1600x1200 CRT or 19" LCD?

[MrCoffee]

Is that Ghosting picture, Actually as it is viewed by the human eye? or is it much more unnoticeable than that.

yeah sorry if i didn't make it clear and that picture is rather misleading, there is zero noticable ghosting to the human eye with this monitor. I wouldn't say i'm a extreme hardcore gamer but I do play about 2-3 hours every day so believe me I would complain if there was.

A picture like this infact should only be used relatively speaking so i'll try and get some objective comparisons of the CRT and the LCD.

 

[boomstick666]

im totally on CRT all the way. i would wait to get LCD another 2-5 years till it catches up on CRT QUALITY and the PRICE wise. i never liked LCD. since im a pretty hardcore FPS gamer so CRT is must have for me. i have nec/mitsubishi 22" CRT. its huge. but nothing beats it in terns of quality. its at 1600x1200 @ 100Hz in games or windows. esp. in BF2, 1600x1200 is great. o and btw, my crt has "super bright mode" switch. it makes the dark place brighter but keep the bright place visible. its almost like made for FPS games. so any dark place in game i can see clealy. anyway, im very happy w/ my CRT. always sharp and crisp. LCDs are not...

 

[MrCoffee]

Nope, definitely not the 19", they use the same resolution as the 17" and I'm pretty sure making the resolution larger just makes it fuzzy. Either get a 17" or 20.1".

CRT's are fine too if you have the space for it.

IMO 20"+ are just too big for comfortable use as a monitor and i'm positive that technically 17" LCDs are generally inferior to 19" LCDs, although in many cases (not all) the dot pitch is better as you say.

 

[Brtnboarder495]

Yea, because the 19"'s look way to stretched out and pixelated. They should of given them their own resolution. I also agree 20" are a little on the big side, but he wanted 19" and that's closer to 20" than 17" is.

 

[TheMajor]

im totally on CRT all the way. i would wait to get LCD another 2-5 years till it catches up on CRT QUALITY and the PRICE wise. i never liked LCD. since im a pretty hardcore FPS gamer so CRT is must have for me. i have nec/mitsubishi 22" CRT. its huge. but nothing beats it in terns of quality. its at 1600x1200 @ 100Hz in games or windows. esp. in BF2, 1600x1200 is great. o and btw, my crt has "super bright mode" switch. it makes the dark place brighter but keep the bright place visible. its almost like made for FPS games. so any dark place in game i can see clealy. anyway, im very happy w/ my CRT. always sharp and crisp. LCDs are not...

Your lucky,
I wish I could find a good Mitsubishi. They only sell cheap Samsungs over here.

 

[Trifid]

I have the same tube in my IIYAMA 514 as that mitsubishi (but your one is slightly tuned, and has the brightness button.) It is an amazing monitor, and I am searching for another one for my PC.

 

[TheMajor]

I have 2 IIyama monitors with Diamondtron tubes. Both 17". An old one from 1997, which I am using, and a spare, more recent, model. The newer model has a slightly flatter tube, but it has some scratches and crappy menu buttons, that's why I am not using it.

 

[DBD]

Hey MrCoffee, Are you using a DVI connection with your new LCD?

 

[MrCoffee]

Yes, i'm not sure what the difference is in practice but I selected this LCD because it was the only 8ms 19" with a DVI connector unsing AUO panel for under £200 that I could find... not that I had many criteria or anything

Does DVI really make much difference? I guess I could swap over to the VGA connector and try to compare.

 

[Trifid]

It is meant to be a sharper picture, but then again LCD's with only VGA do look just as good as a monitor with DVI. When you get monitors with both inputs the VGA doesn't look as good.

(Apparently.)