TV Comparison

[Doombard]

Ok so I posted a thread earlier about my tv breaking and if it could be fixed...... but I decided to get a new one and I've narrowed it down to 2 hopefully.

Both are Vizio, both are 42'', both are LED. Only differences I can find are

TV1= 120hz 100,000:1 contrast ratio $748
TV2= 240hz 10,000,000:1 contrast ratio $998

So I guess my questions are this:

1. Are Vizio TV's good quality? I've read good things in reviews but want to make sure it does die in 2 years.
2. Will I be able to tell a difference with the hz and contrast ratio (I don't really know what either mean)

[shaddix]

What are the specific models you are looking at?
I suggest reading this if you haven't:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/fea...red?page=0%2C0

[Doombard]

http://www.samsclub.com/sams/shop/pr...navAction=push

and

http://www.samsclub.com/sams/shop/pr...navAction=push

edit: I read that site and apparently dynamic contrast ratio numbers mean jack, and the 60/120/240hz refresh apparently doesn't mean much.............. so is the $150 extra for the 2nd TV for being able to connect to the internet? blarg

[Kerberoz]

Refresh rate doesn't matter unless you care about 3D. Movies are 24-30fps and console games are only 30-60. Contrast ratings mean nothing because they're not held to any universal standard. I would say to visit Best Buy or something and actually compare the models, but electronics stores are shady as fuck and will intentionally screw up the settings (or use non-HDMI) on TVs with a low profit margin.

[Doombard]

electronics stores are shady as fuck and will intentionally screw up the settings (or use non-HDMI) on TVs with a low profit margin.

Yeah one time at best buy I got so annoyed at some fucker who asked me if I needed anything three times within 10 minutes piss me off so I asked him what's the difference between the $20 HDMI cable and the $80 HDMI cable and he said the $80 one would give me a better picture. I had to fight the urge to just smack him across his dumbass head.

[shaddix]

http://www.samsclub.com/sams/shop/pr...navAction=push

and

http://www.samsclub.com/sams/shop/pr...navAction=push

edit: I read that site and apparently dynamic contrast ratio numbers mean jack, and the 60/120/240hz refresh apparently doesn't mean much.............. so is the $150 extra for the 2nd TV for being able to connect to the internet? blarg

The difference in refresh rate has to do with the motion interpolation features. The 120 and 240hz(which is actually just 120hz with a scanning backlight at 240hz) panels allow for the TV to generate intermediate frames in whatever video you happen to be watching, so it will give the appearance of much higher FPS. It essentially makes everything look like a soap opera. It's good for nature shows.. some people like it on sports. Most people dislike it on movies.

The more expensive set, the XVT423SV, is definitely worth the extra cash. The main difference is that the XVT is a local-dimming LED set. The M420NV is an edge-lit set(essentially a normal LCD with a shittier backlight.) LED is only worth it if there it is a full-array local-dimming set. What this means is that the TV can dim the backlight in specific areas in order to make dark areas in scenes appear dark, instead of on edge-lit or CCFL-lit sets where the entire set always has a constant backlight(so blacks look greyish).
Basically, the XVT will have far better contrast and black levels than the M420NV set will, they are in different leagues entirely.

Are you set on Vizio and LCD? Depending on what you're doing with the set, you can get more bang for your buck by going with plasma.

[Doombard]

Not set on Vizio or LCD, just seems that the LED TV's always look better in stores which probably doesn't mean jack. I just want to make sure that I get a good brand that won't break like the polaroid TV I had. I always thought it was LED>LCD>Plasma for picture.

[Tythera]

LED>LCD>Plasma for picture.

http://imgur.com/7UxNv.jpg

That aside, you'll get the best picture from a good plasma within reasonable price ranges. LED backlits (that aren't edge lit) are getting there but I still think a decent plasma looks better when both are calibrated right.

[Doombard]

Well then after looking online for a little while I came across this TV from bestbuy


http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung+...&skuId=9789343

also looking at

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Panasoni...&skuId=9786054

[shaddix]

What are you going to be doing on the set? That is most important to your decision. For example, casual console gaming, any tv will work. If you're going to be playing hardcore SF4, then you need a very specific Panasonic LCD. If you're going to be playing a multitude of first person shooters, then the only plasma you should consider would be the Panasonics. If you're going to be playing MMOs on the thing, then I wouldn't recommend a plasma at all. If you're not going to play games whatsoever, then your room conditions become the primary factor. Where is the TV going to be placed in relation to any windows? What is your viewing distance from the set? Are you big into blu-ray or do you watch cable/satellite most of the time? These questions need to be answered in order to choose the correct TV.

From the two you listed above, the Samsung is the better set, unless you're primarily getting it for games.

[Outlaw]

Samsung are good. You can hardly go wrong. They consistently rate in the top ten in magazine or internet site reviews. I second the question of what your going to be doing on the set. It is a important factor.

[Saroyan]

The difference in refresh rate has to do with the motion interpolation features. The 120 and 240hz(which is actually just 120hz with a scanning backlight at 240hz) panels allow for the TV to generate intermediate frames in whatever video you happen to be watching, so it will give the appearance of much higher FPS. It essentially makes everything look like a soap opera. It's good for nature shows.. some people like it on sports. Most people dislike it on movies.



Are you set on Vizio and LCD? Depending on what you're doing with the set, you can get more bang for your buck by going with plasma.

I have a 54" S1 Panasonic Plasma, my friend has a 46" Samsung LED. I notice that soap opera effect on his Samsung and I really really don't like it. I watched one of the Lord of the Rings movies on there and it felt like I was watching something shot with a handycam, totally ruins the feel for me.

Also QFT on more bang for buck with plasma, I bought my 54" set in Feb. for the same price as a 46" Sony LCD.

[ArchDizzle]

Being the owner of all 3 types (Plasma, LED and LCD) Plasma is hands down the winner, and I use to be pretty pro LCD. All of my tv's are middle to high end and while the LED is really nice I had to go way up the tier to get one close to my Plasma (and spent a lot more on it then my Plasma as well). Plasma > LED (higher end properly back lit) > LCD. And to be honest you can usually get a lower base model plasma that will still be on par or better then a high end LCD.

[Anakron]

Plasmas are definitely very good for their money. The only LCDs that can really compare IMO are the Sony XBRs, which are much more expensive. But as shaddix said, Plasmas may not work well for you if you MMOs and have static health bars, etc.

[Adajer]

nvm