TVs for gaming

Steve O

Hows it.

I am looking for an excellent TV for gaming, I have an xbox 360 and plan on doing a lot more gaming over the coming year. Any suggestions on the specs or specific brand I should look out for?

Cheers

Creamy Goodness

Panasonic, plasma.

/thread

Kylo Ren

Samsung LCD

/Thread

um7y1h83ge06nx

Black Diamond CRT

/thread

Big Knox

LG LED

/Thread

the_syco

Check for a decent response time.

More than 16ms is bad.

5ms or less is good.

Some TV's have a "gaming mode" where the TV passes the signal through with minimal processing so there's no image lag.

Headshot

PLasma's would probably be the best for gaming. Lower response times (panny range) and some say better picture

um7y1h83ge06nx

Giving a more serious response to my last one I would maybe recommend avoiding plasmas as I think that burn in is still a real issue.

I have a Panasonic plasma from their 2012 range. Amazing TV and bought it as a display model for a bargain. Thing I'd I notice done burn in. Now it could be down to the fact that the TV was used excessively in a short period of time buy I would be a little nervous of playing games on it.

ShadowHearth

Did they sorted the burn in problem with plasma? Last time I was looking in to this they were the worst choice for gaming. Over all as TV too as those are the worst when it comes to picture detail, but they were not so restricted to go in to bigger sizes as Lcds.

One thing. Would suggest for a gaming TV - don't go mad on a size. It always sounds awesome to have bigger TV, but with bigger TV you get bigger size pixels. So the same 1080p/720p will look a lot better on smaller screen then big feck off bastard.
I know it won't count for much if you sit at long distance from TV, but I personally like to be close to TV when playing games.

um7y1h83ge06nx

My TV was tuned into RTE2 most of the time before I bought it. I used a scrolling bar anti retention option on the TV and I think that improved it. In fairness it's not very noticeable at all and it was probably tuned to the same station for 9 hours a days for a few months.

The Xbox upstairs is plugged into a 32 inch Samsung LCD TV from 2006,.no problems with it at all although it's only 720p.

Steve O

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Did they sorted the burn in problem with plasma? Last time I was looking in to this play were the worst choice for gaming. Over all too as their the worst when it comes to picture detail, but they were not so restricted to go in to bigger sizes as Lcds.

One thing. Would suggest for a gaming TV - don't go mad on a size. It always sounds awesome to have bigger TV, but with bigger TV you get bigger size pixels. So the same 1080p/720p will look a lot better on smaller screen then big feck off bastard.
I know it won't count for much if you sit at long distance from TV, but I personally like to be close to TV when playing games.

Me too actually. I'm looking at 32 inches as its for my bedroom, gonna invest in a gaming chair too. I always try to sit at a distance but I find when I'm immersed in a game I'm nearly hugging the TV

gizmo

Nayeli Rancid Bat wrote: »

Giving a more serious response to my last one I would maybe recommend avoiding plasmas as I think that burn in is still a real issue.

I have a Panasonic plasma from their 2012 range. Amazing TV and bought it as a display model for a bargain. Thing I'd I notice done burn in. Now it could be down to the fact that the TV was used excessively in a short period of time buy I would be a little nervous of playing games on it.

+1 to the Plasma pannys.

I have a P46GT30 at home (2011 model, picked up in 2012) and I absolutely love it. I've noticed zero burn in too which, as far as I'm aware, is fairly unsurprising given how the technology has improved over the last number of years.

Big Knox

I've had the opportunity to use a lot of different TV's when gaming over the past few years and my own personal preference would be a nice LED over plasma. Most of the issues namely burn issues have been fixed on plasma but I still don't think they look as good as a high refresh rate LED.

1080P is a given but 100Hz refresh rate minimum with a low response time is optimal. Samsung make some fantastic TV's but you can't go wrong with LG either!

Agricola

Response time / lag is the biggest issue to consider. Best to read as many reviews of the tv as you can before you take the plunge. Expert Reviews or HDTVTest are the two sites I use. Order them by price, or whatever is your baseline criteria.

I got a 40" Samsung LCD that does a great job on SDTV and HD video but its pretty bad for games due to the desperate response time. You can improve it alot by switching on game mode but that makes everything alot less sharp. Without game mode, PS3 games can look almost as sharp as PC games in places but the lag is the killer. When you have game mode on, everything gets fairly muddy, and as another poster said, on a 40" screen that muddyness is very apparent.

I found that it was hard to get a screen (for realistic money) that could do SDTV, Blu Rays and games well. There was always some trade-off. So if this is only going to be a gaming TV, spend as much as you can on getting something that will have no lag problem.

ShadowHearth

Another bit to consider when buying flat screen TV. All those TVs are not made to last, so their life spam is quite short. I would recomend getting the longest warranty you can, then just "drop" it when warranty goes off.
From my own experience: there is nothing worse then get your TV pop, which costed 1700eu, 2 weeks after standart warranty was up. I **** you not!

GarIT

There's a 40 inch 1080p 100hz Tobhiba in bargain alerts going for €380, it could be a decent cheap option.

Starscream25

my samsung 40inch LED series 5 does just nicely, cant complain at all with my gaming picture quality, very sharp visuals. when combined with HDMI and full 1080p output 60hz

chopperbyrne

Response time does not measure input lag.

Check out this thread: http://forums.shoryuken.com/discussion/55593/the-new-definitive-hdtv-lag-faq#latest

This is the official monitor for Evo (worlds largest fighting game tournament): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236059

Doctor DooM

If you want a proper gaming tv listen to chopper.

Most people don't know what makes a good gaming tv!

Steve O

Thanks lads, I never knew choosing a TV would be so much work.

Steve O

Has anyone a link to somewhere that I can find out the response times? Samsung don't have it on their website and Google is useless.

theteal

Nayeli Rancid Bat wrote: »

The Xbox upstairs is plugged into a 32 inch Samsung LCD TV from 2006,.no problems with it at all although it's only 720p.

Iirc, very few xbox games exceed 720P

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Another bit to consider when buying flat screen TV. All those TVs are not made to last, so their life spam is quite short. I would recomend getting the longest warranty you can, then just "drop" it when warranty goes off.
From my own experience: there is nothing worse then get your TV pop, which costed 1700eu, 2 weeks after standart warranty was up. I **** you not!

Warranty does not supersede your consumer rights.

OP, it's really not that big of a decision, just keep a budget in mind and have a look around to make the most of it. I'd be happy going 720P for anything up to 32". Just steer clear of any of cheap crap form tesco/argos etc and you'll be fine

chopperbyrne

theteal wrote: »

Iirc, very few xbox games exceed 720P



Warranty does not supersede your consumer rights.

OP, it's really not that big of a decision, just keep a budget in mind and have a look around to make the most of it. I'd be happy going 720P for anything up to 32". Just steer clear of any of cheap crap form tesco/argos etc and you'll be fine

Often those cheap crap have so little extra features and processing to the image they're better for gaming than most main brand TVs.

OP, if you just want a sharp image and good sound, then go ahead and get a Samsung or LG in your budget, but if you want a TV/Monitor that is actually really good for gaming, then do a bit of research with the link I provided.

Duggy747

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Did they sorted the burn in problem with plasma? Last time I was looking in to this they were the worst choice for gaming. Over all as TV too as those are the worst when it comes to picture detail, but they were not so restricted to go in to bigger sizes as Lcds.

I've a 42'' Panasonic plasma TV that I have the HTPC hooked up to so it's an all-rounder for gaming, TV / Movies, and general computing usage like web browsing and what-not. It's the main machine I use when I'm at home and the one I'm typing this post on at the moment.

Honestly can't complain about burn-ins though I've seen it happen on older or cheaper plasma models but only if you leave things static for hours and hours on end. Most modern plasmas will have an in-built function to clear away any sort of light burn-in or have a strong resistance to them.

I've played some games for hours on end where the HUD is static, when I exit out of it you can barely see it but it vanishes after a few minutes.

Definitely don't see them as the worst for gaming or picture quality, they're fantastic since they have low response time and you'll get really vivid and the deepest colours with the format. Bioshock Infinite looked stunning in 1080p with the vibrant colours on it.

Like everything, though, there's all sorts of makes and models so some are worse than others for various things and it can go down to personal preference in the end. Spend a little time researching and you'll find what you need. The AVSforum is fairly handy, too.

I personally prefer plasma over LCD / LED for picture quality and I find it perfect for the gaming I do, anyways.

Doctor DooM

Duggy747 wrote: »

I've a 42'' Panasonic plasma TV that I have the HTPC hooked up to so it's an all-rounder for gaming, TV / Movies, and general computing usage like web browsing and what-not. It's the main machine I use when I'm at home and the one I'm typing this post on at the moment.

Honestly can't complain about burn-ins though I've seen it happen on older or cheaper plasma models but only if you leave things static for hours and hours on end. Most modern plasmas will have an in-built function to clear away any sort of light burn-in or have a strong resistance to them.

I've played some games for hours on end where the HUD is static, when I exit out of it you can barely see it but it vanishes after a few minutes.

Definitely don't see them as the worst for gaming or picture quality, they're fantastic since they have low response time and you'll get really vivid and the deepest colours with the format. Bioshock Infinite looked stunning in 1080p with the vibrant colours on it.

Like everything, though, there's all sorts of makes and models so some are worse than others for various things and it can go down to personal preference in the end. Spend a little time researching and you'll find what you need. The AVSforum is fairly handy, too.

I personally prefer plasma over LCD / LED for picture quality and I find it perfect for the gaming I do, anyways.

Once again, none of that actually measures whether a tv is good for gaming or not.

You need an input lag test as pointed out by chopper.

If you want a good TV full stop... that's a very different thing!

Burning Eclipse

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Once again, none of that actually measures whether a tv is good for gaming or not.

With respect Brian, response time, input lag, etc. do not a 'good' tv make for a lot of people. Not everyone is in the enthusiast category where frames count.

Last game I finished was Bioshock Infinite. For me, having a TV with great black levels and contrast range was more important than having one with great response time. By the same token, I played Rocksmith for a bit (must get back to that) and they recommend you use VGA if you don't have HDMI - which my launch 360 certainly doesn't, because the lag is less than it would be through component.

OP, what do you value in your imaging? Do you need minimal latency, etc. because you're playing twitch shooters and fighting games? Or are you more interested in a nice workhorse that will make games look as 'pretty' as possible. They're 2 different things, and almost mutually exclusive.

Projector

/Thread

Agricola

Burning Eclipse wrote: »

With respect Brian, response time, input lag, etc. do not a 'good' tv make for a lot of people. Not everyone is in the enthusiast category where frames count.

Last game I finished was Bioshock Infinite. For me, having a TV with great black levels and contrast range was more important than having one with great response time. By the same token, I played Rocksmith for a bit (must get back to that) and they recommend you use VGA if you don't have HDMI - which my launch 360 certainly doesn't, because the lag is less than it would be through component.

OP, what do you value in your imaging? Do you need minimal latency, etc. because you're playing twitch shooters and fighting games? Or are you more interested in a nice workhorse that will make games look as 'pretty' as possible. They're 2 different things, and almost mutually exclusive.

Thats why I bought the TV I have despite the lag problems, because I knew I would only be playing single player games on the PS3. My reasoning then was, without the need for the most responsive screen I could just get something with great postprocessing tech and really make the game pretty. The practicality of that was very different though. Playing Red Dead Redemption in the TVs normal mode (i.e. postprocessing on) gives you a very juddery experience where missing frames are a constant problem. Quick 360 camera spins around the character nearly give you motion sickness. When you use game mode though, the problem is much reduced but at the expense of image quality.

So point being, even if you want a great image and are willing to compromise on response times, you still may end up with an unacceptable experience.

Doctor DooM

Burning Eclipse wrote: »

With respect Brian, response time, input lag, etc. do not a 'good' tv make for a lot of people. Not everyone is in the enthusiast category where frames count.

Last game I finished was Bioshock Infinite. For me, having a TV with great black levels and contrast range was more important than having one with great response time. By the same token, I played Rocksmith for a bit (must get back to that) and they recommend you use VGA if you don't have HDMI - which my launch 360 certainly doesn't, because the lag is less than it would be through component.

I'd be very, very interested in hearing why component is supposed to generate more lag than VGA-seeing as both are analogue signals- bear in mind who you're talking to here

I'm not buying the colour thing, btw- a baseline requirement of a game is that it be playable, you can worry about all other things after that. But if you're getting input lag and are not aware of it, you will be finding games tougher than their supposed to be, or in extreme cases will feel like your character is not responding correctly.

o1s1n

As far as CRTs go, the Sony Trinitron KV-29X5L 29 is amazing. Monster flat 29 inch 4:3 screen that gives an amazing image. I'd get rid of all of my new TV tech before getting rid of that.

Real cream of the crop with CRTs is the Sony PVM line. They're studio quality CRTs and really made to last. Picture is insanely good.

No lag on any of the above ...

ScumLord

If 27" would suffice you should consider a PC monitor. You get a much better panel for half the price of a tele and it won't require a TV license.

They are purpose built devices and have pretty quick response times. The average seems to be around 5ms on the monitors I've looked at.

Kirby

ScumLord wrote: »

If 27" would suffice you should consider a PC monitor. You get a much better panel for half the price of a tele and it won't require a TV license.

They are purpose built devices and have pretty quick response times. The average seems to be around 5ms on the monitors I've looked at.

Not for long. There is a push by our "government"(I use the term scathingly and loosely), to rebrand it as an entertainment license and basically charge every person in the country who owns any device capable of displaying media. So your monitor, your phone, your ipod, etc.

It would be scandalous anywhere else. Par for the course here.

Steve O

Burning Eclipse wrote: »

With respect Brian, response time, input lag, etc. do not a 'good' tv make for a lot of people. Not everyone is in the enthusiast category where frames count.

Last game I finished was Bioshock Infinite. For me, having a TV with great black levels and contrast range was more important than having one with great response time. By the same token, I played Rocksmith for a bit (must get back to that) and they recommend you use VGA if you don't have HDMI - which my launch 360 certainly doesn't, because the lag is less than it would be through component.

OP, what do you value in your imaging? Do you need minimal latency, etc. because you're playing twitch shooters and fighting games? Or are you more interested in a nice workhorse that will make games look as 'pretty' as possible. They're 2 different things, and almost mutually exclusive.

If possible, one with a great picture and very little lag. I play mostly single player games, Fallout, skyrim, red dead, GTA, Metal Gear. Few racing games like need for speed etc. But again mostly single player games. The budget isn't too small, I would be willing to pay good money for a great TV.

Are there any TV models you would recommend? I know chopper sent me a link but searching for the right tv is painful based on the recommendations, I would love that Asus but in a bigger size, yet I can't find one.

RaZzZz

Why not check out the Philips TV's? I own a 32" 7000 series LED TV and gaming via PC and PS3 is flawless.

muppetkiller

I picked up the Sony PS3 3d tv in smyths for 220 (traded in the two games that come with it) and I find it excellent.
It's only 24 inches but screen is beautiful for gaming. I've my PC , XBOX and ps3 hooked up to it.
It's only got two HDMI slots but has component too. Comes with two pairs of active glasses too.
Be warned though it's not a TV so unless you've got a UPC box you can't get tv stations. Alos sound from the speakers is brutal so external speakers will be required.

ScumLord

Kirby wrote: »

Not for long. There is a push by our "government"(I use the term scathingly and loosely), to rebrand it as an entertainment license and basically charge every person in the country who owns any device capable of displaying media. So your monitor, your phone, your ipod, etc.

It would be scandalous anywhere else. Par for the course here.

I assume businesses will be exempt? My PC is a work PC, just ignore the steering wheel.

ShadowHearth

ScumLord wrote: »

I assume businesses will be exempt? My PC is a work PC, just ignore the steering wheel.

Just say you are delivery driver and you plan/train your routes every day.

Burning Eclipse

Doctor DooM wrote: »

I'd be very, very interested in hearing why component is supposed to generate more lag than VGA-seeing as both are analogue signals- bear in mind who you're talking to here

I'm not buying the colour thing, btw- a baseline requirement of a game is that it be playable, you can worry about all other things after that. But if you're getting input lag and are not aware of it, you will be finding games tougher than their supposed to be, or in extreme cases will feel like your character is not responding correctly.

My guess is this (because this is how it manifests itself on my TV): Component signal gets to your tv, and unless you go into menus and start disabling certain features, gets some processing added to it. VGA gets to your TV and essentially gets thrown on the panel asap (for me anyway). I think the Rocksmith guys are working on the assumption that their users aren't going to take optimization steps for the most part.

On the colour vs technical performance thing, I can see where you're coming from, but like I said before, frames, input lag etc are not important to (I'd go as far as saying not even perceived by) many gamers. Also, surely you'd need a proper ****box of a TV before lag is so bad that it impacts a regular FPS when played solo, offline? And when I say that, I mean in any meaningful way. And if you're playing online, then network lag is far more prominent that input.

Steve O, on the recommendation side of things, first question I'd ask is what size screen you're looking for? Really good (technical) gaming panels are at the lower end of the spectrum.

Steve O

Burning Eclipse wrote: »

My guess is this (because this is how it manifests itself on my TV): Component signal gets to your tv, and unless you go into menus and start disabling certain features, gets some processing added to it. VGA gets to your TV and essentially gets thrown on the panel asap (for me anyway). I think the Rocksmith guys are working on the assumption that their users aren't going to take optimization steps for the most part.

On the colour vs technical performance thing, I can see where you're coming from, but like I said before, frames, input lag etc are not important to (I'd go as far as saying not even perceived by) many gamers. Also, surely you'd need a proper ****box of a TV before lag is so bad that it impacts a regular FPS when played solo, offline? And when I say that, I mean in any meaningful way. And if you're playing online, then network lag is far more prominent that input.

Steve O, on the recommendation side of things, first question I'd ask is what size screen you're looking for? Really good (technical) gaming panels are at the lower end of the spectrum.

32 inch, I'll be playing close enough to the thing and its for my new room.

Cuddlesworth

If your paying the electricity bill, LED tv's all the way.

Taltos

Have a look at this Samsung
32"
Full HD - 1080p
200Hz
3-D
Ethernet / Smart TV
HDMI *3

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/11833420/art/samsung/ue32es6300-3d-led-smart-t.html

If I had somewhere to put it would be tempted myself - Cost = Euro 529
Little bit pricey, a while back they had deals for a 55" for only a few hundred more but this does seem like a good TV - hopefully you can find it a bit cheaper though.

Varik

Taltos wrote: »

Have a look at this Samsung
32"
Full HD - 1080p
200Hz
3-D
Ethernet / Smart TV
HDMI *3

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/11833420/art/samsung/ue32es6300-3d-led-smart-t.html

If I had somewhere to put it would be tempted myself - Cost = Euro 529
Little bit pricey, a while back they had deals for a 55" for only a few hundred more but this does seem like a good TV - hopefully you can find it a bit cheaper though.

Have 40" of this, paid more than what its down for on pixmania but would do so again rather than buy from them.

Azza

I wouldn't worry about input lag too much. Like 1 or 2 frames (or 32ms) of input lag are not going be noticed by most gamers. Your not going notice it unless your playing some multiplayer games competively.

Steve O

Taltos wrote: »

Have a look at this Samsung
32"
Full HD - 1080p
200Hz
3-D
Ethernet / Smart TV
HDMI *3

http://www.pixmania.ie/ie/uk/11833420/art/samsung/ue32es6300-3d-led-smart-t.html

If I had somewhere to put it would be tempted myself - Cost = Euro 529
Little bit pricey, a while back they had deals for a 55" for only a few hundred more but this does seem like a good TV - hopefully you can find it a bit cheaper though.

That looks perfect, thanks mate.

Varik

Might be not be of interest for anyone but the 2013 samsungs will have the dual play/view to allow split-screen to work full screen with a pair of 3D glasses.

If you like that 32" samsung you may want to wait a bit, even if you still go with it the 2013 will drive the price of 2012 models down a bit.

Browning2010

Hi,

Was looking at a new tv today. 99% of the time used for xbox 360 soon to be 'xbox one'.

It's a 42" lg tv.

Would that suit for gaming or is it to big, would I be better of with a smaller tv?

It was 400euro for the tv.

Any thoughts?

Picture attached of label.

Browning2010

Hi,

Was looking at a new tv today. 99% of the time used for xbox 360 soon to be 'xbox one'.

It's a 42" lg tv.

Would that suit for gaming or is it to big, would I be better of with a smaller tv?

It was 400euro for the tv.

Any thoughts?

Picture attached of label.

cherryghost

I'll throw another +1 to Plasma. Switched to LCD to Plasma last year and the colour vibrancy on the plasma just completely owns the LCD. I love it to bits. Because of the way plasmas are built sound will always be less 'tinny' too. Samsung's entry plasma's are great value for money.

I have an LED for my PC gaming and does a great job too, but I'd probably go for plasma if you're content with the slightly higher leccy bill it'll throw at you.

ShadowHearth

cherryghost wrote: »

I'll throw another +1 to Plasma. Switched to LCD to Plasma last year and the colour vibrancy on the plasma just completely owns the LCD. I love it to bits. Because of the way plasmas are built sound will always be less 'tinny' too. Samsung's entry plasma's are great value for money.

I have an LED for my PC gaming and does a great job too, but I'd probably go for plasma if you're content with the slightly higher leccy bill it'll throw at you.

I picked up this myself few weeks ago.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-UE42F5000AKXXU-42-inch-Widescreen-1080p/dp/B00BTG8AR4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1370111102&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+tv

LED makes a huge difference compared to my LCD in bedroom. I still not a fan of Plasmas. I PC world and other local places flogging Plasmas very cheaply now, So if anyone looking for one should go there asap. I guess Plasma is getting discontinued?

cherryghost

It's been so-called 'dying' for about 10 years now, it's really not. Because of the bad image Plasma had about 5 years ago sales have been poor but they have been consistently poor, meaning it's more of a niche market. Because burn-in is no longer a problem, the fact that plasma's entry level TV's are 43" due to the nature of the technology, combined with consumer's desires to get bigger and bigger televisions, I'd expect plasma to grow over the next few years

marshbaboon

If you want the absolute best, get a panasonic plasma tv, I couldn't recommenced the vierras enough.

Deeper blacks, better contrast, better response time, better viewing angles, better more natural colours, better value for money the larger you go. Screen burn in & lifetime of plasmas simply aren't issues any more as they match lcd now.

The only reason you'd want an lcd is the value for money you can get if you go 40" or below, you need to wall mount the tv (lcds typically have plastic screens instead of the glass found in plasmas), or you're going to have the screen in a very bright room (lots of direct sunlight).


Saying all that I use a 42" Bravia as my gaming/pc monitor and I'm extremely happy with it.