Have LCDs caught up with CRTs yet for gamers?

[Visual]

TFTs are doing a pretty good job in decreasing the black brightness.
Yes I get your point. They aren't perfect yet. But they are better than the average CRT I might say. At least compared to what I've used. My old 17" samsung CRT (bought just before the magicbright models were introduced) did have a "black" that was noticeably brighter than the black border around the picture. It couldn't be fixed with the brightness/contrast settings of the monitor (unless you made all colors be too dark) nor with the software for color calibration. I went to the shop to check the magicbright CRTs and they had the same problem pretty obvious at least on the "entertainment" preset. The AOC that I'm typing this on right now has the same problem, plus quite a severe geometry distortion on the higher resolutions. Even my colleague's monitor with some Trinitron CRT is currently set to quite a low brightness (too low if you asked me, but he doesnt play games so its not bothering him) in order to make the black seem real black. So I don't see CRTs as being any superior in regards to black levels.

I am a average guy buying cheap/average monitors, so I'm sure there are high-end CRTs where this isn't a problem, but I doubt those would be any cheaper than TFTs. If that kind of thing bothers you too much, yes maybe an expensive CRT is better for you than a TFT. But for me (and I think for the average Joe out there) it's not the end of the world, and if I'm to spend say $400 on a monitor anyway, I'd prefer it to be a TFT

 

[ao]

What would you say is the best 17" LCD in the market today?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: svi
Kind of. Streaking and ghosting simply aren't issues on good LCDs, but you still have to deal with image quality degradation when a game (or anything, really) isn't run at the LCD's native resolution. There's also color reproduction, but LCDs are close enough these days that I doubt that'll bother you unless you do desktop publishing for a living.

Keep in mind that you'll get people on both sides of the fence who will say all sorts of things. Weight opinions as you see fit, and compare good LCDs and CRTs in person if you can. FWIW, I use both LCDs and CRTs regularly, and the only thing that really bothers me about LCDs is the resolution thing. The only thing that really bothers me about CRTs is sheer bulk, of course.

I do not agree with te image quality issue you mentioned. I got the 2001FP from Dell and I've played many games at 1024 x 768, 1152 x 864 and 1280 x 1024 and it looks awesome. I can't see a difference between those and native other than that the text and other info on the screen is smaller.[/b]

Anyone else here to back me up? I just don't get what the issue is. I agree it doesn't look great for normal non-gaming use but in games it scales very well.

THIS is what i worry about . . . there IS a difference.
:roll:

And to the OP - Andvari, FLASH your 9800p to a 9800xt . . . you will get 10% more "free" performance (actually your 256MB Pro IS an "XT" with a BIOS flash).

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=3&var1=92&var2=0">
Radeon 9800 Pro To Radeon 9800XT Mod Guide Rev. 6.0!
</a>
READ this quide!

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Visual
TFTs are doing a pretty good job in decreasing the black brightness.
Yes I get your point. They aren't perfect yet. But they are better than the average CRT I might say. At least compared to what I've used. My old 17" samsung CRT (bought just before the magicbright models were introduced) did have a "black" that was noticeably brighter than the black border around the picture. It couldn't be fixed with the brightness/contrast settings of the monitor (unless you made all colors be too dark) nor with the software for color calibration. I went to the shop to check the magicbright CRTs and they had the same problem pretty obvious at least on the "entertainment" preset. The AOC that I'm typing this on right now has the same problem, plus quite a severe geometry distortion on the higher resolutions. Even my colleague's monitor with some Trinitron CRT is currently set to quite a low brightness (too low if you asked me, but he doesnt play games so its not bothering him) in order to make the black seem real black. So I don't see CRTs as being any superior in regards to black levels.

I am a average guy buying cheap/average monitors, so I'm sure there are high-end CRTs where this isn't a problem, but I doubt those would be any cheaper than TFTs. If that kind of thing bothers you too much, yes maybe an expensive CRT is better for you than a TFT. But for me (and I think for the average Joe out there) it's not the end of the world, and if I'm to spend say $400 on a monitor anyway, I'd prefer it to be a TFT

Well, monitors is one of those things that I actually do spend a bit of money on, my current one cost me ~$1200, so yeah I'm talking about good CRT's

Have been thinking about a new one though, this one is getting pretty old, and isn't what it used to be, so there are definitely quite a few CRTs as well as TFTs that would beat it these days.

 

[Zucarita9000]

When 8ms, 20" Super IPS panels with wider color gamut become affordable, CRTs will be gone.

 

[nksheriff]

hey
i found this on tigerdirect.com
it looks really good...?
Shuttle XP17BG3 / 17-Inch / 8ms / 1280 x 1024 / Black LCD Monitor

 

[The Boston Dangler]

You CRT fanboys don't know what you're talking about.

I've been using a Samsung 172x LCD for over a year, and it rocks. 1280x1024 native, VGA/DVI, no dead pixels, very small footprint.

This thing is able to hang with any CRT in a game. No matter how fast the motion, no blurring at all. Colors look great too. DVD video looks very good, but the deep black is it's only shortcoming.

CRT= Never Again!!

 

[Visual]

Originally posted by: nksheriff
hey
i found this on tigerdirect.com
it looks really good...?
Shuttle XP17BG3 / 17-Inch / 8ms / 1280 x 1024 / Black LCD Monitor

well, for starters, it shows up as 16ms on some pages when i google it. but that may actually be a good thing. the majority of tfts that advertise low response times happen to be 6bit displays, and they fail to mention that fact in the documentation/specs. i wouldn't want to get such a monitor, but it wont be huge difference in games i guess... i also wouldn't recommend such small diagonal, as bigger monitors have become fairly cheap... but this is personal view. the best way to decide is to go to a local shop that has it, and check it up. you'll not be allowed to try games but they usually have some test-program installed.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: Alptraum

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
All you LCD fans can't really be serious. LCD's are no where near the picture quality of a top of the line CRT.
This is not a flame, but in terms of overall picture quality there is a night and day difference between CRT and LCD.

Well, we will just have to disagree on that. Having owned multiple nice CRTs (The Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2040u and Sony G520p among them) over the years I can tell you for sure that my 192t looks better. And I have spent lots of time with all of them.

Diamond Pro® 2070SB-BK?

 

[imported_rod]

I have a nice 19" CRT at home, and use 1 year old Dell LCD's at Uni. Personally, i like my CRT better. It's colours seem clearer and crisper, and it's much easier to use in a decently lit room. Maybe the newer models are better (i havent really seen any). Also, dont forget the price difference. I can get a high quality 21" CRT for less than a 12ms 17" LCD.

Personally, I'll be sticking with CRT for now. The quality difference is small, but the price gap isn't (yet).

RoD

BtW: BenQ has 6ms screens out now, but they are painfully expensive.

 

[deveraux]

I've had my Dell 2005FPW for 3 - 4 months now and I absolutely loved. I also loved gaming on it and consider myself a relatively serious gamer. However, due to certain circumstances, I had to leave my LCD back in my home over Easter and not bring it back with me. Now, I'm back to using my old 17" CRT (3 years old - mid-range). I fired up UT2k4 on it last night and immediately noticed that I prefered gaming on this CRT compared to my LCD.

The colors are somehow more accurate (for lack of a better word) on the CRT. However, the one main reason I will still continue to game on my LCD is the widescreen feature. While gaming on my CRT, I still found myself looking further to both the right and the left of my CRT trying to "view" more of the game.

So, to sum it up, I think that LCDs have come a long way and may surpass CRTs in certain areas such as clarity at their native resolution, and size. However, I don't know if they will ever truly catch up to CRTs for color reproduction and especially the issue of black really being black. I will still recommend the Dell 2005FPW to anyone that asks though since I think it's still the best monitor I have ever bought.

My $0.02

 

[Penth]

I'd like to go LCD, but I've got 3 19" CRTs that I only spent $300 on total. One is a trinitron too. Once LCD can compete with that, I'll make a switch.

 

[flatblastard]

Go ask a TV repairman (hopefully CET) that same question, only in regards to TV viewing instead of gaming. He will tell you that CRT is better picture quality OVERALL. LCDs are getting better all the time, but still not good enough to be considered better than CRTs at gaming or movies. The only advantages that LCD has over CRT are unrelated to picture quality. LCDs are smaller, lighter, consume less power, etc.....but how does that help make the picture better than CRTs? The answer is that it doesn't. I'm sorry, but a brighter screen does nothing to improve the overall image quality, so don't anyone bother bringing up the whole contrast ratio nonsense. I will be riding the CRT wagon until all of the wheels fall off.....or until a better technology comes along to replace LCD.....like OLED, perhaps?

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Isn't another LCD advantage their display of text? If I guess correctly, text is much clearer and easier to read on LCD's.

 

[flatblastard]

In a way, you are right. Let's see if this helps: When the image is still (no motion), uber-high-end-expensive LCDs have a slight advantage over good CRTs of the same size, and thats only if you are sitting far enough away from the screen.