Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Plasma VS LCD - what are the major differences

Oct 11, 2006 12:59AM PDT

I'm pretty sure this has been asked 1000 times on here but rather than going back and searching, I thought I'd ask again.

My husband and I are currently looking at the Panasonic TH42pX600 - Apparently it's only a few months old. Anyway we actually went into Future shop looking at a SONY LCD but the sales person is a PLASMA fan and we might have let him make the decision for us. Don't get me wrong I LOVE the T.V. but my husband and I are not experts in this field therefore LCD's and Plasma's look the same to me. The ONLY difference I could see between the two was the glare that is visible in a Plasma and non existent in an LCD. Aside from this, is there any pro's and con's from one to another. I will be making this purchase in the next day or so and I'm pretty confident in the Plasma BUT I have to be sure because it's not inexpensive!!!

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
600 vs. 60
Nov 4, 2006 10:27PM PST

I also would like to know if the 600 is worth the difference in cost over the 60. Is the sound system that much better or would it be better to buy the 60 and a separate sound system?

- Collapse -
You can bet on
Nov 5, 2006 2:41AM PST

an exterior sound system offering much more. Then again, some people don't particularly care beyond having sound that isn't just obviously tinny.

It's not even a close comparison between an amp for audio with actually decent speakers versus the TV maker maybe adding a few watts of power to run small, afterthought speakers that cost them $10-20, tops.

- Collapse -
almost there
Nov 7, 2006 6:38AM PST

Thanks, that just about sums it up for me. I am 90% settled on the panasonic 60u and buying a separate sound system.

- Collapse -
a pro's perspective
Nov 7, 2006 1:06PM PST

I've been integrating plasma panels in the commercial world since they were first invented. The Fujitsu 20'' and 42'' were first panels available in the US. The 42'' model cost 20K in 1997 as I recall. Not one of the first gen panels we put in are still in service. We had more than one job where 4 or more plasma panels were outright replaced within a few months.
Over the years we have sold the NEC, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung, LG and a few other plasmas. Most do have excellent picture quality, and the prices continue to tumble. However, plasma is a dying technology, being steadily eroded (and finally surpassed) by the latest LCD technology.
Sony is stopping all plasma production, there is a reason for that.
What kept me from buying a plasma panel all this time (I like projectors) was seeing all the different ways plasma panels fail. From the dreaded burn to the vertical line blowouts to the blocks of dead cells and finally to the totally smeared image. Have a walk around the Las Vegas casinos and you'll see what I mean.
LCD panels suffer from none of those woes. The biggest gripe with LCDs is black levels, which have hugely improved recently, motion blur, also improved now to undetectable levels and largely an artifact of the source rather than the LCD, and the odd dead pixel.
We installed some Sharp 46'' LCDs in a job and finally I said 'there is a flat panel I can live with'. Might not do blacks as good as a plasma, but it sure does everything else better, and its easier to live with; turn it on and don't worry about the scroll bar at the bottom, or the static game graphics, or pausing the DVR.

- Collapse -
Nice post pro, but......
Nov 7, 2006 9:14PM PST

I am not so bold as to call myself a pro, but I have done my fair share of research over time. I read your message and agree with a point that you are trying to make. The reliability of plasma tvs is a subject that comes up all the time. So much, that I feel it might even be exaggerated. From my own experience, friends, and family experiences, I've learned that both technologys are shaky. Thats just the way it is right now. Personally, I do not plan on keeping my tv for a large amount of years anyway. LCD "might" be the all around superior technology (it should considering the prices) but one thing has always stood out to me. Motion blur continues to be a HUGE problem with a lot of LCD manufacturers. I would definitely not say that motion blur has improved to undectectable levels, as you did. I am not saying all LCDs, but many of them including a few popular brands that everyone likes. And its not the source of the signal. Plasma offers the best picture to money ratio right now. Plain and simple. Few people can dispute that. LCD technology did not become perfect overnight. I still see a lot of popular brands with the same old LCD problems. Anyway, the point that I am trying to stress is that the picture to money ratio is very important to most people. LCD definitely loses that battle.

- Collapse -
thanks but
Nov 8, 2006 8:06PM PST

Walked through our service department yesterday. The pile of broken plasma panels is getting quite large. And our techs hate working on them.
I do not dispute the picture/money advantage of plasma panels vs LCDs, (evidence of a technology on its downward slope) but that is changing very fast, at least the money part.
My main point is that PDP is on its way out. New R and D money is not being spent on PDP technology. Commercial users are getting away from PDP fast as they can.
A really fine CRT will outperform either technology, yet nobody is buying CRTs. Its the same thing, yesterdays technology.
And motion artifacts on a high-res display are usually associated to the MPEG2 format and the bitrate it was encoded with, which, now that we can really see it, is quite lousy.

- Collapse -
A really fine CRT will outperform either technology,
Nov 9, 2006 12:09AM PST

Yes they are considered to be dinosaurs.
"And motion artifacts on a high-res display are usually associated to the MPEG2 format and the bitrate it was encoded with, which, now that we can really see it, is quite lousy." You got this right!!!!
Everyone wants to blame the HDTV for this!
Bandwidth or lack of it is the problem, high compression ratios and fast motion do not mix well. john

- Collapse -
LCD vs Plasma
Nov 20, 2006 2:30AM PST

In your first post, you mentioned the fact that LCD screens have less glare, so I figured that may be important to you. It is to me--and having both a plasma and LCD TV, I can tell you the glare is a problem with plasma (most of them anyway) and not wth LCD. So if glare is an issue, go with LCD. If not, plasma.

- Collapse -
Hope you bought the Panasonic
Nov 22, 2006 12:48PM PST

Wow. I read through almost all of the postings here and am pretty surprised by some of them (ie: buy the Sony #1 tv in the world, etc.). Here's the breakdown:

Plasma:
PROS
-Faster reproduced picture (good for sports, fast moving images)
-More accurate colours than LCD
-Bigger pic for lower price (usually)
-Wider viewing angle than LCD
-Panasonic SPECIFIC: one of the best contrast ratios (light to dark) available, especially for the money
CONS
-The burn in potential is a definite reality, but is easily avoided.
-More glare than LCD

LCD:
PROS
-Vivid colours (usually)
-High resolution (the new XBRs are capable of 1080p)
-No glare
CONS
-Narrower viewing angle than plasmas (but not as bad as rear projections)
-Slow picture reproduction (motion blur)
-Cost more

I've been selling electronics for about 5 years, and took television technical operations in college for 2, so I have a pretty good idea about repair rates, picture adjustments, etc. The fact is, if you purchase a quality brand name product, provided you don't get one that is defective out of the box, you should have no reliability issues. According the Consumer Reports, there isn't enough measurable data to give a realistic percentage to repair rates, but both (plasma and lcd) look favourable. Don't listen to the Sony guy that keeps posting, he is WAY to unreasonably biased and is uninformed (ie: the difference btwn the Panasonic 60 and the 600 is speakers).

- Collapse -
Some points ...
Nov 23, 2006 10:45AM PST

Seeing how this thread just keeps going and going, here are some other points to ponder.

60,000 hrs for plasma - quite a number of years ago, and I do not remember which brand did this, someone had to put a number of plasma's through accelerated testing for military purposes. This is where the 60,000 hr life span came from. There is a white paper out there about this. This number represents an expected life, and may not mean anything when looking at cheaper sets today.

Just in case it still is valid, lets look at how long that really is.
Average family with kids, between kids watching after school and parents after kids are in bed, 8 hours per day X 7, add extra 3 hours X 2 days for weekends where TV might be on for cartoons in the morning and you have 62 hours per week. X 52 weeks = 3224 hr per year. 60,000/3224 = 18.61 years of use. Even if in the real world they only get 30,000 hrs, thats still 9 years of consistant use.
We lived with CRT sets that were typically rated for 10 - 15 years use. So under typical household use we know a plasma should last a resonable amount of time.

I haven't actually read any reports about LCD and how long they should last. What I do know, and it seems to get skipped over a lot, pixel burnout. Our persistant UK poster mentioned that PLasma was too expensive to make, I think that statement holds true for LCD too, there is a ton of waste in the production of LCD (unless something has dramatically changed in the last couple of years). LCD panels are made up of pixels, and they have a tolerance of 4 - 6 burned out pixel depending on the manufacture, any more than that and the panel is garbage (or sold to maxcent?). During a panels life time, pixels will burn out, not may but WILL. These represent tiny blue or red or green dots on your screen. A few on the outer edges may not be a big deal, but get one somewhere in the middle and the moment you notice it, it becomes all you can see. I have viewed older Sharp front projectors that look like they have achne, different coloured dots all over the screen. Lots of LCD monitors out there, look closely and you might find a burned out pixel, now imagine that on your new 42" LCD TV, and how much bigger it will look.

As for repairs, someone mentioned they have tons of Plasmas sitting in a repair shop, I am sure there are just as many LCD's sitting in repair shops too. I was at a service counter for (sorry, no name needed)and behind the counter were huge industrial racks about 10 ft high and at least 30 ft long, filled with lcd panels and lcd projectors. I don't believe one is better than the other when it comes to reliability, buy trusted names and your chances of not getting a lemon are at least better.

To our friend from the UK, you need to get a grip... What Hifi is a nice magazine, but like all A/V mags, keep reading. Another few months from now and something else will be the best. Magazines are a great way to see someone's opinion and possibly narrow down your search to a few choices that you want to actually go and see.

Panasonic plasma's certainly are concidered some of the best out there, we use their commerial (8UK and now 9UK) models in most of our installations. Clean lines, upgradable card based input slots and an excellent picture. There are a few other brands out there that are good too. Remember one other fact, in both LCD and Plasma there are only a few companies that actually make the LCD or plasma panels.

On another note, I think we still have a couple more years before the delivery system catches up with the quality new TV's "need". SD channels can look OK, or awful, but even some HD channels, which are not always delivering HD content, can look terrible too. I don't have HD in my home (yet) as I have a very expensive Pioneer Elite TV that still works and produces a great picture. I do look forward to replacing my set with something HD, because when you have the right set, and are watching something in true HD, it really is spectacular.

I know this doesn't answer the Plasma vs LCD debate, but I think there are enough good points in all the posts in this thread for someone to make up their mind.

Enjoy, it just TV....

- Collapse -
John
Nov 24, 2006 4:43AM PST

it'd be nice if people really in the know would share info as to who actually makes what kind of screens for others.

Also enjoyed your little dig at our long winded, self righteous UK friend.

- Collapse -
How the big boys fight it out
Nov 28, 2006 1:20AM PST
- Collapse -
WOW I can't believe my thread is still going
Nov 28, 2006 3:23AM PST

Soooo for those of you who care, I ended up buying the panasonic 42x60, didn't think the price difference for the 600 was worth it especially since we are connecting our own speakers to it.

I have had the T.V. for 2 days and love it. There is some glare but it's not bothersome as it's not as bad as I thought. I LOVE the T.V and whether or not Plasma is a dying technology, plasmas suffer burn-in etc. etc. etc....I love the T.V and am confident in my choice!
While I was at Future Shop - 2 others bought the same T.V. I'm sure if it was a horrible set, the word would get out and nobody would be buying the set so that's that, got the panel and couldn't be happier.

Be sure, I'll let you guys know if I have any problems but until them I'm going to enjoy my set!!!