Just found out that CRTs are bad for you eyes. Because it flickers. Your eyes will take it but your brain won't!
I'm upgrading
I'm upgrading
CRTs are bad for your eyes!
- Thread starter intogamer
- Start date
judasmachine
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2002
- 8,515
- 3
- 81
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
- May 9, 2004
- 8,443
- 124
- 106
I bet 99% of the populace who says CRT monitors sucks compared to LCD is because they didn't bother to set the refresh rate above 60Hz.
No doubt. My last CRT (years, and years ago, maybe 10) was set at 85 Hz. However, the OP is right. There are cells in V1 (the primary visual cortex) that will run at >120Hz. But to say that your brain wont take it is just stupid.
Colors are better on a CRT, in my opinion. Mind you, the refresh rate might seem alright when you're using it (I had mine set at 80-85) but when you (I) switch(ed) to an LCD, there's a noticable difference and it's hard to go back.
There are some people that LCDs actually hurt/strain their eyes more than CRTs, or that's what they say. I'm going to guess they have the brightness cranked to high and just aren't used to it.
For me, CRTs did hurt/strain my eyes a lot more than LCDs do. The odd thing is that for CRTs it was actually worse the higher the refresh rate.
My tube HDTV isn't too bad, its definitely a lot better on my eyes than the CRT monitors I've had. LCDs don't bother me nearly as much even with the brightness high.
For me, CRTs did hurt/strain my eyes a lot more than LCDs do. The odd thing is that for CRTs it was actually worse the higher the refresh rate.
My tube HDTV isn't too bad, its definitely a lot better on my eyes than the CRT monitors I've had. LCDs don't bother me nearly as much even with the brightness high.
i used to run my old CRT at 100 Hz. having a quality monitor goes a long way towards a sharper image, reduced jitter, and the capability for significantly higher refresh rates. the only reason i switched to LCD was they don't make laptops with CRTs. anyone who complains that CRTs flicker are either using a crappy monitor, are too ignorant to adjust their display settings, or both.
No offense but could it possibly be that people might have more sensitive eyes that would be effected by it? There are people who say that the motion blur on LCD is very noticable and bothersome to them (and I've seen some that have even tried some of the best LCDs in that regard) to the point they can't really use them. After using LCDs the flicker of CRTs, even nice Trinitrons was bothersome to me and I played around with settings quite a bit as I was planning on getting a Sony FW900.
Just because you don't have that problem does not mean that nobody would. I'm sure you're right about a good number of people who just used poor quality and incorrectly adjusted monitors, but there are plenty of people who are affected even by good quality ones.
Jeff7
Lifer
- Jan 4, 2001
- 41,596
- 20
- 81
The ghosting is one reason I have yet to buy an LCD. I have yet to see an LCD where I don't see ghosting, and I've seen some with single-digit-millisecond response times.
The lack of true support for non-native resolutions isn't much help either.
I still love my lovely 21" Nokia 445Pro CRT, despite its high lead content and 70 pounds of weight. 120Hz refresh rate, too.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,590
- 986
- 126
I never had any problem with 60hz CRT monitors, and honestly I think half the people who say they need uber-high framerates are full of it. In computer games I could never tell between 30FPS and 100FPS, with a CRT monitor 30FPS might be bad, but 60frames is fine imo. I think brightness also is a big problem, some people have it so high, that is jsut as likely to be the problem.
Having said that, my only problem with LCD is that you only have one real resolution that you can use, so if you are playing a game and your graphics card can't handle that resolution your screwed and have to only use part of the monitor, or upsample a smaller image which make it look like cr@p (at least on my comp).
Having said that, my only problem with LCD is that you only have one real resolution that you can use, so if you are playing a game and your graphics card can't handle that resolution your screwed and have to only use part of the monitor, or upsample a smaller image which make it look like cr@p (at least on my comp).
I use a laptop at work, where I spend 8+ hours per day staring at the thing. I use a CRT at home @85 Hz, where I spend many hours playing games and websurfing. I've never noticed a difference as far as eye strain or headaches is concerned. Except that My laptop screen is a LOT smaller.
Either it's because of my age or my switch to LCDs, but since the switch I find my prescription stabilized. A lot less strain on the eyes looking at LCD than CRT.
My job doesn't require me to look at computers at all, I'm glad I don't get stuck 8hrs a day staring into the monitor.
My job doesn't require me to look at computers at all, I'm glad I don't get stuck 8hrs a day staring into the monitor.
fustercluck
Diamond Member
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,402
- 0
- 71
Really? CRTs worse for your eyes than LCDs? I used CRTs for a long time, recently got a big LCD and it's bright as hell, I'll be lucky if I'm not going blind by 30.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter