So, are CRT's still the king of gaming?

[Patrick Wolf]

Are they? There's not one $700 or less LCD out there that can match a $600 or less CRT for games?

If the answer is no, than I need a new 22" (or 20" viewable) CRT. I'm looking at these, but not sure which one is the best. NEC/Mitsubishi and Viewsonic seem to make the best 22" CRT's.

Viewsonic P225fB
MultiSync FP2141SB-BK
Diamond Pro 2070SB-BK

The Diamond Pro and FP2141 have the exact same specs, but I'm going e-mail NEC/Mitsubishi and ask if there is any difference.

 

[housecat]

pure and simple: yes.


BUT you couldnt take my dell 2005fpw (20.1inch widescreen LCD), out of my cold dead hands. nor replace it with anything but a bigger 12ms LCD. its a $800 LCD, but i got mine on sale.

I value having widescreen (its superior for gaming, not just DVDs), and the space savings for me is nice.. as well as being more presentable (my computer is in the den).

Dont take my word for it, or someone elses.. make your own decision.

Widescreen Counterstrike compared to Full screen: http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=49242
Longhorn (designed widescreens): http://www.longhornblogs.com/a...e/2004/07/13/4015.aspx

My personal advice: if you can get a 2005FPW for $600 or less (check dell coupon sites), and I'd think yer a moron for getting a 20"+ CRT instead (even one of those killer ones you have posted). At $800, I'd have to say unless you MUST have an LCD, that one of those circa $500 screens are a better buy. They are not perfect, some versions seem to have some backlight bleedthrough, but overall I'd still do it again. You will thank me when you have liberated yourself from those ugly 100lb squares.

Thats just MY gut feeling on the issue (some people that still have CRTs refuse to give in to the new wave of killer LCDs), and this is the advice I'd give any friend of mine. Consider this your lucky day.

 

[amol]

i agree with you, HouseCat

got my 2005FPw yesterday (Revision A01, January 2005)

SLIGHT backlighting on the top right, but I have to seriously look for it

I got it for $492

My PS2 also looks great on it

Can't wait to play HL2 and others when I build my new comp

 

[imverygifted]

same as the guy above me, a good flat screened CRT beats out any LCD any day but i am in love with my 2005fpw

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: imverygifted
same as the guy above me, a good flat screened CRT beats out any LCD any day but i am in love with my 2005fpw

i think i'll take my 2005FPw for a walk on the beach tomorrow :heart:

 

[housecat]

good to hear you guys like yours as much as i do mine.

i dont even argue with people anymore that are like "CRT KICKS ASS DUDEZ!"
i suspect most of those ppl are still using 19" CRTs, or just dropped $500 on a 21/22" CRT (even tho all those are all 20inch viewable anyways). and they didnt make a BAD choice, just not the best overall choice.

i think one could honestly say that loving CRTs still is mostly due to ignorance of never have seen one of the newest LCDs in action.

after seeing a panel like the 2005FPW, I dont see how an honest person could desire a CRT.. you'd have to be in a professional that absolutely insists on extremely perfect color reproduction. and even then, if i was one of those people.. I'd do whatever it took to try to get away with using one of these bad boys.



technically, if you want to argue with a CRT fanboy.. yes, CRTs technically are better for games..

but its gotten to the point where its essentially a "paper win", meaning on paper they are better.. but in reality there is little to no difference on the newest LCDs. you'd have to be one anal SOB to notice the difference, and no one can tell the 2005FPW from a CRT image unless you've got one side by side. The perfect geometry of a LCD, and the crispness from a digital connection (DVI) is just awesome.

No way would I drop $500+ on a CRT (the paper champion), when you can get a 20inch 12ms LCD (even widescreen to boot) for around $500-600.

Belie-dat.


PS. I've also read in the past here that they are discontinuing the diamondtron tubes (used in almost all those CRTs posted in the OP), so if you want one.. I"d be a buying one sooner than later.



And Amol- you wouldnt be taking your 20inch viewable CRT for a walk on the beach if you had one. You'd need a wheelchair for yourself later if you did.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: housecat
pure and simple: yes.


BUT you couldnt take my dell 2005fpw (20.1inch widescreen LCD), out of my cold dead hands. nor replace it with anything but a bigger 12ms LCD. its a $800 LCD, but i got mine on sale.

I value having widescreen (its superior for gaming, not just DVDs), and the space savings for me is nice.. as well as being more presentable (my computer is in the den).

Dont take my word for it, or someone elses.. make your own decision.

Widescreen Counterstrike compared to Full screen: http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=49242
Longhorn (designed widescreens): http://www.longhornblogs.com/a...e/2004/07/13/4015.aspx

My personal advice: if you can get a 2005FPW for $600 or less (check dell coupon sites), and I'd think yer a moron for getting a 20"+ CRT instead (even one of those killer ones you have posted). At $800, I'd have to say unless you MUST have an LCD, that one of those circa $500 screens are a better buy. They are not perfect, some versions seem to have some backlight bleedthrough, but overall I'd still do it again. You will thank me when you have liberated yourself from those ugly 100lb squares.

Thats just MY gut feeling on the issue (some people that still have CRTs refuse to give in to the new wave of killer LCDs), and this is the advice I'd give any friend of mine. Consider this your lucky day.

Umm, thanks, but no thanks. Click Here

 

[housecat]

Yeah, like I said, you did a sideby side comparison.. thats the only way someones going to be like "OMG look at the diff!"

Even if i had a nice CRT like you do, with my personality I wouldnt even do a comparison.. I'd probably be like "get this 100lb space hog off my desk now".


It really does come down to the individual. Having a kickass CRT like your 20incher.. ya its goign to be close, with IQ going in favor of the CRT. But for most people.. when choosing between the two, I'd wager most are goign to go LCD for space/widescreen/new tech factor/weight (LAN parties).

Those differences in your comparison are not enough for me to go for a 100lb CRT again. Ugh.. seriously.
This is a 20inch viewable screen, lighter than a 15inch CRT.


Like I said, technically.. if you want to get down to it, yes. CRT has superior IQ.
But the market is dictating differently.. as LCDs have caught up drastically, and many of the best CRTs are being discontinued (diamondtron).. so if you are a lover of these.. better pick one up now (if you can pick it up).

 

[housecat]

Dude, if you are that demanding from your IQ.. you better stick to your CRTs. Get one before they are gone forever.

Seriously. You sound like you are pretty hard to please, and have been spoiled by some of the best CRTs.. and theres no "downgrading" at all in IQ for you. You are going to get similar results with any LCD compared to your old CRT.

Get a Diamondtron NEC/Mitsu.

 

[YBS1]

Turns out (from reading this post and the one from yesterday) we're considering the same three monitors pretty much for the same reasons. Some of the new LCDs have became really attractive and I was seriously considering going that route this time. However, one thing stopped me. As nice (and even price competitve) as they have gotten, to get the best results you have to use them at their native resolution. Considering the monitor screen area we seem to be looking at this is going to mean 1600x1200 on an LCD. Which basicially will require you to always run a top of the line video card if you want decent framerates and/or any eyecandy. I'm still running a 9700pro and considering how little time I spend playing games anymore I don't have a desire to upgrade to a ~$500 6800 Ultra. Granted the 9700 is getting a little long in the tooth now but if I wished to do so it could still pull a bit of decent gaming duty at 1024x768-1280x960.

If you find anything that sways you toward the Viewsonic please post back to here as I'm leaning toward the NEC/Mitsubishi for the slightly higher refresh rates at high resolutions.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

I don't know how weak some of you are, but a 65lb (not 100lb) is not that heavy. An LCD certainly has a better exterior look, but the performance just isn't there yet. When the prices drop and the technology increases, than CRT's will be obsolete, but this won't happen for years. I'd rather wait till that LCD with an 8 ms responsce time hits the streets...


YBS1: The NEC/Mitsubishi CRT's I listed have superbright mode, which I have on my current CRT, and it's an awesome feature for games and movies, makes it very close to the brightness of an LCD, but still has excellent quality.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

LCD vs CRT

My main concern with the 2005 was it's contrast, it produced black as a dark grey. If it was not for this 1 factor, I would have kept the 2005FPW.

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: wolfman579
I don't know how weak some of you are, but a 65lb (not 100lb) is not that heavy. An LCD certainly has a better exterior look, but the performance just isn't there yet. When the prices drop and the technology increases, than CRT's will be obsolete, but this won't happen for years. I'd rather wait till that LCD with an 8 ms responsce time hits the streets...

It depends on how far you are carrying it.


And even with a 8ms panel, I think you're going to have the same complaints on the dark grey blacks. Thats something that will affect all panels until the next big thing.

Thats a legit complaint, and one I dont really like myself.. but it only bothers me in Doom3, and I think Doom3 just sucks anyway. In HL2 the 2005 looks brilliant. This of course, is only my opinion. I could be wrong.

But the dark grey/blacks, never going away, LCDs just dont reproduce blacks..

esp when you're testing in a pitch black room, with Doom3 (talk about stacking the odds in a CRT's favor).

Turns out (from reading this post and the one from yesterday) we're considering the same three monitors pretty much for the same reasons. Some of the new LCDs have became really attractive and I was seriously considering going that route this time. However, one thing stopped me. As nice (and even price competitve) as they have gotten, to get the best results you have to use them at their native resolution. Considering the monitor screen area we seem to be looking at this is going to mean 1600x1200 on an LCD. Which basicially will require you to always run a top of the line video card if you want decent framerates and/or any eyecandy. I'm still running a 9700pro and considering how little time I spend playing games anymore I don't have a desire to upgrade to a ~$500 6800 Ultra. Granted the 9700 is getting a little long in the tooth now but if I wished to do so it could still pull a bit of decent gaming duty at 1024x768-1280x960.

Honestly, the scaling is actually pretty damn good as long as you stay within 16:10 (widescreen) aspect resolutions.
I wouldnt let that deter you. The only thing that is honestly pretty bad is the "dark grey" blacks that Wolfman is talking about.
In other games the difference in IQ isnt enough to complain about, but Doom3 is EXTRAORDINARILY dark.. and this plays horribly to the CRTs' favor.

I still played through the entire game though, its not THAT bad when its not sitting side by side to a killer CRT like Wolf's.. not enough to make me go CRT again. But whatever, I'm honestly trying to help you out.

I play in 960x600 (16:10) in HL2.. it looks great. Native res does look better, but honestly the Dells are some of the best scaling LCDs you can find. I wouldnt worry about being out of native resolution.

 

[housecat]

and no, we arent all weaklings, im about 185lbs and can bench press 275 (not bad for a geek). i used to weightlift competively back in my high school days.


i still dont prefer carrying a 65lb monitor over a 14lb LCD ANY distance.

not to mention its not so much the weight, but the awkward way you have to carry them due to their shape.

guess its a moot point for you guys who benchpress over 300lbs regularly.. but for the rest of us, it gets old if you go to LANs or move a few times.

 

[imported_Reck]

I prefer crts all the way myself.

http://www.insightmedia.info/news/SamsungSDI.htm

http://www.samsung.com/PressCe...eq=20000614_0000000298

Supposedly these new "slim crts" also have even better picture quality than traditional crt tubes. With a production cost at a third of that of lcds it's a win win for the manufacturer and the consumer.

 

[neoreturns]

Good info housecat, I am still debating wether to get the 2001FP or the 2005FPW since I want to run dual screens. Not too sure if 2x2005FPW will just feel too "long" if you know what I mean.

 

[imverygifted]

you could always put the 2005s at 90 degrees, that would be very cool

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: neoreturns
Good info housecat, I am still debating wether to get the 2001FP or the 2005FPW since I want to run dual screens. Not too sure if 2x2005FPW will just feel too "long" if you know what I mean.

Yeah most people here who run dual LCDs run dual 2001s.. they say it just seems more right than two widescreens.

Take that for what its worth.

 

[Insomniak]

I suppose, yes, CRTs are still the best for gaming, but they give me such a headache in the desktop and other apps that I'm never going back to them. LCDs are plenty capable for games these days, and DVI is MUCH easier on the eyes if you do a lot of work on the desktop.

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Reck
I prefer crts all the way myself.

http://www.insightmedia.info/news/SamsungSDI.htm

http://www.samsung.com/PressCe...eq=20000614_0000000298

Supposedly these new "slim crts" also have even better picture quality than traditional crt tubes. With a production cost at a third of that of lcds it's a win win for the manufacturer and the consumer.

Thats really cool stuff (I've read those links before), and it excites me too.. but its a shame we wont be seeing thin CRTs on the computer until the end of 2006.

Thats a long ways out for someone looking for a screen today.


Then theres the matter of, are they as reliable as current CRTs (they had to change SOMETHING in there), and experience the test of time like today's LCDs/CRTs.

 

[ohnnyj]

Widescreen can also be found in CRTs = Sony GDM-FW900.

Granted it's a refurb, Sony still made some of the best CRTs ever!

 

[Patrick Wolf]

WHOA, thin CRT's, those will come out just in time for me. Since I'll be moving in 2007, or 2008. And it'll be nice to travel with one of those.

For some strange reason I feel better lugging around a bulky, heavy CRT, good work out, the ladies will be impressed, haha, I don't know, I'm weird. I don't go to LAN parties either, multiplayer is fine for me, or Xbox parties. (4 Xbox's, 16 people)

housecat: I agree, Doom 3 does suck anyway, but on Far Cry, in dark areas, I see the same problem as on Doom 3, same for any other games with dark areas. Brighter games, like HL2, and Far Cry's outside enviroments, don't have as good color purity, which is harder to see in the pictures I took, but being here in person, you REALLY notice a difference.

But those thin CRT's make me feel much better....

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: ohnnyj
Widescreen can also be found in CRTs = Sony GDM-FW900.

Granted it's a refurb, Sony still made some of the best CRTs ever!

Man, that's a bit pricey for me, but I would love to try one out.

Well, widescreen isn't that great to me. On Far Cry, you don't get a wider viewing angle, as I did the comparison on the 2005 using 1050x1680, and on my CRT using 1280x1024, and there wasn't any difference in how much you could see.

I saw HL pics (I don't know if it was HL1 or HL2, as the description was a bit sketchy) comparing a widescreen to a square screen, on that game, it appeared that you do get a wider viewing angle.

 

[housecat]

i respect your reasons for not liking lcd. at least you tried it. i dont think most CRT fanboys actually have tried a killer panel like the 2005.

i do think, for most people, the 2005 will be good enough.. and its pros will outweigh its cons.


i'd take a thinner CRT over it though, if they ever get them out.
gotta remember, it took the LCDs to get those lazy companys to come out with a thin CRT.. about time.

shouldve been out years and years ago. it wouldve stopped the LCD market from ever rising, IMO.

i'll probably be replacing this 2005fpw with a thin CRT when they come out..

thats barring that something else better isnt out like OLED or whatever the hell.



for now, for me the 2005 fits the bill.
i suspect everything will be widescreen by the time thin CRTs come out, with "longhorn PCs" using widescreen. so no worries there.

i had a hard time choosing between a diamondtron and a LCD myself.

the only thing that tipped me in favor of the 2005fpw over one was the widescreen.
if it hadn't had 12ms response, decent price and everything else it has, i wouldnt have picked it either..

widescreen was the final factor in my decision.
and that with CRTs, I can hear a high electical whine in nearly all of them. i have really good ears.. and I dont hear it from LCDs. must be alot more voltage goign through them.

i can barely stand the high pitched sound coming out of my 32" Sony WEGA and I'm honestly considering selling it for a LCD TV.. and pay out my *** to get one bccause of it.


sent it in to a repair shop and they, "couldn't duplicate the problem".. I've considered taking a hammer to the insides and then calling Best Buy for my warranty repalcement.


Guess thats what I get for having superior hearing.

 

[xtknight]

Wait until the new Samsung Thin CRTs come out. You will regret buying any kind of monitor at this point. I'm not so sure I should have bought my LCD a couple of months ago. Since these things are supposed to be really affordable though, I don't have TOO many regrets. I'm not sure if these are the same as SEDs or not, which was the thing I was really looking foward to. SEDs are supposed to have perfect brightness without aperature grille lines.