ok ive read and read every post in here on crt vrs lcd since its always better to read than post and make a fool of yourself, heheh. as a hardcore gamer, 5+ hours a day ive lead the fight against gaming on lcds since their conception, for me even the new veiwsonic 3ms screen just still has ghosting when your screaming though the air in a jet in BF2 or involved in a heavy ground battle where one shot can make the diffrence. im also using two 7800 gtx in SLI so a lcd just isnt gong to get my cards to "SHINE" the way they are ment to. ive been using a 21 inch trinitron for the last 4 years with no complaints but shes finaly kicking the bucket, cant blame her, she hasnt been turned off for 4 years, heheh. now ive been tryng to locate a diamond pro 2070SB, the big dog 21 incher that retailed for like 1200 bucks but i cant even find a used one on ebay anymore and sure wish i jumped on one 6 months ago. if anyone knows a where a refurb or used is available please speak up. that being said i can get ahold of the fw900 either refurbed or off lease, depending on witch i prefer but i had a couple questions for you guys. are the hp versions of this monitor, the A7217A assembeled in mexico? and if so are the sony name branded models assembeled in japan? and would you personaly go with a refurb or the nonrefurb used off lease? im always leary about cheap labor and i know most hp stuff is made in china, assembled in mexico, nothing against mexican labor but id kinda want my monitor comming from a factory where the guy made more than $1.50 an hour on the line and from what i understand the sony branded version were made in japan. ive also been watching the revewis on the new 2 ms benq lcd but wasnt to impressed when people still say they can see a hint of ghosting thats just not acceptable to me since im involved in seriious competition match play and every single shot needs to hit the mark. id just like to get your thoughts here on if the fw900, is it the screen to get for the hardcore gamer who just cant have ghosting at all and needs picture perfect color representation, considering i cant find the diamond pro anywhere. thanks for your time guys i relay appreciate your input, you guys a have a wonderfull community with some of the most informed posters ive ever seen so im eager to get your thoughts on my situation.
hardcore gamer, 5+hous a day, is the fw900 for me?
- Thread starter fern420
- Start date
rbV5
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2000
- 12,632
- 0
- 0
fight against gaming on LCD's? Seems a bit over the top to care about someone elses display choice don't you think? Personally, I'd like to see the gaming industry pay more attention to LCD's for the various native LCD resolution support.
I like my CRT for my Primary gaming display, but cmon
Sounds like you know what you want, I wouldn't mind havng a fw900 if it was in good shape.Probably not. Your eyes will be gouging out at the end of the day from the flicker if you're like me, even at 100 Hz sometimes, especially for FIVE hours of gaming. I probably did used to play that much Quake 3 and Wolfenstein back in the day on my old CRT but my eyes hated me later.
I don't know why but I thought the part about Mexican labor was hilarious, lol.
If you can't have any "ghosting" at all, a CRT won't cut it either. But it obviously does, so you need to be reasonable. It's also a very subjective matter.
I don't know why but I thought the part about Mexican labor was hilarious, lol.
If you can't have any "ghosting" at all, a CRT won't cut it either. But it obviously does, so you need to be reasonable. It's also a very subjective matter.
Has he been gaming for 5 hours on those? Maybe he didn't know his eyes were red because of the CRT? It took me a while to figure it out too...I thought I just had allergies. I found gaming worse than general usage by a lot, but it's odd because I don't get eye strain on my LCD no matter what I do on it.
Originally posted by: rbV5
fight against gaming on LCD's? Seems a bit over the top to care about someone elses display choice don't you think? Personally, I'd like to see the gaming industry pay more attention to LCD's for the various native LCD resolution support.
I like my CRT for my Primary gaming display, but cmon
well i was being sarcastic trying to point out that lcds lack for high end gamers, id prefer if every other ingame player had a lcd, all that much easier for me to dance around him and knife him becusae hes just seeng a ghost everywhere. what i relay want is that diamnd but i just cant locate one, from what i uderstand that bad boy is the holy grail of crts.
are you refering to sheer size of the monster or just the time staring at it, tehehe? or is there a deeper issue with the fw900 that i missed about its refresh rate? id just liek to get all the info i can and make the right purchase, ive made to many regreatable purchashes in the past, like poping 6 bills for each of my 7800;s when i could of waited 2 months and saved half that money.
If the CRT's flicker doesn't bother you, I'd say there's no reason not to go with it if you can't stand the blur of LCDs.
I have obsessive-compulsive...I do edit my posts a lot.
I have obsessive-compulsive...I do edit my posts a lot.
i hear alot of lcd users refer to the fliker rate on the crts but it honestly doesnt bother me, once i get up to 85 on the refresh rate i honestly cant notice it in game, but for some reason i do notice the blur on the lcd, making fast movements, flying a jet in heavy action and so on. dont get me wrong, i pray for the day we get a lcd that can truly performe in the top of the line games but i just think were still a few years off for that . if anyone has a better suggestion, maybe a lcdi should go check out please let me know, ive just had so many bad exsperiences with lcds and the ghots prob not to mention the color reproduction. granted id prefer a lcd for everyting else but for gaming im still a rusty nut stuck on crt.
Yeah I can't notice the flicker at 85 Hz but it does still bother me for some reason. I do notice the blur on my 12ms 710T LCD too, but for the most part it's a non-issue for me. I will say Battlefield 2 gives my LCD a workout in that regard but for Quake 4 and Wolfenstein it's actually not bad at all (don't even notice it most of the time) which is quite odd. It still sounds like the FW900 would better suit your needs though. There's a reliable ebay seller selling tons of FW900s. At least one person here has it from that seller I'm sure but I can't remember his name.
An LCD to suit your needs may come with the new ones with no color filters...(they'll still be color lol). That should give the response time a big nudge down. For color reproduction a CRT will still be the best for a while unless you're looking at the Eizo ColorEdge LCDs. But on the horizon is OLED and SED which will probably be better than any of today's CRTs and LCDs. It's been said SEDs will be cheaper than LCD and just over plasma.
Edit: the guy I'm referring to is JRW. he seems to love his. here's the ebay auction he got it from (see his post, 5th down): http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1742181&enterthread=y
The same ebay seller is selling more under a different auction name. Just search for fw900 on ebay.
An LCD to suit your needs may come with the new ones with no color filters...(they'll still be color lol). That should give the response time a big nudge down. For color reproduction a CRT will still be the best for a while unless you're looking at the Eizo ColorEdge LCDs. But on the horizon is OLED and SED which will probably be better than any of today's CRTs and LCDs. It's been said SEDs will be cheaper than LCD and just over plasma.
Edit: the guy I'm referring to is JRW. he seems to love his. here's the ebay auction he got it from (see his post, 5th down): http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1742181&enterthread=y
The same ebay seller is selling more under a different auction name. Just search for fw900 on ebay.
hehhehe, thats the exact some seller im looking at on ebay to purchase also and i saw that jrw was very happy with his. i was just wondering if i should save $75 and get the hp made one or get the true sony branded one he also has available.
Fern, paragraphs can be a good thing. I also play alot of BF2, CSS, etc etc and I have a X series from Viewsonic. 16ms timing, but NO GHOSTING!!!!! The only real problem with LCD's is the text.
thanks for all the input guys i do appreciate it but all it took was that shot of call of duty 2 in jsw's post to seal the deal, heheheh. wide screen gamings looks like its going to fun! i definitely like the look of his sony branded model over the white HP and i just have a bad feeling on thoes HP branded ones, theres a reason they are cheaper, i just dont want to be the one to discover it.
thanks again guys.
thanks again guys.
The FW900 is an excellent monitor, right up there at the top. Overall I would give a slight edge to the 2070SB (you give up the widescreen, but get the outstanding superbright mode and higher refresh rates), but as you said, you basically can't get those at all anymore. Those FW900s are awesome monitors for their price on ebay and the availability of used units is also very good. You might want to keep in mind though that there is a significant chance of getting a dud; some people who bought those have gotten great units while others have had issues with theirs.
Regarding the eyestrain thing, that is something that's compeletely subjective and can be a disadvantage of LCDs depending on the person. LCDs have their own potentially headache inducing properties even for text, such as the excessive brightness and screen door effect. LCDs also work better right out of the box. So although most average people (not the AT crowd) will find LCDs to cause less eyestrain upon switching over to them, I would bet that most of those are coming from CRTs that were simply crappy (poor focus and so on; bad CRTs are arguably worse than bad LCDs) and/or never adjusted at all (including changing the refresh rate to something other than the default 60hz windows uses). I see a lot of CRTs running 60hz and displaying an image with incorrect dimensions and pincushioning around my university and several office buildings, even though those things can be easily corrected.
The biggest advantage of LCDs right now is that it's actually possible to buy them new and buying them is not a lottery like it is with whatever CRTs are still left out there. It looks like SEDs and OLEDs will own everything else, but they are still over a year away.
I'm like that too. Three edits per post are about average for me.
Regarding the eyestrain thing, that is something that's compeletely subjective and can be a disadvantage of LCDs depending on the person. LCDs have their own potentially headache inducing properties even for text, such as the excessive brightness and screen door effect. LCDs also work better right out of the box. So although most average people (not the AT crowd) will find LCDs to cause less eyestrain upon switching over to them, I would bet that most of those are coming from CRTs that were simply crappy (poor focus and so on; bad CRTs are arguably worse than bad LCDs) and/or never adjusted at all (including changing the refresh rate to something other than the default 60hz windows uses
). I see a lot of CRTs running 60hz and displaying an image with incorrect dimensions and pincushioning around my university and several office buildings, even though those things can be easily corrected.The biggest advantage of LCDs right now is that it's actually possible to buy them new and buying them is not a lottery like it is with whatever CRTs are still left out there. It looks like SEDs and OLEDs will own everything else, but they are still over a year away.
I'm like that too. Three edits per post are about average for me.
As per the seller's reply to me (I have HP), the Sony brand sells for more just because of the color.
I think the OP knows he wants a CRT - if he can see ghosting with a 3ms LCD than I believe him, they're his eyes. I think the FP900 sounds like good choice, it's what I'm going to be ordering this month. That said can anyone actually answer one of his questions - are the HP branded monitors assembled differently from the Sony versions?
edit: ITPaladin posted while I was typing this
edit: ITPaladin posted while I was typing this
The Sony brand sells more because it has the Sony label on it probably. To me that would be a disadvantage. I know I'd have issues with it. We've had countless Sony products around the house and they all have problems.
I know he's getting a CRT and suggest he do so, but I still want to clear up something. Being able to see the 'ghosting' and it bothering you are two different things. I can see this 'ghosting' effect on CRTs too with the dxdiag tests. But it sure doesn't bother me on a regular basis.
I know he's getting a CRT and suggest he do so, but I still want to clear up something. Being able to see the 'ghosting' and it bothering you are two different things. I can see this 'ghosting' effect on CRTs too with the dxdiag tests. But it sure doesn't bother me on a regular basis.
I agree if you see ghosting on a 3ms LCD then you probably see ghosting during those inbetween gaming times while getting your midnight snack...
I've used a CRT for many years and I know its me, but honestly if i can save myself 20lbs of strain carrying my CRT to the lan I am a much happier gamer, plus I don't honestly think you can see ghosting below 8 or even 12ms, you just have a complex... and it leads me further to believe this when you start your post out like this:
I've used a CRT for many years and I know its me, but honestly if i can save myself 20lbs of strain carrying my CRT to the lan I am a much happier gamer, plus I don't honestly think you can see ghosting below 8 or even 12ms, you just have a complex... and it leads me further to believe this when you start your post out like this:
I guess the only way to solve this completely is to ask the poster boy of gaming, Mr. Fatal1ty if he prefers LCDs or CRTs.
The only problem with going for most high-end CRT's these days, such as the FW900's are that you can't buy a brand new monitor; they're either refurbished or off-lease. Meaning you should only realistically expect 1-3 years of crystal clear picture before it starts to degrade.
Have you tried any new high-quality 12ms or less DVI equpped LCD's? I'd recommend checking one out, either at a store (only if you can make sure they're using a good, unsplit connection by DVI rather than VGA; computer shops may have these properly set up) or a friend.
If you've been using a 21" CRT for the past few years, I think a new high quality 20" or 21" LCD would knock your socks off, as long as it is 12ms or less. Having used a 12ms DVI Samsung LCD, I detected little-to-no ghosting on the screen; my 12ms 2005fpw is gorgeous and I can't see ghosting at all, and my 8ms 730B was a real stunner too (zero ghosting whatsoever).
Have you personally experienced ghosting firsthand, or is your opinion based on reviewers' comments? Because ghosting is different for everyone, and is heavily influenced by the quality of the connector as well (in particular, VGA emphasizes ghosting, while DVI does not).
You can roll the dice on the FW900 and you'll probably get a good screen. Sooner or later, though, you'll have to upgrade and LCD will probably be your only option.
One thing which does limit LCD's is their native resolution; although scaling is vastly improved on newer screens, nothing looks as pixel-for-pixel gorgeous as an LCD set to its native (and thus maximum) resolution. Which makes screens such as the 1920X1200 2405fpw tough beasts to keep satisfied at playable framerates; SLI'ed 7800GT's or above are recommended. With that said, IMO nothing is more gorgeous than a current top-of-the-line LCD. CRT's win out big time on flexiblity of resolution and displaying blacker blacks, but current high end LCD's slaughter CRT's for brightness, sharpness and clarity. Lush games like World of Warcraft look washed out on low-quality LCD's, but they look absolutely stunning on high-end LCD's; the colours really jump off the screen at you .
If your heart is set on a FW900 then that's the route you'll probably end up taking. Just know that LCD is a very viable alternative if you decide to give it a try. The elitist attitude of "LCD's aren't quite there yet" was getting passe two years ago; now it's just a reflection of ignorance to the current LCD market. Which isn't your fault; it's tough to keep up on the latest and greatest all the time (we all have things to do), and close friends can be negative influences when they repeat blanket statements like "LCD's suck" and you don't have the time to test otherwise.
Have you tried any new high-quality 12ms or less DVI equpped LCD's? I'd recommend checking one out, either at a store (only if you can make sure they're using a good, unsplit connection by DVI rather than VGA; computer shops may have these properly set up) or a friend.
If you've been using a 21" CRT for the past few years, I think a new high quality 20" or 21" LCD would knock your socks off, as long as it is 12ms or less. Having used a 12ms DVI Samsung LCD, I detected little-to-no ghosting on the screen; my 12ms 2005fpw is gorgeous and I can't see ghosting at all, and my 8ms 730B was a real stunner too (zero ghosting whatsoever).
Have you personally experienced ghosting firsthand, or is your opinion based on reviewers' comments? Because ghosting is different for everyone, and is heavily influenced by the quality of the connector as well (in particular, VGA emphasizes ghosting, while DVI does not).
You can roll the dice on the FW900 and you'll probably get a good screen. Sooner or later, though, you'll have to upgrade and LCD will probably be your only option.
One thing which does limit LCD's is their native resolution; although scaling is vastly improved on newer screens, nothing looks as pixel-for-pixel gorgeous as an LCD set to its native (and thus maximum) resolution. Which makes screens such as the 1920X1200 2405fpw tough beasts to keep satisfied at playable framerates; SLI'ed 7800GT's or above are recommended. With that said, IMO nothing is more gorgeous than a current top-of-the-line LCD. CRT's win out big time on flexiblity of resolution and displaying blacker blacks, but current high end LCD's slaughter CRT's for brightness, sharpness and clarity. Lush games like World of Warcraft look washed out on low-quality LCD's, but they look absolutely stunning on high-end LCD's; the colours really jump off the screen at you
.If your heart is set on a FW900 then that's the route you'll probably end up taking. Just know that LCD is a very viable alternative if you decide to give it a try. The elitist attitude of "LCD's aren't quite there yet" was getting passe two years ago; now it's just a reflection of ignorance to the current LCD market. Which isn't your fault; it's tough to keep up on the latest and greatest all the time (we all have things to do), and close friends can be negative influences when they repeat blanket statements like "LCD's suck" and you don't have the time to test otherwise.
Great post jiffy, and I agree. I would not say colors stick out more on CRTs. I think the only thing going for their argument is accuracy, but that's only important for photo-editing for the most part.
If the word ghosting was used correctly, it occurs only on VGA/analog connections. Ghosting really means an analog signal collision which produces a nearby faint image stemming off the original one.
However we're talking motion blur on LCD crystals. The speed of the crystals does not change from going to DVI to VGA, however it may indirectly since VGA provides less contrast for some people like me (or it's my video card's crappy VGA output maybe). Then it would get worse because the crystals have to go farther down once they hit white in the transition.
But let's be honest here. You probably can see the motion blur on every LCD you've tried, can't you jiffy? It just doesn't bother you... or maybe you can't see it at all in any situation?
If the word ghosting was used correctly, it occurs only on VGA/analog connections. Ghosting really means an analog signal collision which produces a nearby faint image stemming off the original one.
However we're talking motion blur on LCD crystals. The speed of the crystals does not change from going to DVI to VGA, however it may indirectly since VGA provides less contrast for some people like me (or it's my video card's crappy VGA output maybe). Then it would get worse because the crystals have to go farther down once they hit white in the transition.
But let's be honest here. You probably can see the motion blur on every LCD you've tried, can't you jiffy? It just doesn't bother you... or maybe you can't see it at all in any situation?
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter