Refresh Rate

Technically anything above 30FPS is a waste? Once you dip below that you'll start to slideshow. 60Hz for LCD is 'The' Standard, running any higher just puts a little more load on the GPU with no mentionable gain I believe.

In XP there's a checkbox in Control Panel, "Hide modes that this monitor cannot display". You better leave that checked, or you may have to go shopping for a new monitor soon.

Some LCDs support better refresh rates than others. For example the Viewsonic VX2025WM I got at work offers 75Hz at 1680x1050. My LG and Samsung monitors at home are limited to 60Hz at the same resolution.

crt's are better anyway.

the only thing lcd's have on crt's so far is that they're lighter

Why would it put more load on the GPU? Your GPU would be on load regardless with vsync on or off.

Most people can tell the difference between 30 and 60fps. Some people can tell higher than 60fps.

Mosst lcds cap ot at 60htz as said above. Also as said above click the don't show refresh rates my monitor cannot support box. 60htz hurts my eyes, I have to stick with 85htz. Crt all the way!

60Hz on a CRT hurts my eyes too, big time. 85 Hz on a CRT is much better. However, 60 Hz on an LCD is just as good as 85 Hz on a CRT, maybe even better. If you've never tried an LCD you should, you might have a nice surprise.
Just my personal opinion. I'm not an expert on monitors, I just happen to stare at one for 8 hours a day at work and a bit more at home. I used to think like you and I was shocked to discover that the LCD had no flicker at all and my eyes actually felt better in the evening.

LCDs do not flicker like CRTs, so the refresh rate is more or less meaningless. Nothing on the screen is redrawn unless the image actually changes.

I bet you are one of those people who own a 1972 Chevrolet Silverado- 4 wheel drive -heavy duty half ton pickup with a 400 big block belching smoke and unburned gas fumes that send everyone into tears on the freeway behind you, and drinking gas at the rate of 7 miles per gallon, and all the while declaring new trucks are worthless and "they don't build em like the used too"
Just kidding, but really.......

I have to agree with other's here. The only thing a CRT is "better" at, is maintaining a high degree of accuracy in a fast moving game. LCD's will have some image distortion, or tearing as I believe it is called. The are getting much, much better, but the CRT still has a slight advantage here, but it is a outdated technology that is all but dead.
In a very few years, you will not be able to buy a CRT moniter, or a standard television for that matter. They are/have been being phased out for several years.

Other than that, LCD's are ligher, cooler, use way less energy, have a a much more vivid screen that is easier on your eyes, and to most people just generally "look" a lot nicer than the picture you can get from any CRT. LCD technology has come a long ways, and you can buy higher end units that are fast enough to nearly keep up with a CRT, one could not "see" the difference.

My monitor is set not to display refresh rates it cant handle, thats why i made this post. I mean its a waste getting 100 fps in a game when your monitor can only show 60. It seems that the monitor gets blurred when increase the refresh rate, maybe its getting old?

There are still limits for scaling on CRTs in my experience. Though this only matters for very low resolutions like 800x600 or lower. At least on my 19" CRT, ant anything below 1024x768 (and even a little at that resolution) horizontal lines can be seen making up the image, rather than a consistent image. At 1152x864 and higher this is no longer noticeable. I never play above 1280x960 because it doesn't look any better to me, and it just takes more effort and more time to move my mouse across a greater number of pixels.