CRT vs LCD (which is better for me, after all?)

[xtknight]

There's a very eye-opening article on X-Bit Labs about LCDs and parameters. I suggest anyone interested in monitors read this article: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd-parameters.html

( I hadn't even finished reading the article when I posted this as I was pretty amazed by how well he explained the whole input lag thing. I feel that he has confirmed or discarded many of the myths regarding the whole CRT vs. LCD debate, and it's finally clear due to all the evidence he brings forth, which type is better for who. )

Cliff notes: input lag is detrimental to serious gamers with good hand-eye coordination, but for general usage the claims of unusability are unwarranted as humans can adapt.

It?s the same with the input lag thing. A person who has just bought or is going to buy a new monitor, goes to a monitor-related forum to find multiple-page discussions of such horrors of the input lag as slow movements of the mouse, total non-playability, etc. And there surely are a few people there who claim they can see the lag with their own eyes. Having digested all that, the person goes to a shop and begins to stare at the monitor he?s interested in thinking, ?There must be a lag because other people see it!? Of course, he soon begins to see it himself ? or rather to think he?s seeing it. Then he goes back home and writes to the forum, ?Yeah, I?ve checked that monitor out ? it?s really retarded?. You can even read some funny posts like, ?I?ve been sitting at the discussed monitor for two weeks, but it?s only now, after I?ve read the forum, that I see the lag?.

A) There is indeed an input lag on some monitors. The maximum value of the lag that I?ve seen in my tests is 47 milliseconds

B) A lag of this value cannot be noticed at ordinary work or in movies. It may make a difference in games for well-trained gamers, but wouldn?t matter for most other people even in games.

C) You may feel discomfort after changing your monitor with a model that has a larger diagonal and resolution due to low speed or sensitivity of your mouse, low speed of your graphics card or due to the different size of the screen. However, many people read too much of forums and are inclined to blame the input lag as the cause of any discomfort they may feel with their new monitor.

For general usage and the occasional gamer (most of the population and probably a great deal of AnandTech), monitors with input lag should still be considered. For the most hardcore gamers, it is best they stick with CRTs. It may have seemed that we had known this already, but that's not true as there have been many claims of certain LCDs being unusable even for menial tasks like minimizing a window or aiming their cursor due to the input lag.

Another part of his article talks about how CRTs have a definite contrast advantage in the darkness but how the tables turn when ambient light is taken into account. He also talks about the effects of the glossy/OptiClear coatings on human perception. I really suggest reading the whole thing to get the whole scoop.

 

[Imyourzero]

Well, I'm trying to choose my next LCD and it seems that there is not ONE that doesn't have some kind of flaw. I'm not sure if that's because LCD technology is still evolving toward perfection or if people are just too damn picky and tend to turn minor quibbles into major issues. Ghosting, input lag, color reproduction, banding...I mean it seems like there are so many more things to be wary of than in the old days of buying a CRT where the biggest decision was choosing an AG or shadow mask display.

I'm willing to bet that if more people just went out and bought an LCD and began using it, they'd be happier than if they spent hours pouring over threads that tend to exaggerate the flaws. Take ghosting for example. It didn't bother me on my old Viewsonic 25ms panel and it certainly didn't bother me on my 16ms 2001FP. Yet there are people with 8ms and 6ms panels that complain about it, and I think if they followed the advice of the sticky in this forum and just tried to enjoy the thing that it wouldn't be such an issue. I understand that people want to be happy with their purchase and get the best for the $$ but chances are if you do some research and pick one of the top rated displays you'll be satisfied. Don't try to notice and nitpick every little thing, or you WON'T be happy.

 

[Dainas]

Well even discounting all the performance variables known in LCDs, the square-pixels(Aperture grille CRTs suffer from this to a lesser extent too) and problems with black is conductive to bringing out all the roughtness in videogames visually that is detrimental to graphics, that CRTs tend to ignore.

I have both a brand new rev03 Dell 2407WFP and a 4 year old 19inch Phillips 109b CRT(shadow mask). The picture quality with the CRT at 1600x1200 is infinitely superior to the LCD at 1900x1200 in pretty much any game with complex environments(Far Cry, Oblivion and Medieval 2).

Not until LCDs come out with a much much smaller pixel size(sub .2mm) and better black representation will CRTs finaly be eclipsed as gaming displays.

 

[JRW]

Originally posted by: Dainas
Well even discounting all the performance variables known in LCDs, the square-pixels(Aperture grille CRTs suffer from this to a lesser extent too) and problems with black is conductive to bringing out all the roughtness in videogames visually that is detrimental to graphics, that CRTs tend to ignore.

I have both a brand new rev03 Dell 2407WFP and a 4 year old 19inch Phillips 109b CRT(shadow mask). The picture quality with the CRT at 1600x1200 is infinitely superior to the LCD at 1900x1200 in pretty much any game with complex environments(Far Cry, Oblivion and Medieval 2).

Not until LCDs come out with a much much smaller pixel size(sub .2mm) and better black representation will CRTs finaly be eclipsed as gaming displays.

Thats pretty much the way I feel about CRT vs. LCD , I have a 20" NEC 20WMGX2 LCD & 24" Sony FW900 CRT side by side and even tho the LCD is brighter and sharper I cant help but prefer the CRT's overall picture quality when playing games or watching movies.

My mom came by last week (she's not a videophile by any means) and suprisingly she chose the CRT when I asked which looked better to her. (had a 720P episode of Heroes playing on both monitors).

To me the biggest downfall on current LCDs is black level performance... but they're great for browsing the web

 

[dennilfloss]

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1996474&enterthread=y

Mentioned it a couple of days ago.

 

[dug777]

I have to admit i can see no persuasive reason to ditch my 21" CRT at the moment. A LCD that is bigger and provides the same res is still pretty farking expensive, and while my videocard can't push that kind of high res i appreciate being able to game very happily at 1024 if need be (6800GS)