What is - CRT, LCD, IPS, LED, CCFL

[irlwizard]

Having a day off and tried to educate myself about monitors.

Been reading 100s of articles and forum threads about PC displays and I think it is very important that people learn the differences, pros/cons of each output device in the title.

We should also explain marketing gimmicks that you should watch out for and have no difference to your overall experience.

LETS START WITH MARKET HYPE.

goldchain wrote :

Ignorant is going with a monitor just because it has a lower response time instead of thinking it through, gamer or not.

Let's look at the facts:

1ms = 1/1000 of a second

2ms response time = 500fps

4ms response time = 250fps

8ms response time = 125fps

Anything beyond that is market hype meant to sell cheap 6-bit monitors.

And, as a gamer who also does OTHER things with my monitors, I would choose a monitor with 8ms response time that has TRUE 8-bit color for things like image/video editing over a 2ms TN panel that can't display any sort of color gradient to save it's life.....

Same thing with these 120Hz and now 240Hz HDTVs. People swear that it makes fast-motion video look crisper. I'd like to see that considering the video source itself is limited to 30/60fps (30fps in 1080, 60fps in 720). More marketing hype. Another way to charge more for the same old displays......

Apart from that, here is what I know in general. So far...

CRT
- Pros: Extremely good colour and high refresh rates.
- Cons: Health (radioactive), Expensive to operate (draws a lot of power), Bulky.
-Note: From numerous sources a lot of people agree that the Sony SW900 is one of the best CRT and monitors of all time especially for gaming. Even to this day, CRT definitely has it's play in many peoples hearts.
-Extra: Personally I never had a problem with CRT when playing games at a younger age, in fact I hated the switch the LCD around my teens and to me the picture was worse. Furthermore in the last two years I feel my eyesight has slightly decreased using LCDs. On the other hands it's the opposite for a lot of people, getting eyestrain and headache from CRT but this is mostly likely due to flickering or screen tearing because they run too low Mhz on the display frequency.

LCD
-Pros: Cheap, Flexible, Reliable (lots of years put into development), Brighter then CRT (the lights might be what my eyes don't like, usually have the brightness down to 0 depending on LCD).
-Cons: i.e. hours in front of the desktop or going afk with the screen on (I guess sleep-mode prevents that), Not a very pleasant or realistic picture compared to good CRT or other monitors.
-IPS: Additional feature for LCD (don't exist on LED to my knowledge). Not sure how it works but has something to do with switches and ultimately gives a noticeably better picture.

LED
-Pros: Backlit (can eyestrain some individuals). Less power consumption then LCDs (credit to - amk-aka-phantom).
-Cons: Unlike a LCD your background can't get burnt into the screen BUT small spots on the LED can die out giving you red or black marks at random places on the screen as it breaks down over time.
-CCFL - Feature of LED.

Sidenote: Neither LCD or LED can burn a still image into the screen, that is only plasma TVs (credit to - cats_paw).

Will edit ANY CORRECTION on this post and given credit for your contribution like I did to goldchain.
Btw, you don't have to respond to all of this, but contributing what you can will make it a good thread over time.

As always, thanks in advance.

BONUS: According to few forum posters on various sites. The human eye can only register 60FPS. Maybe I don't understand the difference between FPS and Mhz refresh rate but Microsoft recommends no lower then 75Hhz frequency on your monitor.
Source: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Getting-the-best-display-on-your-monitor
If someone can explain why they recommend 75+ and what effects VERY HIGH (120Mhz) will have on your sight vs too low Mhz or FPS.

Here are SOME of the many...
Sources:

From Tom's - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/54419-3-best-monitor-ever-beautiful-samsung-t240 (the last 5posts are alright).
CRT/LCD + Resolutions - http://thescreamonline.com/technology/monitor/monitor_res.html (found this to be the best source but most outdated).
IPS/CCFL - http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1562533
LCD/IPS - http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/lcd-panel-types.php
LCD/LED - http://screamable.com/difference-between-led-and-lcd-displays.html
LED/CCFL - http://www.samsung.com/us/article/benefits-of-an-led-monitor-ccfl-vs-led

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

LED
-Pros:
-Cons: Can have high power consumption compared to LCDs, Unlike a LCD your background can't get burnt into the screen BUT small spots on the LED can die out giving you red or black marks at random places on the screen as it breaks down over time.

LED's power consumption <<< LCD power consumption.

 

[cats_Paw]

I dont know where youve been reading, but you got most things backwards....
LCD has a full background on/off system, while LED iluminates certain areas stronger than otehrs.
It is becouse of that that LCD has lower dynamic contrast ration than LED.
Image burn in is from plasmas, and has nothing to do with lcd/leds in current times.
The human eye can percive over 30.000 fps in reality, the thing is our brain is not used to it (unless you play games).

Its the same crap statement as :
*Humans reaction time is 0.25 seconds: Im quite sure a F1 racer ahs better than my mother.
*Humans can only hear 20Hz to 20.000 Hz: Then why audiphiles buy stuff with 5Hz to 55.000Hz.

 

[irlwizard]

Humans reaction time is 0.25 seconds: Im quite sure a F1 racer ahs better than my mother.

I see your point buddy. I read through this. It was a bit confusing for me but kinda 'opened my eyes'.
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

Here are some sentences from the site.
Tests with Air force pilots have shown, that they could identify the plane on a flashed picture that was flashed only for 1/220th of a second.

Saying that... Even if

The human eye can percive over 30.000 fps in reality, the thing is our brain is not used to it (unless you play games).

Are you implying that games have the best eyesight? Because I HIGHLY DOUBT that. Besides, it surely can't be safe. Given that...
What is "Enough fps"? I don't know, because nobody went there so far. Maybe 120fps is enough, maybe you will get headaches after 3 hours. Seeing framewise is simply not the way how the eye\brain system works. It works with a continuous flow of light\information. (Similar to the effects of cameras' flashlights ("red eyes"): flashing is simply not the way how we see). So there are still questions. Maybe you need as much as 4000fps, maybe less, maybe more.


Anothe question. Isn't Mhz monitor refresh rate the same as FPS? i.e. 60Mhz monitor won't go over 60FPS?
If so does that also mean a 2ms monitor can display UP TO 500Mhz/FPS? Or does response time have NOTHING to do with Mhz/FPS?
http://www.viewsonic.com.au/products/productspecs.php?id=494

PS: cats_paw -

I dont know where youve been reading, but you got most things backwards....

It's good that you correct me I really prefer it, so we can update the main post and educate more people about monitors.