• 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.

LCDs images delayed compared to CRTs ? Yes !

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
It's not any better than mine
Click to expand...

Want to bet 🙂 ,focus will get worst with time with CRTs(I have had to replace a few CRTs in my time over the years due to focus and other problems),geometry can never be as good as a LCD .I remember when LCDs were very expensive and CRTs were so cheap,times have changed.

If you happy with your CRT fine,LCDs are only going to get better with the new technology that's coming there way.
 
Originally posted by: Mem
It's not any better than mine
Click to expand...

Want to bet 🙂 ,focus will get worst with time with CRTs(I have had to replace a few CRTs in my time over the years due to focus and other problems),geometry can never be as good as a LCD .I remember when LCDs were very expensive and CRTs were so cheap,times have changed.

If you happy with your CRT fine,LCDs are only going to get better with the new technology that's coming there way.
Click to expand...

You've evidently never seen a high quality CRT that has been properly calibrated (in particular, the internal focus knobs) and is not defective in some way. Granted, they're quite a rarity these days, but they do exist.

It will probably change over time as you say (although it has remained good for the last 18 months) but for now, I can get the focus and geometry to look identical to my 90GX2 LCD, leaving aside the other image quality differences.
 
You say that as if Widescreen PC CRTs dont exist
Click to expand...

It's not just about widescreen, just that the LCD is just so much better for me. The image is just so crisp compared to my old CRT. The colors seem more defined to me. And I have a cheap panel, I belive my LCD is just a 6 bit color TN panel. I've used CRT's for years, then I got a 19" LCD which I gave to the wife and now have a 22" LCD. When I went out to replace the 19" LCD a CRT of any kind was never in the running. If you like CRT's better, great! They certainly have their advantages. To each their own. But I do think 9 out of 10 people will perfer an LCD.
 
You've evidently never seen a high quality CRT that has been properly calibrated (in particular, including the internal focus knobs) and is not defective in some way. Granted, they're quite a rarity these days, but they do exist.
Click to expand...

I have seen a few in my time AG type from Sony,NEC,Mitsubishi etc.


I always wondered why plasma WS monitors never took off(except in the home tv entertainment field) ,maybe too expensive?
 
I have seen a few in my time AG type from Sony,NEC,Mitsubishi etc.


I always wondered why plasma WS monitors never took off(except in the home tv entertainment field) ,maybe too expensive?
Click to expand...

Well, there are a lot of bad AGs out there, and a lot of bad samples of top end, flagship AGs for that matter too. 😛 The quality control on CRTs, even on the best models, was quite horrendous during roughly the last year of their production, so the few units still left on the market have a lot of duds among them. That's the main reason I advise people to avoid CRTs these days, even though used ones are readily available for bargain prices.

As for plasmas, I think it has something to do with manufacturing them in small pixel densities. They apparently aren't much cheaper to produce in small sizes than the larger ones used for TVs.
 
Plasmas have burn in issues and are not suitable for prolonged static displays.

Obviously LCDs are clearly superior because they are newer technology, when diesel replaced gasoline engines noone complained about their drawbacks, nor did they when we moved from piston based internal combustion powerplants to rotary powered. These technologies were newer and hence by default vastly superior 😛

LCDs are short lived tech(thankfully). OLEDs and at some point SEDs will replace them. The only good LCD displays are the LED backlit ones, they are the only type that can have acceptable contrast levels and their price point is certainly keeping them out of the realm of the normal consumer at this point. LCDs are 'good enough' for slow paced gaming or casual shooter fans without a doubt at this point, it is mainly their horrific overall IQ that is a problem as of this point, that will be rectified when the newer technology arrives within the next couple of years.
 
The image quality is not horrific and they are perfect for games with a 20ms ping time. The clarity is much better than the flatscreen CRTs I've had in the past.
 
Originally posted by: brianmanahan
The image quality is not horrific and they are perfect for games with a 20ms ping time. The clarity is much better than the flatscreen CRTs I've had in the past.
Click to expand...

What does ping times have to do with a monitor? 😕 Will a CRT make my internet connection faster?
 
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
CRT's may be superior in a lot of ways, but now that I have a widescreen LCD there is no way I can ever go back to a CRT. I wonder if people who rode horses yapped about the advantages of the horse over the horse-less carriage as well? 😀
Click to expand...

I agree. I have no doubt that a high-end CRT is superior to most LCDs in almost every way, specially in terms of color reproduction, viewing angles and contrast. However, LCDs are not only getting better and better but also cheaper and cheaper, to the point that a quality 22"'er can can be had for less than $400, and that can fulfill the needs of over 95% of the market.

Not to mention they are dead sexy, and take up just a fraction of the space a CRT does.

 
Originally posted by: CP5670
Originally posted by: Mem
It's not any better than mine
Click to expand...

Want to bet 🙂 ,focus will get worst with time with CRTs(I have had to replace a few CRTs in my time over the years due to focus and other problems),geometry can never be as good as a LCD .I remember when LCDs were very expensive and CRTs were so cheap,times have changed.

If you happy with your CRT fine,LCDs are only going to get better with the new technology that's coming there way.
Click to expand...

You've evidently never seen a high quality CRT that has been properly calibrated (in particular, the internal focus knobs) and is not defective in some way. Granted, they're quite a rarity these days, but they do exist.

It will probably change over time as you say (although it has remained good for the last 18 months) but for now, I can get the focus and geometry to look identical to my 90GX2 LCD, leaving aside the other image quality differences.
Click to expand...



I've seen quite a few actually & owned several ... still have one in fact & its currently sitting right next to my LCD.

 
Originally posted by: Ichigo
Originally posted by: Ateo
Originally posted by: Ichigo
This isn't new information.

Have fun sticking to old technology. Not all of us live for FPS games, you realize.
Click to expand...

CRT's are better for gaming(aliasing/lag) and video(color/contrast/brightness) so don't dismiss "old" technology that still have superior preformance in key areas.
Click to expand...

Feel like proving the latter?
Click to expand...

It's common knowlegde?
Comparision LCD vs. CRT

About LCD Monitors and CRT monitors - Comparison of technology and advantages

Was that all I needed to do?
 
Originally posted by: Captante
I've seen quite a few actually & owned several ... still have one in fact & its currently sitting right next to my LCD.
Click to expand...

Did you fully adjust them and ensure that they had no problems? A lot of people get blurriness and other imperfections even on the top CRTs and just assume it's normal, while it's really either due to bad settings or subtle manufacturing defects (the latter mostly depends on the production dates). The focus controls are particularly important and often need to be aligned properly for things to look right.
 
The focus controls are particularly important and often need to be aligned properly for things to look right.
Click to expand...

Not all CRTs have manual focus controls,however my CRT does ,I could never get it good as my LCD,I have seen a few AG type CRTs over the years as you know,now I'm talking way back when AGs ruled as the best, and LCDs were still way too expensive and pretty new.

Talking about quality control I have seen a lot of LCDs too ,and the default colour settings,brightness etc are way off ,even my own LCD was way off the mark until I used my ColorVison Spyder 2 to calibrate the colours etc,made a big difference on skin tones etc...

Getting back on topic the thread is mainly about lag,and LCDs have come a long way on response times,anybody that owns a new LCD knows what I'm talking about.

Widescreen models have added an extra dimension to gaming and prices falling all the time is an added bonus,I just hope we start seeing more new quality panels (IPS ,A-MVA etc..) real soon.
 
I think the OP is referring to input lag rather than response time, which from what I've seen is very minimal, if it exists at all, on smaller (17/19" 1280x1024) LCDs. It's only an issue on the 23/24" models, like the one in that review, and a handful in the 20/21" range. It would be interesting to see one of those timing tests on a 19" LCD and see how it compares to the 24" ones.

As for the response time, LCDs have indeed gotten a lot better and continue to improve, but at the moment they aren't quite good enough in my opinion. The 90GX2 I have is apparently 0-7ms across the board according to the LCD thread (which would tie it with a few others for the fastest current LCD), but I find the motion blur to be quite substantial in several older games that can maintain a constant 60 framerate. I got it mainly for school/office work (for which it's excellent) so this is rarely a problem, but I wouldn't want to use it on my gaming rig. This depends a lot on the particular game though; in some games it's next to unnoticeable while others basically become unplayable.
 
Originally posted by: CP5670
I think the OP is referring to input lag rather than response time, which from what I've seen is very minimal, if it exists at all, on smaller (17/19" 1280x1024) LCDs. It's only an issue on the 23/24" models, like the one in that review, and a handful in the 20/21" range. It would be interesting to see one of those timing tests on a 19" LCD and see how it compares to the 24" ones.

As for the response time, LCDs have indeed gotten a lot better and continue to improve, but at the moment they aren't quite good enough in my opinion. The 90GX2 I have is apparently 0-7ms across the board according to the LCD thread (which would tie it with a few others for the fastest current LCD), but I find the motion blur to be quite substantial in several older games that can maintain a constant 60 framerate. I got it mainly for school/office work (for which it's excellent) so this is rarely a problem, but I wouldn't want to use it on my gaming rig. This depends a lot on the particular game though; in some games it's next to unnoticeable while others basically become unplayable.
Click to expand...

Id have to agree.. my 20WMGX2 is rated 6ms but you can still see blurring in everyday usage and gaming, heck just moving the mouse pointer around on this forum has a blur / stutter effect while on the CRT its perfectly fluid.(still have both monitors side by side).

Ive never seen an LCD that can actually maintain texture details during motion such as in an FPS game , for example stand facing a wall (doesnt have to be very close) and Strafe left and right , on an LCD the wall texture detail is blurred until you stop moving while on a CRT the wall details remain perfectly clear during movement.

Input lag is present as I described in my first post in this thread (pics) but in real world usage I cant notice it.
 
On a black background, I see blurring/ghosting of the white mouse pointer on my *CRT*. However, I'm sure that's because it's a really really really horrid/cheap/crappy one.

19" Proview/MAG. The one you can get at Best Buy (in Canada) for $150 or less. Probably $99 in the 'States! Made in China POS, 90-day warranty... the "white" color started dying on this from the very first day. Now, it's not really white but rather white mixed with a very subtle pinkish hue. Hilarious!

Looking forward to getting a decent 19"/20" WS LCD soon; hopefully one of the Dell Ultrasharps, Viewsonic PVA's or even an LG or Samsung TN-based would be fine too. I'm sure they'd all be a gigantic leap forward from this 50 kilo deadweight. 😛
 
I love my LCD screen - it's nice and sharp and uses alot less power than my old CRT, and the screen lights up instant. I'll never go back to CRT, and games play great for me. I don't see any reason for sticking with CRT on purpose unless you're an obsessed professional gamer where every last drop fo performance actually means anything.
 
Moving from CRT to LCD has greatly reduced my eyestrain and therefor headaches while working for long periods of time. I cannot work around a CRT that is running 60Hz or below for any period of time without headache, I can phyically see it flashing. But because of the technology used in LCDs, I don't have that problem. Not to mention I don't like the idea of using an "electron gun" to paint an image that my head is on the other side of.

There is absolutely no noticeable blurring or lag in FPS games for me... and I even have some of the "older" tech(8ms). I've got a new 5ms wide screen display on the way, and that should definitely be desirable. However, I will say that I hate not having true 32-bit color anymore. It CAN be seen in the poor blending of many reds and blues. (Almost all LCD monitors that are using the newest technology, and 8ms or below will be 24-bit instead of 32-bit.) 16.7 million colors = 2^24.

But in the end the lack of full 32-bit display colors isn't really such a big deal. I would certainly not claim it causes "horrible image quality."
By the way, newegg has a decent deal on this one, but costco is better... 22" 5ms wide LCD with extras for $299.99 after $30 rebate:
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.as...mode+matchallpartial&Nty=1&topnav=&s=1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top