Flatscreen or monitor

[dreten707]

well im gonna get a new pc from my dad a dell xps and im confused what to pick flatscreen or monitor? :O

 

[ComradeBadger]

Uh?

Moved.

 

[Dedalus]

i'd go with a CRT because it's cheaper and has better image quality.

on the other hand, a TFT is smaller and takes up less room on your desk. also, it's a pain having to put up w ith ghosting and such, so you'll end up paying twice what you'd normally pay for a CRT. on top of that you'll probably only end up with a 15" or 17" monitor that's within a reasonable price range.

for me anyway, TFTs are still a novelty. best to stick with something that is tried and trusted like an entry level Iiyama 1451 19". you can pick one of those up for around £100 nowadays (around 150 euros).

 

[theGreenBunny]

TFT gives a nice, sharp image and is a lot smaller. If you pick a good one (check reviews) there won't be much trouble with ghosting/trailing/etc. When switching from CRT to TFT it takes a bit of getting used to.

If you're a hardcore gamer and you have plenty of space you're probably better off with a CRT. If you lack space and have enough money a good TFT is nice.

 

[PvtRyan]

Flatscreen = CRT with flat screen

Flatscreen != TFT

But between CRT and TFT, I'd choose CRT for gaming, unless you have a LOT of money to spend.
CRT has better responsetimes, better contrast, better brightness, not bothered by dead pixels and a lot cheaper.

 

[lans]

A good ol' fashioned CRT pwns both a Flatscreen (price wise) and a LCD (brightness/contrast wise) - as far as gaming is concerned.

 

[SubKamran]

If you want uber-sharpness and gaming goodness, go with a Samsung 172X...if you are going to play games. Otherwise get a good TFT. CRTs are big, bulky, and hurt your eyes more than TFT (at least in my experience). If you use the screen on it's native resolution it will be uber sharp. Those 21" TFTs are amazing.

 

[SubKamran]

A good ol' fashioned CRT pwns both a Flatscreen (price wise) and a LCD (brightness/contrast wise) - as far as gaming is concerned.

How about a low-response TFT? Eh? EH?! *cough*Samsung172x*cough* My CRT is a 21" and gives a very clear picture, but my uncle's TFT 21" is 10 times sharper and easier to read than mine.

 

[Johan_Tayn]

I couldn't and still can't believe what I was missing before I got my Sony Widescreen LCD. It is so SHARP I believe I'd be bleeding if I was any closer.

 

[ailevation]

:thumbs: LCD have better quality than CRT. But CRT's are ideal for gaming, refresh rates, etc etcttetctettdsfsdkhfd;lg.

 

[Sedako]

How about a low-response TFT? Eh? EH?! *cough*Samsung172x*cough* My CRT is a 21" and gives a very clear picture, but my uncle's TFT 21" is 10 times sharper and easier to read than mine.

Yeah, IF you have $500+ to blow on a monitor. I'd much rather keep my CRT and get a x800 XT platinum. Of course, my 27" RCA TV is hooked up to my comp too, so that makes things very interesting.

 

[crabcakes66]

:thumbs: LCD have better quality than CRT.

You have that backwards. :thumbs:

An LCD is not physically capable of producing an image of "better quality" than a comparable CRT.

 

[kidrock450]

so wait cant u just get a Flat screen CRT?

 

[Dr. Freeman]

i am also shopping for a monitor and created a thread.. theres some useful info and links in that thread.. i suggest u have a peak at it

 

[theGreenBunny]

I love my LCD - nice image quality, nice resolution (could be a bit higher, but hey), and tons of space to put stuff on my desk (well, 'tons' is relative, but still...). It's not always great for gaming, but being basically limited to 1024 means that you have lots of horsepower left over to crank the details.

Heh, pretty much exactly how I feel about mine.

 

[Subatomic]

I would get a CRT Flatscreen, mine right now is really good. I have a 19" Dell, and for a 19" LCD... well it is about 300-400 dollars more which is ridiculous. LCD's are also plagued with problems sometimes, such as ghosting, pixels burning out if you don't keep it at the right resolution... so anyways get a regular CRT Flatscreen, very good =D

 

[crownest]

I have an LCD flat screen, and im happy with it. Although i couldnt play on high res since my LCD cant support it..... But that doesnt bother me, and its better for eye-sight too

 

[Evil Beaver]

What do you all mean by high res? I have a flat panel LCD and I can play all the way up to 1600x1200 :|
Anyway, I love mine. I don't see what the big deal about ghosting is, I've never actually noticed it (aside from the CS flashbang)

 

[poseyjmac]

if you game, go with a flat CRT. but get one that has high refresh rates especially, its important if you dont want eye strain at high resolutions.

 

[Jammydodger]

If I had the money I'd go for this baby - http://www.buysafe-online.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductID=201575

 

[Cybernoid]

Dead pixels, terrible image quality when scaling, low response times, insane prices... I've never understood why everyone is suddenly so excited about LCD.

 

[SubKamran]

Dead pixels, terrible image quality when scaling, low response times, insane prices... I've never understood why everyone is suddenly so excited about LCD.

Space saver? Looks great on the desk? Very crisp image?

Hmm, I guess those are the only good points. :-/

Maybe I should buy a CRT Flat instead, a 23" or something.

 

[harhar]

:thumbs: LCD have better quality than CRT. But CRT's are ideal for gaming, refresh rates, etc etcttetctettdsfsdkhfd;lg.

LCD has much higher refresh rates than CRT!! Its one of the major reasons why people buy LCDs

And to the original poster, flatscreen or monitor?? Flatscreen is also a monitor, a flatscreen monitor. I think you mean CRT, flat CRT, or LCD. I would recommend flat CRT unless you have a lot of money lying around. If you DO have a lot of money lying about, buy an LCD. It's cooler :E , has much better refresh rates, takes up little space, lighter, and etc.

 

[Asus]

My Flatscreen CRT has a refresh rate up to 120Hertz. What's that about LCD's? hehe

Windows Default refresh rate is 60Hertz but it gets set to 75Hertz for a LCD.
LCD refresh all the pixels at once while a CRT refreshes each pixel at a time.
CRTs work even better with a good Refresh Rate.
LCDs are very dependant on a good response time.

On a CRT, a pixel can be blue and the very next second it could be green. LCDs have to wait a long time for the pixel to change colors.
If my CRT is set to 75Hertz then that pixel can update 75 times in a second. 100Hertz then 100 times in a second.
LCDs are set to 75Hertz but how quick the pixel can change color is dependant on the pixel response time. So if the LCD has a 25ms response time it can only change the color of the pixel an average of 40 times in one second (1 second/.025 seconds or 1000ms/25ms).
Here's another catch, response time on an LCD can be measured quite differently from brand to brand and is actually a poor way to measure since they only test one color. Quiet often changing from a different color to another can take up to 30-35m on an LCD. The standard used to be black to white and white to black. Currently the standard is Gray to white and white to gray, which is a big improvment over the previous rating but still many manufactures do not rate their response time the same.

 

[poseyjmac]

ive heard those 12ms LCDS have very minimal ghosting if any.. haven't got a chance to see one for myself yet though