Dismantled my CRT today...

[EliteRetard]

*snip*
Must be a CRT thing where you can only compare to entry level LCD's.

Because a brand new name brand 4k TV with full array back lighting is entry level. Because a brand new 27" 4k monitor is entry level. Before 4k, all the high end 1080p screens were entry level too (obviously). Because any and all LCDs compared to a CRT are entry level (or is it just my CRT?). Well dang man, if everything I have compared to my CRT is entry level crap, then every LCD is crap...those are your words.

You guys keep pushing this line like I haven't spelled it out for you 3 or 4 times. I'll say it again, I have compared my CRT side by side with many high end LCD's and many low end LCDs and a bunch of stuff in between.

 

[EliteRetard]

*snip*
Somehow I believe being poor is just an excuse to not buy yourself a brand new gaming display to play Witcher 3.

Well...uh, yeah.

 

[CZroe]

How about, who cares? Live in the past much? Tell me how Witcher 3 would look better on a CRT so I can have a good laugh.

I would not say that Witcher 3 looks or plays better on a CRT. I was very specific in what I said looks better on a CRT.

Console gamers LOL. I see you're passionate about the PS3, and it did come out when CRT's and regular analog TV's still had a major presence. I don't believe later PS3 games had issues with 1080p/720p output (despite it being rendered internally at a lower resolution), but then again if you still have the early PS3 models, feel free to continue using a CRT and live in the past.

"Console gamer?" I have walls full of PC game boxes and have always preferred to buy the PC port any time it's an option.

My Xbox 360 Slim outputted fine in 1080p when I played Red Dead Redemption and Alan Wake. This was when I had my high end Samsung LED 3DTV. If you're telling me the picture output would have been better on a CRT, then :rollseyes LOL

Nope. I'm telling you that a fancy digital output was not an option for millions and millions and millions of XBOX 360 users.

Sounds like you don't know the difference between full-array local dimming LED and CCFL backlighting. Simply stating LED's are "inferior" to CCFL doesn't make it true, especially since budget LCD's continued to use CCFL while LED TV's continued to evolve and provide better picture quality overall.

Sounds like I know perfectly well because that's EXACTLY what I described. The people who confuse "LED" as a display type are the reason why the cheapest of the cheap but "LED!" on their box and call their crappy edge-lit TVs "LED TVs."

Amusing as your statement is, I'm not sure if you're being serious. Are you seriously comparing Super Mario Bros 3 to a modern multiplayer game like Battlefield? If you're talking about living room multiplayer, well that's what a Wii is for LOL.

Sorry. I didn't realize I was expected to throw out thousands of old games because the Wii exists.

I suppose that is my fault for not stating I was referring to PC games. However, I didn't see in the OP where he mentioned NES games or the like. And, my original post was not intended for consoles no longer being made. I was responding to the suggestion that flat panels are still inferior to CRTs, which this post clearly implied:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37821672&postcount=4

My first reply to you was when you responded to my post about classic games scaling poorly on modern fixed-resolution displays. I specifically mentioned NES & SNES.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

Let me explain this for those whose can't seem to understand that CRTs do have several advantages over LCDs and are indeed superior in picture quality.

LCDs especially IPS and TN based panels have terrible contrast ratios (~1000:1 static is common high). VA based panels are batter in this regard (2000-4000:1 static). Plasmas, CRTs (rear and direct view), OLEDs and DLPs all have much better contrast ratios than LCDs (full array dimming or not). That is just a fact.

When talking about quality LCDs you usually start with TVs, the panels they use are usually far better because they use quality VAs and way better backlights. PC monitors usually use low quality panels unless they are expensive models designed for professionals. IPS panels really are just pants in every department besides refresh rate and color gamut/accuracy. TN panels are even worse and are pants in every department besides high refresh rate and "relatively high" motion resolution.

I always laugh when people fawn over these high refresh rate high res monitors. They really suck in every other department compared to other displays and quality issues are prevalent. You see people on forums commonly complaining about things like IPS glow and exchanging the monitor several times(!) just to get a good one.

CRTs really don't have these issues that LCDs have and that's the bottom line as to why many who know better know it's a better display technology as far as picture quality goes. You have better contrast ratios, much deeper black levels, very accurate colors, high gamut coverage, no motion blur, full motion resolution, no need for RTC, no need for BFI, no native resolution (underrated advantage here), no input lag, higher refresh rates (higher than 144Hz), high resolutions (just recently surpassed), perfect viewing angles, naturally anti-aliases and no need for an ADC.

All these advantages of CRTs and LCD only has a few over them. Slightly sharper (if your CRT is blurry you need to adjust the fly back transformer voltage), perfect geometry, magnet proof, hemisphere independent, higher resolution, more aspect ratios and more sizes.

So don't knock CRTs because they really don't have a true replacement yet (OLEDs aren't mainstream yet). The only reason I don't use my CRT as my main display is because it's not 16:9 and not 40".

 

[rancherlee]

The only thing I miss about by CRTs is the variable resolutions, everything else is fine with me on LCD. Contrast ratio seems to be the biggest complaint but unless you game in total darkness your not going to notice the "limited 1000:1" ratio of LCDs. How many people would have room for a 80# 32" widescreen 4K Uber CRT on their desk anyhow? I still have an old high end 19" Viewsonic CRT hooked up to an XP box for older games and it has held up fairly well over the years but has gotten noticeably fuzzy. It quickly reminds me why I moved to LCD in the first place, CRT eye strain, and I never had them set below 75hz

 

[TestKing123]

Noticably fuzzy? You mean not "naturally anti-aliased" like Hi-Fi Man stated? :lol:

 

[CakeMonster]

What I do miss is playing games in >60hz, which I haven't done for 15 years.

But there are many reasons I made the switch already then...