>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
Non mobile discussion
> LCD vs CRT
Bookmark topic
I'm surprised people didn't mention how pixelated text can get on a low quality LCD. I have been a CRT man for quite some time. The only reason I see to get an LCD is the size and style associated with it. To me features are better than style.
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 04:01:02
Edit :
Quote
nickorooster Posts: > 500
Ah, you can just use "CLear Type" or sumthing, built in to windows, to clear up that dodgy text for you. But ok.
And my monitor is about £50 cheaper than the next alternative (as in, it IS the cheapest) and its still better than the LG Flatron 15" that cost twice as much!
But meh.
Nick
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 09:25:30
Edit :
Quote
Actually, Space is a bit of a factor for me. Where i will keep my pc, the desk isn't broad enough for a CRT. And i would have to modify it if i have to keep the keyboard too . In short, there's not enough space for a CRT and a keyboard to be kept in its front. Thats the reason why i even thought of an LCD. Otherwise, i wouldn't have any second thoughts about a normal CRT. And i thought, it would be good looking too!
This message was posted from a T230
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 09:48:07
Edit :
Quote
seems like you need an LCD then, comparisons don't matter.
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 10:28:51
Edit :
Quote
Don't some companies sell reduced size CRTs?, they are a third smaller than normal CRT but I don't know if the monitor will be small enough for you.
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 10:44:55
Edit :
Quote
nickorooster Posts: > 500
True, but a 17" one of those is comparable to (in price) a 15" LCD, and the LCD will most probably be better for you, while having a similar (only .8 or so of an inch difference) screen size.
Trust me, go LCD. My eyes used to hurt for a while after using my CRT (generic 17" at 80Hz and 1280*960 for about 6 hours), now the screen is crystal-clear, flat and VERY crisp. JUst make sure you set your resolution to the screen's native resolution (mine is 1280*1024) and you will have a crisp, pixel for pixel, screen.
Seriously, I will never be able to go back to CRT.
Oh and make sure the TFT you get has at most a 16ms response time (the lower the better) and a contrast ratio of at least 450:1 (the higher the "450" value, the better). And I suggest a 17", 'cause you will love the increased size (over a normal 17" LCD).
A TFT monitor does not operate on the same way of "refreshing" as a CRT does, so each pixel is lit up, ALL the time, meaning there is no "in between" colours stage, unlike CRT. JUst go for 16ms response time or less and you will be in heaven. I am an avid gamer (half-life 2, CS, Doom 3, NFSU:2 etc) and I have never seen any ghosting, just crisp, clear graphics. However, on a Friend's 19" TFT with 25ms response time, there was some noticeable, but it was still playable. Just. SO go for a 16ms or less
.
I know there have been good arguments for CRT, but they really only apply to specific professions or uses.
I have had my rant, and now I'm done. You WILL NOT regret getting a TFT if you get one as detailed above.
Nick
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 11:28:48
Edit :
Quote
The only problem i have with LCD other than price, is i find that if the light hit's my monitor from an even slight angle i can't see a thing.
Never had that problem with indirect light on a CRT, but there you go...a minor complaint.
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 11:29:39
Edit :
Quote
nickorooster Posts: > 500
Really? Well I was the only person in my LAN group that had a CRT, and they always had to rea-arrange when I got there so I had the shadiest corner possible, 'cause the glare on a CRT (the glass screen) is terrible.
Oh and price is getting better...
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 12:12:30
Edit :
Quote
@whiz - duh ! For that price difference you can get a whole brand new computer table
Get the CRT !
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 13:05:51
Edit :
Quote
K4, whats the price difference between a 17inch CRT and a 15inch LCD?
This message was posted from a T230
--
Posted: 2005-02-23 13:11:57
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
