Need a new tv for ps3

  • Thread starter Thread starter ronzer
  • 28 comments
  • 4,559 views
R

ronzer

Messages
140
Can anybody recommend a good 32 inch tv for ps3?
Do I need one with a fast refresh rate or is it not that critical for ps3,
Trying to decide on a tv or monitor, thanks for any help
 
Actually, it depends on how much you want to spend on a TV (I guess).

I, myself, would recommend a SONY TV. A nice feature, is the HDMI-control (I don't remember it's name), where you can use the remote, to navigate around the PS3.

Actually, the only thing you'll need, is a TV with an HDMI- or an AV-output, which, I believe, is quite normal nowadays.

It's your choice between LED and LCD. I'm very satisfied with LCD, thought.
 
Depends on country you live in. That might be between Samsung and Sony. Their TV's are great although Sony did asleep a little this competition and Samsung does pretty awesome TV's

Actually i'm thinking of changing mine 55 inch LCD sony to 65 inch LED samsung. But i have to see it first on some store to asses the real size of that thing.

Mid ranges TV's are great, you don't have to spend all your money on full multimedia monster because you will spend less time playing video games and more time watching stupid TV or streaming medias from internet.
 
I did a lot of research on the Internet as I have recently bought 2 tv's, and what kept coming up, in my research anyway, was either Samsung or Sony were the best. I've got a 50 inch Samsung plasma, and a 55 Sony LED LCD.
Plasma are almost always cheaper, don't think LED/LCD are better just because they are more expensive. To be honest I prefer the plasma for the PS3, but I have the Sony LCD in the main lounge because it's slightly bigger and the matte screen shows less reflections. I just wanted to have one of each (I don't really know why) but if I was buying another I would go plasma
 
ronzer
Can anybody recommend a good 32 inch tv for ps3?
Do I need one with a fast refresh rate or is it not that critical for ps3,
Trying to decide on a tv or monitor, thanks for any help
Click to expand...

The refresh rate is important but more important is the response time usually measured in ms. something that can make or break your gaming experience because of the so called input lag.

Unfortunately I'm no expert on what good TVs for gaming are out there at the moment since I bought mine 3 years ago.

I would suggest you to google around for a 1080 TV with a 120 refresh rate and a response time of sub 0.5ms

EDIT: plasmas are great for gaming because of their fast response time (up to 2000 times quicker than a LCD with 5ms or 2ms)
 
It should be fine but it is up to you. But you just can't go past Samsung or Sony for your PS3.
 
ronzer
the response time is 6.5ms I just want to know if this is to much for GT5?
I dont want any lag .
Click to expand...

I don't know much about the vizios. The E320i-A2 was decent, but only 720p and 60Hz. The E420i-A1 is really good (1080p, 120Hz), but maybe too big? Can it be too big? Costs about the same as the M32, but is much bigger.


I personally have a Samsung UE32C5100, which is the european version of the UN32C5100. The C models are from 2010, D from 2011, etc.

I recommend the UN32EH5000 series if you want direct-lit, or the UN32F5000 series if edge-lit is ok. F is from 2013 whereas E is from 2012. The picture of the F series seems to be better according to reviews.



I must mention that the new 6000 series does have 120Hz refresh rate, but input lag seems to be 1.5-2 times as high with them. Reviews also say that the 6000 isn't really superior to the 5000 series.

I fear the M series could have the same problem. All I know is that as example the M3D550KDE is terrible in input lag.



EDIT:
ronzer
Is this modal any good? Samsung UN32EH5000
I can find the response time for it.
Thanks
Click to expand...
What a coincidence!
:)

Yeah it's a very good TV. Although I'd probably take the F series (newer version of the same TV) as I wrote above.

EH: Direct-lit
F: Minor improvements, refined features, only edge-lit though (just like all vizios, so don't see this as bad point)



EDIT2: With gaming mode on I seriously can't feel the slightest bit of input lag. I own 3 LCD/LED TVs, 1 Monitor and 2 CRTs (had more but they're broken now :), the crt's not the lcds just to be clear) in different sizes and this one is definitely the one with the lowest input lag compared to the LCD/LEDs. Even with gaming mode turned off it's not really noticeable.
 
Last edited:
dr_slump
I don't know much about the vizios. The E320i-A2 was decent, but only 720p and 60Hz. The E420i-A1 is quite good (1080p, 120Hz), but maybe too big? Can it be too big? Costs about the same as the M32, but is much bigger.


I personally have a Samsung UE32C5100, which is the european version of the UN32C5100. The C models are from 2010, D from 2011, etc.

I recommend the UN32EH5000 series if you want direct-lit, or the UN32F5000 series if edge-lit is ok. F is from 2013 whereas E is from 2012. The picture of the F series seems to be better according to reviews.



I must mention that the new 6000 series does have 120Hz refresh rate, but input lag seems to be 1.5-2 times as high with them. Reviews also say that the 6000 isn't really superior to the 5000 series.

I feat the M series could have the same problem. All I know is that as example the M3D550KDE is terrible in input lag.



EDIT:

What a coincidence!
:)

Yeah it's a very good TV. Although I'd probably take the F series (newer version of the same TV) as I wrote above.

EH: Direct-lit
F: Minor improvements, refined features, only edge-lit though (just like all vizios, so don't see this as bad point)



EDIT2: With gaming mode on I seriously can't feel the slightest bit of input lag. I own 4 LCD/LED TVs and 2 CRTs in different sizes and this one is definitely the one with the lowest input lag. Even with gaming mode turned off it's not really noticeable.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the help, I will check out the Samsung
 
Samsung works well with the PS3.

As for what was posted before about Plasma sets that is not correct. Plasma sets are not typically faster than LCD sets, quite the opposite in fact. The plasma tvs I have looked at have a response time of over 20ms where all 4 of my LCDs have a response time under 15ms with the best one being 5ms.

Plasma is also not so good for video gaming in that it burns in very easy where LCD does not burn in at all. You can leave a grid image up on a plasma for 10 minutes and you will still see traces of it when the screen changes. On the other hand you could leave that same grid image up on an LCD for a year and when the screen changes there is no trace of the grid.

I do not know about the LEDs as I have did no research on them but I can tell you that a cheap Vizio 32 inch LCD works just fine on PS3 and Xbox and well as a computer monitor.
 
I do think that one thread would have been enough to get some advice on a display.

A few points:
- 120/240hz motion interpolation on a tv will only introduce more lag. 120hz refresh rate on a monitor can give marginal improvement, but will not with a PS3.
- Best response times for currently available tech will come with a plasma, but size starts at 42".
- Led displays do exist but only massive things at football stadiums and such. The marketing of led is the glorification of an alternate lcd backlight. Aside from locally dimming "led" tvs, the led lcds are no better than ccfl lcds by default.

From what is currently available, a plasma display will give the best results (Samsung or Panasonic please) for response times, but the size could be an issue. Best results for lag might be a good monitor, as they tend to do less processing.

All the offerings from leading brands should look great with static images, it's the motion handling and lag that is the real issue for gaming. Also, a simple way to set up the displayed image is to grab a Pixar movie on DVD/BD and go through the setup steps.
 
HBR-Roadhog
Samsung works well with the PS3.

As for what was posted before about Plasma sets that is not correct. Plasma sets are not typically faster than LCD sets, quite the opposite in fact. The plasma tvs I have looked at have a response time of over 20ms where all 4 of my LCDs have a response time under 15ms with the best one being 5ms.

Plasma is also not so good for video gaming in that it burns in very easy where LCD does not burn in at all. You can leave a grid image up on a plasma for 10 minutes and you will still see traces of it when the screen changes. On the other hand you could leave that same grid image up on an LCD for a year and when the screen changes there is no trace of the grid.

I do not know about the LEDs as I have did no research on them but I can tell you that a cheap Vizio 32 inch LCD works just fine on PS3 and Xbox and well as a computer monitor.
Click to expand...

Plasma definitely has better response times, it's the input/processing lag that you should be pointing to.

Burn in and image retention depends on brand and model. My Pioneer has an orbiter which works the pixels constantly to avoid burn in.
 
I have a Samsung 40 inch Plasma set that I do use with the PS3 and while it is a great set I would not recommend it for use with any game console. The screen burn in is the real issue with them. It is very noticeable playing Forza on it. You can pull up the race event list on it and leave it up for just a short while then when you go into the race you can still see traces of it on the screen while you are racing, same for the leaderboards, menus and any other static image that uses bright lines.

I also use a 37 inch Vizio LCD and it works flawlessly with just a 60hz refresh rate. Never any burn in issues and the image looks just as good as the Plasma, better actually because there are no ghost lines on the screen when you have left a static menu up to long.

Granted my Plasma set is about 3 or 4 years old now but burn in has always been an issue with plasma sets and not with LCD

Looks like I was mistaken about the response time, I do not even see that listed on any of the plasma sets now but thought I remember seeing them listed as high as 65ms in the past.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_display
Advantages

Picture quality
Capable of producing deeper blacks allowing for superior contrast ratio[5][6][7]
Wider viewing angles than those of LCD; images do not suffer from degradation at high angles like LCDs[5][6]
Less visible motion blur, thanks in large part to very high refresh rates and a faster response time, contributing to superior performance when displaying content with significant amounts of rapid motion (Though newer LCD screens have similar refresh rates, that also introduces the soap opera effect).[5][6][8][9]

Disadvantages

Earlier generation displays were more susceptible to screen burn-in and image retention, recent models have a pixel orbiter that moves the entire picture slower than is noticeable to the human eye, which reduces the effect of burn-in but does not prevent it.[10]
Due to the bistable nature of the colour and intensity generating method, some people will notice that plasma displays have a shimmering or flickering effect with a number of hues, intensities and dither patterns.
Earlier generation displays (circa 2006 and prior) had phosphors that lost luminosity over time, resulting in gradual decline of absolute image brightness (newer models may be less susceptible to this, having advertised lifespans exceeding 100 000 hours, far longer than older CRT technology)[4][7]
Screen-door effects are possible on screen sizes larger than 127 cm (50 in); the effect is more visible at shorter viewing distances.[11]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ronzer
Thanks for the help, I will check out the Samsung
Click to expand...
If you think the EH is too fat, that's because of the direct-lit. All models with H are like this. The F is thin again.


I just saw they're offering a UN32EH5300 and UN32F5500, which have some fancy smart TV functions, whereas the normal 5000 series doesn't. They don't seem to be much more expensive.
 
HBR-Roadhog
I have a Samsung 40 inch Plasma set that I do use with the PS3 and while it is a great set I would not recommend it for use with any game console. The screen burn in is the real issue with them. It is very noticeable playing Forza on it. You can pull up the race event list on it and leave it up for just a short while then when you go into the race you can still see traces of it on the screen while you are racing, same for the leaderboards, menus and any other static image that uses bright lines.

I also use a 37 inch Vizio LCD and it works flawlessly with just a 60hz refresh rate. Never any burn in issues and the image looks just as good as the Plasma, better actually because there are no ghost lines on the screen when you have left a static menu up to long.

Granted my Plasma set is about 3 or 4 years old now but burn in has always been an issue with plasma sets and not with LCD
Click to expand...


What is the response time on your Vizio? and do you get any lag?
Thanks
 
HBR-Roadhog
I have a Samsung 40 inch Plasma set that I do use with the PS3 and while it is a great set I would not recommend it for use with any game console. The screen burn in is the real issue with them. It is very noticeable playing Forza on it. You can pull up the race event list on it and leave it up for just a short while then when you go into the race you can still see traces of it on the screen while you are racing, same for the leaderboards, menus and any other static image that uses bright lines.
Click to expand...

That is image retention, rather than burn in. I had a Panasonic that was quite bad in that area.
 
ronzer
What is the response time on your Vizio? and do you get any lag?
Thanks
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure it is listed as 5ms. No lag, nice tv and not very expensive. I use it as a PC monitor, Gaming screen and TV.

My brother has a 32 which is just like it accept the 32 inch model only does 720P where the 37 does 1080p still on a 32 inch screen 720p looks very good. I could not really tell a difference between the 2.

I did have a 32 inch RCA LCD before that I used for the same things. I think it had a response time of 11ms and never had an issue with that either picture wise. Power supply died about 2 weeks after the warranty expired though :(

That is image retention, rather than burn in. I had a Panasonic that was quite bad in that area.
Click to expand...
Yes... sorry, burn in would be more severe, the retention can be quite annoying though.
 
ronzer
I am leaning towards this one, but cant find the response time.
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN32EH5300FXZA
Click to expand...

You mean the numbers the manufacturers show on their websites? Useless

The 40F5000 was measured at around 22-25ms, the EH at the same, the 32EH at even lower numbers. Smaller displays from the same series normally perform better.

The numbers seem high, but it was measured by using this method: http://www.displaylag.com/the-lag-tester-a-new-standard/

Even top (input lag wise) Monitors such as the ASUS VH236H (which has a very good reputation for gaming use) were measured at about 18ms by using this method. So just about 5ms more for a 40" TV is damn good. The 32" model performs just as good or even slightly better.

Vizios are around 25-35, which is still very good.




EDIT: If measured by conventional methods, all those TVs would be under 10ms (expected at around 5ms).
 
Last edited:
Yes, specs are marketing, nothing else.

Just check that the model that you are considering is actually a full array/locally dimming backlit version, as some seem to be saying that it is not. It will make a huge difference to black levels.
 
LeMansAid
Yes, specs are marketing, nothing else.

Just check that the model that you are considering is actually a full array/locally dimming backlit version, as some seem to be saying that it is not. It will make a huge difference to black levels.
Click to expand...

All EH are direct-lit, which is already better than the edge-lit of most other TVs (apart from being thicker). Full array is a dream in his price class, or could you show me a good one for an affordable price?
 
dr_slump
All EH are direct-lit, which is already better than the edge-lit of most other TVs (apart from being thicker). Full array is a dream in his price class, or could you show me a good one for an affordable price?
Click to expand...

Ah, I mistakenly thought that you were mistakenly thinking that direct lit equaled full array, sorry. I don't think that we have even one model that is full array in Australia any more actually.

So yes, they should definitely go with direct lit, otherwise it might even be a step down from ccfl.
 

Similar threads

E
PS5 and Xbox Series X
Replies
4
Views
961
ExoticMachines
E
Todt
32 inch curved monitor for simracing
Replies
16
Views
7K
Todt
Todt
PirovacBoy
LG Oled TV for Gran Turismo 7
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
shadow0460
S
C
Logitech G29
Replies
2
Views
819
cdk
C
Jezza819
Bigger computer monitor or tv as a monitor?
Replies
13
Views
4K
wheelhp
wheelhp

Latest Posts

Back