LCD, LED or Plasma?

sid said:
Ok guys, possibly a technical question

Does anyone have time-integrated energy requirements for a 50" plasma v 52" LCD over the course of a movie.

Need to properly compare power consumption on both.
Click to expand...

Depends on the movie. Something like cloverfield will have a plasma using much less power than a bright film.

I just shut my lounge door anyway, warms the room up and saves me heating the whole house :D
 
Simon said:
Depends on the movie. Something like cloverfield will have a plasma using much less power than a bright film.

I just shut my lounge door anyway, warms the room up and saves me heating the whole house :D
Click to expand...

Well yes that is obvious mate. I'm looking for test type result.

Has anyone seen any reviews online who might have looked into it?
 
I went from a samsung series 4 Lcd to a samsung series 4 plasma and the S/D picture on the plasma is so much better? But Hd it's about the same on both or maybe it's better on the plasma because it's size 43"? Then the LCD 32"
 
Last edited:
sunama said:
We just have to wait and see I guess.
Click to expand...

OF course, but my initial viewing really did show it to be groundbreaking. Stop picking at it, you are making me all sad now as I had pushed all reasoning out of my head and was happy with the ZOMG WOOTY AMZING !!!! LD

sid. Not sure if there have been any in depth demos, for example over the course of tvarious programs, games and movies. Hdtvtest do have some average figures but I cannot remember how they calculate them.
 
-Ad- said:
OF course, but my initial viewing really did show it to be groundbreaking. Stop picking at it, you are making me all sad now as I had pushed all reasoning out of my head and was happy with the ZOMG WOOTY AMZING !!!! LD

sid. Not sure if there have been any in depth demos, for example over the course of tvarious programs, games and movies. Hdtvtest do have some average figures but I cannot remember how they calculate them.
Click to expand...

Tbh if you have the wall plug monitor that can often do it but do you have a link to that test plz
 
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/reviews.php

Look at the reviews for each set and plot them on a spreadsheet if you so wish. Generally LCDs use around the 100W mark using the test pattern (when calibrated) and a plasma uses around double that. Obviously screen sizes vary, but it's a rough idea.

Tbh power consumption really isn't something to worry about unless you are seriously anal. Using 'http://www.ukpower.co.uk/tools/running_costs_electricity/' with electricity at 15p per kWh you are looking at:

Samsung 46 B750 (105W average) = £1.40 pcm = £16.80 per yr
Sony 40 W5500 (106W average) = Similar to above

Panasonic 42V10 (225W average) = £3.00 pcm = £36 per yr
Pio Kuro 5090 (272W average) = £3.70 pcm = £44 per yr

So in effect running a 50 kuro for a year costs only £27 more than a 46 LCD. To some people that might be incredibly important, but to others its just part of the running cost. How many times do you go into the pub and ask for the cheapest only lager, or do you drink what you life ? Or do you buy a car based colely on the parts cost and fuel economy ? :D
 
You make good points AD but then again I don't think your leecy bills are quite around £65pm for a two bed flat.

All of that is electronics btw, no heating/cooking/hot water.

I have good reason to be anal.
 
I can assist you with the final point but not the first :D:D

I used to be pretty anal in my 2 bed flat down there and can totally agree with you, but left for greener pastures (parentals) so I could save up for my own place. In Tooting I was paying £1kpcm with my mrs and letting the heat from the back of the plasma cook the food and supply heating ;)
 
Jonnycoupe said:
People dont actually have electricity that is that expensive on the secondary rate anyway? Mines 9.2p flat rate.
Click to expand...

Don't think so, I just took a rough guess and equated it to the standard daytime rate out there, worst case scenario so to speak. I honestly can't remember exact prices now that I have moved back in with the parents, but I'm sure I was paying 16.2p last year in London with the night rate about 11p.
 
Well as it just happens I'm in the market for a large display atm.

The options are something like a 50" G10 plasma or 52" Sony v5500

I'm heading towards the LCD because its going to be used for MCE and PS3 mainly.

Rarely watch TV but I've got a virgin box with scart out.

The sony is few hundred more expensive so electricity isn't a problem due to the money i'm saving at the start.

edit/ I'm guessing 1:1 pixel mapping over HDMI isn't a problem on either, used to be an issue when I got my 37" LG 3 years ago
 
The V range is inferior to the W from what remember, don't know the exact differences though. But I would still take the panny over the W, so the V shouldn't even feature. But I suppose it's the 52 size which increases the price that much.

Another important thing to consider that might change the tech type is, how light is the room, window locations etc, and when is the tv mostly used ?
 
-Ad- said:
The V range is inferior to the W from what remember, don't know the exact differences though. But I would still take the panny over the W, so the V shouldn't even feature. But I suppose it's the 52 size which increases the price that much.

Another important thing to consider that might change the tech type is, how light is the room, window locations etc, and when is the tv mostly used ?
Click to expand...

Thats a very vaild point. After setting up my friends Panasonic at the weekend, you cant see a thing if it has the sun on it.

The main difference between the V and the W, is the W series features 100Hz motion flow and a higher contrast ratio. Id really recommend the W Series TV, as they are a very good set. I also believe they use a IPS panel which gives excellent colour repoduction.

If it was the V series or the Panasonic G10, i would take the G10. However, if it was the W series or the G10 i would buy the Sony. The W Series is a very good match for the Panasonic G10/15 sets. It all comes down to a cost / quailty question.
 
Interestingly was reading something today about OLED and it was saying how it does degrade over time.

Mitsubishi and their little 1.5inch square modular OLED screens, they reckoned lifespan of 20,000 hours. Still a hell of a long time for general tv usage, but as the article said for a commercial use that's 'only' abotu 2 and a half years non stop usage.
 
Ev0 said:
Interestingly was reading something today about OLED and it was saying how it does degrade over time.

Mitsubishi and their little 1.5inch square modular OLED screens, they reckoned lifespan of 20,000 hours. Still a hell of a long time for general tv usage, but as the article said for a commercial use that's 'only' abotu 2 and a half years non stop usage.
Click to expand...

yeah, the xel1 has a half-life of 17,000 hours apparently, or 708 days 24 hours a day, 2,125 days @ 8 hours a day.... 5.8 years in other words before the display reaches half brightness. compare that to the 60k or 100k hours half life being quoted now for lcd and plasma and its obvious its at a disadvange. i would expect 10 years from a display really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom