LCD's better for "high end" systems?

G

Gambit

Gawd
Joined
Aug 26, 2002
Messages
764
Currently I'm running a 19" IBM monitor. Other than taking up half my desk space, it's a great monitor that gets up to 1600 x 1200 resolution. I have however, been toying with the idea of going to a 22" WS Scepter. I have a few questions though.

My mom recently bought an LCD screen for her computer after her 15" CRT bit the dust. If it's not running in it's native resolution of 1024 x 768, you can see the screen "shimmer" a bit. Once you put the screen at it's native res, it looks great. My question is, what happens if the screen's native resolution is higher than the resolution of the game I'm running? For instance, what if it's native res is 1600 x 1200 and I'm running the game at 1024 x 768? Am I going to get the same shimmering?

I ask this because I currently have a NVidia 7800GT on a opteron 170 with 2GB of ram. Not the worst video card, but not the best either. What happens if I buy the new latest and greatest game and can't run it at the native resolution of my monitor... Hell, what if I want to play one of my old games (Starcraft for example), which doesn't *have* adjustable res. Will I still have to put up with the shimmering?
 
It will interpolate the pixels and look a bit blurry unless you set your display option to use 1:1 and then it will put a black border around the image and will be as sharp as using native res. A game that will only run at 640x480 will be quite small in the center of the screen. That's one of the reasons I went back to CRT.
 
Generally yes, you want to play at the native res because lower resolutions will look like crap. You don't really have too many options here AFAIK. Two things I know you can do are run the game windowed, or use 1:1 mapping in your video drivers. For nvidia cards, this can be found in the nvidia control panel. Go to Display->Change flat panel scaling. I forget the name of the option you want, but there's only four as I recall, and the name should be something descriptive (I'm not at home or I'd check for you, I have a 7950 GT). Basically it'll give you the option of either maintaining the aspect ratio of the lower resolution but enlarging the image to take up as much of your monitor as possible (some people like this for playing games at 4:3 resolutions on 16:10 monitors), or simply not scaling the image at all. The second option will look the best since if the resolution you choose is 1024x768, it'll only use 1024 pixels across and 768 pixels down, the rest of the screen will be black. This, however, might not be desirable, especially if you're running a game in a very low resolution (like Starcraft).

[edit]Damn your summarization skills, Gatticus ;) You said the exact same thing as me in two sentences.
 
I've found that anything but native res on lcd's looks either not so great or total crap depending on what it is....your rig won't have trouble with most games @1680x1050 and even if your monitor doesn't have 1:1 scaling in hardware you can still do it through the Forceware drivers for older games or newer games you don't have the horsepower for.
 
Alright, knowing all of this now though, do you think it's worth the switch from a CRT to LCD? Obviously Gatticus doesn't, but anyone else want to chime in?
 
Gambit said:
Alright, knowing all of this now though, do you think it's worth the switch from a CRT to LCD? Obviously Gatticus doesn't, but anyone else want to chime in?
Click to expand...
Personally, after getting used to lcd and widescreen I would find it difficult to go back to crt or a 4:3 screen. Whenever I look at a crt now it just seems that the text is harder to read after getting used to the sharpness of Cleartype fonts on an lcd. Crt's are over for me all the way around...I can see myself moving on to a new technology but never back to the good 'ole days. ;)
 
Gambit said:
Alright, knowing all of this now though, do you think it's worth the switch from a CRT to LCD? Obviously Gatticus doesn't, but anyone else want to chime in?
Click to expand...
Personally, despite the annoyances, I still find LCDs worthwhile. The lack of glare, the crisp text, and the size/weight are all very nice features. I find that when I look at a CRT all day my eyes get all watery and tired, LCDs don't bother me as much. I don't know the technical reasons behind this, all I know is I find looking at LCDs much more pleasant.
 
I do think it's worth the switch, and indeed I did about a month ago. I had a LaCie 22" pro CRT, now I have a BenQ 24" LCD. I just love my LCD. Is it in every way as good as the CRT? No, there are some things the CRT did better however overall the LCD is much, much nicer. I find that the LCD scaling is pretty good. As often as I can I run a game at native rez, of course, but when I can't (like with FEAR, which runs too slow) the scaling isn't bad at all. I have my graphics card do it, rather than the monitor since it can do aspect ratio correct scaling (meaning it shows the largest possible image while keeping the aspect ratio the same).

Now of course it's not sharp like a CRT, I mean nothing does arbitrary rez like a CRT since it can actually reclock and display the correct number of pixels. However LCDs do have some advantages. If you do a low resolution like 640x480 on a high rez CRT, you'll get black lines across the screens, scanlines. On my CRT it was pretty pronounced. Well, LCDs don't do that, of course, since they scale up.

All in all, provided you get a good LCD, I think it's well worth doing, hence, I did it.
 
joemama said:
Personally, after getting used to lcd and widescreen I would find it difficult to go back to crt or a 4:3 screen. Whenever I look at a crt now it just seems that the text is harder to read after getting used to the sharpness of Cleartype fonts on an lcd. Crt's are over for me all the way around...I can see myself moving on to a new technology but never back to the good 'ole days. ;)
Click to expand...

I use a 22" NEC CRT at work and a Sammy 21" LCD WS at home. I have no problem reading text on either. It's pure nonsense to say CRTs are blurry....that is assuming that it is functioning properly. The CRT I mentioned is about six years old, is on all the time and looks fantastic.
 
I agree with 'Sycraft', I find scaling on a decent quality LCD is pretty good and I have never tried getting my graphics card to do it, that sounds like a better idea. Concerning 'Greenwit's' comments: I find CRTs blurry compared to LCDs, maybe because of the native resolution of LCDs. I'm sure there are some CRTs that look sharper than others but I don't think a CRT can ever match the sharpness of a high quality LCD through a DVI @ native res. I have worked with a range of CRTs over the years and I generally dislike them, the health issues bother me the most and I found the refresh rates caused headaches.

One thing I would like to add to this discussion is that I have noticed games look different at low resolutions... that sounds stupid, let me explain. For example I found that 'Fear' looked amazing @ 1024x768 with 4xAA/8xAF on a 1920x1200 monitor letting the monitor do the scaling, much better than at native resolution without any AA/AF. Whereas 'Half-life 2' looks better the other way around. So it's not just down to your graphics card and monitor, it's related to individual games and the way they are coded too.

Although I've found differences in LCD gaming I would not like to go back to a CRT. At the moment I am stuck using a 17" 1920x1200 laptop screen. Before this I had a Dell 2405FPW which I did most of my gaming on but soon I am upgrading to a BenQ FP241WZ. For colour reproduction I may be tempted to go for a NEC LCD2690WUXi later on.
 
artmonkey said:
I agree with 'Sycraft', I find scaling on a decent quality LCD is pretty good and I have never tried getting my graphics card to do it, that sounds like a better idea. Concerning 'Greenwit's' comments: I find CRTs blurry compared to LCDs, maybe because of the native resolution of LCDs. I'm sure there are some CRTs that look sharper than others but I don't think a CRT can ever match the sharpness of a high quality LCD through a DVI @ native res. I have worked with a range of CRTs over the years and I generally dislike them, the health issues bother me the most and I found the refresh rates caused headaches.
Click to expand...

Headaches? It's all in your head, LOL! A bazillion people used CRTs before the invention of LCDs (including me) and for hours on end and I knew of no one that complained after work, oh, sheesh, my head is about to explode. LCD hype perpetrated by their fanbase is just hilarious at times. I think so many of you have a huge chip on your shoulder 'cause you know they ghost, you know you are limited by one resolution, you know they can't do blacks, and you know for gaming CRTs just punish LCDs. So you gotta make up for it all by convincing yourself with the sing-songy "Once you go LCD, you ne-ver go back." BTW, I'm typing on my Sammy WS LCD at home. And ya know what, I was in front of a CRT all day, and I have no headaches. Is that amazing or what! :p
 
I just upgraded from a 17 inch CRT to a 22 inch Gateway widescreen LCD, I would never go back to a CRT ever, LCDs have nice crisp text, no eye strain. I've been sitting in front of my LCD for about 12 hours now with no eye strain, with my CRT I could only do about 1.5 hours.
 
For gaming, an AG crt is my preference.. How the AG crt managed to be replaced by a product that is inferior in most ways, is beyond me..


artmonkey: Turn the refresh rate up to 75 or 85 or higher if your crt supports it.. Doing that also gets rid of the "flicker" which can cause the headaches and cause things on screen to look less sharp.. Windows likes to default your refresh rate to 60 for compatibility with older or just plain low rent crt's..
 
I know about the higher refresh rates, I used to use 85Hz but it still gave me headaches from time to time. 85Hz was much more usable but still gave eyestrain after long periods of use. It was lack of sharpness that made me constantly squinting to see things clearly at reasonable distances (I used to use CRTs for 8 hours a day for 2D/3D work). I need glasses by the way, it's only a slight (1) distortion but I can use LCDs with no problem all day without glasses, with CRTs and no glasses it's just too painful.

The health risk I mentioned are related the the radiation gun firing directly through your eyes and into your brain bothers me a bit. The fact that no-one know what sitting so close to such a device will do to people after long term use also is not cumforting so I'd rather skip that little land mine of cancer, call me picky if you like :p .
 
artmonkey said:
I know about the higher refresh rates, I used to use 85Hz but it still gave me headaches from time to time. 85Hz was much more usable but still gave eyestrain after long periods of use. It was lack of sharpness that made me constantly squinting to see things clearly at reasonable distances (I used to use CRTs for 8 hours a day for 2D/3D work). I need glasses by the way, it's only a slight (1) distortion but I can use LCDs with no problem all day without glasses, with CRTs and no glasses it's just too painful.

The health risk I mentioned are related the the radiation gun firing directly through your eyes and into your brain bothers me a bit. The fact that no-one know what sitting so close to such a device will do to people after long term use also is not cumforting so I'd rather skip that little land mine of cancer, call me picky if you like :p .
Click to expand...

Actually, I did a study of this back in 1995 for the Science Fair, and the health effects are minimal. What you are talking about is ELF (Extremely-Low Frequency) radiation, with a shorter wavelength even than microwaves. Radiation, like sound waves and most waves in general, follow the inverse-square law - every time you double the distance, your intensity will be 1/4 of that from the original distance. Normal CRT monitors viewed at a distance of 9 inches or more expose you to a nominal level of ELF radiation, less than that of normal cell phone use. And yes, there were studies done showing that even prolonged cell phone use does not cause cancer.

That said, I do think LCDs are easier on the eyes than CRTs :)

Contributing minutia to the forums, every day... at your service.
 
Greenwit said:
Headaches? It's all in your head, LOL! A bazillion people used CRTs before the invention of LCDs (including me) and for hours on end and I knew of no one that complained after work, oh, sheesh, my head is about to explode. LCD hype perpetrated by their fanbase is just hilarious at times. I think so many of you have a huge chip on your shoulder 'cause you know they ghost, you know you are limited by one resolution, you know they can't do blacks, and you know for gaming CRTs just punish LCDs. So you gotta make up for it all by convincing yourself with the sing-songy "Once you go LCD, you ne-ver go back." BTW, I'm typing on my Sammy WS LCD at home. And ya know what, I was in front of a CRT all day, and I have no headaches. Is that amazing or what! :p
Click to expand...

Best post ever :)
I use an LCD at work everyday, an HP 7217 CRT at home for an equal amount of time for YEARS and I see ZERO difference between the two and far as "eye strain/headaches"
what a crock of baloney lol

The hype on LCD's is sooooo over exaggerated its to the point of hiliarity
 
Look, to all you CRT fans you need to consider that your experience is not generalizable to the entire population. If people find that LCDs help wtih eyestrain, there's nothing wrong with that. I found that mine helped a bit, though that's not the reason I switched. In my case its because I can keep my LCD closer to my seat, and thus use my computer glasses. My CRT had to sit back near the rear of my desk and that was too far away for the computer glasses (they only focus up close, that's the whole design). The LCD I can move close and thus use them, which is easy on the eyes (again the point of them).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying CRTs are bad, but don't have some ego stake in pushing them. LCDs are nice, they work well. They'd not be so damn popular if they sucked. You can get LCDs that suck, but then you can get CRTs that suck. However nice LCDs are, well nice. As I said, I switched, and I'm not going back. I still have my CRT, it still works fine it's not broken or anything, however I like my LCD much better, and many people find the same thing.

If you like a CRT, fine, when someone asks you should offer the reasons you find it to be the best choice. However don't hate on people with a different experience. You way is not the One True Way(tm).
 
Greenwit said:
Headaches? It's all in your head, LOL! A bazillion people used CRTs before the invention of LCDs (including me) and for hours on end and I knew of no one that complained after work, oh, sheesh, my head is about to explode. LCD hype perpetrated by their fanbase is just hilarious at times. I think so many of you have a huge chip on your shoulder 'cause you know they ghost, you know you are limited by one resolution, you know they can't do blacks, and you know for gaming CRTs just punish LCDs. So you gotta make up for it all by convincing yourself with the sing-songy "Once you go LCD, you ne-ver go back." BTW, I'm typing on my Sammy WS LCD at home. And ya know what, I was in front of a CRT all day, and I have no headaches. Is that amazing or what! :p
Click to expand...


You're being an ass, that's one thing for sure. LCD's are great things, same as a CRT, each has it's own respective strengths.

I personally hate a 70lb behemoth on my desk that adds 100w of heat to my room in the hot Texas weather....

I also hate that NO CRT MADE has "perfect" geometry....period. Just the same as NO LCD MADE has "perfect" black levels. I love having "perfect" geometry on my LCD, and the black levels are "good enough" for me and my games.

SOME people are indeed bothered by the flicker that a CRT produces, and they DO produce flicker no matter if it is at 60hz (very bad) or if it is at 120hz (not bad at all to most). LCD's do not flicker, PERIOD, and for those that ARE affected, an LCD is the right choice.

For gaming, I love my LCD. I love the light weight when I go to a LAN party, I love the CRISPNESS that never changes, and yes, I would like a little better black levels, but for ME, the LCD beats the CRF, hands down.

Stop being a dick just because someone does not agree with you.
 
No hating or ego stroking on my part.....I own both CRT and LCD. I use both considerably and know the strengths and weaknesses of each tech. Basically, I'm cutting through the hype. For example, headaches? I owned two Dells last year and returned both because they caused me headaches! And you say I shouldn't generalize? :p
 
TheRapture said:
Stop being a dick just because someone does not agree with you.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the support there, I was going to argue with this idiot but he'll just keep coming back again and again to make the same point and preaching superiority. I can't wait for SED or LED LCD to kill off those huge blurry boxes of pain for good, hopefully they can kill off anoying idiots who are full of crap while they're at it.
 
Once you go the ad hominem route you've lost the argument. I can't blame you. The LCD argument is loaded with blanks. :p
 
Greenwit said:
Once you go the ad hominem route you've lost the argument. I can't blame you. The LCD argument is loaded with blanks. :p
Click to expand...

Loaded with blanks...just like your dickhead rantings...
 
TheRapture said:
Loaded with blanks...just like your dickhead rantings...
Click to expand...

Lessee, "dickhead", "ass", "dick".........and that's not from me, that's you. And you say I'm ranting? Here is Rapture's idea of lucidity.....and here's some more rope. Fill this forum with your genius, LOL!
 
Well, all I know is I used a CRT for work and then for games and stuff in the evenings, and it was fine until about a year ago when I started getting headaches and pains at the back of my eyes. I went to my doctor and he sent me to an eye specialist. Explained my situation and he recommended trying an LCD monitor for a few weeks and seeing if that solved my problem. So in August I borrowed a 24 inch dell LCD for a few months and all my headaches went away. Lots of people are affected by the flicker of an CRT according to this guy. And some never get affected by it.


I am currently back using a 19inch samsung CRT while waiting delivery of a new LCD. And since I have gone back to using the CRT I have noticed a strain again on my eyes and blurry text etc.

Greenwit, just because something doesn't affect you doesn't mean it's not a problem for other people.

And once you get used to a large screen LCD you will never want to go back.
 
reaper12 said:
Greenwit, just because something doesn't affect you doesn't mean it's not a problem for other people.

And once you get used to a large screen LCD you will never want to go back.
Click to expand...

Reap, I own a large screen LCD....in fact I'm typing on it right now. It's ironic that you caution me not to generalize and on the very next line that's exactly what you do.
 
Ok lets try to avoid all this petty stuff (no finger pointing, I know I'm guilty too). Lets go back to basics and consentrate on the point of the original thread. Maybe we can have a poll for this, as I know a lot of people are interested in this topic. Something like this perhapse:

Assume for this poll you are talking about a high end CRT and/or a high end LCD. Try not to think about cost, I know an LCD can cost 2 or 3 times more than an equivelant CRT. If you own a high end PC what do you think about your monitor/s?

If you have only owned a CRT
CRTs are great for everything, I don't want LCD - Yes/No
CRTs are great for some things. I want LCD as well - Yes/No
CRTs are rubbish, I want to change to LCD - Yes/No

If you have only owned an LCD
LCDs are great for everything, I don't want CRT - Yes/No
LCDs are great for some things. I want CRT as well - Yes/No
LCDs are rubbish, I want to change to CRT - Yes/No

If you own or have owned both a CRT and an LCD
LCDs and CRTs both have their uses - Yes/No
LCDs are the only way to go - Yes/No
CRTs are the only way to go - Yes/No

I'm sorry I don't know how to make a poll, maybe someone else would like to start one?
 
SEALTeamSix said:
Actually, I did a study of this back in 1995 for the Science Fair, and the health effects are minimal. What you are talking about is ELF (Extremely-Low Frequency) radiation, with a shorter wavelength even than microwaves. Radiation, like sound waves and most waves in general, follow the inverse-square law - every time you double the distance, your intensity will be 1/4 of that from the original distance. Normal CRT monitors viewed at a distance of 9 inches or more expose you to a nominal level of ELF radiation, less than that of normal cell phone use. And yes, there were studies done showing that even prolonged cell phone use does not cause cancer.

That said, I do think LCDs are easier on the eyes than CRTs :)

Contributing minutia to the forums, every day... at your service.
Click to expand...
I'd just like to say thanks for sharing this, I am actually using a CRT at the moment so it's interesting to know someone has done some research on this. Although my point about no-one knowing the long term affects of CRTs on people still stands and the same goes for mobile phones, I guess we'll find out in about 30/40 years. Hopefully CRTs will be well and truely dead well before this time but for now they still have their uses for some.
 
artmonkey said:
Ok lets try to avoid all this petty stuff (no finger pointing, I know I'm guilty too). Lets go back to basics and consentrate on the point of the original thread. Maybe we can have a poll for this, as I know a lot of people are interested in this topic. Something like this perhapse:

Assume for this poll you are talking about a high end CRT and/or a high end LCD. Try not to think about cost, I know an LCD can cost 2 or 3 times more than an equivelant CRT. If you own a high end PC what do you think about your monitor/s?

If you have only owned a CRT
CRTs are great for everything, I don't want LCD - Yes/No
CRTs are great for some things. I want LCD as well - Yes/No
CRTs are rubbish, I want to change to LCD - Yes/No

If you have only owned an LCD
LCDs are great for everything, I don't want CRT - Yes/No
LCDs are great for some things. I want CRT as well - Yes/No
LCDs are rubbish, I want to change to CRT - Yes/No

If you own or have owned both a CRT and an LCD
LCDs and CRTs both have their uses - Yes/No
LCDs are the only way to go - Yes/No
CRTs are the only way to go - Yes/No

I'm sorry I don't know how to make a poll, maybe someone else would like to start one?
Click to expand...

Have owned, and currently own several of each.. For games, flat out, hands down, an ag crt is the only way to go, imho.. The ability to scale down the res and still have games look good as your vidcard gets a little olders is something I like.. The high refresh and 0 lag is sweet also..
For movies, web surfing, and general uses aside from gaming, lcd are great, imho.. (Unless you need accurate color reproduction of course).. And I often use my lcd's for my non gaming work.. And a good ag crt is hardly ugly when doing mundane non gaming tasks..

So both have their uses.. But if I could only have 1 monitor, it would be a 21" or larger ag crt..
 
Gambit said:
Alright, knowing all of this now though, do you think it's worth the switch from a CRT to LCD? Obviously Gatticus doesn't, but anyone else want to chime in?
Click to expand...
I just switched from a 21" CRT over to a 19" widescreen LCD. I've only seen one game on it so far (Civ 4) which looks decent. I haven't had the chance yet to play anything on my computer, due to school and whatnot. But I find that switching to LCD is beneficial. Even my eyes thank me for it (I was getting the worst of headaches after a night of usage on my CRT - even with the refresh set to 75Hz).
 
As I said, I own both and use a 22" NEC CRT at work and a 21" Sammy LCD WS at home. My home home NEC unfortunately is sick so I went the LCD route. No question, a properly functioning CRT is the way to go IMO.....for the flexibility in refresh, for black performance when playing dark games, for response performance when playing FPSs, and for accurate color reproduction. With LCDs you have to choose speed over image quality or vice versa. The only reason why I would choose LCD is if I did alot of small text reading (1600 lines of resolution and above).....that's where I think LCDs have the advantage. I think WS overall is badly overhyped.....at least for me since I don't watch movies on it and web pages and business apps are not designed with WS in mind. Some games are cool in WS but you pay for it performance wise (compared to a CRT) on fast action games.
 
Greenwit said:
Headaches? It's all in your head, LOL! A bazillion people used CRTs before the invention of LCDs (including me) and for hours on end and I knew of no one that complained after work, oh, sheesh, my head is about to explode. LCD hype perpetrated by their fanbase is just hilarious at times. I think so many of you have a huge chip on your shoulder 'cause you know they ghost, you know you are limited by one resolution, you know they can't do blacks, and you know for gaming CRTs just punish LCDs. So you gotta make up for it all by convincing yourself with the sing-songy "Once you go LCD, you ne-ver go back." BTW, I'm typing on my Sammy WS LCD at home. And ya know what, I was in front of a CRT all day, and I have no headaches. Is that amazing or what! :p
Click to expand...

You obviously don't own a decent LCD, When I first switched from a CRT to an LCD I was blaming the LCD for me getting killed in first person shooters, I even wrote posts about it and asked for help. But It was just getting used to the change from going from a 19inch CRT a 24 inch LCD.

As I said I am now back on the CRT and gaming looks ugly. Websites look ugly, movies that I play are ugly. To say that in gaming a CRT punishs an LCD might have been true a year ago, not anymore.

It's just personel preference now. Either you like games on an LCd or you like them on a CRT, I used to be the latter, but after seeing games and HD movies on the dell 2407wfp, was blown away.

Isn't it time for CRT !!!!!!s to start to admit that LCD's have caught up with CRT's. And it is just personel choice.
 
reaper12 said:
You obviously don't own a decent LCD, When I first switched from a CRT to an LCD I was blaming the LCD for me getting killed in first person shooters, I even wrote posts about it and asked for help. But It was just getting used to the change from going from a 19inch CRT a 24 inch LCD.
Click to expand...

The Samsung 215tw is not a decent LCD? You obviously don't know what a decent LCD is. Maybe you should look up some reviews on that panel....there are plenty of them on the web. And speaking of owning crappy equipment, if stuff looks bad on your CRT it's a defective or old CRT. If you're trying to argue that is typical then you can't speak competently about CRT technology.
 
CRT's at 100Hz and above are just fine for me, no headaches here.

But to be honest, the perception is different for different people. For example, at work, I offer to some co-workers to help increase their refresh rate, and some can't tell the difference between 60Hz and 100Hz, while others can. I love CRT's, but like a high enough quality one that will display whatever res I use at 100Hz or better. 85Hz would bother me after an hour or so.

When I choose a display, I want the absolute best experience I can get. I have owned and used many CRT's and LCD's in my lifetime, and for gaming, CRT provides the absolute best experience.

Reasons I prefer CRT for gaming:
- No tearing w/ vsync on (tearing is a big problem with LCD's and games, but none of the zealots ever want to talk about it)
- Ghosting. Improves all the time, and I think LCD's have reached a point where they are playable, but its still there and slightly noticeable.
- More selection of resolutions

Weight/size of the CRT does not bother me as my 22" doesn't go anywhere unless I move (and even then the moving company can carry it). I have a 17" CRT I take to LAN's.

Power and heat from a CRT? Just turn the A/C up a notch in summer, lol. It's well worth the premium to me (and since when have LCD's been the budget conscious option??)

Since you are talking "high end", its assumed you are talking high quality CRT. I really like my Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070SB.

If I did not game, I would have a LCD in a heartbeat!

Then again, if I didn't game, I wouldn't upgrade my system as often either.
 
Hornswoggler said:
CRT's at 100Hz and above are just fine for me, no headaches here.
Click to expand...

Yep. for YOU......

But to be honest, the perception is different for different people. For example, at work, I offer to some co-workers to help increase their refresh rate, and some can't tell the difference between 60Hz and 100Hz, while others can. I love CRT's, but like a high enough quality one that will display whatever res I use at 100Hz or better. 85Hz would bother me after an hour or so.
Click to expand...

At 60hz, with vsync on, 60fps steady is pretty badass when you are at 1680x1050 and all the eye candy on, with at least 2xAA and 16xAF...



I have owned and used many CRT's and LCD's in my lifetime, and for gaming, CRT provides the absolute best experience.
Click to expand...

For YOU....and it sounds like you have not had a very good LCD lately....

Reasons I prefer CRT for gaming:
- No tearing w/ vsync on (tearing is a big problem with LCD's and games, but none of the zealots ever want to talk about it)
- Ghosting. Improves all the time, and I think LCD's have reached a point where they are playable, but its still there and slightly noticeable.
Click to expand...

Well you fucked that all up...vsync ON and triple buffering ON, make games TEAR FREE and a very steady framerate. LCD's do NOT have a tearing problem with vsync on and triple buffering enabled, as long as you have a good video card that can push that framerate at your given settings. If a 5200FX could do 60fps at those settings, then having a 8800GTX that could maintain the same AVERAGE framerate would not be an improvement. But you can't.



If I did not game, I would have a LCD in a heartbeat!
Click to expand...

If you can't make a recent version LCD perform well in games, then you don't have a modern LCD or you don't know how to setup one properly yet....
 
I had a Samsung 204B and tried both with and without vsync, with and without triple buffering, and still had tearing.

Even worse, playing UT2004 with vsync on caused a few second delay in inputs. was weird and there is no way to to get used to that.

I even tried 800x600 (was a division of hte native 1600x1200, so no stretching or interpolation)

My system at the time was a 6800GT and 3500+. I play quake4 and ut04 with very low detail as I play them competitively. LCD was and still is a compromise, sorry. It cannot match my current gaming experience.

Were my problems of tearing limited to the 204B? I thought that was supposed to be a nice LCD display?
 
TheRapture said:
If you can't make a recent version LCD perform well in games, then you don't have a modern LCD or you don't know how to setup one properly yet....
Click to expand...

All *modern* LCDs lag or ghost or whatever you want to call it with games. TN panels help somewhat but you still lag and then your image/color fidelity sucks. Have you watched Gameplay TV and watched the CS, Halo, UT or other such competitions? They all use CRTS! Why do you that that is? Another LCD lemming living in fantasyland.
 
Hornswoggler, I never would have switched to CRT until I was forced to becuase of the way it was affecting my eyes. I would have said all those things as well.

I didn't use triple buffering or anything like that on the dell 2407wfp. I didn't get any tearing or ghosting or smearing or any problems at all. My whole argument for CRT's used to be that games looked and played so much better on them, but as I said already I was very impressed with the Dell LCD and now realise that my arguments are out of date.

If you have a cheap or defective LCD you will get ghosting or tearing.

which brings me back to Greenwit. By your own argument you said to go check the LCD review, so I did. And yes it seems to be a great LCD. But it's not a large screen LCD. But aside from that, the reviews all say that the black levels are perfect, that gaming is perfect on it and everything from HD movies to web browsing is amazing. The only con for the reviewers was that it for a few 100 more you could get a 24inch LCD and that some games needed hacks for widescreen. This monitor seems to have it all, which leads me to another one of your arguments against LCD's that you have to choose speed over image quality in buying one. Not anymore.

So you must have a faulty LCD, because the samsung 215tw is excellant at both. Or else you haven't configured it properely with your system.

Here is another quote from your arguments "'cause you know they ghost, you know you are limited by one resolution, you know they can't do blacks"

Again by telling me to check the reviews you have shown me that this statement isn't true, the samsung 215tw does do blacks, and doesn't ghost at all. So again you must have a faulty LCD.

The only statement that is true is that they are limited to one resolution, but even that is not quite true. And Just out of curiousity how often do you go changing resolution on a CRT?? I always game at the one that looks best. And on LCD's the one that looks best is the native resolution, so no big swing.

But, anyway, You took one bit of my post and pasted it up, but what you forgot was that I also said these days it is only whatever you think is best yourself, some people like the CRT's better others like the LCD screens better. But ghosting and bad blacks are things of the past or maybe in really cheap LCD's. Just check reviews on the Samsung 215tw and you will see that.

Oh and I use a high quality samsung CRT, its the syncmaster 997mb. And to me the image on an LCD just better. To you it's better on CRT. Long live freedom of choice, well at least for the next 1 or 2 years, because I think CRTs are a thing of the past and are slowly been phased out.
 
Hornswoggler said:
I had a Samsung 204B and tried both with and without vsync, with and without triple buffering, and still had tearing.

Even worse, playing UT2004 with vsync on caused a few second delay in inputs. was weird and there is no way to to get used to that.

I even tried 800x600 (was a division of hte native 1600x1200, so no stretching or interpolation)

My system at the time was a 6800GT and 3500+. I play quake4 and ut04 with very low detail as I play them competitively. LCD was and still is a compromise, sorry. It cannot match my current gaming experience.

Were my problems of tearing limited to the 204B? I thought that was supposed to be a nice LCD display?
Click to expand...
I use the 204b at work, it is a horrible monitor generally, viewing angles terrible because it's a TN but I found it sucked in games too. I think our company buy them because they are cheap and they think low responce times mean something (on a modern monitor do not even look at respoce times, it's irrelevant). Compared to a good 24" screen (most of them) this monitor sucks.
 
artmonkey said:
If you own or have owned both a CRT and an LCD
LCDs and CRTs both have their uses - Yes/No
LCDs are the only way to go - Yes/No
CRTs are the only way to go - Yes/No
Click to expand...

I have owned both, and I'm pretty picky about what LCD I'll use having used CRTs for a long period of time. To me, there is a noticeable difference between a 'glossy' LCD, and a traditional LCD. I went from a 19" Sony Flat CRT to a 19" Sony Flat Panel SDM-HS95P/S and just on picture alone, gaming or not, I prefer the glossy flat panel. Now, it's only 1280x1024 native, and it's not wide screen. To me this resolution is perfect. I will probably be upgrading to a glossy wide screen if I can find one in the next 6-12 months.

I looked at flat panel after flat panel before I purchased this one, and to me there is a night and day difference between glossy and standard. That was one of the key things to me when I was purchasing my laptop also.

Now, from another aspect entirely, if you find an LCD you like, the difference in space on your desk and heat generated in the room makes it entirely worth it unless you use your 19" or larger CRT Monitors to heat your house in the winter, then please continue on with them.

Personally, I will be eliminating my CRTs one by one, and I definitely prefer a glossy LCD for gaming, photo editing, etc.

Good luck with whatever you decide, just take your time and go out to see them at a store in person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top