LCD vs. CRT - Page 5 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-17-2005, 01:43 AM   #41 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 422
Default

I have:
17" LCD Liquidvision (or video I forget)
12MS refresh rate
1280x1024@75Hz, and it works great

Oh yea, got it at circuit city.
__________________

__________________

Current PC
Windows 7 Pro x64
AMD 965 Black Edition 3.4GHz
ASUS Crossfire III
Corsair 650 Watt
12GB RAM
Sapphire ATI 5770
500GB Samsung*2 | 150GB VelicoRaptor 10K HDD
1TB Samsung
Jobs
Electrician
C# Programmer+Web Programmer
Gamer :)
mack is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 01:44 AM   #42 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,349
Default

this is retarded.. like what was mentioned b4, it does come down to aplication and cost.
----------------------------------------------
if you only use the comp for word proccessing, web browsing, simple stuff like that. or you photoshop high quality photo's to be prited out. or for some reason u cannot fit a CRT in ur room. then LCD may be a better choise.

LCD's are a lot less power hungry. LCD screens are immune to images being 'Burned in', were as everything else CRT or Plasma are not. thy have higher native resolution then CRT witch makes detail's, such as defects in high res pictures noticable were it would otherwise not be on a CRT. ther is no LCD out there that can match a CRT's contrast ratio, video benifits from high contrast ratio.
----------------------------------------
if your using your comp for hardcore gaming, watching video's.. thats all i can think of, that totaly benifits from CRT.

CRT monitors dont only have lower native resolution, but there pixels are also arranged in a different manner(cause of native res diff). CRT's pixel placement causes a sort of natural anit-ailiasing(effect of less sharper image) as apposed to LCD's. this allows CRT to run in any resolution with no change in image quality, were as if u change LCD's res lower then the recomended native res, you will see a dramatic drop in image quality. this allows CRT to display -example- a 800x600 picture 19" in full screen res on a 19"crt set at 800x600 desktop resolution without a drop in image quality.

thats why CRT is soo much better for gaming, besides the faster rate. u can set a (19" 1600x1200native res CRT) at 1024x768 res to run your game. witch depending on what game and what hardware, u could experience a mild to very significant FPS increas, with no loss in image quality. on my 19" crt, iv also notice that in game i see no difference between 16/32bit color depth, so i leave it at 16 for FPS increase.

same picture quality and resolution apply for video's such as DVD's. plus the crt contrast benefits.
__________________

jolancer is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 01:45 AM   #43 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 422
Default Re: Re:

Quote:
Originally posted by Alvin.C
LCDs do have lower refresh rates...however who's gonna need a CRT refresh rate of 100Hz !?

I have a TFT LCD at 72Hz.....and I don't treck to the downstairs PC anymore because the CRT monitor operates at 100Hz- it hurts my eyes because I can't adjust to it. I treck back upstairs only to witness my TFT screen flash before my eyes (but not literally of course).

Anyways enough of my strange affairs... The frequency wont make much difference. Do what you think is wise with your money.
My friend has a crappy lcd monitor and in-games it "ghosts"
__________________

Current PC
Windows 7 Pro x64
AMD 965 Black Edition 3.4GHz
ASUS Crossfire III
Corsair 650 Watt
12GB RAM
Sapphire ATI 5770
500GB Samsung*2 | 150GB VelicoRaptor 10K HDD
1TB Samsung
Jobs
Electrician
C# Programmer+Web Programmer
Gamer :)
mack is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 03:17 AM   #44 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,782
Default

crt have been immune from "burn ins" for years
__________________
Core 2 Duo E6400, DFI Infinity 975X/G, 2x 512mb DDR2 667mhz, Albatron 7900gt, WD 200gb SATA, Samsung DVD-RW, Silverstone ST-50EF 500w PSU.
waynejkruse10 is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 11:19 AM   #45 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
idiotec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,748
Default

This does just get pointless. People have their preferrence and that is all there is to it. I for one do put a lot of emphasis on form, and the last thing I want is some big ugly *** crt on my desk, it looks ghetto. The other main point is most people here are either college or highschool students without a pot to piss in, so crt's make more sense.

The post about native resolution is correct, but IMO LCD's in their native resolution look better than CRT's, but of course that is my opinion. CRT's do handle other resolutions better.

It is rediculous to say factors other than picture quality shouldn't be discussed, there are many factors to consider. My current screen is my first LCD, and I can tell you, I will never go back to CRT. I play CS: S at 1680x1050 (my screens native resolution) and it looks unbeleivable. I would put it heads up agaist any of these peeps baige, 1970's, 200lbs CRT's in a heart beat.

The end
__________________

BE HEARD - Techonvent
DS3 | E6400 - 3.2GHz 24/7 | 2GB OCZ PLat. PC6400 | 6800GT | Zippy 460W
What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left.
idiotec is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 12:46 PM   #46 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 530
Default

I concur, I believe pretty much all negative and positive bases of both have been covered. Lets not have another ATI vs. Nvidia warish type of thing. They both have their ups and down, its up to you to decide which is right for you. People should respect other people and the decisions they make, this is a help forum, not a convince everyone else of what I think is right forum.
FoxyLoxy is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 01:19 PM   #47 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,349
Default

Quote:
crt have been immune from "burn ins" for years
Umm.. i seriously doubt thats correct. if u think that is absolutly correct u must provide a link to the information.

nothing but LCD is immune to burn it. though burn in doesnt affect the average user, unless u leav your monitor on with the same picture just sitting there and forget about it for weeks.
Quote:
This does just get pointless. People have their preferrence and that is all there is to it.
my post didnt have any preferences in it, just fact.
__________________

jolancer is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.