Monitor of choice - CRT or LCD?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

js wrote:
> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD programs
> and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is the
> better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but have
> no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>
>

Well, I use a ViewSonic G70f CRT and my better half has a ViewSonic 171s
LCD. Both are "17 inch" although the G70f only measures 16 inches
viewable while the VP171s measures a full 17 inches. Both are excellent
monitors. My G70f cost $200 about 18 months ago and the VP171s cost over
$543 three months ago.

jimbo

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

I use both. Unless desk top space is a problem the best price and best
picture comes from a CRT monitor.
A good flat screen that will go 1280X1024 like the ViewSonic G75f+
will give pleasure.
One mans opinion
JPS


"js" <rhuandra@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:B1ddd.18883$Qv5.11036@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD
programs
> and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is
the
> better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but
have
> no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:28:49 GMT, "js" <rhuandra@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

| If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD programs
| and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is the
| better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but have
| no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.

Opinions vary, but I've not found any pluses for LCDs except size and
weight. Any good CRT tends to beat LCDs for color accuracy and text
clarity. And there are no concerns about insufficient response times
or dead pixels, although most consider 16ms or better adequate
response. Additionally, LCDs are limited to native resolutions for
optimum display; CRTs generally support a wide range of resolutions
with excellent display.

Plus comparable screen sizes usually cost considerably less in a CRT
than an LCD. :-)

Larc



§§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"js" <rhuandra@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:B1ddd.18883$Qv5.11036@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD
> programs
> and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is
> the
> better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but
> have
> no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>
>

Personally, i havent looked back since i dumped my 17" CRT for a TFT.

Apart fro mthe obvious space gains, and loss of picture quality (from which
i hardly notice, even when doing graphics work or webdesign) are eaisally
outweighed by the lower strain on the eyes.

Look for a the loseste response time and allways drive the screen at its
native resoloution and they are fine for games.

Avoid the cheap, unbranded screens. I have an LG and an Acer Panel, both of
which have no dead pixels after 2 years and 1 year respectivly.

hamman

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

js wrote:
> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD programs
> and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is the
> better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but have
> no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>
>
I switched to a 19" Samsung LCD last year for Autocad and general office
programs. I would never go back. I was simply looking for sharpness
under high ambient lighting conditions and I could find none better. I
doubt if it is any good for gaming but they kind of frown on that at
work anyways.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

CRT is still the better choice due to cheap cost, very high resolutions and zero
lag time compared to LCD. The biggest drawbacks of CRT is weight, size, and
heat.

However, I've seen some high-end LCDs that would satisfy even the most finicky
gamer and video editor....but be prepared to shell out some major dough for
those kind of units! Also, most of the high-end LCDs are 16:9 wide-aspect ratio
which makes them better for watching DVDs or editing images & video.


> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD programs
> and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is the
> better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but have
> no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"js" <rhuandra@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:<B1ddd.18883$Qv5.11036@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>...

> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle
> CAD programs and also I like to play computer games every now
> and then, which one is the better bet?

A refurbished Dell or Viewsonic 21-22" CRT monitor is available for
$600 new, $250 refurbished, and for CAD I wouldn't want any monitor
smaller than 19". I don't see any reason to prefer an LCD, unless
it's 32", which costs roughly $100 an inch. Also a CRT monitor with a
good CRT (any Japanese CRT, like a Sony Trinitron or Mitsubishi/NEC
Diamondtron -- some Japanese brand monitors use Taiwan or Chinese
CRTs) can last a long time with just inexpensive repairs.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

A typical CRT monitor has a response time that's under 3 msec. You can see
why LCD monitors are said to Ghost the image when you have a moving scene.

--
DaveW



"js" <rhuandra@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:B1ddd.18883$Qv5.11036@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD
> programs
> and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is
> the
> better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but
> have
> no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

> A typical CRT monitor has a response time that's under 3 msec. You can see
> why LCD monitors are said to Ghost the image when you have a moving scene.

That's why I will never buy an LCD big screen TV......who wants to see ghosting
on a nice DVD movie?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:28:49 GMT, "js" <rhuandra@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD programs
>and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is the
>better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but have
>no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>

js:

I use a DualHead video card and am looking at two very good monitors.
One TFT and the other, CRT.

ATI Radeon 9800 XT 256MB AGP retail (Cat4.10)
DV-I: Monitor #1 Samsung SyncMaster 213T Black 21.3" TFT
1600x1200 32bit 60Hz (native).25ms response time
VGA: Monitor #2 ViewSonic P225f 22" Aperture Grille CRT
1600x1200 32bit 85Hz

WindowsXP HE SP2
Asus P4T533-C s478/i850e
P4 2.8b\533MHz FSB retail
1GB OCZ PC1066 RIMMs
etc

Before the TFT, I had been using a ViewSonic P817 21" shadow mask CRT
(which was probably the best of its type the company ever built) as my
main monitor.

I am an LCD convert. When the P225f goes, it will be replaced by an
LCD.
I game with the LCD (mostly bf1942+DC,DCX) without artifacts, and am
very pleased with all of the Samsung monitor's features and
performance aspects.

Happy trails,

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

I had been using CRT monitor until my friend gave me a LCD when she leave
NZ.
I don't really like it, Big 19" CRT monitor was very expensive now is much
cheaper due
to new technologies(LCD), but if space is not a problem for you I stand by
the CRT, since
you could get a top of the range CRT at a very reasonable price, but only
get a low end of middle range
LCD with the same price. For what? Just to catch up with other people?


"TJM" <tjm@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:2tnk26F2237j3U1@uni-berlin.de...
> CRT is still the better choice due to cheap cost, very high resolutions
and zero
> lag time compared to LCD. The biggest drawbacks of CRT is weight, size,
and
> heat.
>
> However, I've seen some high-end LCDs that would satisfy even the most
finicky
> gamer and video editor....but be prepared to shell out some major dough
for
> those kind of units! Also, most of the high-end LCDs are 16:9 wide-aspect
ratio
> which makes them better for watching DVDs or editing images & video.
>
>
> > If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD
programs
> > and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is
the
> > better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but
have
> > no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <8CBgd.899$op3.42490@news.xtra.co.nz>, moneyturtle@xtra.co.nz
says...
> I had been using CRT monitor until my friend gave me a LCD when she leave
> NZ.
> I don't really like it, Big 19" CRT monitor was very expensive now is much
> cheaper due
> to new technologies(LCD), but if space is not a problem for you I stand by
> the CRT, since
> you could get a top of the range CRT at a very reasonable price, but only
> get a low end of middle range
> LCD with the same price. For what? Just to catch up with other people?
>
>
> "TJM" <tjm@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:2tnk26F2237j3U1@uni-berlin.de...
> > CRT is still the better choice due to cheap cost, very high resolutions
> and zero
> > lag time compared to LCD. The biggest drawbacks of CRT is weight, size,
> and
> > heat.
> >
> > However, I've seen some high-end LCDs that would satisfy even the most
> finicky
> > gamer and video editor....but be prepared to shell out some major dough
> for
> > those kind of units! Also, most of the high-end LCDs are 16:9 wide-aspect
> ratio
> > which makes them better for watching DVDs or editing images & video.
> >
> >
> > > If I would like to have an excellent display monitor to handle CAD
> programs
> > > and also I like to play computer games every now and then, which one is
> the
> > > better bet? I have been hearing 16 ms response time on LCD monitor but
> have
> > > no clue how it compares to a good CRT monitor. Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>
>
And if you get a pretty good CRT, you still really can't compare the
sharpness and clarity of text, nor the subtleties of color gradients as
compared to LCDs.

Louise

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:

....

>And if you get a pretty good CRT, you still really can't compare the
>sharpness and clarity of text, nor the subtleties of color gradients as
>compared to LCDs.

I have seen/owned some bad looking CRT color monitors. When I used to go to
stores, looking at all the new personal computer hardware coming out. I
used to look closely as I passed by color monitors to see how sharp the
text was, especially black horizontal/vertical lines. Most of the time it
was blurry.

My CRT ViewSonic PF-790 19" perfectly flat Trinitron color monitor produces
sharp text, even looking at the screen from three inches away.