• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

crt vs. lcd

Negative Decibel

Negative Decibel

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
3,588
I have always had a crt. As far back as I can remember I had a 14" then a 15"... and I only upgraded to a 17" a few years ago... I have been happy with my 17" for a long time now.. each time i upgraded It was amazing visual experiance...
About to upgrade again.
Besides the weight, power consumption, and footprint... what are the pros and cons to crts vs. lcds...

I run a wide variety of applications... besides gaming, I write, watch movies, C++, visual basic, surf the web, etc., etc....

It's almost imposible to walkinto a best buy, or compusa anymore and find a crt... and most of the time shipping online for a crt is insane...

If I were to get a crt, i'd want to get 21". I got the space for it. What about refurb crts? are they safe? Where is a good place to get a good deal?

Or should I get an LCD?

Thanks... i'm confused.....
 
i've used a refurb CRT for the last 3 years (Sony E400) and it has worked great.

If you have the space, i'd go with the CRT since you claim to like it so much. Personally i'd go with LCD since it looks more classy, but image-wise CRT is superior.
 
I had a 17" CRT and recently bought a 17" LCD, can't go back anymore to the old technology. In an LCD the refresh rate is outstanding, the brightness too, in gaming its just awesome. To me LCD is more satysfying. I got a 17" Samsung 740n.
 
weather i upgrade to crt or lcd, it's got to be bigger. whats the best bang for the buck... size/quality as far as lcds go? I don't really know anything about lcds...
 
Alien said:
I had a 17" CRT and recently bought a 17" LCD, can't go back anymore to the old technology. In an LCD the refresh rate is outstanding, the brightness too, in gaming its just awesome. To me LCD is more satysfying. I got a 17" Samsung 740n.
Click to expand...
how is a LCD refresh rate outstanding? as far as i know all LCDs are at 60hz, while CRTs can go anywhere from 60-120hz typically.

CRTs are best for gaming, while LCDs are best pretty much for everything else.

to the OP, if you have the desk space and dont care about huge footprint of a CRT then get a 21-24".

I got a FW900 last week, its on its way to me now. http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&satitle=fw900
Im so excited hehe.
 
How are LCDs better at everything else? I mean I have LCDs but I've also got a good CRT HDTV when I want to watch a good movie.. IMHO LCDs just aren't there for video. Color range is still inferior to CRTs and now there are new issues like input lag. But I guess they have to win for desktop use because of geometry and brightness.
 
FW900 for the win! :D

Like someone else said, CRTs are good for gaming/movies, For general desktop use LCDs are better. CRTs are huge, heavy beasts. LCDs have a smaller footprint. Depends on what matters to you most.
 
i own a botha CRT and an LCD over here. At full resolution the CRT refresh rate is lower than the LCD. Also in the CRT you see some flickering, it has an almost ultrasonic beeeeeep when you turn it on. My CRT is the same brand as the LCD

In gaming i like the contrast of the LCD, and the brightness. I don't know but i prefer the LCD to my CRT nowadays.
 
What refresh rate is the CRT at? You shoudn't see any flickering on a modern CRT unless it's being run at too high a res at a low refresh rate.
 
Going from a high end NEC FE2111SB CRT to a Dell 2407, I think the Dell clearly has the advantage in clarity.

The black levels suck though, but the overall colors and brightness are leagues ahead of the CRT.
 
OP: I purchased two Dell P1130 21" CRT's from a website last year...they're amazing and were very cheap. I got them each for $99. You should be able to find a lot of this specific monitor as junk dealers buy them off-lease. I've been strongly considering going with lcd's lately, but i just haven't been able to decide. If you have the space, grab two definately. It's the most important upgrade I've ever done. I think unless you have a lot of money to sink into some very nice lcd's, you'll get much more value out of refurb crt's. $200 for 2 21" monitors can't be beat, even if you have to replace them now and then (i haven't had to so far).
 
n3g471v3 d3c1b3l said:
cool stuff guys.. I think i'm going to go with a crt for now. probably a 21".
Thanks
Click to expand...

Which is technically a 19" :p

Just buy an LCD, spending money on a CRT right now is like flushing money down the toilet. :eek:
 
19.8" actually.

And buying a CRT is hardly flushing your money down the toilet. Like misterE said you can grab top of the line Trinitrons for super cheap nowadays. So what if its used or refurb, you still end up with superior image quality and chances are it won't break down for a very long time.
 
Deetox said:
19.8" actually.

And buying a CRT is hardly flushing your money down the toilet. Like misterE said you can grab top of the line Trinitrons for super cheap nowadays. So what if its used or refurb, you still end up with superior image quality and chances are it won't break down for a very long time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Size of 20" 4:3 LCD and 21" trinitron have essentially identical picture size. See pic of side by side: http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1029736133&postcount=19
 
Deetox said:
19.8" actually.

And buying a CRT is hardly flushing your money down the toilet. Like misterE said you can grab top of the line Trinitrons for super cheap nowadays. So what if its used or refurb, you still end up with superior image quality and chances are it won't break down for a very long time.
Click to expand...

Well its certainly closer to 19" then it is to 21" since the geometry doesn’t use all of the screen, and no.. IQ is actually better on LCD's, the only real issue with LCD's is the response time which is fairly good on most new displays. As long as the contrast is 1000:1 or better the blacks look black. :)
If you want to remain stuck in the past then do so., I’ll stick to my LCD’s with crystal clear display, perfect geometry, and vibrant colours.

Games play and look better on my 24” LCD then they ever did on my old CRT’s and I used to use a 22" iiyama :)


Also the comparision above is comparing a high quality CRT to a dell with somewhat pathetic 400:1 Contrast ratio and very poor viewing angles of only +88 / -88, most new one are around +170 / -170 oir better.
 
Shocky said:
Well its certainly closer to 19" then it is to 21" since the geometry doesn’t use use all of the screen, and no.. IQ is actually better on LCD's, the only real issue with LCD's is the response time which is fairly good on most new displays. As long as the contrast is 1000:1 or better the blacks look black. :)
If you want to remain stuck in the past then do so., I’ll stick to my LCD’s with crystal clear display, perfect geometry, and vibrant colours.

Games play and look better on my 24” LCD then they ever did on my old CRT’s and I used to use a 22" iiyama :)
Click to expand...

I agree. LCD's produce a cleaner, richer more vibrant picture than CRTs. Its almost as if the colors jump out of the screen. The only real downfall of LCD's is their response time. But response time may no longer be an issue as Viewsonic is suppose to release their 1ms display this year.
 
Shottah_king said:
I agree. LCD's produce a cleaner, richer more vibrant picture than CRTs. Its almost as if the colors jump out of the screen. The only real downfall of LCD's is their response time. But response time may no longer be an issue as Viewsonic is suppose to release their 1ms display this year.
Click to expand...

6ms to 2ms g2g is excelent for gaming to me with no noticable ghosting but theres still room for improvement. :p
 
Shottah_king said:
I agree. LCD's produce a cleaner, richer more vibrant picture than CRTs. Its almost as if the colors jump out of the screen. The only real downfall of LCD's is their response time. But response time may no longer be an issue as Viewsonic is suppose to release their 1ms display this year.
Click to expand...

And I disagree. This is after getting excited to get a new LCD and buying first a Dell 2405 (Too bright, poor black, hideous viewing angles, smears/lags, SDE, poor resolution scaling), then a Dell 2007 which was better, but still no where near as good as the refurb Philips 202P4 (21" trinitron) It is exaclty the same active screen area as the Dell 2007, but image quality is still the best of any screen I have ever owned.

This CRT has absolutely luscious deep detailed blacks, free of any visible pixelation, perfect viewing angles, perfect resolution scaling, perfect response times.

I would like an LCD for the size, but for image quality it is not even close.

I think this thread illustrates the black issue nicely:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1079774
 
Snowdog said:
And I disagree. This is after getting excited to get a new LCD and buying first a Dell 2405 (Too bright, poor black, hideous viewing angles, smears/lags, SDE, poor resolution scaling), then a Dell 2007 which was better, but still no where near as good as the refurb Philips 202P4 (21" trinitron) It is exaclty the same active screen area as the Dell 2007, but image quality is still the best of any screen I have ever owned.

This CRT has absolutely luscious deep detailed blacks, free of any visible pixelation, perfect viewing angles, perfect resolution scaling, perfect response times.

I would like an LCD for the size, but for image quality it is not even close.

I think this thread illustrates the black issue nicely:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1079774
Click to expand...

The main issue with the Dell 2405 there is backlight leakage, i've never tried the 2405 but my 2407 has virtually none and the blacks are black or as black as i've seen it on a LCD.
 
Archonius said:
i've used a refurb CRT for the last 3 years (Sony E400) and it has worked great.

If you have the space, i'd go with the CRT since you claim to like it so much. Personally i'd go with LCD since it looks more classy, but image-wise CRT is superior.
Click to expand...

LCD are now coming on par with CRT's if you get higher end models, and an 8bit panel.

LCD, dont fresh on a per screen basis, they work by refreshing each individual pixel - LCD are better for your eyes, or at least for alot of people, things are more crips and detailed.
 
Ton of people will say they went CRT to LCD and are happy but I sold my 2405FPW for a loss and went with an ebay'd FW900. Wouldn't have it any other way. Can't stand any blurring and I like the flexibility of resolutions even with my x1900 crossfire setup.
 
texuspete00 said:
Ton of people will say they went CRT to LCD and are happy but I sold my 2405FPW for a loss and went with an ebay'd FW900. Wouldn't have it any other way. Can't stand any blurring and I like the flexibility of resolutions even with my x1900 crossfire setup.
Click to expand...

One reason I never bought the 2405, input lag and high responce time, the latest version based on the samsung panel is much improved at least in those areas.
 
I have had both lcd's on laptops, lcd's for desktops both pricey and cheap. I'm typing on a brand new Acer laptop with a 15.4ws shiny lcd. The biggest problems with lcd's is that no matter how much you adjust the brightness, contrast, gamma, colors, the image to me is really never as rich as on a good crt, not even close. I have a viewsonic p95f+b, probably one of the best 19" gaming, and highest res. monitors for its size. It's laughable to compare the image from it to the "good" lcd's in gaming and dvd playback. The crt image is just more immersable, you feel as though you are looking through it, not at it. So if if I had the space, and didn't really care about the style of the crt. I would go for a refurb 24" sony ws (forgot model) or a 19" viewsonic p95f+b. You can always repaint your refurb to look new or cool. my two cents
 
syntax_terror said:
I'll give you my 20" Sony CRT. You just have to come by with a crane to move it.
Click to expand...

serious? I'll take it... live anywhere close to south carolina?? (probably not...I live in the middle of nowhere!), but I would drive a few hours for a good deal
 
Shocky said:
:)


Also the comparision above is comparing a high quality CRT to a dell with somewhat pathetic 400:1 Contrast ratio and very poor viewing angles of only +88 / -88, most new one are around +170 / -170 oir better.
Click to expand...
that +88/-88 actually MEANS 178 viewing angle. :rolleyes:
 
CRT's were great when we were all running 1024x768 resolution, get with the times and stop defending your CRT's

You'd have to spend an outrageous amount of money to get the same performance out of a crt as an lcd at the super high resolutions we are all used to now.
 
lcds "were" bad. that has changed in the last months, now, lg, samsung, and others, are releasing lcds capable of great color reproduction just like crts. but you are gonna have to pay $$$ for it, just like in the time when crts were new.
as far as i know crts have been stop production, new technology is only available for lcds i think. why buy a heavy crt like that if can have a lcd that image quality is far superior to anything crts got. imo.
 
streetkid said:
CRT's were great when we were all running 1024x768 resolution, get with the times and stop defending your CRT's

You'd have to spend an outrageous amount of money to get the same performance out of a crt as an lcd at the super high resolutions we are all used to now.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance is showing. The natural resolution of a 21" CRT is 1600x1200 (mine will run 2048x1536. I have been running 1600x1200 for about 7 years.

You can get refurb version of these Trinitrons for about $120.

dBASE3PLUS said:
lcds "were" bad. that has changed in the last months, now, lg, samsung, and others, are releasing lcds capable of great color reproduction just like crts. but you are gonna have to pay $$$ for it, just like in the time when crts were new.
as far as i know crts have been stop production, new technology is only available for lcds i think. why buy a heavy crt like that if can have a lcd that image quality is far superior to anything crts got. imo.
Click to expand...

Just to be accurate, there are some LCD's based on new backlight technology to improve color range. But this doesn't improve poor black performance which a fact of life with LCD because of the way the technology works. Sony Trinitrons are no longer but refurbs are available. Why get one? Because the image quality is still much better and cheap units are still available. Just about the only LCD of decent quality that is even close to CRT is the NEC 20WMGX2. That is still about 6 times the price of a nice refurb, still doesn't do nice resolution scaling like CRT.
 
streetkid said:
CRT's were great when we were all running 1024x768 resolution, get with the times and stop defending your CRT's

You'd have to spend an outrageous amount of money to get the same performance out of a crt as an lcd at the super high resolutions we are all used to now.
Click to expand...

Umm, seems like you've never owned/seen a good 19" crt. Great image quality with 1600*1200@85Hz. ;> That's not a small resolution.
 
trek554 said:
actually my eyes enjoy my crt much better. i have tried 7 or 8 lcd monitors and they all hurt my eyes no matter how much i adjusted the settings.
Click to expand...

Ditto here (though I only bought 2 LCDs before giving up). I wonder how many people quoting the LCD easier on eyes stuff are just parroting what they heard or are coming from real crappy CRTs. The funny thing is I bought into this before getting my LCD even though I didn't experience eyestrain, I just thought it would somehow be even better with LCD. Was I ever wrong. I have done many 16 hour days on CRT without eyestrain, but 20 minutes on LCD kills me.

I think there are two reason why LCD is harder on the eyes:
1: They have to operate at higher brightness. Because blacks are poor, they operate at much higher brightness than CRT to compensate. Even when turned down. If they actually turn down enough, they look like crap.
2: Pixelation also known as Screen Door Effect. Whereas CRTs produce smooth continues text/images. LCD highlights individual pixels separated by black borders (SDE). I think my eyes anyway keep trying to focus too much on individual pixels, causing eyestrain. It is an involuntary reaction. They relaxed when looking at the smooth continuous nature of CRT images.

I don't know if it contributed to eyestrain but I couldn't stand the wierd, inconsistent, angular glare effects of PVA screens. For example here in this forum on my CRT all tones are treated equally and look like I am looking at a printed page surface. When using the PVA screen there were all sorts of wierd artifacts where the grey tones shifted and the furhter from the center you got the more washed out the grey became. It was not like a printed surface, but instead like staring at a transparency with different angle light behind it. The sides of the screen, the grey actually became shiny and glaring. Don't know if this contributed, but I certainly hated it.
 
I'm running a 21" Trinitron alongside an 24" LCD (AL2416wd).

The Trinitron has better picture quality (contrast, blacks, colour reproduction), response, and no input lag.
The LCD is great for text and desktop applications, plus it is really easy to move around.

It's a tough decision. These days I'm mostly looking at text and staying on the desktop, so the LCD is better. For picture quality and performance the CRT can't be beat though.
 
I've just gone from two 19 inch CRTs to two 19 inch TFTs today (they just arrived!). They're very stylish. But CRTs are miles ahead of TFTs to be honest lol. If you have the room (which I do); and you can stand the sight of them (which I cant't), then stick with CRT!
 
sounds like i'm still going to stick to the crt for now. I'm all about most bang for my buck, as well as good picture quality
 
Personally I wouldn't be without my CRT right now. Don't get me wrong, I think LCDs are great (I do have a couple), but if you want to run a really high resolutions with very good refresh rates you need a lot of change. I run mine at 1600x1200 @ 120Hz and it is impecable. I would run it higher for it's native is a good bit higher, and it can still handle something like 80-100 hz, but it gets to the point where everything is way too small for normal work unless you up the font sizes. Anyway, I have a Viewsonic P91f+ and it is amazing. When it comes to running at high resolutions with fast refresh rates, if money's an issue CRT is the way to go. Though, with everyone talking about this, does anyone know of an LCD that has a native resolution above 1600x1200 @ 120hz and is under $600? That would be great. It would have to be at least 21". Anyway, i'll check back if anyone knows any good ones. Good luck with your purchase.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top