• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

LCD / CRT

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I had a dell fp1901 that even my 6 year old could see ghosting on. He said, "daddy the regular monitor looks better when I play jedi outfcast." The lcd looked great but just was not it for gaming. I currently have a 21" NEC and it is great! I still like lcd monitors but the fixed resolution and price are still big things to consider. I really like the lcd for surfing but not for gaming.
 
LCD's give me a headache, sure the actual LCD is a solid picture but the POS flourecent light behind it isnt, they give me headaches.

CRT 100hz only way to go, when you play games at high FPS it's so so smooth. Not only that but tou save yourself like $200-300 dollars at least and you arent limited to one resolution, lots of people forget that. When doom3 and HL2 come out i'll probably have to knock my res to 1024x768 from my usual 1600x1200 when i play BF 1942, AAO and such. Like, sure you can set it lower but the $200-300 bucks u just paid for a quality image just went out the window, and for me, i'd need lots of tylenol too.
 
The "lowering resolution for decent performance" really isn't that applicable to LCD owners. People who own LCDs are committed to spending money to enjoy their computing experience. So they'll have the hardware necessary to utilize their LCD. It's like saying, why buy a Ferrari, you have to get really expensive oil filters, when my Ford Focus oil filters are really cheap. People with expensive cars can generally afford to maintain them. Likewise, people with expensive displays can generally afford to drive them properly. This goes for high end LCDs and CRTs, of course. Although the hardware required to drive a high end CRT is usually far more costly and underperforming (3d wise) than that required for LCDs.
 
There are things I love and hate about both:

CRTs:
Love:heart:
Cost-efficient
High resolutions
Fast response time

Hate:frown:
High heat output
Bulky & weighty size
Skewed screen boundaries


LCDs:
Love:heart:
Crisp, flat image
Small & light architecture
Minimal heat output
Border-to-border proportionate viewable screen boundaries

Hate:frown:
Rediculous price
Low resolution
Slow response time
Occasional blockiness of small fonts


So I came to the conclusion to own both a flatscreen 19" CRT and a 19" LCD, before when I used two CRTs my small room got over 85 degrees with two people in it! And the annoying high-pitch whine that emminates from the plugged-in-but-off CRT is extremely irritating. ViewSonic seems to have a running problem with that.
 
Well... I just bought a Dell 2001fp since most people said it was really good. Right now I am using an old 15" CRT which doesnt cut it right now... I do a lot of gaming, and once I get it, I'll see which one is really better..
 
I must admit that I was once a die-hard CRT fan as above posters (better colors, cheaper price, better performance, etc.), but everything changed after I got Samsung 213T. Sorry to say this but I don't think anyone would know the feeling unless he/she owns one. 🙂

I won't try to explain/convince. But the owners know. 😀

lop

P.S. Um.. space? My 213T doesn't even take a square inch of my desk space. It's mattly mounted against the wall right in front of me. 😛
 
I was not ready to pay a premium for an LCD, but couldn't resist the NEC 17" hot deal. I bought one and now I'm really pleased with the NEC. The aesthetics and space saving are the biggest advantages. Compared to my previous monitor, a Samsung 955DF, the actual display size is only slightly less and the image quality, IMO, is just as good, if not better. I play UT2004 on it--no ghosting that is apparent to me.

I hate to sound shallow, but the NEC LCD actually made me smile with joy 😱

Other benefits of LCD: Lower electricity consumption, less heat output, easier to move, fewer toxic components.
 
My 17" NEC 1765 LCD playing a game with a resolution at 1024 or higher, kicks major ass. I've never seen one instance of ghosting yet, especially in twitch fps games like counter-strike and CoD.
 
A good CRT will kill every LCD...problem is they cost as much or more than an LCD. In general LCD is the way to go today.
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
A good CRT will kill every LCD...problem is they cost as much or more than an LCD. In general LCD is the way to go today.
Click to expand...

Do you really need me to link to the $6k+ Eizo and IBM LCDs? 😛
 
I have both a CRT and LCD, and although i voted for LCD, i use my CRT for gaming... why? My gaming monitor is a Sony GDM-FW900 24" monitor, while my LCD is the 1800FP 18". But if i had to choose between my 19" CRT and 18" LCD, 18" hands down.
 
I don't really notice ghosting on my 20 inch LCD. My eyes are much happier, and my desk as more space. I could not be happier...but to each his/her own.
 
have the viewsonic x910. With which i am very happy for playing unreal tourney 2k4.
No ghosting, no blurryness, 16ms response time @ 1280 x 1024. It is real sweet.
 
I will be a die hard CRT fan until I can find an LCD that rivals my 200$ CDN (used) Dell P1110 Trinitron 21". Cost to performance ratio is just impossible to beat on this one.
 
The only thing I hate about CRT's is lugging my 22" ~ 100lb NEC 1250+ to lan's...so I grabbed a lil cheap 15" lanning LCD and leave this BEAUTIFUL CRT sitting on my desk.

I also got in on one of those $260 for a "used" 22" NEC crt's....has worked fine the last 9 months..phenominal value IMO.

But yeah, CRT's are definitely the way to go...grabbed a 213T samsung just to compare to this 22" CRT and let me tell you, it can't touch it. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Nebor
The "lowering resolution for decent performance" really isn't that applicable to LCD owners. People who own LCDs are committed to spending money to enjoy their computing experience. So they'll have the hardware necessary to utilize their LCD. It's like saying, why buy a Ferrari, you have to get really expensive oil filters, when my Ford Focus oil filters are really cheap. People with expensive cars can generally afford to maintain them. Likewise, people with expensive displays can generally afford to drive them properly. This goes for high end LCDs and CRTs, of course. Although the hardware required to drive a high end CRT is usually far more costly and underperforming (3d wise) than that required for LCDs.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Please. I have high end equipment and I switched from an LCD back to a CRT which had nothing to do with cost. There is a physical limitation of lcd's that can't be overcome, no matter how much you want to believe.
Lowering resolution has to do with the fact that a lot of games don't even support 1280x1024, not because a system can't handle it.

I don't even care about ghosting that much. I care about true color, contrast, and sharpness.

Do you really need me to link to the $6k+ Eizo and IBM LCDs?
Click to expand...
I'm sure those look great at 1024x768 comparied to a high end Samsung or Sony crt 😛
 
Originally posted by: Nebor
All of you CRT guys, never take a second look at LCDs. Ever. LCDs are as inferior as multipoint fuel injection.
Click to expand...

What's inferior about multi-point fuel injection? Did you mean single-point (throttle body) fuel injection? (Or is this some joke I'm not getting?)
 
This discussion reminds sorta of Digital vs. Film cameras.

CRTs are still the best for gaming.

And Film cameras are still the best for pictures.

(unless you spend a fortune in either case)
 
Originally posted by: Pacinamac23
Anyone who says LCD is out of their mind. I am sorry but even the best LCDs cannot compare to midrange CRTs.
Click to expand...

I've put a Gateway 15" CRT and Samsung 15" LCD next to each other while running in cloned dual display mode and the LCD truly puts the CRT to shame. The colors are much more vibrant/richer and the brightness can go much much higher with less power usage. No visible difference in any kind of tearing/lag lines as long as vsync is enabled. Call me crazy but the LCD while more expensive is much much nicer to game on!
 
But yeah, CRT's are definitely the way to go...grabbed a 213T samsung just to compare to this 22" CRT and let me tell you, it can't touch it.
Click to expand...
this man speaks the truth. even a computer illeterate friend of mine prefers the looks on my monitor to that of school's 1800FP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top