60HZ CRT rez

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: Wardog2121
I have had my monitor at 1024x768 rez and at 60HZ for a while now and is it really bad for your eyes? i also have another monitor i use thats 1280x1024 and its at 60HZ also, is one better then the other?

Kills me. I can get 100Hz easily in Windows @ 1024x768, but my monitor manual says it supports 120Hz. By the time you get to 100, its not that noticeable.

I still dont like 1280x1024@85 a lot...

Man I love my 17" CRT.. the best around still.

 

[Pete]

Zebo, .

Chaotic, that NEC looks pretty good. I'm a big fan of Diamondtron (both regular and NF) tubes, so I'm leaning slightly toward your video card as the culprit. I'd think after all these years that nVidia cards would be basically faultless at 11x8, though, so I single it out without much conviction. I've just had two great Mitsu monitors, a 17" Diamondtron with captive cable and a 19" Diamondtron NF with DB15 and BNC inputs, and both have offered tack-sharp text (provided I gave them quality signals, which is why I sacrificed some 3D speed to get ATI over nVidia cards back when nV was the undisputed 3D king). According to NEC's spec sheets, both your FE700 and my DP900u use "medium short persistence phosphors," so I'm guessing the difference you see is either the cable or the video card affecting image sharpness.

I guess you could try using the DVI output with a DVI-VGA adapter that was included with your card? Let us know if you see a difference at either 60 or 75Hz--namely, if fonts look blurrier. The image should look more solid at 75Hz, though, especially if you look at a white background (fullscreen blank IE page) out of the corner of your eye.

You could also try 10x7@85Hz, to see if font edges look crisper or the screen looks more solid than 11x8. Or just use 11x8@75Hz for a few days, to see if it feels better after some time getting used to it.

Wait a second, you're not talking about the screen size/geometry/rotation changing because of the different refresh rate, are you? Because that's something you can adjust with your monitor's controls.

 

[VIAN]

b) Most LCDs *are ok for gaming... at 30fps. Most LCDs claim such and such a response time, but in truth, the fastest LCDs can only show at least 66fps. 66fps is far from the response time they claim to operate at. So with most LCDs, if you are playing at about 30fps, ghosting should be small enough to not be seeable, because it would be too difficult to differeniate it from the blurring caused by low framerates. At higher framerates, say 60 and above, ghosting is more noticeable. Since most LCDs only do 60Hz anyway, 60fps is the maximum you are ever gonna get on an LCD. Ghosting is much more noticeable with 60fps, because now you can actually see the ghosting instead of the frame blur. With the Dell 1704FPT, the ghosting isn't amazingly terrible at high framerates, but I can deal with it for the games I play. Most of the time, I play at about 30fps anyway (due to my turning up the Image quality high enough), so I won't notice.

I've changed it a bit. Before it said that the fastest LCDs display at least 33fps, but it's actually 66fps. I missread a graph.

 

[CP5670]

I can't use 60hz for more than about five seconds. 75hz is usable but still forces me to look away after a few minutes. 85hz is fine for extended periods as long as I look directly at the monitor; I can notice the peripheral vision flickering effect if I look away from it. The effect is still there to a lesser degree at 100hz and goes away completely at 120hz. I have 20/20 vision although with glasses.

I actually find LCDs quite a bit harder on the eyes due to their excessive, uniform brightness and that glittering "silk screen" effect. The GDM-5410 21" CRT I am using at work is total junk though and hurts my eyes at any refresh rate simply due to how blurry it is, a far cry from what I'm used to at home. The only way to make it usable is to set it to 1024x768 and sit far back from it.

My dad says he can't tell the difference between 60hz and 120hz, so I guess it really depends on the person.

As for framerates, I can generally notice differences up to about 115fps, although it depends on the game. I like to keep the minimums above 60 in most cases and am ready to sacrifice some IQ for that.

 

[Pete]

CP, I wonder if your video card isn't the problem at work.

 

[CP5670]

It's hooked up to some Sun Ultrasparc machine that must be several years old given how slow it is and probably has some crappy integrated graphics chip. It looks only slightly better when I connect it to my laptop though. (and the laptop's image looks fine on my CRT at home) It also seems to have some power regulation problem. For example, if I open Firefox on it and go from the default blank page (gray) to Google (white), the entire image suddenly expands a fair bit and then shrinks to its normal size in about a second. Anyway, I only need to use this POS for another two weeks until the internship-type program I'm in ends.

 

[Zebo]

I use two video cards Pete. A 6800U as my main to drive MIT 2070 and Dell 2001: and a PCI 9200 to drive Dell 2005. IQ is just fine it's all about motion. Which I mirror the CRT and 2001 @16x12 of course the LCD is more razor sharp due to it's perfect geometry technology. But when gaming it's night and day..blur fest LCD vs. perfect instant reaction CRT.

 

[amplemind]

You guys have like laser eyes. I go from 60hz to 85hz no visible difference. And for low FPS, I set it to 30 max in counter strike sometimes, lol, it's so choppy, but by if you get used to it, when you go back to 100fps, the game is like in slow motion.

But perhaps eye strain is a real consequence, so I'm back up to 85hz.

 

[CraigRT]

I hate 60hz more than a bad hair day.... should not be allowed to be used!

 

[Crescent13]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Wow.. I notice anything less than 100. 85hz is bad enough but 60 is like a strobe light.

same here

 

[mwmorph]

I had the same problem as you. A 17" CRT(Viewsonic A70) that I tried to run at 12x10 60hz. It rrally hurt my eyes after a while on it. Now I run 11X8 75hz and it's quite the difference. can stay on longer without discomfort, the objects arent too much bigger(10x7 makes icons and text and everything else seem just too big, i like smaller text.) and yes there is realyl a huge difference.

 

[Wardog2121]

Can the refresh rates have any effect on FPS in game? if it can well then im screwed

 

[mwmorph]

if you have vsync on, the refresh rate dictates the max fsp a game can be at.

 

[Dough1397]

i hate 70hz or less... hurts... but then my monitor looks sharper at 10x7 with lower refresh rates.... but then flicker is annoyign so i live with the blurryness...

 

[CP5670]

I use 1280x960 at 85hz since it looks very slightly sharper than 100hz and my particular monitor has some weird vertical linearity problem at the top edge of the screen at 100hz at this resolution. It's not there at 120hz, but 120hz is a little too blurry compared to 85hz. I don't have any trouble with 85hz for windows usage, although I like to use the maximum possible refresh rates in games.

Originally posted by: Zebo
I use two video cards Pete. A 6800U as my main to drive MIT 2070 and Dell 2001: and a PCI 9200 to drive Dell 2005. IQ is just fine it's all about motion. Which I mirror the CRT and 2001 @16x12 of course the LCD is more razor sharp due to it's perfect geometry technology. But when gaming it's night and day..blur fest LCD vs. perfect instant reaction CRT.

The ghosting is noticeable even on 8ms screens but it only really annoys me in a couple of games. The thing I can't stand about LCDs are the total lack of black colors in dark conditions. I have the same CRT and dark games like D3 or SCCT look way better at night (especially with the SB-1 mode) than on any LCD.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: CP5670
I use 1280x960 at 85hz since it looks very slightly sharper than 100hz and my particular monitor has some weird vertical linearity problem at the top edge of the screen at 100hz at this resolution. It's not there at 120hz, but 120hz is a little too blurry compared to 85hz. I don't have any trouble with 85hz for windows usage, although I like to use the maximum possible refresh rates in games.

Originally posted by: Zebo
I use two video cards Pete. A 6800U as my main to drive MIT 2070 and Dell 2001: and a PCI 9200 to drive Dell 2005. IQ is just fine it's all about motion. Which I mirror the CRT and 2001 @16x12 of course the LCD is more razor sharp due to it's perfect geometry technology. But when gaming it's night and day..blur fest LCD vs. perfect instant reaction CRT.

The ghosting is noticeable even on 8ms screens but it only really annoys me in a couple of games. The thing I can't stand about LCDs are the total lack of black colors in dark conditions. I have the same CRT and dark games like D3 or SCCT look way better at night (especially with the SB-1 mode) than on any LCD.

Dude can you believe they don't make our CRT anymore I got two in garage though for backup. I bet I can sell them for $1000+ in a year

As far as black yea, plasmas and CRT turn off the light -- while LCD mearly filters it, some backlight gets though -- impossible to solve really

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: amplemind
You guys have like laser eyes. I go from 60hz to 85hz no visible difference. And for low FPS, I set it to 30 max in counter strike sometimes, lol, it's so choppy, but by if you get used to it, when you go back to 100fps, the game is like in slow motion.

But perhaps eye strain is a real consequence, so I'm back up to 85hz.

I think it's a matter of getting used to things. I was at 100 Hz for like 3 years. Working with 85 Hz at work is not that fun for me. My eye does get really tired at the end of the day. Seeing my laptop LCD screen at night is more refreshing.

60 Hz is an instant killer for me.... 85 Hz can be noticed, but it's MUCH MUCH MUCH better. 100 Hz for me is where the line is. Anything above, I can't really tell.

Samsung's 17" 700NF rocked, and so did their 900NF in terms of refresh rates. Viewsonic had some decent monitors, but I still can't find anyone who does 1024x768 @ 120 Hz...

 

[Wardog2121]

vsync? whats that?

 

[Wardog2121]

ok another question, with my monitor right now that displays 1280x1024 at 60Hz will i be able to play BF2 with the rez closest to that with mostly high graphics(x800xl) or does monitor have nothing to do with that?

 

[mwmorph]

vertical sync. most games run fine with it off but some games have bad image tearing without it on. if you have 60hz refresh rate and you have v sync on, you have a max of 60fps at all times. slows down your games a bit.

 

[Wardog2121]

how do i knoaw if i have vsync on?

 

[mwmorph]

it's a option under visual properties in most games.

 

[Matthias99]

(re: LCDs) As far as black yea, plasmas and CRT turn off the light -- while LCD mearly filters it, some backlight gets though -- impossible to solve really

Well, there is, but it's called moving to OLED instead of LCD.

It seems like sensitivity to these factors is something that either affects you or doesn't. And you can be sensitive to one thing but not another. Kind of like motion sickness -- for instance, my girlfriend can't read a book in a moving car, but she can ride a rollercoaster or be on a sailboat in rough seas without a problem.

Personally, refresh rates below 75Hz *hurt* for me. 75 is tolerable, 85 looks better, and I can't really tell a difference above 95-100. But I know people who work on 60Hz monitors all day and seem completely oblivious to it (nor do they have horrible vision problems or anything like that).

On the other hand, response time blur and low FPS don't really bother me that much (unless it's >25-35ms response time, or <20FPS or so). I mean, I can see the blur if I look for it, and can easily tell the difference between something running at 30FPS, 60FPS, and 100FPS, but it doesn't bother me in terms of gameplay. But I can't *stand* playing without VSync turned on. The tearing drives me crazy.

 

[CP5670]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Dude can you believe they don't make our CRT anymore I got two in garage though for backup. I bet I can sell them for $1000+ in a year

As far as black yea, plasmas and CRT turn off the light -- while LCD mearly filters it, some backlight gets though -- impossible to solve really

Yeah, that really sucks. Even among CRTs I think these 2070s and their clones were the best by some distance with their superbright mode and excellent refresh rates. Although to be honest the quality control on these monitors was so horrendous in their last few months of production that it's probably a good thing they stopped making them. I got mine just a few weeks before they were taken off the NEC website, but I went through three defective ones before I got a good one. I think it should last me for a few years though until OLED, SED and the other new stuff arrives.

you got two extras? cool...yeah, those would probably fetch a good price in a year or two.

 

[JRW]

Ouch my eyes cant handle 60Hz (I just tried it before typing this) , I run 1600x1200 @ 85hz on this Sony 21".

I agree it sucks companies like Sony stopped making PC CRT's , I've already tried LCD once last month (Dell 2001FP) and found out LCD is more hype than I thought , a *GOOD* CRT is still the best visual experiance with gaming (No response time issues / awesome contrast & black levels etc.)