The most difficult part of this is that both have different technologies but offer the practically the same advantages, so the choice will ultimately depend on pricing, features, and/or manufacturers brand.

In terms of picture quality, both screens have undeniably clear and vivid imaging, but on closer inspection, the LCD (liquid crystal diode) projects more "black imaging", meaning that more darkness is projected than color. Although this has been reduced and improved upon in LCD recent years, plasmas don't seem to have this problem as badly as the LCD.

Plasmas usually have better viewing from all angles, while LCDs may have a fading effect when viewed from different angles, and ultimately the picture may not be visible from views like the extreme side, top, bottom, etc.

LCDs seem to have an edge over plasmas with regards to screen reflectivity, as they use matte plastic screens, and they don't reflect too much light. Plasmas use glass screens which do have a glare when reflected with light, so the amount of reflective glare of the screen depends on the placement of the television; in either more or less lighted areas.

Energy consumption is an important feature here, as plasmas generally are less energy efficient than LCDs. Plasmas use pixilated technology to provide a crystal clear picture, but keep in mind that each of these thousands of pixels must use electricity to stay lit, so overtime this burns more energy. The LCD has the edge here, since the operation depends primarily on backlighting through a specialized prism, and consumes very little energy. It's like comparing the energy burning properties between a fluorescent light bulb and a regular watt light bulb.

Despite the aforementioned benefits of each, everything else seems equally matched- longevity is pretty much even here, both can last for approximately 20 years of unchanged image quality until the picture starts to fade. The resolution, as well as the Color saturation, and extra features are also about the same. Size is one of the most competitive features for each, since they both offer a maximum of 65 inches in screen width, and approximately 3 inches in depth.

The bottom line: The benefits of owning either type seem to be a draw; with the main differences in operating technology you might be led to believe that one would top the other in performance, but such is not the case. It seems no matter which one is chosen, the consumer still walks away with a great deal.