LCD verses CRT

[jiffylube1024]

I'm just going to throw in my final post of the thread (most likely). Usually when you play the 'well nobody is going to to convince anyone so blah blah' card, it's because the argument is lost (or you're just plain tired of the arguing).

But basically, these threads to grow tiresome since everyone is so set in their ways. All I ask is that before you come into these threads at least work with what you're talking about. I'm pretty sure BenSkywalker has used current LCD's, he just prefers CRT. I respect his opinion.

However so many people just rehash the same old arguments (like "small text"). Do you want a cracker, polly? It's lunacy that some people will admit to tuning CRT for 13 hours while others dismiss LCD because they can't be bothered to spend 15 seconds changing a setting. Or how about this one for text on the internet if it's such a big problem on the LCD you don't use: hold control and move the scroll wheel!

-Screen Door effect: I haven't had this problem on any of my LCD screens, and have not heard of it being a big problem on computer LCD's. The screen door effect is (was) a huge problem on LCD TV's (particularly large ones) since the size of the pixels leads to them being noticeable. We're talking 40" + screens that are displaying resolutions like 1280X720 (720p). It should not be an issue on an LCD monitor since they run such large resolutions on small screen sizes (<=24") . Point me to a 17"/19"/20" LCD that has a bad problem with the screen door effect, especially a high quality computer monitor brand.

Contrast ratio: a huge issue with a 40"+ set top display constantly showing TV, HDTV and movies. On a screen displaying text, pictures and the odd movie (heck I watch a couple movies a week on my 17" LCD) and the 600:1 or whatever contrast ratio I have is irrelevant. Blacks aren't pink, they're an extremely dark shade of grey that looks like black next to the normal grey shades. Comments like "black = gray" are IMO a bit obtuse.

 

[BenSkywalker]

"Blazing brightness" Again...weak. Take another 10 seconds, reduce the brightness. Brightness is one of the LCD's strongest points...after you've used a bright LCD, CRTs look so dull in comparison.

Many years ago I used to work managing an electronics store, and people wowed by the brightness of a display always walked out with the poorest displays we carried. This was during the days of straight CRT-CRT comparisons, not a display type preference issue, it was always the people attracted to how flashy something was never could be bothered to check out the images being displayed. Too much brightness kills contrast, eliminates fine color gradiations and in general washes out the entire image. Brightness on my CRT is currently @42.7% with my individual color push options all south of 80%- overly bright kills image fidelity on ANY display.

What is relevant is whether the black level is distinguishable from a CRT - I have seen enough LCDs to know that some can accomplish this, while some can't.

No LCD is capable of displaying a true black. It may compare to a horribly set CRT display that has its brightness cranked to obscene levels, but it can't display a true black.

I'll go over the list point by point for housecat now-

1-perfect geometry- LCD (NEVER loses focus over the years)
2-16.7million colors- LCD and CRT
3-crystal clarity from DVI- LCD (its a digital interface for a digital screen)
4-easy on the eyes- LCD with DVI and cleartype enabled (its like looking outside at the beach compared to CRTs)
5-size- LCD
6-cool factor- LCD
7-heat- LCD
8-energy savings- LCD
9-environmentally friendly- LCD
10-large screen size- LCD BY FAR, theres the Apple Cinema 30", Dell 24" and you can use most 1080 HDTV's as screens and they are beautiful that go as big as you want
11-response rate- LCD and CRT (no difference in the new 12ms and 8ms panels from CRTs)
12-weight- LCD (a 20" lcd weighs like 12lbs. a 20" CRT weighs like 80LBS!)
13-best black reproduction- CRT
14-resolution scaling- CRT (while CRT wins this one, LCD does just great check my post about playing 160x200 games on a 20" LCD.. beautiful, hence scaling from 1600x1200 on a LCD to 1042x768 is only a problem for the most anal people)

Numbered them to make them easier-

1- I'd agree excluding the improper 1280x1024 diplays of course
2- CRTs handle billions- you can argue if this makes a difference or not, but LCDs aren't close
3- If only DVI output were perfect
4- Disagree- the ghosting gives me eye fatigue quickly, and then makes me sick to my stomach- this includes the 2001FP and Apple's 30" display
5- If you are talking about taking up less space I would agree
6- I have yet to have any LCD users jaw fail to drop when they saw my CRT- you move to the 'King of the Hill' in either camp and has the 'cool' factor going
7- I live in New Hampshire- CRTs throwing heat is an *advantage* most of the year
8- Agreed
9- Depends on numerous factors, in terms of raw waste the CRT has more
10- CRTs by miles- Mitsu at one point produced a 70" CRT- you are just looking at readily available displays- HDTVs works for CRTs too
11- LCDs are orders of magnitudes slower then CRTs- that is point of fact
12- Certainly CRTs are much heavier- mine tips the scales right around 75lbs or so
13- Obviously CRTs
14- Again CRTs


Anther point-

LCDs are limited by the low bandwidth of DVI- 2048x1536@85Hz is too much for them to handle

People have embraced LCDs, as has the industry.. the CRT is just inferior technology overall.

Except they haven't. LCDs are the cheapest of the new wave of tech for small displays so it hit the consumer market first. Come back to me in ten years and talk about how great LCDs are- they will be all but dead(if not completely dead).

jiffy-

I would just like to say for the record I've not once used the 'small text' argument against LCDs, heck even using a CRT adjusting the sizes comes in pretty handy when running in real high res(north of 16x12).

 

[rbV5]

1- I'd agree excluding the improper 1280x1024 diplays of course

Its only "improper" if its set on a display that is not 5:4, my 17" LCD is physically 5:4 ratio (HxV), and anything "but" 1280x1024 is "improper" (unless you configure a custom resolution, which makes little sense seeing how its native resolution is 1280x1024)

On most other points I agree with BenSkywalker, heck even my 55" widescreen is CRT based and its PQ is very nice. Additionally, my 22" Mitsu CRT is going on 4 years of use with my main PC, and I bought it used after they used it for 3 years. My LCD is basically utilitarian use, while the CRT produces the eye candy.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Its only "improper" if its set on a display that is not 5:4, my 17" LCD is physically 5:4 ratio

That is why I stated the improper 1280x1024 instead of simply saying 1280x1024 or just using 17"

 

[Space Cowboy]

Hmmm .. So what is the best and largest CRT out there without breaking the bank?

Thanks

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

What is relevant is whether the black level is distinguishable from a CRT - I have seen enough LCDs to know that some can accomplish this, while some can't.

No LCD is capable of displaying a true black. It may compare to a horribly set CRT display that has its brightness cranked to obscene levels, but it can't display a true black.

Yes, we get it. It is impossible for it to display "true black" (whatever that means), because it uses a backlight. Theoretically, there's a tiny amount of spillover between pixels in CRTs, too, so they don't display "true black" unless you're showing a completely black screen (if you display a black screen with a bright white square in the middle, some of the CRT phosphors near the square will be grey instead of black -- this can be very noticeable on some TVs). The question is whether an LCD monitor displays a black that is visually close enough to some reference black that it doesn't make a difference. From reviews, the newer ones seem to be damn close to CRT monitors in this regard.

I'll go over the list point by point for housecat now-

1-perfect geometry- LCD (NEVER loses focus over the years)
2-16.7million colors- LCD and CRT
3-crystal clarity from DVI- LCD (its a digital interface for a digital screen)
4-easy on the eyes- LCD with DVI and cleartype enabled (its like looking outside at the beach compared to CRTs)
5-size- LCD
6-cool factor- LCD
7-heat- LCD
8-energy savings- LCD
9-environmentally friendly- LCD
10-large screen size- LCD BY FAR, theres the Apple Cinema 30", Dell 24" and you can use most 1080 HDTV's as screens and they are beautiful that go as big as you want
11-response rate- LCD and CRT (no difference in the new 12ms and 8ms panels from CRTs)
12-weight- LCD (a 20" lcd weighs like 12lbs. a 20" CRT weighs like 80LBS!)
13-best black reproduction- CRT
14-resolution scaling- CRT (while CRT wins this one, LCD does just great check my post about playing 160x200 games on a 20" LCD.. beautiful, hence scaling from 1600x1200 on a LCD to 1042x768 is only a problem for the most anal people)

Numbered them to make them easier-

1- I'd agree excluding the improper 1280x1024 diplays of course

See post above. I've never seen an LCD that had a 1280x1024 native resolution but wasn't 5:4 (I have seen LCD and plasma TVs that had nonsquare pixels, but never a computer monitor).

2- CRTs handle billions- you can argue if this makes a difference or not, but LCDs aren't close

Theoretically, a CRT can produce an infinite array of colors, since it is an analog device. However, the input logic for the electron guns only accepts 16.7 million unique color values (0-255 for red, green, and blue). Any "billions" of colors being generated are from inaccuracy/bleeding between pixels, which is a downside.

3- If only DVI output were perfect

It's as perfect as you can get up to the bandwidth limits of the standard (which I guess is what you're obliquely referring to). VGA has far worse signal noise issues.

4- Disagree- the ghosting gives me eye fatigue quickly, and then makes me sick to my stomach- this includes the 2001FP and Apple's 30" display

This is, to some extent, a matter of personal preference. I mean, I know people who actually work all day on a CRT at 60Hz and it doesn't bother them (while it hurts me just to look at their monitor for more than about five minutes). However, you can't deny that many people find LCD monitors easier on the eyes for 2D work.

5- If you are talking about taking up less space I would agree

Hard not to.

6- I have yet to have any LCD users jaw fail to drop when they saw my CRT- you move to the 'King of the Hill' in either camp and has the 'cool' factor going

Again, sort of irrelevant.

7- I live in New Hampshire- CRTs throwing heat is an *advantage* most of the year

For those of us who don't like space heaters, however...

8- Agreed
9- Depends on numerous factors, in terms of raw waste the CRT has more

Not particularly relevant to graphical performance, but both true.

10- CRTs by miles- Mitsu at one point produced a 70" CRT- you are just looking at readily available displays- HDTVs works for CRTs too

First off, projection displays are going to beat out any direct view display in terms of raw size, and the only realistically affordable projectors are going to be LCD/DLP (you can get high-res CRT projection systems, but they are not cheap). Secondly, CRT computer monitors are not readily available in sizes greater than 20-21" diagonal -- you can get 24" widescreens, but they're not cheap either. I'm not sure if any 30" diagonal monitors are even still in production.

The best CRT-based HDTVs have an effective vertical resolution of about 1000 lines, and are 34" widescreens. Those could be run at 1080i (1920x1080), but would not be pixel-perfect. You can get 40-50" plasma screens at native 720p (1280x720), and probably within a year or so at 1080i/p. You can get fairly large CRT-based RPTVs, but RPs have their own issues (light bleed, generally not great viewing angles).

11- LCDs are orders of magnitudes slower then CRTs- that is point of fact

Yes, but again, the question is whether it makes a noticeable difference. It certainly does with a "16ms" LCD (which is more like 30-50ms in actual use); I have not personally used an 8/12ms model, but they are supposed to be better. I would hope the 4ms models coming out this summer would basically eliminate ghosting in most situations.

12- Certainly CRTs are much heavier- mine tips the scales right around 75lbs or so

13- Obviously CRTs

(with regard to black level)

Again, the question is one of real-world difference, not of theoretical performance.

14- Again CRTs

And again, newer LCD models are apparently very good in this regard. Scaling was certainly awful on the first few generations of panel, but even the 2001FP (hardly the newest thing on the market) does this pretty decently.

Anther point-

LCDs are limited by the low bandwidth of DVI- 2048x1536@85Hz is too much for them to handle

While it is not supported on most consumer displays and video cards, dual-link DVI can go to much higher resolutions (but I'm sure you know that and just didn't mention it). The Apple Cinema display, for instance, uses it. DVI with reduced blanking interval seems capable of running 1080p (1920x1080) on the Dell 2405FPW, so I don't see this as a huge problem currently.

What's the dot pitch on the better 21" CRTs these days, anyway? Do they even have 2048x1536 discrete phosphor groups?

People have embraced LCDs, as has the industry.. the CRT is just inferior technology overall.

Except they haven't. LCDs are the cheapest of the new wave of tech for small displays so it hit the consumer market first. Come back to me in ten years and talk about how great LCDs are- they will be all but dead(if not completely dead).

As will direct-view CRTs, I'm sure. OLED and SED will likely wipe both of them out within 5-10 years (assuming something else doesn't come along and make all of these things obsolete).

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy
CAn you hook This up to use as a computer monitor?

Would it be better than the 24" Dell?

Yes you could.

I would rather have the Dell over that one. its 1366 x 768 resolution.

The Dell is OVER 1080P HDTV standards (1920x1200).

But for $2Gs you'd be much better off with the one I linked. Its 1080 and thats what you need.. and I'd highly recommend if not just for the purpose of HDTV content and future proofness.

 

[Space Cowboy]

Originally posted by: housecat

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy
CAn you hook This up to use as a computer monitor?

Would it be better than the 24" Dell?

Yes you could.

I would rather have the Dell over that one. its 1366 x 768 resolution.

The Dell is OVER 1080P HDTV standards (1920x1200).

But for $2Gs you'd be much better off with the one I linked. Its 1080 and thats what you need.. and I'd highly recommend if not just for the purpose of HDTV content and future proofness.

Housecat
I'm kinda old and slow so .. link please?
Thanks

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy

Originally posted by: housecat

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy
CAn you hook This up to use as a computer monitor?

Would it be better than the 24" Dell?

Yes you could.

I would rather have the Dell over that one. its 1366 x 768 resolution.

The Dell is OVER 1080P HDTV standards (1920x1200).

But for $2Gs you'd be much better off with the one I linked. Its 1080 and thats what you need.. and I'd highly recommend if not just for the purpose of HDTV content and future proofness.

Housecat
I'm kinda old and slow so .. link please?
Thanks

its ok, im not pissy

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-eP2FZT8gy5...g=153650&id=essential_info&i=610DV3750

prices on that should drop to $1750 or so once cheaper retailers get ahold of it. but this is brand new.. and simply the best deal.

just check best buy to see what im talking about..

its the one I'm getting. I'm just waiting to see if Dell will respond to it.

Even 2Gs is a great deal for this screen.

I'm personally getting a 24" 2405 for my personal rig, that HDTV to replace my sony wega and leaving the 2005FPW with my wife's P4.

So I'd get both

The 2405 is so great in my mind, not only because it should be availaible with coupons for $900 free shipping, no tax thru DellHome.. but because it is 1080P compliant, yet goes higher than 1080HD, and just enough so that I can run 1600x1200 in non-Widescreen games.

Though most games I play (HL2, D3) support widescreen.. it will be nice for SWAT4 and a few others I like.

 

[Ackmed]

There is no chance I will go back to a CRT any time soon. Too ugly, hot, big, heavy, and hard on the eyes, for me. Also, not many widescreen CRT's, which is what I am really digging currently. Widescreen gaming is so much better than 4x3 to me.

 

[Space Cowboy]

All I can say is WOW

You can hook this puppy up to a computer's DVI output on a ATI Radeon Video Card?

Amazing .. And I hate to admit it but I'm in the market for a new TV :shocked:

Wonder what the boss would say ........

 

[housecat]

I love it when me and ackmed agree.

BTW OP-
Regarding this endless LCD/CRT war, let me tell you that i took the "plunge" into LCDs and I'm never going back. Few ever do.
I'd highly recommend going with lcd technology, its newer and in this case better..

if you resemble someone anything like BenSkywalker then I'd encourage a CRT. But just trust me in that 95% of the population would prefer that 2405FPW over whatever CRT hes recommending.

The saddest thing of all (really), is that the BEST CRT line ever the Diamondtrons from NEC/Mitsu are discontinued.. that really, really sucks.
So if you decide to go CRT, those were the best.. but it will be your last.

Things have changed, as always.
Widescreen is the future (a LCD thing primarily)
... and not just for games (scroll halfway down and see the difference in Counter Strike Course)

You can either ride with the future, or get stuck in the past with a big, heavy, 4:3 square CRTs that we've been using for over 50 years.
Your call.
But when it comes down to it, do you demand the remaining minute advantages that CRTs hold? ie. color reproduction?

Unless you make a living off of artistry.. I'd recommend against it.
Even then, Toms Hardware has recommended certain LCDs FOR graphic artists!

So again, things have drastically changed.

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy
All I can say is WOW

You can hook this puppy up to a computer's DVI output on a ATI Radeon Video Card?

Amazing .. And I hate to admit it but I'm in the market for a new TV :shocked:

Wonder what the boss would say ........

Yes you can run that off a radeon.

Any single link DVI (all current and older DVI card) can push 1080P.

Its the perfect stopping point (1080) for current single link DVIs.. hence my strong 2405FPW recommendation, and that 37" reccomendation.

I do not recommend outdated, slow or crappy hardware.
Contrary to many who lurk these forums.
Sometimes I really believe ppl want other ppl to buy the same junk they own so they dont have something better than they do.

I have a 2005fpw and dont care if the next guy buys a 2405, its just better.. no argument.
I dont understand why ppl argue about AMD/Intel, NV/ATI.. there are CLEAR winners in each segment.

I want everyone to buy what I would buy, so prices drop and competition ensues!



I have a good boss, letting me have that BenQ 37" and the 2405 (edit- but only on sale LOL)

Take her to Best buy to look at TVs first!
Then show her that one and its price.

She'll find its just as big as bargain as we do and surely let you order it.

 

[Space Cowboy]

Cool,
Another question? Why would you want both? I see you explain it but again .. I'm old and slow .. sorry. I don't game and probably never will.

Right now I have a 27" Hitachi TV facing me and a 17" Hitachi monitor.

They both are excellent but the tuner blew out on the TV (routed threw the vcr for channels) and this monitor is to small.

Thanks
Cowboy

 

[housecat]

hey i was on bestbuys site and heres what you can get for 2K at WorstBuy

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp...yId=pcmcat31800050024&id=1091100579235

I dont know if the link will work so its a
Philips 30" Widescreen HD-Ready Flat-Panel LCD TV with Picture-in-Graphics - Silver Frost
(1280 x 768 pixels)
Model: 30PF9946D/37
$2000
:thumbsdown:

total rip
30" compared to 37"
resolution not comparable either.. esp considering you'll prob want to see HDTV content in which 1080 is the highest popular standard.

 

[Space Cowboy]

What about this?

Link

 

[Ackmed]

That res is much too low for PC usage, to me. Reading text would suck, even if your enlarge it.

Im happy as a clam with my 2405FPW, I really dont see me upgrading any time soon. Any larger, and it would be too big for me. Its about 3 feet away (arms length), and just perfect for me. It has all I want, including component video, which looks great with my PS2 and GT4. Its also nice having Comcast HDTV in a window, while surfing the net.

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy
Cool,
Another question? Why would you want both? I see you explain it but again .. I'm old and slow .. sorry. I don't game and probably never will.

Right now I have a 27" Hitachi TV facing me and a 17" Hitachi monitor.

They both are excellent but the tuner blew out on the TV (routed threw the vcr for channels) and this monitor is to small.

Thanks
Cowboy

if you dont play games, then having both might not be economical.

i would just like to replace my 32" sony wega due to its weight and we are looking at building a new house so i if i can eliminate all my CRTs.. the better now than later

thats one reason, but really its because I hog the computer all the time.
and if i used that lcd tv as my computer screen, my wife would throw me out the window.

so i want something nice for my PC as well.
24" is just the right size for up-close, and it supports 1080 as well in case i run the digital cable to it and watch HDTV channels.

also, i want to go from my 2005 to the 2405 not only cuz of the size/res.. but because its a GREAT standard/stopping point: it maxes out single DVI link video cards that are currently on the market, and it also runs the "de facto" 4:3 resolution of 1600x1200.. which is great for benchmarking purposes, and non-widescreen supporting games.


Plus, I need another new screen.
My wife only does ebay (and we are starting to play WoW together), but she is on a 17" CRT and i just want better for her
so that means I gotta get another LCD and theres really no choice but the 2405 as decent priced upgrade from my 2005

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
That res is much too low for PC usage, to me. Reading text would suck, even if your enlarge it.

Im happy as a clam with my 2405FPW, I really dont see me upgrading any time soon. Any larger, and it would be too big for me. Its about 3 feet away (arms length), and just perfect for me. It has all I want, including component video, which looks great with my PS2 and GT4. Its also nice having Comcast HDTV in a window, while surfing the net.

Ditto.

For $750 more, I'd still go with the 37" 1080 panel. I wouldnt even consider that 32" that was linked for myself. Like he said, its the resolution.. its drastically lower than the 2405 or the 37" benQ.

If you are going to dump the cash to get into HDTV, go 1080 or dont go at all.
thats my suggestion

the 37" might be a bit big for a PC, but it might work just fine from the couch!
hehe i dont know.. but i cant possibly hog the main TV for my PC screen anyway.. my wife would kill me

so 2405 it is for me, and I'll be using Mediacom Digital cable thru the PIP just as ackmed does.
I cant wait!

the 37" is mainly for my wife, I just want it cuz its big like my current TV and 1080 so I can play with it, I'm sure I'll plug my PC into it and play a little Counterstrike source and world of warcraft.


*DROOL* over the thought of History channel in PIP while in counterstrike....

 

[Space Cowboy]

I called Dell yesterday and they offered me the 24" LCD for $950.00
He said thats as low as he can sell it for.. I said call me when it's $850.00

So .. help me decide here? I like having the tv on while I'm surfin the net. I sorta watch the tv out of the corner of my eye's.

How would the quality of the picture compare between the Dell and the Benq?

I don't need speakers since I'm hooked up to 100 watt per channel amp. to full size 3 way speakers.

Thanks
Cowboy

 

[Ackmed]

The History Channel, and Discovery do rock in HDTV. Ive always liked them, but I find myself watching them more now that its in HDTV. I generally just have them in PiP (or ESPN) while browsing. My reciver is 1 foot from my PC, so its not hard to do.

 

[Hadsus]

Another thing to possibly look into is HTPC. Get a monitor that you can watch TV but also use as a regular PC monitor. I'm not an expert but I know the AVSforum addresses it in one of their many sub-forums. I've seen some screenies of people using 55" inch LCD HDTVs as their computer monitor. It's pretty geeky but pretty cool.

BTW, I can't help but chuckle to myself at the continual CRT bashing. One thing that people forget is that I literally had one of the best LCD monitors and best CRT monitors side by side, both new and made the choice.....and an easy choice it was. I'm almost sure people are comparing old, used up, curved suface CRTs (not to mention it is just in their mind's eye, not reality) to the new LCDs. They are not seeing what I'm seeing. They are not doing the direct comparison. There is something fun and satisfying about going against pop-culture.....and knowing at the same time you have a monitor that crushes LCDs in imaging and just about everything else.

 

[Space Cowboy]

and an easy choice it was

Hadsus

Link please ...

I'd like to see what you got?

This looks interesting Link

Thanks
Cowboy

 

[Hadsus]

Originally posted by: Space Cowboy

and an easy choice it was

Hadsus

Link please ...

I'd like to see what you got?

This looks interesting Link

Thanks
Cowboy

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=24-002-040&depa=0

Just keep in mind they are out of production.

 

[ponyo]

Originally posted by: Hadsus
Another thing to possibly look into is HTPC. Get a monitor that you can watch TV but also use as a regular PC monitor. I'm not an expert but I know the AVSforum addresses it in one of their many sub-forums. I've seen some screenies of people using 55" inch LCD HDTVs as their computer monitor. It's pretty geeky but pretty cool.

BTW, I can't help but chuckle to myself at the continual CRT bashing. One thing that people forget is that I literally had one of the best LCD monitors and best CRT monitors side by side, both new and made the choice.....and an easy choice it was. I'm almost sure people are comparing old, used up, curved suface CRTs (not to mention it is just in their mind's eye, not reality) to the new LCDs. They are not seeing what I'm seeing. They are not doing the direct comparison. There is something fun and satisfying about going against pop-culture.....and knowing at the same time you have a monitor that crushes LCDs in imaging and just about everything else.

Hadsus, check my rig. I've been running my dual LCD/CRT monitor setup for almost 2 years now. I prefer my LCD for majority of the stuff although I prefer the CRT for movies and certain games. Don't assume people are not doing direct comparisons. Most people who switched to LCDs early had nice CRTs. What do you think they were using before the LCD?