做出正确的选择： LCD电视或血浆电视？
或许您计划得到新的电视为你自己。 您也许看LCD电视(液晶显示)或血浆电视和设法推测这二有何区别。
血浆和LCD有固有力量和弱点。 完全，电视的这二个类型是相当相似的。 他们两个比血浆非常稀薄提供盘区象形状与LCD少许稀释剂。 然而，他们使用另外技术为提供近似结果。 如此，电视是更好的？
技术上，没有简单的直接的答复用期限，其中是更好的。 两个有他们的好处和缺点。 例如， LCD电视为所有特定大小一般是轻，并且它也是经营的致冷机。 它引起较少热与血浆电视比较。 LCD电视也许是一个更好的选择，如果您打算围住登上您的电视，因为它是更轻和更加安全的。 说到这点， LCD电视丢失根据大小作为一个购买的因素。 大屏幕大小为血浆电视是可利用的。 它容易地到达65英寸和更多。 LCD电视是传染性的在这缺点通过设法出来与大屏幕电视。 根据费用， LCD电视比相似的大小血浆电视昂贵。
血浆电视有更好的对比比率和颜色细节例如颜色准确性和饱和。 它也有一个更好的视角与LCD电视比较。 LCD电视一般导致更加明亮的图片并且有更好的好处在它的当地决议。 不管大小，所有LCD电视来以当地高定义决议与血浆电视比较。 一个标准LCD电视模型的决议通常是1,366由768个映像点或1,280由720个映像点与只是800由仅480个映像点的预算血浆电视比较。 LCD电视高端模型可能由1,080个映像点决议甚而有1,920。
根据行动跟踪，血浆电视有更好的好处。 特别是在快行场面期间一些个LCD屏幕在体育或电影，倾向于有模糊的照片。 另一方面，血浆电视也许有时遭受屏幕烧伤问题。 当图象在屏幕和结果留给太长在永久地时，被烧的那个图象鬼魂屏幕留下深刻印象发生。 However, this problem has been gradually overcome in the latest Plasma TVs. Newer Plasma TVs are less susceptible due to the improved technology.
LCD TVs have an edge in terms of power consumption. LCD TVs generally can save up to 30 percent power usage compared to Plasma TVs. LCD TVs have longer life spans in comparison to Plasma TVs. Compared to LCD TVs, Plasma TVs have altitude problems. Plasma TVs do not perform as well at higher altitudes. This problem doesn’t exist for LCD TVs.
Both LCD TV and Plasma TV have their advantages and disadvantages over each other. Of course, the last factor to consider is still the budget in your pocket!
IMPORTANT: This is a machine translated page which is provided "as is" without warranty. Machine translation may be difficult to understand. Please refer to original English article whenever possible.
Share and contribute or get technical support and help at My Digital Life Forums.
Related Articles
- World’s Largest TV?
- Cool USB Plasma Ball
- New Plasma TV Power Regulation Proposed For Australian Market
- New Samsung 3D-Ready Plasma TV Boasting 1000000:1 Contrast Ratio
- World Largest LCD TV: Sharp’s 108-Inch
- How NOT to Ship a HDTV
- New Record for the World’s Largest TV
- Global Gadget Mania
- Samsung HP-S4253 42-inch HD Plasma TV Review by Sci-Tech Today
- Philips 50-Inch Plasma HDTV Reviews
Entries (RSS)
March 19th, 2007 10:02
One thing I can tell you is that if you live above approx. 6,500ft sea level, LCD is your only choice. Plasma TV’s, because of some interaction with the gas envelope that I only vaguely understood, tend to buzz and burn out in weeks or months at high altitude. I found this out in Santa Fe when the Best Buy salesman made sure I wasn’t a Los Alamos resident before selling me a plasma TV.
PS for my money plasma is still much better than LCD in matching price ranges.
March 20th, 2007 23:21
Well even after eading this rticle,i am nable to justify which to buy.i read this blog and the prices are in Rs can i know in dollars price sof lcds
http://hdtvindia.blogspot.com
March 21st, 2007 23:10
Power consumption LCD vs Plasma:
The article is not correct about power consumption differences between plasma and LCD. The article is probably based on the manufacturers quoted numbers (which deserves a foot note) the consumption of an LCD display is constant and will not change in relation of the displayed image (the manuf.quoted numbers are in this case the min.,max and average consumption) A plasma screen will consume less power when the displayed image is dark and more when light, The quoted figure is the maximum power consumption. In daily usage the difference between lcd and plasma is very little.
Below the results of a test done in Germany:
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)
June 15th, 2008 03:18
On my Sony 46″ LCD TV, the backlight on the maximum setting uses 100 watts more than the backlight on the mininimum setting (237 watts vs 137 watts). My Kill-a-Watt also says my Sharp 26″ LCD TV showed a similar correlation between the backlight setting and energy usage. The Sony 46″ LCD TV has a Power Saving setting which reduces energy usage to 87 watts (instead of 137 watts), though the picture is pretty dim in Power Saving mode. No other picture settings other than backlight had any effect on the power usage.