crt vs. lcd

[Crazylikeafox]

the only thing i hate about LCD technology is the native resolution, because i love 1024X768
but my lcd's native is 1280X1024 and everything's so firkin small i cant read it and when its out of its native resolution everything's so firkin blurry i cant read it!

 

[SeetheSeer]

increase the font size to 120 pt.

 

[Snowdog]

OLED will make it in the small/medium display market however it suffers in response time which IMO will rival LCD but not CRT, SED will eventually appear in computer monitors. The only issue with SED is the fixed resolution which is fine.

According to to Sony and Sumsung response time ∼ 0.01 Mil. sec

That is about 100 times better than LCD.

SED is only going to be here in 2008 and only in big screen TVs at a high end price. It will be years to the Desktop, maybe never. OLED might displace it. Or people may decide LCD is good enough and it never get's displaced.

My bet is on OLED is the first to the desktop in ~2008.

 

[SH1]

the only thing i hate about LCD technology is the native resolution, because i love 1024X768
but my lcd's native is 1280X1024 and everything's so firkin small i cant read it and when its out of its native resolution everything's so firkin blurry i cant read it!

You might consider using a 26 inch LCD television as a monitor then: 1366 by 768, true 16:9...

And enabling Clear Type font smoothing in XP does a terrific job of cleaning up the fonts so you can sit closer.

(Two advantages of LCD screens are, admittedly, that you can go much larger and get true 16:9 aspect ratio...)

 

[trek554]

You might consider using a 26 inch LCD television as a monitor then: 1366 by 768, true 16:9...

And enabling Clear Type font smoothing in XP does a terrific job of cleaning up the fonts so you can sit closer.

(Two advantages of LCD screens are, admittedly, that you can go much larger and get true 16:9 aspect ratio...)

or he could just get a 19inch lcd. im guessing he has a 17inch since 1280x1024 on a 19inch is not small at all.

 

[Crazylikeafox]

iv already tried everything from font increase to clear type...its just not the same, i have really bad eyes probably from sitting in front of the computer all day!

 

[trek554]

iv already tried everything from font increase to clear type...its just not the same, i have really bad eyes probably from sitting in front of the computer all day!

do you have a 19inch or 17inch? if you cant read 1280x1024 on a 19inch then you need glasses.

 

[kleox64]

According to to Sony and Sumsung response time ∼ 0.01 Mil. sec

That is about 100 times better than LCD.

SED is only going to be here in 2008 and only in big screen TVs at a high end price. It will be years to the Desktop, maybe never. OLED might displace it. Or people may decide LCD is good enough and it never get's displaced.

My bet is on OLED is the first to the desktop in ~2008.

if that is true then why is sony's 24" OLED been said to have acceptable/adequate response time.

 

[Svperstar]

I would just like to add I have been an absolute LCD hater for years, I despised LCDs, every one I had tried disappointed me and either had ghosting or very poor colors with lousy contrast.

Because it was on sale I picked up the new Samsung 940bw from Office Max this sunday, 14 days 100% money back. I must say LCDs have come a long way, this panel really doesn't have any ghosting I have seen, certainly nothing that pops out at me.

The only thing I would change is the blacks, they aren't quite black enough for dark games, however setting the brightness to zero helps with this a LOT. I get next to nil backlight bleeding with brightness set to zero.

If like me you have hated LCDs for years, you should give some of the newer models from this year a try,

 

[Crazylikeafox]

do you have a 19inch or 17inch? if you cant read 1280x1024 on a 19inch then you need glasses.

17inch

the thing i love most about LCD's is they have that auto adjust feature that automatically fits the picture to the rim of the screen, i had so much trouble manually doing that with CRT's it always seemed to be to stretched or to small GRRRR

 

[trek554]

17inch

the thing i love most about LCD's is they have that auto adjust feature that automatically fits the picture to the rim of the screen, i had so much trouble manually doing that with CRT's it always seemed to be to stretched or to small GRRRR

get a 19inch lcd and you will be able to see everything just fine. that sounds like the perfect solution for you. it will have the same resolution but be much much easier to see because of the larger size. my parents looked at monitors and realized that a 19inch lcd would be perfect for them too.

 

[Crazylikeafox]

get a 19inch lcd and you will be able to see everything just fine. that sounds like the perfect solution for you. it will have the same resolution but be much much easier to see because of the larger size.

cool, first i have to find a problem with this monitor befor i can get a new one....maybe i can make it disappear muwhahaAAHA muwaHAAHAHA!!!

 

[trek554]

cool, first i have to find a problem with this monitor befor i can get a new one....maybe i can make it disappear muwhahaAAHA muwaHAAHAHA!!!

another good thing about 19inch lcd monitors is that they are usually only 40 or 50 more than a 17inch. sell your 17inch and get you a 19inch and you will have a happy pair of eyes.

 

[trek554]

cool, first i have to find a problem with this monitor befor i can get a new one....maybe i can make it disappear muwhahaAAHA muwaHAAHAHA!!!

damn double post.

 

[Tetrahedron]

LCDs dont really have a 'true' refresh rate, they dont refresh single micro-second like CRTs do.

Also why does viewing angle matter? I mean I sit right directly infront of my monitor.

I use LCDs now, use to hate them, but now I love them... for one they take up less space, look more sexier, less power consumption and I live in Phoenix, so the LCD doesnt heat up my room with my computers in it like CRTs did. I have 4 computers in the room, all with the monitors on for various reasons.. I would hate to have all CRTs making my electric bill rise do to power consumption and cooling needs.

but Hey I do agree with the fact that CRTs are better for FPS gaming, which I rarely get into much these days, I still game and all.... just less twitch gaming for me now.

 

[trek554]

LCDs dont really have a 'true' refresh rate, they dont refresh single micro-second like CRTs do.

Also why does viewing angle matter? I mean I sit right directly infront of my monitor.

i hope you are just kidding about the viewing angle comment because thats actually a MAJOR issue on TN panels. why the hell do you think they list it in the specs? i move around in my chair and sometimes lean back. unless you sit in a rigid chair directly in front of your monitor like a statue then viewing angle is important.

 

[rysher]

the only thing i hate about LCD technology is the native resolution, because i love 1024X768
but my lcd's native is 1280X1024 and everything's so firkin small i cant read it and when its out of its native resolution everything's so firkin blurry i cant read it!

it is a SIGN............
............................
............................
............................
that it is time to see the OPTOMETRIST!

 

[trek554]

it is a SIGN............
............................
............................
............................
that it is time to see the OPTOMETRIST!

hey my vision was good enough for the Air Force and i still think 1280x1024 seems small on a 17inch monitor.

 

[Tetrahedron]

i hope you are just kidding about the viewing angle comment because thats actually a MAJOR issue on TN panels. why the hell do you think they list it in the specs? i move around in my chair and sometimes lean back. unless you sit in a rigid chair directly in front of your monitor like a statue then viewing angle is important.

hehe.. I sorta do.. i mean I have my nice comfy suade manager chair I sit in, and the monitor is always directly in front of me.. I guess some situations and setups people use, but view angle is not one that affects me.

I love my vx922 but I think im gonna get a Acer AL2423Wdr next month, I also have my Sanyo Z3 LCD Front Projector... but before all that I had a Viewsonic g90fb which was AWESOME!!! but it died.. I still have it, maybe it can be fixed? I dont know the picture just gets all waving and distorted after 30 mins or so.. the picture slides off to one side.. I can SLAP the side of it and it fixes it for a few minutes or so.

I just perfer LCD nowadays, though I would love to get a FW900 just dont know of reliable source

 

[Snowdog]

Here is my take on the whole viewing angle thing. A long post, since it is one of my top issues with LCD panels.

First the manufacture numbers quoted are basically outright lies. The only use is they will tell you if you have a TN panel or not. But they should be different for PVA/MVA vs IPS but they are not. In fact the numbers tell you almost nothing about real world performance. It also says nothing about the realworld artifacts generated by poor viewing angles.

Behardware explains the joke of viewing angle measurements.
http://www.behardware.com/articles/...ds-overdrive-contrast-and-viewing-angles.html

Here I will rate performance based on a real world experience.

Normal viewing angles, sitting fairly centered small movements. Basically normal reasonable using situations. I must stress that this happens even if you don't move from center. Viewing angles are so much worse than advertised it is a joke.

Horizontal: Image stability in the horizontal direction, freedom from artifactcs, tone shifting. Image consistent across screen.

IPS - Very good
TN - Very good
VA - Poor

Vertical: Image stability in the vertical direction, freedom from artifactcs, tone shifting. Image consistent across screen.

IPS - Very Good
VA - Good
TN - Poor

Some explanation is in order. VA technologies actually have the same performance in either direction(H/V) as does IPS. But the vertical direction is slightly less critical, so VA is acceptable in that direction, but not in the horizontal to my eye.


Overal ratings:

For monitors used only in Landscape mode: Best to worst:

IPS, TN, VA.

For monitor used in both Landscape/Portrait or exclusively portrait: Best to Worst:

IPS, VA, TN.


I would think the only controversy is that I rate TN better than VA if you are not going into Portrait. I find the Horizontal behavior of TN much better than VA, which contradicts the numbers.

TN: Vertically is the worse. But TN vertical behavior is so bad that it is unusable in portrait mode. Even in landscape mode you will need to position it carefully. Look at techreport.com. On a TN panel, chances are the botom of the screen is glaring bright/pale blue.

VA: Horizontally it is the worst. At small angles it washes out the image. Since your eyes are at different angles this will lead to all kinds of glare washout

IPS: It is the best in all directions. It is no contest, this is the only type of screen I would replace my main CRT with.


Caveats. I am very picky about visual abberations. Reports are that the new Samsung. PVA 21"/24" panels are better though still not as good as IPS, I haven't seen them. Here is a sampling of what I have owned/seen. Among these the behavior is very consistent

I have owned 3 panels.
Dell 2405fpw PVA (Sold)
Dell 2007fp S-PVA (Returned)
Dell 1707fp TN (Keeping as secondary to my main CRT)

I have examined several panels in store to get an idea of the behaviors. I will name only a couple of the popular ones but I have seen dozens of VA/TN panels, few IPS:
Samsung 242 PVA
Viewsonic VX2025 MVA
Apple 20" 30" Cinema S-IPS

 

[Shocky]

I do agree with the above but IMO there are more important factors to consider then the viewing angle, I've tried pretty much all types accept MVA and the viewing angles on all of them were fine.. You would need to be extremely picky to make it an issue.

The only one which does present a problem is TN since the effect is very obvious, you end up with the bottom half being much brighter then top half which is very noticeable in games and desktop use and I agree using it in portrait mode would be horrible.
Viewing angles would probably be the last thing I look at since its more then acceptable on any modern panel including TN .

If a monitor has a fast responce time, low input lag, 800:1 or greater contract, the right inputs and excelent colour reproduction then id probably buy it regardless of the panel type.. with the exception of TN where I would probably not buy anything larger then 20" widesreen since the larger the vertical viewing area the larger the brightness difference between the top and bottom of the screen,

 

[Snowdog]

I do agree with the above but IMO there are more important factors to consider then the viewing angle, I've tried pretty much all types accept MVA and the viewing angles on all of them were fine.. You would need to be extremely picky to make it an issue.

The only one which does present a problem is TN since the effect is very obvious, you end up with the bottom half being much brighter then top half which is very noticeable in games and desktop use and I agree using it in portrait mode would be horrible.
Viewing angles would probably be the last thing I look at since its more then acceptable on any modern panel including TN .

Damn. I was sleepy. I intended to post that in the viewing angle thread. Then it dissappeared when I looked at the thread,I thought crap, I lost all that typing, oh well.

I think viewing angle is one of the biggest differences right now. Most screen types are apporaching sub 10ms, which is pretty good. Contrast is more or less limited unless they have an adaptive backlight which is kind of trick that only works in some situations. And notably it has mostly been VA screens where most of the lag problem where reported.

I would agree with 20" widescreen is the limit on TN even then it might be a challenge at times. I am typing this on my 17" TN, same height as a 20" WS. But without hesitation, I would get 20" widescreen as TN before VA. The side to side washout on VA is almost as bad as up down on TN when you take into account the greater width of a typical screen. The difference is VA is dark in the center and whites out to the sides. It was extremely bad on my Dell 2405 and Dell 2007fp (pva model). It is interesting how I started with an expensive screen and eventually bought one of the cheapest and the cheap one is much better than the expensive one in every way except size. Better veiwing angles, no input lag, tolerable backlight, better response time.

After two PVA screens. This TN is the first one I owned where in these forums, the greys don't glare at me from the sides. The BS numbers are meaningless. TN has worse horizontal number than VA but the horizontal image is much more stable and over a greater range than VA on TN.

I did note that there may be exceptions for the newest 21" and 24" Samsung panels (Dell 2407)that appear better than others VAs. For me the older VAs like the Dell 2405/2007fp I owned where almost as bad as using TN in vertical mode. Other VAs like MVA on the VX2025 were the same when I examined them in store. If you could swap in a 2405 for a day and surf these forums and other places you may discover you are picky too.

I personally wouldn't touch VA tech. Unless I had a chance to try one of those specific panels for free. IPS is still king and when it comes time to retire my CRT it will be IPS or some new tech.

 

[brumwald]

The BS numbers are meaningless. TN has worse horizontal number than VA but the horizontal image is much more stable and over a greater range than VA on TN.

Somehow I feel that you have mixed up TN and VA...

I must say the opposite.
My experience may not include the latest TN panels but compared to the VX2025WM I haven't seen anything coming close. The reason for that might be that you're often not exactly aligned vertically when you are off horizontally. But to say that TN is better...

Or maybe the VX2025WM is extremely good but since you mentioned it I guess not.

Granted the black levels are not that great (quite poor actually) and it feels like the antigalre-coating is much to blame for the poor viewing-angles in dark scenes but besides that I really can't see what your talking about. For everyday use, office, and non-dark images I can't see what you are talking about. And TN panels are not exactly known for their great black levels so I suppose you didn't compare during those circumstances either.


IPS are superior but I can't see how anyone can think that TN is better than PV (generally speaking):
http://www.behardware.com/articles/619-17/updated-survey-13-lcd-20-5-6-8-16-ms.html

 

[Snowdog]

Somehow I feel that you have mixed up TN and VA...

Or maybe the VX2025WM is extremely good but since you mentioned it I guess not.

IPS are superior but I can't see how anyone can think that TN is better than PV (generally speaking):
http://www.behardware.com/articles/619-17/updated-survey-13-lcd-20-5-6-8-16-ms.html

No mixup, even the link you post backs up what I say. Look at the TN based BenQ FP202W, look at the side angle shot. Compare to the side angle shot from the p-mva panels above it. Note how the TN is holding contrast and how the MVAs have washed out severely. From above they are about the same, it is only from below where the TN turns black that it is the issue. A quick crop of side angle performance. MVA washing out big time. IPS perfect. TN very close.

The big black mark against TN is that it gets dark from below. From above it washes out about the same amount as VA. In practice though TN is much more real world usable exhibiting horizontal resistance to washout almost as good as IPS.

 

[brumwald]

Wow, you found the worst looking MVA panel of the bunch
Look at your own image. The blacks of the TN image in the upper right corner. No detail too speak of. It's first when you get to the far left that the image lightens up... It brightens up more than the PVA panel under here.
Perhaps not the most scientific approach but anyway. No other than the TN panels showed signs of this.

The TN panels are also the only ones that doesn't change uniformly.

PVA 8 ms : Samsung SyncMaster 215TW:

Although a bit too off topic perhaps.

 

[oqvist]

what on earth is TN and VA?????

 

[Snowdog]

And you used the exception I already mentioned. NEW 21" or 24" Samsung S-PVA panels. I already said these were better.

Pick any of the MVA panels you like including your own VX2025, they all suffer the same performance. I chose the one that had the closest image framing. Here is your Vx2025:

Same washout. It is a fact of life. I have gone through 2 PVA screens before getting a cheapo TN screen that is much better in this respect and everything backs that up. Most MVA/PVA screens washout badly at all angles. The only possible exceptions I have seen are the new Samsung 21"/24" S-PVA screens. TN is superior to the rest ov VA tech in real world usability.

 

[brumwald]

I'd take that any day over the TN.
The washed out image is atleast uniformly and doesn't vary across the screen.
And as said, you are never that off horizontally and right on vertically anyway.

 

[Shottah_king]

My VP930b had great horizontal viewing angles. You could almost look at that the monitor sideways and still see the picture. Since there are different types of VA panels, I think you should take that into consideration. P-MVA AUO, S-MVA Samsung. It seems like the AUO P-MVA Panels have better viewing angles then Samsung offereings. My Dell 1905fp was a samsung MVA panel and it had bad horizontal viewing angles unlike the VP930b which had a AUO P-MVA panel with great horizontal viewing angles.

Please take this into consideration before saying that all VA Panels have bad horizontal viewing angles becaues what your saying is not entirely TRUE.

 

[Snowdog]

I'd take that any day over the TN.
The washed out image is atleast uniformly and doesn't vary across the screen.
And as said, you are never that off horizontally and right on vertically anyway.

This is precisely what drove me nuts about VA. The lack of uniformity. As simple greys like are abundant here would be darker in the center of the screen while fading/passing glare the further out the image goes. This is an angular response and that does not result in a unifor image. Each eye even gets a different image, this leads to each eye seeing a slightly different tone and creates odd artifacts (false 3d effect and not in a good way) Both my PVA panels gave me headaches/eyestrain and this wierd artifact may have been a contributory factor. My new TN is thus far, not hurting my eyes/head and is very stable image across the screen.

My VP930b had great horizontal viewing angles. You could almost look at that the monitor sideways and still see the picture. Since there are different types of VA panels, I think you should take that into consideration. P-MVA AUO, S-MVA Samsung. It seems like the AUO P-MVA Panels have better viewing angles then Samsung offereings. My Dell 1905fp was a samsung MVA panel and it had bad horizontal viewing angles unlike the VP930b which had a AUO P-MVA panel with great horizontal viewing angles.

Please take this into consideration before saying that all VA Panels have bad horizontal viewing angles becaues what your saying is not entirely TRUE.

I have noted the only exceptions that I think apply. After looking at the 19" survery that includes the VP930 with viewing angles, I see no reason to change that. You will note that the picture above is an AUO P-MVA panel. Same washout on the VP930. It may be better than earlier PVA panels, but it still not great. TN panels do have much more resistance to this and as result image is more stable across the screen. I can move my head around and the grey tones don't shift.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/602-13/19-lcd-survey-2-3-4-6-8-ms-and-above.html