd not as big but you won't have any trouble with screen burn, plus because plasma's use phospher gas, in time that gradually starts to burn away therefore making your picture continually duller over the years!


LCD is the future!!

[Sarkster]

I thought screen burn and a short screen useful lifetime was a thing of the past now?

[yashiro]

LCD has crap contrast, response time and dead pixel risk. The worst scenario for gaming. Stick with the plasma.

[Pij]

in time that gradually starts to burn away therefore making your picture continually duller over the years!

Yea where as LCD looks shat straight out the box

Unless you intend on using it fro 24H a day for the next 10 years you wont have much to worry about.

I had 3 LCD's before a plasma, and not 1 was as good.

[mr_fantazmo]

LCD has crap contrast, response time and dead pixel risk

Coz plasma's don't get dead pixels do they?? And fair enough, contrast isn't as good but they're a hell of a lot brighter! Plus LCD's have Anti reflection screens as they are a matt finish, plasmas have plastic covers over their screens which can be a pain in the arse with reflections!

Yea where as LCD looks shat straight out the box

Every TV/plasma/LCD/rear projection looks Shat out of the box, as long as it's set up properly you won't have a problem with it!!

But everyone has their own opinions!!

[Pij]

i tried 3 LCD's before going to plamsa, and they all suffered from, either Bleed, poor colours, ghosting, the worst was the 2.5k philips which had double imaging on reds.

Also some LCD's also have a glass plate over the screen. E.g the 27" Thompson.

[Lyris]

LCD fan here - it's interesting to hear them described as the "worst for gaming", especially with Plasma's burn-in situation (or is this less severe than I've been led to believe?) I know in more recent games they take steps to hide static information like scores and the like, but it's still something to consider.

You just have to remember no technology is perfect. I don't like the Plasma look as much for the easily visible pixel (correct term?) structure but I still think it looks stunning. Likewise CRTs are full of deficiencies that we have simply become accustomed to since we grew up with them. The blooming on whites, geometry errors and visible line structure (although I love how that looks on a retro game) being the ones that come to mind.

As for crap contrast, do you mean the poor black level (compared to CRT)? Or do you mean the visible range of different tones they can represent is limited?

I would also agree that hooking a computer up to a TV set isn't really worth the bother. Using a DVI>YPBPR Converter on my Radeon card I can say that it's fun at first, but really is just a gimmick. Windows' dual monitor support seems to be utter **** even with a program like Ultramon or Powerstrip, I'd love to be able to just full-screen Unreal Tournament 2004 and have it in widescreen on my LCD TV but it's not that simple.

Also remember that LCDs are getting much, much better - it no longer looks like watching TV through a screen door. I can notice a visible difference in my dad's old Philips to my new Sony.