What Is The Best LCD TV Resolution To Get For The Wii

Ambro

Ambro

Ambro

Associate
Joined
12 Sep 2006
Posts
287
Hopefully I am getting an LCD TV that I was going to use with a Wii and also for linking up to a PC.

The Wii displays an 852 480 resolution but an lcd tv with that resolution would not be any good for a PC so is there any other resolutions that anyone can recommend.
 
Last edited:
It's between getting a standard definition lcd, 720p, or splashing out on a 1080p model.

I'd pick the first for gaming on the Wii, watching dvds, and watching the tele. A 720p set would be more suited for use with the pc and high def gaming (360/ps3). I wouldn't buy a 1080p lcd fullstop - prefering to go the plasma/projector route for the kind of money they go for.
 
You just need to find an HDTV that is reviewed as great for displaying normal standard definition TV via composite/compontent. I've not got a clue what's the best one, but don't worry too much about the specific resolutions, HDTV nowdays are 1366x768 I believe for 720p models.
 
Thanks, so what you are saying is that some TVs are better at displaying 420p but it does not really matter about the resolution. This makes it even more difficult to choose. :confused:

If anyone could say which TVs are good at displaying standard definition that would help a lot as I don't have a clue. :D
 
As mentioned, most LCD TVs are 720p and normally have a resolution of 1366x768. They will display Wii and TV fine and if you get a progressive scan DVD player, they look nice too. A normal telly can only do Wii and near DVD resolution when interlacing, an LCD will do them progressive, so you'll get a better picture.

1366x768 is a usable resolution for a PC if you are using it at a distance across your living room. Some stuff will seem a bit cramped as the res isn't that great for a PC screen, but at a distance of about 4m on a 32" TV, the text is already pretty small, a higher resolution would make it worse.

You can get 1080p TVs now, but they tend to be over £2000 at the moment. There's not a lot of point to them yet. They can be used for the next gen video players (BluRay and HD DVD) if you want to splash out for them. The PS3 and XBox360 can also theoretically use the resolution, but most games for the forseable future will use 720p resolution anyway. You may find it's cheaper to get a £600 720p now and £600 on a better 1080p set in 3 years time when you might actually have some content for it.

Plasmas look like they are being replaced by LCD. Most of them are far lower resolution that LCDs until you look at the bigger ones, then they are LCD money anyway. Plasma is old tech.

Projectors are great, but they aren't anywhere near as convenient. Great for movies and hardcore gaming, but you have to get out the screen and close the curtains, hardly something you'll be bothered to do for watching telly for a few minutes or having a quick game of Wii Sports. Projectors really need to be part of a home theatre set up, so even if the projector itself is cheap, you need to add screen, amp, speakers (and some good curtains). You also need lots of space and you'll need to do lots of wire routing if you want it to look neat.
 
Guigsy said:
Plasmas look like they are being replaced by LCD. Most of them are far lower resolution that LCDs until you look at the bigger ones, then they are LCD money anyway. Plasma is old tech.
Click to expand...
Plasma being replaced by LCD / Plasma is old tech...this sounds like something only sony would come out with..

I think you find LCD is an older tech then plasma....

Plasma being replaced by LCD
Pioneer/panny/LG plasma sales are way stronger then ever before with no sign of slowing down..

Plasma is old tech: So i guess you think even the new 1080p plasma's (pioneer/panny) are old tech ??

I think you got it mixed up with LCD/plasma's are replacing CRT tv's

It would be a little stupid if LCD did replace plasma screens as there is not a single LCD out there that can match a plasma for PQ..
 
Last edited:
Ambro said:
Hopefully I am getting an LCD TV that I was going to use with a Wii and also for linking up to a PC.

The Wii displays an 852 480 resolution but an lcd tv with that resolution would not be any good for a PC so is there any other resolutions that anyone can recommend.
Click to expand...
The most important thing is not what resolution LCD..

It much more important if the LCD can do 1:1 pixel mapping at 50hz for which ever LCD you choose..as without this support..It going be pretty bad for PC usage..

Eliot said:
what about those philips?? or maybe sharp i think ones that are optimised for sd
Click to expand...
Some Philips LCD's are know to be no good for PC usage..Same as some toshiba LCDs are not to good for PC..
 
Last edited:
Plasma is expensive, takes lots of power and produces thicker, heavier screens. It's also harder to squeeze enough plasma cells in to make high res tellies without making them huge. I know it's better than a few years ago, but plasma still suffers from burn-in.

The only advantage of plasma was the brighter picture, better contrast and no ghosting. All 3 of these have disappeared in recent generations of LCD. If your plasma is a couple of years old, it's probably much better than the equivalent LCD. Now I think that the £5k plasmas are only produced for those people who think plasma sounds better.
 
Guigsy said:
Plasma is expensive, takes lots of power and produces thicker, heavier screens. It's also harder to squeeze enough plasma cells in to make high res tellies without making them huge. I know it's better than a few years ago, but plasma still suffers from burn-in.
Click to expand...


test data regarding Plasma/LCD energy consumption

Test done by AVt.o.p. messtechnic in Germany, they tested a panasonic 42px60 plasma, LG 42LC2R LCD, Philips 42PF7621D LCD, Sony 40s200 LCD and a Samsung LE40R71B LCD. They measured the total energy consumed watching movies from DVD

Result watching 6 days, 7 nights (German version) (This is a movie that is quiet bright)

1. LG 42" LCD 200.10 Wh
2. Sony 40" LCD 208.60 Wh
3. Philips 42" LCD 218.90 Wh
4. Panasonic 42" Plasma 230.40 Wh
5. Samsung 40" LCD 239.20 Wh

Result watching X-Men (A rather dark movie)

1. Panasonic 42" Plasma 200.80 Wh
2. LG 42" LCD 205.70 Wh
3. Sony 40" LCD 213.80 Wh
4. Philips 42" LCD 224.60 Wh
5. Samsung 40" LCD 246.70 Wh

The Sony and Samsung were 2" smaller then the rest of the screens but they could not take advantage of this fact. (The Samsung actually preformed the worse in both movies)


My Plasma depth is only 90mm and weights 25kg...What the depth and weight of the average 40"+ LCD ??(sony 40v2000 = 103mm depth/27kg)(sony 40x2000 = 121mm depth)

The 42" 1080p plasma's are meant to be coming out sometime next year.
 
Last edited:
Appologies. Last time I saw a plasma (about 2 years ago), it has a power pack bigger than an XBox360s and a couple of fans and it was kicking out heat like no tomorrow. I would have guessed 500w from the size and heat-waves coming off of that brick. That was a 32".

I thought several manufacturers were dumping plasma now LCD had come on stream? They are more expensive (when you match the res), particularly for 'smaller' screens like 32". Most 42" Plasmas are still only 1024x768 which isn't really even 720p is it? (not enough columns?) You need to spend big money to get a high res plasma. For MOST people, LCD is the way ahead.
 
Actually I'm a bit puzzled about the power consumption of LCD TVs? I know one of the benefits of computer LCD monitors was their lower power consumption. eg. my 19" TFT uses about 30 watts versus probably around 100w for a same-size 19" CRT. So why is it that larger LCD TVs use as much or more power than same-size CRT televisions? eg. 26" LCD TVs use around 150w apparently? What's that all about then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom