Monitors -- Why have LCD's sucked for so long??

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
I'm extremely sensitive to Input Lag, and anyone who claims they cant tell the difference between 60hz refresh and 120hz refresh must be brain damaged. I've gone out of my way to keep on to my CRT monitor as they have 0 input lag, and better refresh rates with deeper blacks and way higher resolutions. What I can't understand is how everyone has for YEARS, uncontested, accepted the horrible refresh rates, input lag, and color depth of LCD monitors. Even on this forum, which is primarily gamer and performance enthusiasts. People claim "oh CRT's are so heavy!" ... REALLY? are you spending the majority of your time carrying yours around? because mine sits on my desk... Then to add on to the BS, these companies advertise things like G-Sync and 1080p as if they are awesome features. But it's really just a brand name for something that has been around for years. V-SYNC, which adds, mind you, to your overall input lag! Wow, 1080p eh? That's pretty impressive, my 16 year old monitor only does 2048x1536 at 100hz ... but yeah 1080 yeah that's REALLY GREAT! Manufacturers flood the market with made up terminology and misleading specs and names for those specs to confuse and trick buyers. But in actuality they are putting lipstick on a pig. Not to mention that the current state of LCD's are moving away from the sample and hold method, which they have actually learned causes more strain on your eyes than the dark phase method of the CRT. Anyways, my point is, and I expect a bunch of un-intelligent flame, it's been 20 years. Why the hell haven't we gotten away from 60hz being the norm and horrendous input-lag. I expect answers about "it's a different technology!" OK, that's true, but that's really no excuse. And perhaps with my question, I'm revealing my own answer, and probably relevant answer to this. The industry is money driven and they will milk every "feature" until the last drop. Meaning they purposely progress slowly because there is no money in jumping advancements. It's more profitable to progress slowly. And everyone eats it up. Consumers don't always drive the best product to being the most popular.

Here's some light reading material for reference: Factors Affecting PC Monitor Responsiveness - PC Monitors
 

emmjawsX

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
86
People claim "oh CRT's are so heavy!" ... REALLY? are you spending the majority of your time carrying yours around? because mine sits on my desk...

I actually move my multi monitor setup around a fair bit, to accomplish what i do with CRT's i think i'd end up spending more on reinforced hydraulic arms than the monitors themselves. A small forklift for the 40in may come in handy as well i guess.
 

Panmaster

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 31, 2013
Messages
228
CRT's were terrible for eyestrain.
OLED > Plasma > LCD > CRT

LCD's have gone backwards since 2011. Features that improve image quality such as glossy, polarisers, GBr-LED backlighting have quietly disappeared.

Now we have ultra-widescreen and curvature as the main selling features at a premium price with terrible QC: backlight bleed, clouding etc... with rubbish matte coating and cheap crap WLED backlighting and people are stupid enough to buy them.

Wait for OLED.
 

toast0

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
1,705
The one thing I really like about LCDs is that the vertical and horizontal lines are always straight, which was really hard to get to happen on a CRT. (PS, glossy is the worst, I don't really want to see all of the point light sources in my room, and my fingers typing while i'm looking at the screen. :p)
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
CRT's were terrible for eyestrain.
OLED > Plasma > LCD > CRT

LCD's have gone backwards since 2011. Features that improve image quality such as glossy, polarisers, GBr-LED backlighting have quietly disappeared.

Now we have ultra-widescreen and curvature as the main selling features at a premium price with terrible QC: backlight bleed, clouding etc... with rubbish matte coating and cheap crap WLED backlighting and people are stupid enough to buy them.

Wait for OLED.
If you're one of the many lemmings that left their monitor at 60hz.. yeah GG eyes. But 85hz is very nice and achievable at practically any resolution. Also, I think you skipped over the part where I mentioned the sample method is breaking away from the current hold method and making its back to the CRT method of dark phases. I'm sorry but spending 800 dollars on a monitor that my 20 year old CRT can outperform is just freaking nonsense.
 

KG-Prime90

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Messages
251
I'm with you man. Crts caused me ZERo eye strain staring at them for well over 20 years. Zero. Quite the opposite. I have also only used glossy monitors CRTS or LCDs, on a full glossy lcd now and NEVER have a problem with glare. It's user error if you have that problem at home where you can control your lighting..
 
Last edited:

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
The one thing I really like about LCDs is that the vertical and horizontal lines are always straight, which was really hard to get to happen on a CRT. (PS, glossy is the worst, I don't really want to see all of the point light sources in my room, and my fingers typing while i'm looking at the screen. :p)
This is something that is adjustable on the OSD. Which I guess its too much of a hassle. Also, the transformer has controls for usage very far down the road. I haven't had to adjust mine yet, but it adjusts things such as the brightness and the focus. The geometry is what you're talking about which again, is part of the OSD.
 

KG-Prime90

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Messages
251
Geometry on a decent flat crt is not an issue either. I drew blueprints and used grids all the time for decades on them. Another lame argument. Is lcd better? Yeah. But if it has never been a problem to me on crt. The weight or the geometry pales in comparison to the 100 other ways lcds are crap in comparison.
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
Speedrunners for example use CRT's still. Gee, I wonder what the reason for that is? The street fighter community also uses these because they have 0 input lag. Which to my exposure in researching... we have come nowhere close to that. What good is a 4k TV when the input from my keyboard to the actual display makes me feel like I'm drunk. There is a site, which has probably been mentioned before on here for input lag measurements of popular brands and displays. None of them would suffice. Also, HDMI is a joke as far as video bandwidth. Go play Quakeworld with a 5ms monitor and then go play it with a 100hz CRT. Then tell me which one feels better.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,468
Now normally, I would write a snarky response to this but I don't think the OP has merited that. She/He made a good, thorough post that was obviously heartfelt.

My PERSONAL opinions on LCD vs CRTs are that CRTs are big, heavy, expensive but they are great for content that was originally created to be displayed on them. LCDs get a bad rap from CRT truthers for having lower contrast and duller colours, and in truth, I don't really get it. I have a few CRTs for my older systems, they are not the highest-end models but they don't have 'true blacks'. In fact, my 4K VA panel monitor has MUCH deeper blacks than any CRT I've seen. Its possible super-duper high-end CRTs offer 'true' blacks but I'm not convinced. Colours seem full and saturated on CRTs, but are they more accurate? Are they better than high-end LCDs of today? not sure, I'd have to do a side-by-side comp. Response time? I have to agree that CRTs are still pretty awesome in that department, I'm not super sensitive to it, but I can say it can be the selling factor for some. Regardless of the resolution, text is ALWAYS sharper on LCDs. in fact, at native-resolution, LCDs will always be sharper, pixel-for-pixel than CRTs. 4K and greater resolutions, and more importantly, super-high PPi are things that can ONLY be done on modern LCD technology. It does not matter how good of a RAMDAC you get, the phosphor excitation will never be able to provide that level of sharpness. Its a newer thing, yes, but its a thing. Size is also a huge consideration. A 50" TV is a common sight in middle-class homes, and the size of a viewing screen REALLY DOES have an impact on experience, not just how much of your view it takes up. Its a complicated science, but basically, your mind subconsciously responds more to the physical size of the screen versus how much of your view it takes up. CRTs are definitely limited in size, and modern homes would not be able to enjoy big-screen experiences if tied to CRT tech.

But the real reason CRTs died out over LCDs is the same reason Plasmas died out: cost to manufacture. LCDs are cheap and standardised, easy to replace. Cheap really does win out: look at VHS over Betamax, HDDVD over BluRay: cost and accessibility is what drives the market. that and porn.

Plus it would be REALLY difficult to do this sort of thing with CRTs:

Sky2.jpg
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
LCDs will always be sharper, pixel-for-pixel than CRTs. 4K and greater resolutions,
You say sharper, I say BLOCKIER. Try playing and older game like Mario on a LCD and then play it on a CRT. You will see what I mean. Now, with a newer game like CS:GO I would say the same thing but it's less noticable like if you were to use 0 Anti-Aliasing vs AA @ 16x. A CRT would look more like a video with 16x AA and a LCD would look more like a display with NO anti-aliasing turned on. Interpolation is another factor I forgot to mention in the original post that adds to input lag. Clear motion and all those similar brand terms saturate the market to trick buyers into purchasing their crappy display. Hence the soap opera effect.

and the size of a viewing screen REALLY DOES have an impact on experience
OK, I do agree with this. It sucks trying to watch a blockbuster movie on a smaller screen. But I wouldn't do that anyways, because there wouldn't an advantage to doing that because FPS on a blue ray or DVD still haven't surpassed 60 fps.. THIS IS JUST SO STUPID TO ME. Remember all the people complaining about The Hobbit, where some versions displayed the higher frame rate and people were actually complaining about it because it looked awful to them! That's as dumb as the people at my work actually trying to tell me that the crappy analogue phone system sounded better than the flac-lossless audio codecs of our newer VoIP system. (I'm sure some audiophile would disagree with me on that)
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
I've owned a few decent quality Samsung TV's and monitors and comparing them to my crappiest CRT monitor and the picture is just worse. CRT just has deeper blacks, better frame rates, smoother edges... honestly the only thing the LCD has going for it is the brightness. But with a 5ms response time, who gives a crap. I still laugh about the fact how popular the GoPro camera was and yet no-one probably uses a display to even appreciate the FPS that camera can capture. What a joke. Yeah enjoy your 240fps on your 60hz display. Oh wait... you cant. The point of this is the fact that we have literally gone backwards in technology for the sake of ???? convenience? thinness? size?? It's been 20 years and we cant surpass 60hz? Its become the awful standard. Will we ever get away from it? 4k at 60hz?? what is the point ?
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
Do me a favor, load up CS:GO, type in console, "fps_override 1" & "fps_max 24" then see how great that looks. That is literally what movies are displayed at. 24 frames per second. and people were actually complaining about how the hobbit looked awful with 60fps... this is just too funny to me.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,468
Do me a favor, load up CS:GO, type in console, "fps_override 1" & "fps_max 24" then see how great that looks. That is literally what movies are displayed at. 24 frames per second. and people were actually complaining about how the hobbit looked awful with 60fps... this is just too funny to me.

The reason for that is not the FPS themselves, its more the fact that the increased temporal resolution actually makes it much harder to hide imperfections in the set pieces and CG. its MUCH easier to tell the props are foam and wire when the movement with them is so well defined.
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
The reason for that is not the FPS themselves, its more the fact that the increased temporal resolution actually makes it much harder to hide imperfections in the set pieces and CG. its MUCH easier to tell the props are foam and wire when the movement with them is so well defined.

This is a valid point. I honestly had no idea The Hobbit had used animatronics with enhanced CGI in the movie. BUT I must confess I've always felt animatronics LOOK more real, but they just don't MOVE more real. This is obviously a limitation of the robotics in charge of moving the cervos and what not. CGI has ALWAYS been more noticable in higher resolutions compared to real life characters. So I would propose that the animatronic movement with the added CGI enhancements REALLY look horrible with the higher FPS (exploiting the motion of the robots) and the higher resolutions (exploiting the clarity of the CGI)
 

SARUMAT

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
13
Go play Quakeworld with a 5ms monitor and then go play it with a 100hz CRT.
First you'd have to convince them to play quakeworld, which is a filthy opensource mod with modified physics, instead of the original, official steam version of netquake from the 90's. And you're some knob with 12 posts.

Can you show me what high hz is like? Can you post a graph in this thread? Can you prove that one site's measurements in a review are accurate when the models test within 8ms of one another?

Buy your toys while you can, tech isn't going to get better or cheaper. You want a company to sell you clean 144hz? They're shipping 90fps reprojected. People pay extra for gsync instead of faster hardware. They pay to introduce input lag and mitigate the effects of driving the display at lower than refresh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: w35t
like this

euskalzabe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
1,478
LCD's have gone backwards since 2011. Features that improve image quality such as glossy, polarisers, GBr-LED backlighting have quietly disappeared. Now we have ultra-widescreen and curvature as the main selling features at a premium price with terrible QC: backlight bleed, clouding etc... with rubbish matte coating and cheap crap WLED backlighting and people are stupid enough to buy them. Wait for OLED.

YES. PC monitors are specially bad at this:

You want high-fps? Here's a disgusting TN panel.
You want colors? Here's IPS, but say b-bye to contrast.
You want contrast? Here's VA, but colors will shift.

And for the honor of always sacrificing something regardless of what you buy, you get to pay, say, $430 bucks for a 34" ultrawide that's 1080p! W00t, what a deal! Thanks but if I'm going to make any of those sacrifices, I'd rather just buy a 40" 4K TV for $430 that does 4:4:4.

Now some of you will say - but input lag! I hear ya. It bother some people like OP to no end. I personally don't notice it if it's ~30ms. In any case, charging as much as monitors are for the one and only benefit of lower input lag, is a shameless money-grab.

I cannot wait for everything to be OLED. Sadly it's $2.5K at the moment... most people will wait until $700 to make it mainstream. I'm afraid I won't be able to wait so long myself (current TV-monitor is 7 years old) so HDR will have to do next year. Or whatever good deals this black friday brings.
 

Archaea

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
11,551
Original poster needs to try a modern 16x9 gsynch or freesync LED monitor at 2k (1440p). He'd come back here and delete his post right before he set his CRT out by the curb. This argument has merit maybe as recent as five years ago, but those points have no legs anymore. There have been VERY nice LCDs for many years now. You just have to pay a bit more for them. I'd put my Dell 3014 or my HP 32" Omen up against your CRT with a smile and a large wager.
 

euskalzabe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
1,478
Original poster needs to try a modern 16x9 gsynch or freesync LED monitor at 2k (1440p).

I keep hearing this. Could you elaborate on why gsync/freesync is so great? As far as I've seen on youtube, it just makes things smoother. If I'm not bothered by input lag and I'm happy with VSYNC (playing non twitch-reflex games, but slow paced adventures instead), what benefit would it bring me? Is there anything image quality wise that improves that is not actually tied to the panel itself?
 

SARUMAT

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
13
I've been lurking here for a couple months, and this is easily the most memorable thing I've read during that time.

Not to mention, do you know how frustrating it is to switch between mouse and keyboard? They are right next to each other yet moving my right hand over to my keyboard may as well be a 3 mile journey. If I'm doing something, and I'm relaxed and just browsing, and I encounter something that requires me to type, take for instance: those useless "HOW OLD ARE YOU" prompts on steam store pages for mature games, or entering tobacco websites. If they DON't have a drop-down of some sort and I need to type ANYTHING, I'll often just avoid the page, clicking out of it and finding a different one. Its disrupting and inconvenient to have to change my current mode of input. I'm in a groove, my mouse is me: I'm clicking on stuff. I'm clicking on pages, videos, buttons. The 'typing' part of my brain is off completely.

Just remember, there are people for whom moving their right hand over to their mouse is nearly a 3 minute journey.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

UrielDagda

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
2,844
What I miss about CRTs is the smoothness of motion. Even blur reduction monitors have issues where parts of the screen just aren't smooth. And on CRT anything 75Hz and above I never noticed any flicker... On my LCD it flickers noticeably using anything less than 100hz.

The good thing about LCDs is a nice crisp picture. Now they have to actually spend time perfecting blur reduction LCDs.
 

euskalzabe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
1,478
I've been lurking here for a couple months, and this is easily the most memorable thing I've read during that time.

Wow, 2nd post ever and already dropping F-bombs. What a great future I see ahead of you... how about we treat differences of opinion with respect?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SARUMAT

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
13
how about we treat differences of opinion with respect?
Sorry man, I wasn't responding to you, but kazeohin. Maybe if we had some fuckin comprehension of the thread you would have posted something different.

I do have an appetite for irony.
 

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,468
I've been lurking here for a couple months, and this is easily the most memorable thing I've read during that time.



Just remember, there are people for whom moving their right hand over to their mouse is nearly a 3 minute journey.

There are some people who don't have a right-hand to move. Regardless, This conversation is not really about UX (ask anyone involved with UX and they'll agree with me, though), instead, lets focus on the OP.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

euskalzabe

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
1,478
Sorry man, I wasn't responding to you, but kazeohin. Maybe if we had some fuckin comprehension of the thread you would have posted something different. I do have an appetite for irony.

You misunderstand. I was perfectly aware of your response being directed at somebody else. That doesn't erase the fact that I found it offensive and completely out of place in the [H] forums.
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
First you'd have to convince them to play quakeworld, which is a filthy opensource mod with modified physics, instead of the original, official steam version of netquake from the 90's. And you're some knob with 12 posts.

What games do you play? What monitor do you use to play them? Your attempts to dissuade me with stupid retorts like "some knob with 12 posts" are pretty childish and non-relevant to the topic. My tenure on the forum discredits my knowledge and experience? Your logic is truly flawless! Forgive me that I haven't lurked these forums for arduous amounts of time

Can you show me what high hz is like? Can you post a graph in this thread? Can you prove that one site's measurements in a review are accurate when the models test within 8ms of one another?
Do I need to show you what high hz are like? Or perhaps maybe you could stop regurgitating what you see on the internet and experience it for yourself. Which is exactly what I'm explaining here. I have first hand visual experience with these displays which maybe more than what you can say. And you don't have to take my word for it. You can find this all over the web along with the few people who have agreed with me here. I invite you to do some research before you immaturely parade your epeen. Be my guest in trusting the measurements that the manufacturer "sells" to you. If you believe those.. I have some beach front property in Arizona I would love to sell to you! Again, If you never used it, which my guess you are an un-challenging, un-questioning, believe everything on the internet, autistic millennial... than I suggest you try it before you knock it. ‘visual latency’ rather than ‘felt latency’ is something you have to experience. You want pretty graphs to help you understand what I'm talking about? OK, find me some pretty graphs that explain the speakers that sound better to you. I don't need to show you graphs. I've already mentioned a couple websites and common place knowledge about the technologies for you to get an idea and make your own opinion based on your own research. I gave you literature to read, and terms to investigate and you want me to also explain everything to you? My 5ms monitor at 60hz is less responsive than my 0ms monitor at 60hz. What more info do you need? Also the limitation is not the GPU's it is the displays technology that is the limitation. Why would a 3Dfx's Voodoo3 (150MHz clock) be able to run higher resolutions at faster rates than what we have today? Seriously, please do your research before posting.
 

SARUMAT

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
13
Seems like this is a time of change. A time of rollups and prerolls, and people without 12 posts or second hands. Surely, you can respect my opinion that keyboards are more useful that mice. What forum is this? Can you respect kazeohin referencing my postcount, in reference to a post I made about blowing off op because he has low postcount?

edit, I play fucking quakeworld. If you want people to agree with your op you'll have to acknowledge and address some things I brought up in my first post.
 
Last edited:

KazeoHin

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
8,468
Seems like this is a time of change. A time of rollups and prerolls, and people without 12 posts or second hands. Surely, you can respect my opinion that keyboards are more useful that mice. What forum is this? Can you respect kazeohin referencing my postcount, in reference to a post I made about blowing off op because he has low postcount?

edit, I play fucking quakeworld. If you want people to agree with your op you'll have to acknowledge and address some things I brought up in my first post.

984fd05019ee8089c7996ba7d270ca76bffee94c75bbfb733235c98a8fa384d6.jpg
 
D

Deleted member 126051

Guest
Do me a favor, load up CS:GO, type in console, "fps_override 1" & "fps_max 24" then see how great that looks. That is literally what movies are displayed at. 24 frames per second. and people were actually complaining about how the hobbit looked awful with 60fps... this is just too funny to me.

Okay, you just removed all doubt...

There are other reasons why analog movies get away with 24fps.

Doing it with digital video (especially at lower resolutions) simply doesn't come off smoothly because digital entities don't move the same way IRL people and things do, nor do they create the same visual artifacting that real life does.

Maybe if you'd actually participated, someone could have educated you about how computer graphics work in comparison to real life and why greater refresh rates and framerate benefit users.

And, unlike you, up until recently, I used to lug an entire desktop machine (AND an office-grade laser printer) around to LAN parties, conventions, etc. complete with multiple 21" CRTs.

Sorry, but I'll take my 24" LCDs any day. Even if I do miss some of the vertical resolution.

If you prefer blowing your nuts down into your socks with 50, 100, 150 lbs of monitor, BE MY GUEST!
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
Gsynch is a remarketed V-sync, which causes a very noticeable input lag. Which is why most serious fps gamers turn that crap off.


I'd put my Dell 3014 or my HP 32" Omen up against your CRT with a smile and a large wager.

You're saying that your 1200$ monitor in the year 2016 is capable of producing similar results of a monitor from 1997? THAT'S REALLY IMPRESSIVE. This is my whole point guys. We have accepted crap for so long and no one here is expressing that, expect me. This is a step backwards in technology. For the sake of what? cheapness for the manufacturer? Then they have to convince you with flashy terms and made up specifications and benchmarks to sell it to you?

SARUMAT I really don't understand your logic and none of it is relevant to the technologies discussed in this post.
 

realworld

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
389
That's because the monitor industry has been scamming PC users for ages with crappy quality LCD monitors. All the best consumer LCDs are literally in TV form. The latest display shootout shows highend LCD TVs beating the shit out of the latest generation Kuro plasma display. The LCDs in the test showed better colors, deeper blacks, and brightness; only thing that beat the LCDs was the 2016 LG OLED.
 

SARUMAT

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
13
Look, I am a wizard. I have been researching cheap 144hz displays myself, for the specific purpose of playing quakeworld. I have been pounding F5 and was really excited that my edit stood for 22 minutes before you posted and asked if I was a wizard.

Seriously though, check out this thread. Here you will see quakelive plebs bickering over methods used to measure monitors. This is why, in my opinion, lcds have sucked for so long.
ESR - 'Cheap' 144Hz LCD for Kvek - but which? - Hardware Forum
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
And, unlike you, up until recently, I used to lug an entire desktop machine (AND an office-grade laser printer) around to LAN parties, conventions, etc. complete with multiple 21" CRTs.

lmao why the hell would you bring a lazer printer to a lan party, bro? LOL WOW

Maybe if you'd actually participated, someone could have educated you about how computer graphics work in comparison to real life

Please enlighten us because you would only be doing the entire gaming/hardware community a favor
 
D

Deleted member 126051

Guest
lmao why the hell would you bring a lazer printer to a lan party, bro? LOL WOW

Because we'd ran our LAN party on a weekly basis. And we always had new blood. Instructions on where on the network to find stuff, how to install stuff, etc.

Please enlighten us because you would only be doing the entire gaming/hardware community a favor

Why should I be the one having to grind your face in the last 20 years of graphics and computer gaming technology?

You obviously didn't care to learn it firsthand, AS IT WAS HAPPENING...
 
D

Deleted member 126051

Guest
You misunderstand. I was perfectly aware of your response being directed at somebody else. That doesn't erase the fact that I found it offensive and completely out of place in the [H] forums.

So you found it offensive? So what? The Unwatch Thread link is right up there at the top. If you're triggering, go straight to your safe space.

As for being "out of place" here? Not sure which forum you've been posting to for the last few years...
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
I'm sorry but what does that sentence " Maybe if you'd actually participated, someone could have educated you about how computer graphics work in comparison to real life" have to do with the fact that the computer monitor industry has made sluggishly slow advancments in resolution, refresh rate, and input lag ??? and the fact that its taken 20 years to come to anything close were as we now have petabyte hard drives and processors with 8 cores? the only benefit from high performance monitors is noticed in the niche community that we have here... and there is a market for that, that is exploited which is basically my point here. aside from the fact that most displays now-a-days suck ass compared to ones from 20 years ago in performance.
 

hoek88

n00b
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
49
This is why I hate the internet. People are neurotic and insecure and are afraid to say anything that may be wrong, and heaven forbid they admit to being wrong when challenged. Please look at the specs, and if you have the opportunity to see them in person... please do so.

Viewsonic Flat P225FB 22-inch


InterView 28hd96 Color Monitor

Diamond Pro 2070SB

This is to name a few monitors that would kick the ass on any monitor today.
 

SARUMAT

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
13
Why don't you link us the test results, op, along with test routine? Because it's not 1999 and we can't go out and access these monitors. Some people on these forums are fuckin lazy and all they need to know is that their gsync boards do a fine job. The rest want to see the numbers but maybe they know that their favorite game engine runs at 60hz, so what's the point even? And some csgo player will come out and champion a specific modern lcd, saying it's the best on the market, the best he's used, and you'll challenge him on the basis that you play quakeworld?
 

suiken_2mieu

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
2,910
Eh, I play fighting games competitively. I don't mind practicing on my Dell 3007wfp-HC. Although it doesn't have a scaler on it, so input lag is minimal.

I do own a Widescreen HD CRT (480p 1080i), that I used to use exclusively for fighting games, but it's just more convenient to use my comuputer monitors.

Point is, that as long as input lag is low enough for me to not notice, I'm good.

LCD is imperfect, as no matter what type of panel you use, there is going to be a compromise. But they are cheap and can be made at high resolution and at different form factors easily.
Convenience and cheapness wins out. It just has to be good enough. The enthusiast is not the common consumer, so you're going to get tech that meets the common consumers expectations or you're going to pay out the ass for them.
CRT's are too expensive to manufacture anymore. I assume you (the OP) know this and are merely frustrated with this reality.

I do hope that a new technology (looking at you OLED) can fill what made CRTs great, as used CRTs wont last forever (I've got a nice 36" Sony Trinitron for my retro games).

Until then, keep your eyes out for the great CRTs on the used market, and snatch them up (FW-900s, GDMs, PVMs, BVMs). Or else, once your CRT dies, you'll have to make the compromises that the rest of us had to.


Fun fact, I first noticed that CRTs looked better than LCD's when I bought a 17" 1280x1024 business dell monitor with a TN panel to replace my Dell CRT, and then went back to the CRT. It wasn't until I bought a glossy TN LCD (HP w1907) that I converted to LCD's.
It also helped that I immediately went to having multiple monitors, and that would be a nightmare with CRTs and horribly big bezels between. I actually had 3 of those HP's using a TH2Go. But the bezels on those are not nearly as big as CRT's.
images
images

Also, I'd love to see CRT's do a 5x1 Portrait setup and it not suck.

965315_10200576859196651_988761642_o.jpg
 
Top