1080p LED tvs, good for gaming?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
...and I play on a 96" front projection LCD projector. Doesn't stop me from saying that plasma produces the best picture available today in a fixed pixel display. When I replace my 54" Sony rear projection unit in my family room (still an awesome HD picture by the way) it will be with a plasma.rastanThis is an example of what i was talking. I wonder is it GREED or EGO that's corrupting people minds these days. They sometime get giant screens just to say "HEY i have a giant 60 inches tvs" Oh brother. The thing is though, he was overrating the product he bought by saying "BEST FOR GAMING" or "BEST IMAGE QUALITY YOU CAN GET" when what he bought was an LCD :S. There are more than 5 plasma TVs that look better than the best LED backlit LCD. and the best CCFL / 'regular' LCD looks significantly worse than the best back or edgelit LED panel. So by no means "best".
[QUOTE="soulreaper-4"]I wonder is it GREED or EGO that's corrupting people minds these days.oldskooler79
No to both of these. The simple truth is that the best technology isn't available in smaller sizes. If it were, I may have considered. It has nothing to with money, even though I make alot of it. It's not my fault I took an interest in success.
EDIT --> As I noted above, I mentioned the 34" Sony as having the best picture on a consumer hdtv that can be had for a couple hundred clams on craigslist after a few weeks shopping. Proof that EGO and GREED gets thrown out the window. We simply want a solid picture for our hobby and know better, that's all.
Yeah they have more things because THEY ARE BIGGER. The bigger they are the more it needs to have compare to a smaller size. It like buying a giant mansion, you will need a lot more stuff to fill it, more furniture and appliances.
Yeah they have more things because THEY ARE BIGGER.soulreaper-4
Even still.. if you take the best 32" against the best 50" there is no comparison. Doesn't matter how close or far you sit from the tv, the bigger sizes offer superior technologies such as local dimming and plasmas.
OLED will most likely eliminate this problem. I say that because I imagine OLED coming to market in the next couple years, and it will only come in small to medium sizes. I highly doubt you'll see 50-up sizes due to the pricetag. As you know, OLED is set to destroy everything today. So.. perhaps in a couple years I'll be satisfied with a 32" again?
...and I play on a 96" front projection LCD projector. Doesn't stop me from saying that plasma produces the best picture available today in a fixed pixel display. When I replace my 54" Sony rear projection unit in my family room (still an awesome HD picture by the way) it will be with a plasma.rastanThis is an example of what i was talking. I wonder is it GREED or EGO that's corrupting people minds these days. They sometime get giant screens just to say "HEY i have a giant 60 inches tvs" Oh brother. Actually has nothing to do with ego. Has to do with having an awesome experience if you can afford it. There is little doubt to anyone that has experienced an excellent picture at a big size that the experience is far and beyond what you get from a smaller picture. Once you've gamed on a big high quality screen, nothing smaller feels the same. Same goes for movies. When I watch a movie in my theater it is very similar to what I get at the actually movies (minus the sticky floors and obnoxious talkers)perspective wise, but still sometimes it is better to experience a big movie in IMAX. Gaming and movies are all about the experience and you should make the best of the time you spend on it.
[QUOTE="rastan"] When I replace my 54" Sony rear projection unit in my family room (still an awesome HD picture by the way) it will be with a plasma.oldskooler79
Then please take my advise and wait for a good one. Nothing on the market today is worth a damn unless you find a Kuro. I've had both the 63C8000 and 58VT25 and they both FAIL MISERABLY next to my Pioneer 5020fd. The panasonic, which supposedly is the best you can buy atm, has floating blacks that will drive you crazy to no end. Whenever you watch dark scenes (practically every movie), the anamorphic black bars rise up to near grey. It does this all throughout the movie. The Samsung C8000 plasma is a very nice 3D plasma. In fact if you were limited to what's on the shelf now I would go for this one. The blacks are stable and deep. The main issue I have with this one is the 24hz bug. You MUST use 3:2 pulldown for all sources. If not, the blacks will rise. This is a known flaw that Sammy has dealt with for a few years now. This isn't acceptable IMO.
No other manufacturer is worth mentioning here. We're talking plasmas and we're talking the best. After owning a Kuro for a few months, you won't take any other display seriously again either.
So just wait and see if Panny gets their act together. Otherwise it would be in your best interest to seek out a Kuro now. I seriously doubt the 9G Kuro will be triumped in the next couple years. If your that desperate for a tv now you could always pick up a Sony 34XBR960 off Craigslist. At only 34" you would need to move your couch/chair closer, and probably not the ideal size for you. However, nothing beats the picture quality on this set (I have two of them). Nothing. Not even a calibrated 9G Pio Elite.
You should be able to find a 9G Kuro non-elite (5020 or 6020fd) for a reasonable price. Maybe not the 60" but the 5020 can still be found. Outside an Elite, it will be the benchmark for the coming years...
I've experience many Kuros and yes they are the best, but hard to find anywhere. That being said, the best Panasonic's are nothing to sneeze at and at the moment if you want the best picture for the money the Panasonic plasmas are the way to go. Check out the G25's and the floating black thing is not that noticeable especially compared to localized dimming LED's![QUOTE="pimperjones"][QUOTE="rastan"]120/240 Hz processing creates artificial frames to deal with the inherent blur found in LCD's. This type of processing is not required with plasmas, DLP, or CRT's because there is no inherent motion lag in those display technologies. You are correct that some of the anti-blur/anti-judder technologies can be turned off or set to lower levels, but the 120/240Hz processing can still cause lag in video games. With his return, he upgraded to a Panasonic plasma, so basically he got no motion lag, no game lag, higher contrast, and a wider viewing angle for less money.wowroflurah0m0
Just to be completely clear 120hz/240hz does not add ANY artificial frames. All 120hz and 240hz TVs do is allow for an even division of 30hz TV output, 24hz film output, and 60hz video game output. For 30hz programming, it simply repeats 4 duplicate frames for every frame shown. For 24hz film output, it repeats 5 duplicate frames for every frame shown. And for 60hz video game output it repeats 2 duplicat frames for every frame shown. Never will 120hz TV generate any artificial frames that do not exist in the original signal, in other words it does not alter the signal in anyway.
The Motion Processing is what really creates the artificial frames in between the what would normally be filled by duplicate frames. Motion Processing or Motion Interpolation is what generates fake frames to simulate smooth 120hz motion and in turn making movies look like soap operas.
As for the Plasma, it's really a double edged blade. Yes you get, no motion lag, no game lag, higher contrast and even a wider colour gamut. But in return you lose the ability to view true white, which my opinion is more important than all the above gains. Plasma cannot show the color white at high luminance, the ABL kicks in everytime the screen is filled with a very light hue or white. This in turn makes white color scenes in games, tv and movies look gray in comparison to LED or LCD. So, yes you get some benefits but you lose the ability to see true white.
its cool when uneducated people try and sound like they know what there talking about to make there uneducated bad purchase sound like a good one, plasmas can display true whites, sigh It's also cool when level 2 posters with 2 posts like to make fun of random users when they themselves have no posting history or credibility. *sigh* No, really dude. It's cool. Really.[QUOTE="soulreaper-4"] Yeah they have more things because THEY ARE BIGGER.oldskooler79
Even still.. if you take the best 32" against the best 50" there is no comparison. Doesn't matter how close or far you sit from the tv, the bigger sizes offer superior technologies such as local dimming and plasmas.
OLED will most likely eliminate this problem. I say that because I imagine OLED coming to market in the next couple years, and it will only come in small to medium sizes. I highly doubt you'll see 50-up sizes due to the pricetag. As you know, OLED is set to destroy everything today. So.. perhaps in a couple years I'll be satisfied with a 32" again?
Yeah, ok so that is the way you see it. Seriously some technologies are useless, if you take a look at 120Hz tvs and then look at one with higher Hz your eyes won't see a difference. From 60 to 120 it is noticeable but not higher than that. It is a waste of money unless you want to go 3D.
[QUOTE="oldskooler79"][QUOTE="soulreaper-4"] Yeah they have more things because THEY ARE BIGGER.soulreaper-4
Even still.. if you take the best 32" against the best 50" there is no comparison. Doesn't matter how close or far you sit from the tv, the bigger sizes offer superior technologies such as local dimming and plasmas.
OLED will most likely eliminate this problem. I say that because I imagine OLED coming to market in the next couple years, and it will only come in small to medium sizes. I highly doubt you'll see 50-up sizes due to the pricetag. As you know, OLED is set to destroy everything today. So.. perhaps in a couple years I'll be satisfied with a 32" again?
Yeah, ok so that is the way you see it. Seriously some technologies are useless, if you take a look at 120Hz tvs and then look at one with higher Hz your eyes won't see a difference. From 60 to 120 it is noticeable but not higher than that. It is a waste of money unless you want to go 3D.The 120hz on TVs are gimmicks unless it's a 3DTV where it's true 120hz. The 120hz effect non-3DTVs have is nasty and only makes the picture look worse IMO.
Quick question is the XBR970 an upgrade of the 960? It doesn't say anything about Super Fine Pitch. And just curious were you live, oldskooler not address or anything like that, just I've been looking for a xbr960 for a while now and no luck.brandon2802
Sorry it took awhile to respond.. I overlooked your post and just getting back from the holidays.
No, the XBR970 isn't an upgrade of the 960. In fact, it is a downgrade. I believe I'm telling you this right.. but in 2003 Sony released the 960 with Super Fine Pitch and it truely was THE BEST HDTV that the general public could buy at that time. Most likely Sony spent too much in that set, didn't get enough return, or CRTs were beginning to die off in general. It was a combination of them all I'm sure. Either way, the next year 2004 Sony released the 970 without Super Fine Pitch. What this means is less resolution and not as tight of pixel pitch. So the picture will not be as sharp on any and every source and your taking a small hit in resolution. But also from my minimal experience with the 970s.. the colors and overall accuracy isn't as good either.
However.. I will say this with confidence. Unless you buy a Sony CRT with Super Fine Pitch (there are a few of them if you google) then the 970 is perhaps the next best thing. Even though you take a hit in resolution and fine pitch, you still get an incredible picture that should hang with most anything today. The picture will also be brighter due to not having the Super Fine Pitch. Yeah.. the Super Fine Pitch as incredible as it was, made the image darker. The black hole blacks came at the expense of overall darkening the entire picture. Not really a concern if you a serious movie/game buff and play/watch in a dark room.
I bought a 960 brand new. But have since sold it before I moved and have seeked another out on Craigslist. It took me a good while to find one though so you gotta be patient. If I were you I'd keep searching for a 960 because it truely is the best. If you find one that is well taken care of and calibrated, you won't be sorry. In fact, like me you will be spoiled and even owning a 9G Kuro will have you feeling "settling for the next best". I'm trying to spare the 960 as much as I can because I want it to last.
I'm from Raliegh, NC. But wherever you are, just keep on the lookout and it'll pop up.
[QUOTE="brandon2802"]Quick question is the XBR970 an upgrade of the 960? It doesn't say anything about Super Fine Pitch. And just curious were you live, oldskooler not address or anything like that, just I've been looking for a xbr960 for a while now and no luck.oldskooler79
Sorry it took awhile to respond.. I overlooked your post and just getting back from the holidays.
No, the XBR970 isn't an upgrade of the 960. In fact, it is a downgrade. I believe I'm telling you this right.. but in 2003 Sony released the 960 with Super Fine Pitch and it truely was THE BEST HDTV that the general public could buy at that time. Most likely Sony spent too much in that set, didn't get enough return, or CRTs were beginning to die off in general. It was a combination of them all I'm sure. Either way, the next year 2004 Sony released the 970 without Super Fine Pitch. What this means is less resolution and not as tight of pixel pitch. So the picture will not be as sharp on any and every source and your taking a small hit in resolution. But also from my minimal experience with the 970s.. the colors and overall accuracy isn't as good either.
However.. I will say this with confidence. Unless you buy a Sony CRT with Super Fine Pitch (there are a few of them if you google) then the 970 is perhaps the next best thing. Even though you take a hit in resolution and fine pitch, you still get an incredible picture that should hang with most anything today. The picture will also be brighter due to not having the Super Fine Pitch. Yeah.. the Super Fine Pitch as incredible as it was, made the image darker. The black hole blacks came at the expense of overall darkening the entire picture. Not really a concern if you a serious movie/game buff and play/watch in a dark room.
I bought a 960 brand new. But have since sold it before I moved and have seeked another out on Craigslist. It took me a good while to find one though so you gotta be patient. If I were you I'd keep searching for a 960 because it truely is the best. If you find one that is well taken care of and calibrated, you won't be sorry. In fact, like me you will be spoiled and even owning a 9G Kuro will have you feeling "settling for the next best". I'm trying to spare the 960 as much as I can because I want it to last.
I'm from Raliegh, NC. But wherever you are, just keep on the lookout and it'll pop up.
So what resolution is this Sony XBR 960 CRT?So what resolution is this Sony XBR 960 CRT?hd5870corei7
Your really determined to bring a knife to a gunfight aren't you..?
I'll say it again and again until I'm blue that plasmas and LCDs, as nice as they are, simply fall behind the XBR in all the critical departments concerning PQ.
If we're talking resolution.. I don't believe the XBR has a native resolution. It's a progressive multi-scan display that does indeed display 1080i, 720p, 480i, 480p natively. Similar to your old CRT monitor, when a signal is detected the tv changes its resolution automatically. Hence why ALL content looks better on it. Xbox 360 games play natively on it, PS3 (even with sometimes weird native signals) look their best, Wii looks fantastic with 480p, and blu-ray will playback as 1080i natively since this is an interlaced display. You can choose between 720p or 1080i in the settings, to whichever looks best to your eye.
To answer you question though...
The aperature grill splits the light into 1400 something horizontal lines, and with the way the trinitron aperture grill is designed, there's not really a set vertical resolution for the set. But it will show the full vertical resolution for 1080i. I think it has an advantage with 4:3 content by allowing to squeeze more resolution into it. Overall, it's going to be a little less that 1920x1080 so if we're talking pure resolution then current tech has the edge WITH 1080P CONTENT ONLY. But when you factor in the 34" size, and every other benefit including the monsterous native contrast of the set.. its a winner.
Trust me, I know 1080p content looks very damn good on a modern LCD or plasma. What I'm trying to get at.. is that the 34XBR960 will look that good displaying any content including 480p. So yeah even DVDs and Wii or Xbox original games will take on a whole new meaning on it for those who haven't gamed on it. Your PS3 games and Blu-rays movies won't look any better than the XBR either. A tiny hit in resolution for a more engaging picture and natural 3D picture. You woudn't want any more resolution packed in a 34" CRT anyway. It'd be overkill even at 3 FT viewing distance. Not so for 46"-up flat screens even with 1920x1080. Won't look as sharp.
Look guys.. the 34XBR960 is a confusing beast. You need to read through the whole "Official Sony 34XBR960 Thread" on AVSforum.com to get a better understanding. If you have your doubts, that's fine. To each his own. But I emplore you to read through the numerous testomonies from folks with the latest and greates over the years and have switched back to the Sony. It would be worth it for hardcore gamers (or movie buffs) such as yourselfs to scout out a 34XBR960 and if you find one for cheap price then pick it up (if your inclined). It's heavy at 200lb but I'm sure you'll have no problem reselling it to an enthusiast if your not satisfied.
But no way will that happen. The 34XBR960 is still the current benchmark on Cnet. The Pioneer Elite is the current benchmark for LCD/Plasma/DLP/etc but the 34XBR960 is still the king overall. I wish I had a way of inviting you to my house for a demo where I have my Kuros and other LCDs just to show you how badly they get beaten in the dark whether you watch The Dark Knight on Blu-ray, playing Uncharted, or even Mario for that matter. Even Mike Tyson's Punchout looks really good (if you can imagine that) on it.
[QUOTE="hd5870corei7"]So what resolution is this Sony XBR 960 CRT?oldskooler79
Your really determined to bring a knife to a gunfight aren't you..?
I'll say it again and again until I'm blue that plasmas and LCDs, as nice as they are, simply fall behind the XBR in all the critical departments concerning PQ.
If we're talking resolution.. I don't believe the XBR has a native resolution. It's a progressive multi-scan display that does indeed display 1080i, 720p, 480i, 480p natively. Similar to your old CRT monitor, when a signal is detected the tv changes its resolution automatically. Hence why ALL content looks better on it. Xbox 360 games play natively on it, PS3 (even with sometimes weird native signals) look their best, Wii looks fantastic with 480p, and blu-ray will playback as 1080i natively since this is an interlaced display. You can choose between 720p or 1080i in the settings, to whichever looks best to your eye.
To answer you question though...
The aperature grill splits the light into 1400 something horizontal lines, and with the way the trinitron aperture grill is designed, there's not really a set vertical resolution for the set. But it will show the full vertical resolution for 1080i. I think it has an advantage with 4:3 content by allowing to squeeze more resolution into it. Overall, it's going to be a little less that 1920x1080 so if we're talking pure resolution then current tech has the edge WITH 1080P CONTENT ONLY. But when you factor in the 34" size, and every other benefit including the monsterous native contrast of the set.. its a winner.
Trust me, I know 1080p content looks very damn good on a modern LCD or plasma. What I'm trying to get at.. is that the 34XBR960 will look that good displaying any content including 480p. So yeah even DVDs and Wii or Xbox original games will take on a whole new meaning on it for those who haven't gamed on it. Your PS3 games and Blu-rays movies won't look any better than the XBR either. A tiny hit in resolution for a more engaging picture and natural 3D picture. You woudn't want any more resolution packed in a 34" CRT anyway. It'd be overkill even at 3 FT viewing distance. Not so for 46"-up flat screens even with 1920x1080. Won't look as sharp.
Lol, its a shame I have such a ocdish personality (OCD-ish) I don't really have Obsessive Compulsive Disorder but I'm a guy who really wants to set standards if you know what I mean. I'd be frustrated as hell not having 1080p even 1680x150 monitors disgust me, 1080p or nothing :P (in a few years I'll be all "2560x1600 no less") Even if the picture quality was better I'd still feel "incomplete". Sucks to be me I guess :) :PNot trying to slant the display off... I have every faith in Sony making the best displays ever made with GDM's and XBR's.
How much would one of these 960's cost me?
I understand. I have OCD as well, if you can't tell by now lol. Much like you, not really OCD but I'm quirky enough to be frustrated over miniscule things that don't really matter. I mean if my socks have the slight speck of dirt on them they have to be washed. I can't simply wipe a smudge. It's terrible I know.
Back on topic.. 1080p matters more in PC monitors than HDTVs. With a PC Monitor, a 1080p is a must on a fixed pixel display. The dot pitch on them makes everything crisp, and the extra real estate is nice. But again, the Sony 24" FW900 trinitron will go beyond 1080p as well as natively display every resolution known to mankind, along with having superior contrast and zero input lag. But it's whatever floats your boat. I have two FW900s, yet as I type this I'm currently using an Asus 27" LCD which is very awesome. The only time I turn the CRT on is to game. But text and all looks better on the LCD.
In the HDTV world the dot pitch isn't as tight and your not sitting 2 feet from the screen. Also processing is a BIG FACTOR in choosing the best HDTV. All of the factors I mentioned previously have more impact than the resolution. You shouldn't feel incomplete without 1080p because it only matters with 1080p content. Everything else won't look as good since it must be processed. When it comes to displaying 1080p content on the 34XBR960, it has no problem displaying it as 1080i. The same horizontal pixel count, just interlaced which is fine since it's an interlaced display. Input lag, like CRT monitors is non-existant on the XBR so gamers really have the upper hand. Street Fighter is slightly faster and smoother than even the best plasma. Once you game on a 960 everything else will feel laggy.
I'm not trying to deter anyone from buying a new display. Look, I know things are getting better and 3D is exciting. Not to mention, 34" is something you'd have to live with on the XBR. Small by today's standard. So I understand if it's not practical for you. Just know that thus far the 960 offers the best picture to date on an hdtv, and is the benchmark for a reason. Whether we're talking contrast, sharpness, colors, acccuracy, scaling, processing, depth, and so forth. Put it this way, I'm a fan of using a little frame interpolation on LCDs (Amp or Motionflow) because it makes Blu-rays in particular seem so 'real' and lifelike. If that's what your after.. the 960 doesn't need interpolation. You'll be stunned at how real a Blu-ray looks on it. I'm still taken back by it from time to time. The latest example was when I watched Napolean Dynamite on Blu-ray. I could see cob webs and dust in the picture when it wasn't supposed to be there. COB WEBS FOR GOD SAKE. In the same scene, you couldn't make it out on the Kuro. I see flaws in just about every DVD or Blu-ray I watch. I can even tell when the lighting is poor or cheap. It truely is a reference diplay.
It's all a matter of finding one in good condition. Preferably from a single owner and not one that's been here and there. Also, hopefully it wasn't set in Dynamic mode since that kills the tube. Immediately when you get it put it in Pro mode. If you do get one I'll gladly list my calibrated settings. It should be around $3-500 for a good one. If it cost more, then most likely your buying from an enthusiast and it's worth it. Generally I see them for $3-400 from ppl who don't know what they have.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment