Going back to 4:3 CRT for pc gaming... what should I expect?

dustNbone

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
1,032
Yes you would :) I get alot of "wow"s from people who don't know the first thing about display technology, but have spent lots of money on LCDs. 1080p video on my FW900 still smacks the teeth out of basically any LCD, same goes for both my 36" XBR800 (4:3) and my 34" XBR960 TVs. I'm not firmly against having an LCD display for either my PC or my TV, but I have not yet been impressed by any of the TVs I've seen at retail. I do like the pixel definition, which a CRT will never match, but at the same time an LCD will never be as fast or have as good of contrast as a CRT, it's just impossible. Major geometry and brightness issues are not an issue with quality CRTs in good condition, I do not have an hourglass shaped desktop or wavy lines anywhere on my FW900, though I have seen these problems on cheap, misadjusted or malfunctioning monitors and TVs. I will have to choose another display technology at some point probably in the near future, at least for my primary PC monitor, as this thing won't last forever. I just hope it lasts long enough for a better tech than LCD to mature enough, because I don't see LCD ever making a good low compromise replacement.
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
And by the way, "without numbers, we know nothing". Here's some empirical data on the speed of the HP ZR30w, which is among the fasted IPS panels out there (but not quite the fastest).

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3754/a-new-30-contender-hp-zr30w-review/8

As you can see when compared to the gold standard input latency, our much beloved CRT, this IPS panel lags about 10ms. That's less than 2/3rds of one frame. Further down the page you can see that the "ghosting" test reveals one frame worth of mild persistence. If you can perceive this, you are a very rare specimen.

I disagree the only reason more people cannot percieve this is because they are used to garbage. Even in the CRT days I would go by 90% of peoples computers and clearly see they were running at 60hz. Once I showed them what 100hz looked like they were amazed. My point is that people learn through experience to have better taste. This is because your brain learns to pay attention to detail better when it can experience that detail. If your brain is never presented with the experience it won't learn. Perhaps in your case ignorance is bliss. I can sit down at any LCD I have every tried and feel the lag pretty much right away. So far to me all LCDs feel like playing on a slow computer now matter how fast the computer is. I will admit I have not yet experienced true 120 hz LCDs yet but I will soon be trying one.
 

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
5,012
I disagree the only reason more people cannot percieve this is because they are used to garbage. Even in the CRT days I would go by 90% of peoples computers and clearly see they were running at 60hz. Once I showed them what 100hz looked like they were amazed.

That is a different situation. The problem with CRTs is they are not steady state, their phosphors decay on a continual basis any time the electron beam is not on them. Well at 60Hz, the fast decay phosphors in computer monitors are not being refreshed fast enough to exceed human perception, hence there is some flicker noticeable. Increasing the refresh rate reduces that below the limits of perception.

LCDs don't do that, they are always on, until a change comes though, no flicker. So their refresh rate is only relevant in terms of how often they can be updated.

So that people can see the difference between 60Hz and 100Hz on a CRT has nothing to do with when they can perceive input lag. That is quite a different phenomena.
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
It is not entirely different. Refresh rate is refresh rate on any monitor, how many times can you draw the screen in 1 second. Just because an LCD stays illuminated the whole time does not mean that increases in refresh rate are not percievable. Everyone knows that difference between LCDs and CRTs and that CRTs make it obvious right off the bat even on a still image. But the mere fact that people can percieve it at all is what the discussion is about. Some people seem to think that just because an LCD pixel stays illuminated means it is acceptable to have a lower refresh rate.

I would love to give you an example with LCDs but to bad none of the ones I go by ever can go past 60hz on 99% of anyone I knows computer. So obviously I could not say that I turned up the refresh rate on an LCD for a friend and they noticed the difference.

The input lag on an LCD is partly due to its refresh rate as well as any image processing and the the pixel response.
 

kumquat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
5,269
On a CRT at 60 Hz, the eye can perceive flicker because the pixels themselves are literally pulsing.

On an LCD at 60 Hz, the eye cannot perceive flicker because there is none. An LCD can be operating at 1 Hz and you will not see the flicker because the pixels are not flickering.

The refresh rate on LCDs only affects how smoothly they display motion. The refresh rate on CRTs affects flicker.
 

mathesar

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
1,590
If I ever get my FW900 CRT (16:10) repaired I wouldn't have any hesitation making it my primary monitor again and moving both of my current LCDs to another room.

But I couldn't go back to 4:3 aspect...
 

hughJ

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
336
Only reason I don't miss my CRT is due to having forgotten how much better it felt to game with. If I still gamed competitively, I'd dust off the trinitron again.
 

quantum112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
392
On a CRT at 60 Hz, the eye can perceive flicker because the pixels themselves are literally pulsing.

On an LCD at 60 Hz, the eye cannot perceive flicker because there is none. An LCD can be operating at 1 Hz and you will not see the flicker because the pixels are not flickering.

The refresh rate on LCDs only affects how smoothly they display motion. The refresh rate on CRTs affects flicker.

Yes, because it's -waiting- for the image to change to start doing something, by the time the electronics figured out something happened and the pixel changes, it's too late.

Read this bit here about FED displays where it mentions the advantage that CRT-like refreshing has over "sampling and holding";

http://www.fe-tech.co.jp/en/features/features.html

EDIT: The more I read this, the more this thing seems like it fixed every imperfection the CRT ever had and put it into a thin form factor. Far as I'm concerned, this is the god of display technology right here. FFS if AU optronics scraps the FED project I'm going to get a 30 year loan and open my own factory, because letting something like this go would just be wrong.
 
Last edited:

kumquat

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
5,269
Yes, because it's -waiting- for the image to change to start doing something, by the time the electronics figured out something happened and the pixel changes, it's too late.

Read this bit here about FED displays where it mentions the advantage that CRT-like refreshing has over "sampling and holding";

http://www.fe-tech.co.jp/en/features/features.html

EDIT: The more I read this, the more this thing seems like it fixed every imperfection the CRT ever had and put it into a thin form factor. Far as I'm concerned, this is the god of display technology right here. FFS if AU optronics scraps the FED project I'm going to get a 30 year loan and open my own factory, because letting something like this go would just be wrong.

SED and FED displays have been the next big thing for the past 5 years. It's like the nuclear fusion of the display technology world.

Wake me up when they appear and they are high quality. Til then I'll keep my plasma TV ;)
 

quantum112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
392
SED and FED displays have been the next big thing for the past 5 years. It's like the nuclear fusion of the display technology world.

Wake me up when they appear and they are high quality. Til then I'll keep my plasma TV ;)

At least there -is- a next big thing. Whether it's OLED or SED, I don't really care, as long as they make it, and start selling it. I don't want to meet the moment that my CRT dies and there's still nothing else on the market but LCD's.
 

Poordevil

Gawd
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
783
Yea I am using this fw900 until it goes wonkers. High quality CRT display is the better gaming display choice at the moment to my eye. I'm not stuck on it, show me an LCD that can impress me as much and I would let this puppy go.
 

Collapsed

n00b
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
24
At least there -is- a next big thing. Whether it's OLED or SED, I don't really care, as long as they make it, and start selling it.

Well, unfortunately SED is dead, so our only hope is OLED or FED. Probably OLED, as it seems that FED is much farther away from mass production stage.
 

quantum112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
392
Well, unfortunately SED is dead, so our only hope is OLED or FED. Probably OLED, as it seems that FED is much farther away from mass production stage.

True. Personally, I would much prefer FED than OLED due to its constant refreshing, and the fact that it is the literal successor of CRT with the nice, natural color of phosphors and overall working mechanics.

It also sounds like it will have resolution flexibility despite being a fixed-pixel type display, due to being able to vary the beam size somewhat like a CRT - this also means that even if 20% of the emitters fail there will be no change in overall luminance.

Far as I'm concerned, this would be the display of my dreams, though I fear that even if it were delivered to the market, OLED would win simply because of being flexible and paper thin, even if FED had the better picture quality.

At times, I wish people weren't so damn dumb.
 

Collapsed

n00b
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
24
Far as I'm concerned, this would be the display of my dreams, though I fear that even if it were delivered to the market, OLED would win simply because of being flexible and paper thin, even if FED had the better picture quality.

Maybe they both will have their place in the market: OLED for those who are most concerned about the price, and FED for enthusiasts who want the absolute best from picture quality. Anyway, OLED seems pretty damn promising: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GYI1LPCqNI

I'm definitely going to get an OLED-monitor as soon as 22+" sizes are available for reasonable prices, hopefully in the next 1-2 years. I hope my 19" CRT survives that long.
 

quantum112

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
392
I would replace my FW900 with an OLED of similar size if test results proved it was better.
I guess then I wouldn't have to worry about my desk caving in.

Although, they're likely going to cost an arm and a leg at those sizes when they do come. 2011 sounds like a good year to start saving... in 3 years I should have enough cash on the side for a very nice model.
 

dara

Gawd
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
638
I actually just switched back to using my old CRT after using a vx2025 for years and recently a 32" TV. It is only 19" so it definitively feels much smaller then I am used to, but I love it aside from that.
 

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
17,809
I surf the net on a 19" Trinitron CRT and use a Led Lcd for games because I tired using my new computer with my current CRT and I got alot of eyestrain. So I game like two days a week on my LCD so I don't mess up my eyes at work. Yeah I know it's sounds silly but that is me.
 

monitor3

n00b
Joined
May 13, 2011
Messages
17
A pretty good CRT blows the most LCD monitors of today completely away, because the today LCD monitors are mostly TN. TN is an extremely SHIT technology. The top of the picture that's darker than the bottem because of the crappy viewing angles. Washoud out colors, smearing, backlight bleeding. It's completely redicilous that TN has succeeded CRT. It's gives so crap picture.

IPS is a much better technlogie(if without AG coating), and for the most casual users gives e-IPS a good picture. Only the blacks (from angles) and the responsive time are crap compared to CRT, but IPS is much much much better than TN.
 

spaceman

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
14,866
I will upgrade from my old G500 Crt when IPs 120Hz monitors are less than $200 for a 22". Until then, fuck it. My crt at 2048x1536 75hz makes games like Witcher 2 look holy sheet like.
 

dusty_fox

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
61
Rather than making a new thread, I thought I'd just post here. I'm looking for a big high end CRT that will last me a couple years at least - and someone in my area is selling a Viewsonic g225f that only has about 2 years use on it (manufactured December 2006 though). He's trying to sell it for $125, but I think I could probably talk him down a bit from that.

What do you guys think? If the monitor is in really great condition, is a 2 years of use g225f worth around $100?

A little background: My main monitor right now is a Dell u2410 IPS lcd, and while its color is better than anything I've ever seen, it sucks for fast paced gaming. I was using a Sony fw900 before that, and though it still works I don't think it has that much life left in it. I want to go CRT for as long as I can because nothing matches them in terms of low input lag, fast response and high refresh rates. One of these days I might get one of those 120hz TN panels, but I'd rather wait on that.
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,866
I believe it is a flat shadow mask set, and not a Trinitron clone, (Diamondtron). It is prolly one of the nicest shadow masks made during what can be considered the end of days for CRT monitors. I do not have much direct experience with that set. Only have about 30 minutes spent on one at a lan party a few years back. I thought it was an excellent looking monitor at the time even if it was a shadow mask. The slight halo effect that shadow masks tend to have was present and I did not see, or notice the cross wire present on AG tubes.

As for price, I recently sold a 2003 or 2004, P220Fb 22" Diamondtron, that was in excellent condition except for a little brightness loss for $100. If this set is in really good shape, I would imagine the price of $100 to fair.

I was a CRT guy myself for the longest. That was until Eyefinity and a trio of HP ZR24w's came along.
 

dusty_fox

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
61
I believe it is a flat shadow mask set, and not a Trinitron clone, (Diamondtron). It is prolly one of the nicest shadow masks made during what can be considered the end of days for CRT monitors. I do not have much direct experience with that set. Only have about 30 minutes spent on one at a lan party a few years back. I thought it was an excellent looking monitor at the time even if it was a shadow mask. The slight halo effect that shadow masks tend to have was present and I did not see, or notice the cross wire present on AG tubes.

As for price, I recently sold a 2003 or 2004, P220Fb 22" Diamondtron, that was in excellent condition except for a little brightness loss for $100. If this set is in really good shape, I would imagine the price of $100 to fair.

I was a CRT guy myself for the longest. That was until Eyefinity and a trio of HP ZR24w's came along.
Thanks for the info. I love the color on IPS lcd's, but I'm too much of an FPS man to rely solely on one of those for gaming :)
I'll see what the condition of this monitor is. Maybe I can talk the guy down another $25 to $100.

I have one of these too, but it's a little older and I'd be getting the viewsonic in the hopes that it combined with the NEC should keep me CRT happy for at least 5 years...and hopefully more.
 

musician

n00b
Joined
Jul 3, 2011
Messages
17
Rather than making a new thread, I thought I'd just post here. I'm looking for a big high end CRT that will last me a couple years at least - and someone in my area is selling a Viewsonic g225f that only has about 2 years use on it (manufactured December 2006 though). He's trying to sell it for $125, but I think I could probably talk him down a bit from that.

What do you guys think? If the monitor is in really great condition, is a 2 years of use g225f worth around $100?

A little background: My main monitor right now is a Dell u2410 IPS lcd, and while its color is better than anything I've ever seen, it sucks for fast paced gaming. I was using a Sony fw900 before that, and though it still works I don't think it has that much life left in it. I want to go CRT for as long as I can because nothing matches them in terms of low input lag, fast response and high refresh rates. One of these days I might get one of those 120hz TN panels, but I'd rather wait on that.

this thread made me get an crt from craigslist. yesterday.

i got a viewsonic graphics series G220Fb for $30. the guy says he bought it for $400 a few yrs ago.

years ago i had a dell p992 (19") monitor before which was a true flanet crt. this 220fb isnt. (it has "PerfectFlat" screen reduces reflections) the viewsonic could be "tweaked" to appear flat but really isnt. its really a 21 inch with 20 inch viewable area. b=black
the 19" dell (recommended 1600x1200) could also go as far as 2048x1536 resolution. this viewsonic (recommended 1600x1200) seems only to do 1920x1440.
the dell (trinitron) also seemed to have way better text quality than this viewsonic.

when displays comes from idle its almost instant on the crt (viewsonic). takes about 2 seconds on the 24" V7 LCD (2ms. not sure about input lag) and about 4 seconds on the LP2465 (8ms. not sure about input on this but i know its bad).



i say $100 is a little much.
 
Last edited:

dusty_fox

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
61
this thread made me get an lcd from craigslist. yesterday.

i got a viewsonic graphics series G220Fb for $30. the guy says he bought it for $400 a few yrs ago.

years ago i had a dell p992 (19") monitor before which was a true flanet crt. this 220fb isnt. (it has "PerfectFlat" screen reduces reflections) the viewsonic could be "tweaked" to appear flat but really isnt. its really a 21 inch with 20 inch viewable area. b=black
the 19" dell (recommended 1600x1200) could also go as far as 2048x1536 resolution. this viewsonic (recommended 1600x1200) seems only to do 1920x1440.
the dell (trinitron) also seemed to have way better text quality than this viewsonic.

when displays comes from idle its almost instant on the crt (viewsonic). takes about 2 seconds on the 24" V7 LCD (2ms. not sure about input lag) and about 4 seconds on the LP2465 (8ms. not sure about input on this but i know its bad).



i say $100 is a little much.
This one is a g225f though. I won't be getting it unless it can hit its specified max resolution & refresh (2048x1536@80hz). The biggest plus with this one for me is its (relatively) young age, compared to most CRT's that you find on craigslist.
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,866
Value is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. If a hardcore competitive twitch shooter player looks at that monitor, he might assign a much higher value to it than a guy just looking better blacks, color, higher refresh rates, and generally better responsiveness, and both of them will assign a higher value to it than someone that cares little for those things..
 

dusty_fox

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
61
An update on my posts above...

I went to this guy's house to look at it, and while it could still reach the right resolutions the color was AWFUL - from the short tests that I did, it looked like the red electron gun was shot, and it didn't look like something I could correct with the surprisingly limited menu options. I would only pay $15 for a monitor like that, if that.

The dude tried to tell me that "I really wouldn't notice it". I said I wasn't interested, and he said fine because he "didn't really want to sell it for as little as $100 anyway". On my way out, he told me "Man you don't really know what you're looking for, do you? That is one of the best CRT's you can get, I paid almost $500 for it".

Mhmm. No.
 

musician

n00b
Joined
Jul 3, 2011
Messages
17
An update on my posts above...

I went to this guy's house to look at it, and while it could still reach the right resolutions the color was AWFUL - from the short tests that I did, it looked like the red electron gun was shot, and it didn't look like something I could correct with the surprisingly limited menu options. I would only pay $15 for a monitor like that, if that.

The dude tried to tell me that "I really wouldn't notice it". I said I wasn't interested, and he said fine because he "didn't really want to sell it for as little as $100 anyway". On my way out, he told me "Man you don't really know what you're looking for, do you? That is one of the best CRT's you can get, I paid almost $500 for it".

Mhmm. No.
i hooked mine up for gaming yesterday and all i gotta say is wow!

i use a 2ms lcd monitor as my main monitor. i went from the lp2465 to the v7 and the difference was amazing. i was not really a good gamer but my speed/skill greatly improved..
when i hooked up the crt i was wowed. first of all my video card isnt that nice so i usually have my in game resolution down to 1280x1024.
with the crt the colors were so rich and gameplay so smooth.
best of all was the close ups... where i'd roll over 3 guys knocking them head shots moon-walking all over them before the 4th guy killed me.
i usually play point-man and my style is very aggressive (dying a lot). but i was rolling over the other team so bad having too much fun. i was either 2nd or 3rd in my team.
i had in game resolution of 1800x1400!

it was just a quick 2 hr 2am setup to try the monitor out coz i had to be at work today at 8am. i WILL most definitely try to find a way to incorporate the CRT to my multi-monitor setup.

i didnt think i could feel the difference from a 2ms lcd monitor to a crt but there is.
 

dusty_fox

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
61
i hooked mine up for gaming yesterday and all i gotta say is wow!

i use a 2ms lcd monitor as my main monitor. i went from the lp2465 to the v7 and the difference was amazing. i was not really a good gamer but my speed/skill greatly improved..
when i hooked up the crt i was wowed. first of all my video card isnt that nice so i usually have my in game resolution down to 1280x1024.
with the crt the colors were so rich and gameplay so smooth.
best of all was the close ups... where i'd roll over 3 guys knocking them head shots moon-walking all over them before the 4th guy killed me.
i usually play point-man and my style is very aggressive (dying a lot). but i was rolling over the other team so bad having too much fun. i was either 2nd or 3rd in my team.
i had in game resolution of 1800x1400!

it was just a quick 2 hr 2am setup to try the monitor out coz i had to be at work today at 8am. i WILL most definitely try to find a way to incorporate the CRT to my multi-monitor setup.

i didnt think i could feel the difference from a 2ms lcd monitor to a crt but there is.
I know how that feels! Going back to a CRT after using the "game mode" on my Dell u2410 was like night and day. I rained death on my foes as Sniper in TF2 in koth_nucleus...nothing like doing so well that half the enemy team gets pissed off at you and rushes just you all at once! Plus, Scout is actually playable again.

I'm using an NEC FP2141sb right now, and I have my feed reader set to look for "crt monitor" updates on the local craigslist, but I hope that by the time it gets impossible to find decent CRT's that the 120hz LCD's will approach a 0ms input lag....if that's even possible.
 

musician

n00b
Joined
Jul 3, 2011
Messages
17
even tho imo knowing a map is key and the difference btwn a noob and a pro, its nice when one's not handicapped by hardware. i felt invincible last night. it felt like i was teleporting and literally running circles around the other team.
im also good with nades so i throw one and take like half the noobs out before i got there. when i got there the pros have faces and lay them down.


im not so good at sniper maybe the crt will improve my sniping skills.



good idea with the feed reader. i need to do that with my opera browser too.
 

mathesar

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
1,590
broke your CRT and buy an LCD.
CRT is for noobs

fl8TM.gif
 

Frameless

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
217
i hooked mine up for gaming yesterday and all i gotta say is wow!

i use a 2ms lcd monitor as my main monitor. i went from the lp2465 to the v7 and the difference was amazing. i was not really a good gamer but my speed/skill greatly improved..
when i hooked up the crt i was wowed. first of all my video card isnt that nice so i usually have my in game resolution down to 1280x1024.
with the crt the colors were so rich and gameplay so smooth.
best of all was the close ups... where i'd roll over 3 guys knocking them head shots moon-walking all over them before the 4th guy killed me.
i usually play point-man and my style is very aggressive (dying a lot). but i was rolling over the other team so bad having too much fun. i was either 2nd or 3rd in my team.
i had in game resolution of 1800x1400!

it was just a quick 2 hr 2am setup to try the monitor out coz i had to be at work today at 8am. i WILL most definitely try to find a way to incorporate the CRT to my multi-monitor setup.

i didnt think i could feel the difference from a 2ms lcd monitor to a crt but there is.

...do you know what input lag is? I guess not. You got a better aim from less/zero input lag from the CRT, not from the pixel response time.
 

Valnar

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 3, 2001
Messages
3,582
I can see smearing on every LCD monitor I've ever used quite easily. Doesn't matter if its PVA, IPS or TN. Maybe you guys got used it playing a FPS game on an LCD, but if you ever went back to CRT you'd notice the difference immediately. It's like going into a bar with smoke. Once you get used to it, you only notice it when you leave, or go back in.

The LCD fanboys always come out swinging with convergence or weight, but they ignore black level, color depth, color accuracy, input lag and response time. If you like your LCD, then fine. But don't think the CRT people are crazy or old. Their reasons are objective, not subjective.
 

GreenMonkey

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
2,159
The LCD fanboys always come out swinging with convergence or weight, but they ignore black level, color depth, color accuracy, input lag and response time. If you like your LCD, then fine. But don't think the CRT people are crazy or old. Their reasons are objective, not subjective.

Most of them just come out swinging "CRT sucks".

If you want a good CRT for gaming, hold out for an FW900. I've been rocking mine for 5 years now, and it cost me $200. Great purchase.
 

dusty_fox

n00b
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
61
So, what are the lowest input lag LCD's out today? Anything 1ms or less? What about the 120hz displays?


@Green Monkey: I have one too, but it suffers from the blur-POP! effect and poor convergence. Maybe one of these days I'll dust it off and use it until it dies completely, but I'm just keeping it stored for now.
 
Last edited:
Top