![006-1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/YeZAM2N.jpg "006-1[1].jpg")
Are CRTs still the best?
Not with that size and lack of VESA mount.
i don't know but i sure as fuck miss my trinitron
>>54086784
No, they're shit, despite what some turbo-hipsters may tell you.
>>54086784
All memes aside. No. Not they are not.
If you really miss CRT, get a plasma display.
>>54086814
But depth.
But zero lag.
But no v-sync issues.
>>54086784
if ur playing melee yeah
>>54086927
Any old school game that needs fast reactions definitely shows improvement. Though what I'm curious about is does it affect new games too.
I held a 1440 monitor once. It had about 6mm of bezel (maybe that's an exaggeration, but it was short), and it felt heavier than a CRT in my hands. The stand was apparently spring-loaded for some reason, presumably to counter-set the weight (which added more weight anyways)
If CRTs are "too heavy" for you, i.e. 'lack portability', then you should consider the weight of other monitors before you go and buy them, thinking they'll be light.
What people don't know is that pixel density increases monitor weight exponentially.
An average 4k LCD weighs about the same as a CRT. Don't believe me? Weigh one yourself.
No, but that doesn't mean you should dump a perfectly working crt in the dunpster.
If you can tolerate low resolution (some do capable of 720p), it's cool
>>54086832
Not necessarily true, especially if you use hdmi-vga(or s vid. or av. whatever) converter
Serious question: How many people ITT fell for the LCD meme ?
I still use a CRT, much better image quality
It's like when casettes and then CDs came out, I kept my Vinyl and now everyone is sorry they bought into the CD meme
and now everyone's crazy about SSD! replace, replace! and they'll be sorry soon, SSD is another meme
>>54086784
No
And you don't want CRT's either
You think you do but you don't
>>54087948
>LCD
That's 10 years ago, gramps
>>54086784
>falling for the meme TV
There are no advantages to CRTs, can't even do HD.
>>54086927
>>54086980
>falling for the retro meme
>>54087948
>own a good 21" CRT
>sell laptop to buy a desktop computer
>buy R9 390
>doesn't have analog output
>can't use it anymore
pic related
now its just sits in the corner of my room
help
>>54088181
Get a DVI->VGA adapter.
>>54088382
an active adapter would add tons of lag
also its quite expensive
not worth it
>>54088083
hey retard, TN, IPS and other flat screen are both LCD
>>540881
your mobo doesn't have VGA?
If so, you can use it and you gaymes will still be rendered by the GPU
>>54087948
I know this is bait but some people on here really believe the SSD part
>>54088514
>>54088541
sure I can use the integrated GPU
but its so shit it literally cant even output 1600x1200@95 resolution so I would be stuck with 1280x1024@95 which is kinda fuzzy
Nothing beats the GDM-FW900.
>>54088408
DVI is backwards compatible with VGA so you should easily be able to use a passive adapter with no problem
>>54088831
you are talking about DVI-I which is analog
R9 390 only has DVI-D which is digital
R9 390 and R9 290 do not have analog output
>>54088808
why dont they produce more awesome CRT's that dont cost like 8000 USD
AND WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE SED MONITORS
>>54088808
>GDM-FW900
That looks pretty sweet, too bad I do not have $1,250 to spend on a monitor.
>>54087912
>vga
Speaking of which, are there any graphics card that still have a vga port?
>>54089106
No, but if you have a DVI-I out you can just use a passive adapter.
>>54087022
Was it heavier than a 1440p CRT?
>>54089135
Why is that, mobos still utilize it and most graphics cards are so pigfat that they could fit several if they only tried.
>>54088993
my bad didn't notice the graphics card in the first post
>>54088808
Why are those Sonys so overpriced, I mean there has to be something of similar quality for cheaper?
>>54089178
I sometimes question myself if I should have gotten a GTX 970
that card has analog output
but didnt want to fall for the memes
>>54089235
This Sony was one of the few widescreen, HD CRTs ever made. Of course it's expensive.
>tfw my CRT has some slight burn in
Its only visible on a bright background, or when the screen is off, still sucks tho. Just goes to show that screensavers do have their uses.
>>54089287
Couldn`t someone just repurpose a widescreen TV tho? Would be much cheaper.
>>54089350
There are very few CRT TVs that aren't 480/576p.
OLED or similar tech is the future. Once they figure out image retention and uniformity issues. Their 4K TV's are already approaching 'acceptable' and even if not then the benefits of HDR and infinite contrast far outweigh the other issues. The problem right now is there is no competition. LG dominates the market. Samsung are rumored to be reentering the OLED market but it looks like they may need to license the WOLED patent from LG if they cannot come up with something of their own. LG have also only just begun making smaller panels for laptops.
>>54089571
what about the $5000 4k OLED 120hz monitor?
http://www.144hzmonitors.com/monitors/dell-up3017q-30-inch-4k-120hz-oled-monitor/
>>54089571
>>54089666
or Nvidia's 1700hz display
http://www.geek.com/games/nvidia-shows-off-experimental-1700hz-zero-latency-display-1651928/
>>54089241
lol you let /g/ convince you that the 970 is a meme
nice work m8
>>54089779
Everything is a meme.
>>54089779
>3.5
>nvidia lied about every other spec too
>gimping
I made t-the right decision buying amd r-right?
Yes, CRTs are the best.
I challenge anyone with a colorimeter to install Dispcal and show me a result better than this.
>>54089810
I've got a 2048x1536 or so CRT that I picked up off Craigslist.
It's super cool, but I was wanting to buy one because of the "CRT's do infinite black" meme and that ended up being 100% bullshit. It technically can, but the second you put up anything on the screen, that light spreads across the entire screen. It ends up being like those LCD screens with a super high "dynamic contrast" where they have a shitty static contrast but dim the screen when displaying a dark image. It's subjectively nicer than the standard 1000:1 LCD, but doesn't even beat out my 3000:1 TV.
Was like 10 bucks though, so fuck yeah I love this thing
I just fucking hate the 16-18 KHz sound they make
>>54088181
If your r9 390 has a display port then you can get a display port to VGA adapter like I did.
>>54088808
I had one for a while. It was alright. The aperture grille varies so text is sharper in the middle of the screen. Ended up getting rid of it when the transformer started going out.
Good quality CRT are great
Low quality CRTs are fucking eye cancer tier heaps of shit
I found a Viewsonic p220f new in the box about 3 months ago.
It was great until it died. now it turns on with no picture and it makes a crackling noise
anyone have an idea what the problem is?
>>54092366
transformer dead
>>54092552
How difficult is this to replace, if possible?
thanks for your time.
>>54087445
how much does a pixel weigh?
>>54087948
You were right about everything except ssd. Ssd is fast as fuck, platter drives are slow as fuck. Holy shit who is still using platter drives in a workstation in 2016. I mean I have platters in my file server but sure as fuck not in my PCs. Shit i even have a 20gb ssd in my kodibuntu box. My 3 year old daughter's PC has an old ssd even.
>>54086784
Yes and anyone who tells you otherwise is a pleb
>>54086825
>If you really miss CRT, get a plasma display.
No
If you miss CRT get a CRT
Plasma is not really a CRT replacement by any stretch
Plasma Monitors suck(the few that are out there)
They also have
>input lag
>motion/persistence blur depends on the model
>severe IR/burn-in issues
Only consider a Plasma if all you do is watch TV Shows/Movies
They are not good as a daily driver for your PC or for gaming however
>>54088099
>CRTs can't even do HD.
Hello fucking underage who has never used a CRT Monitor in his life
>>54088181
>buy R9 390
That's where you fucked up
You don't buy shit like AMD which doesn't even have Ramdac's anymore
You buy Nvidia which does have support for analog because they're not shit like AMD
>>54088808
The Nokia 445Pro does
And also Sony's BVM's are on a whole different level
They have low persistence phosphor on them(compared to FW900's medium persistence phosphor) and they're basically some of the sharpest monitors ever
>>54088099
>can't even do HD.
They did 4K before you were even born
>>54089406
this is bullshit
there's no shortrage of PC CRT Monitors out there and all of them are at the minimum 1024x768...a good percentage of them are 1600x1200
>>54089571
OLED is a meme
That fucking Laser Beam Steering tech on those Pico Projectors needs to be developed and used on Real TV's/Monitors already
It's the only chance we have at a new CRT
>>54090864
Have you even professionally calibrated the damn thing?
Also how's your room condition?
If your room is bright the black levels will suffer because the phosphor absorbs light
>>54088099
>can't even do HD.
guess what? Sony did made HD CRTs
(KV-30HS420, KD-34XBR970 to name some examples.)
>>54090438
>spyder
>not i1 display 3
>not i1Pro
>>54094892
And those were TV's
CRT Monitors could do 1080p like 20 years ago
John Carmack had a 1080p CRT Monitor in his office in like 1995
>>54088808
>tfw passed on the opportunity to buy the HP rebrand for 40 bucks on craigslist 3 years ago
>>54089406
Finding an HD trinitron isn't hard, but they weigh probably 100+ lbs
>>54089159
>mobos still utilize it
mine does not.
>fit several
and that would increase the cost. who the fuck would buy a high end graphic card to use the fucking vga port, only fucking hipsters
>>54094740
Well the DAC is kind of shit anyway, an ancient budget card like the 9600GT has a clearer analogue picture than both the 960 and 970 (this matters if you run high refresh)
>>54089018
>AND WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE SED MONITORS
they were killed by cheap LCDs before they were even produced, along with FED
>>54096647
How come?
Still best but CRT makes your badly and so small size likes your pennis
>>54086784
Like everything, GOOD CRTs were great but most consumer grade stuff from any era is trash, it's no wonder that LCD rose to the top of the trash pile
>LCD (lowest common denominator) kill count
Sony Hi-Scan Rear PRO
Sony Trinitron tubes
Canon SED
Pioneer CEL PDP
Mitsubishi laser projection
The best thing about early high definition rear pros and CRTs is no reliance on digital scaling which still sucks huge donkey dicks
>>54088408
>an active adapter would add tons of lag
DVI signal timing is actually broadly compatible with CRT/VGA timing: h-blank, v-blank intervals, etc., which have no real necessity for LCDs.
while it's possible that some DVI-D -> VGA converters may be shit, it's not necessarily true for all of them due to underlying technical reasons.
>>54088099
>>54089018
>WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE SED MONITORS
>>54096655
>killed by cheap LCDs before they were even produced, along with FED
sort of. the full truth is that nobody figured out how to cheaply produce large arrays of nano-emitters that didn't get eroded by exposure to plasma traces in the gap. they had lifetimes that made OLED look good, and nobody had a credible path towards a solution even if billions of R&D were available for an unsure product.
all "cool techs" tend to have a big gotcha somewhere of other
> OLED - different color emitters lose brightness at different rate, some dropping to <50% in a few thousand hours
> QD-LED - best quantum dots use heavy metals, need to make uniform 1-molecule thick layer for each subpixel stripe across entire display is hard
> blue phase LCD - needs relatively high switching voltages, modulating subpixel output via birefringence instead of polarization bending is tricky
> GLV - nobody likes projection displays, laser speckle is a pain to eliminate
> ...
>>54099578
You forgot
>CRT - absolutely perfect
>>54100207
>flickers on every refresh
>not pixel-precise when you want it to be
>susceptible to geometry issues
>susceptible to uneven phosphor wear (burn-in)
I love a good CRT but the technology is definitely not perfect.
isn't OLED just as good?
>>54086784
no. i can't fit 3 on my desk and one above those. they were big and heavy sons of bitches, most of /g/ is likely too young to remember hauling something like a 19" crt to a lan party. shit was horrible.
they also were more prone to give people headaches and eyestrain (only rivaled by early lcd panels which were shit tier).
>>54100565
>flickers on every refresh
That's a good thing.
>>54100726
It's a good thing when it comes to making moving images look crisper, but it's a bad thing when it comes to staring at a website or document and having the background constantly flicker when it's not even changing. Even if the refresh rate is set high enough to not notice it, health issues are still possible.
The pixel-imprecise nature of CRTs is also both a positive and a negative depending on usage. Bad for things that really benefit or require pixel-precision, but good for the flexibility of being able to display many (particularly lower) resolutions without becoming a total blurry mess.
>>54100780
>health issues are still possible.
this is a meme
if you're referring to x-rays/radiation than you get more radiation from the sun than you'll ever get from a CRT
and also above 100hz most people can't detect flicker anyways...it's also better for moving and dragging windows or scrolling through webpages with no blur
>>54099578
>laser speckle is a pain to eliminate
this has already been figured out
sony introduced some sort of filter on their Laser Beam Steering Pico Projector(based on the Celluon Air Pico Projector) and some guy named Light23 on the Blurbusters forum improved on it
Sucks that LBS will never catch on because it's basically the new CRT
>>54086784
Yes, but normies ruined it like they ruin everything, we were just a short time away from slim flat CRTs, I'd kill for a 32" 4k one right now
>>54102156
No, I'm referring to the effects on your brain from the flickering. Just because you can't detect flicker in normal usage doesn't mean it's not effecting you. Chances are you can still see the flicker in your peripheral vision or when you wave your hand or an object in front of the display. Your brain just tunes it out the best it can when you look directly at it.
>>54103068
>Chances are you can still see the flicker in your peripheral vision
not him but I do not see this from a certain amount of flicker
like 85-90hz, but the higher the hz the less flicker I can detect
at ~110hz I can't detect flickering even in my peripheral vision
>when you wave your hand or an object in front of the display
that I can see on my 144hz lcd monitor when strobing is enabled
is there a problem with this?
The only way to play pre 360 games.
>>54086784
Ive used ctrs a lot in the past, but will always prefer old dell ultrasharps like the 2408WFP
>>54103219
>is there a problem with this?
It's questionable. I've never really found a good study on the matter, but as a sufferer of frequent headaches, I'd like to eliminate anything that might make things worse for me, even if I'm not 100% sure it's contributing.
A lot of LCD monitors also use PWM for dimming the backlight, which causes varying amounts of flicker even without any sort of strobing feature. The thing about this is that it's unnecessary. Backlights can be and in some cases are dimmed with zero flicker, so in my opinion it's unacceptable to use the PWM method and potentially put people's health at risk when it's not necessary.
>>54086784
Hey that's a nice wallpaper!
>>54103743
>lot of LCD monitors also use PWM for dimming the backlight
thats why I only use BenQ monitors
they have been proved to be flicker (PWM) free
>>54103894
It's one of the reasons I bought a MacBook Air for my laptop. All modern Apple displays I've tested have been PWM-free.
There are some other options aside from BenQ for desktop displays... I think some of the latest Dell monitors are PWM-free.
>>54103894
oh man this is so awesome. i always play with a fan between me and my monitor!
>>54103894
I tend to stay away from benq monitors because they are usually not calibrated well
>>54104015
>using default calibration
>any monitor
>>54104004
I have no words for how dumb you are
>>54086784
Depends on what you're using it for
>>54103219
strobing is literally flickering, it's not a problem, it's working as intended.
>>54087948
CDs are objectively much better than fucking vinyl
LCDs are better than CRTs
>>54104189
idiot
>>54104186
>strobing is literally flickering
motion blur reduction flickering is not the same as PWM flickering
>>54104033
>knowing how to calibrate the monitor outside of brightness
>actually doing it
>>54104230
it's flickering
>>54100565
You forgot
>fuckhuge and heavy
>>54104257
here is what you do for every monitor
>brightness: 100
>contrast: 50
>open a white page in webbrowser
>set the red, green and blue colors in the OSD so the white is not too reddish or blueish
done
>>54104271
you are not fooling anyone
>>54104344
>motion blur reduction flickering
>flickering
i'm not saying there's anything wrong with it, just explaining why he's detecting flickering with strobing enables and that's how it's supposed to be
>>54088808
DP2070sb beats it on all levels except for aspect ratio.
Source: I own and still use both of them.
>>54104375
>DP2070sb
what resolution do you use it?
2048x1536@86 or 1600x1200@110?
>>54086784
CRTs still have the highest refresh rate (up to 200Hz). True non-interpolated 240Hz LCDs are supposed to be out this year, which means CRTs will finally be defeated.
>>54104344
Flickering is the only way to get good looking motion from low framerate content, so it is intended. The real solution is displaying 500fps at 500Hz, or even faster. Flickering is visible during eye motion well into the kilohertz.
>>54104581
But any CRTs (at least any PC monitor a consumer could get a hold of) could only do high refresh rates at ridiculously low resolutions. Useful for old games and stuff, but not much else.
>>54104581
>CRTs still have the highest refresh rate (up to 200Hz)
http://www.geek.com/games/nvidia-shows-off-experimental-1700hz-zero-latency-display-1651928/
>>54104643
Not commercially available, doesn't count. But I want one.
>>54104581
Plasma has higher refresh rates
>>54099494
Carmack's CRTs were 1080p
>>54086784
Aren't the resolutions for CRTs like at max 1024x768? The only thing CRTs are good at in this day and age are refresh rates.
>>54104907
>Aren't the resolutions for CRTs like at max 1024x768
>>54104690
It does not, it's just PWMed brightness. No plasma supports faster than 60Hz input, so it doesn't matter what the PWM frequency is, it's still 60Hz refresh.
I only use CRT tech for old console video games. I have a sony WEGA right next to my flatscreen and that's it. People keep telling me to buy a CRT monitor but I'm perfectly happy with mine right now so I don't see the use in switching. If I'm honest I would play those old games on a flatscreen if it weren't for Duck Hunt. Man I love Duck Hunt.
>>54096498
I literally would.
I have a multi monitor setup with one 16:9 monitor going via HDMI and two 4:3 monitors I got for free that only do VGA.
So I have to go with one via mobo and one via GPU (DVI-I to VGA) which is pretty fucking retarded.
>>54092633
the only real difficulty is going through the steps to make sure you dont kill yourself - CRTs hold a hell of a lot of electrical power in their parts for a hell of a long time.
In any case google is your friend here, not 4chan.
>>54104643
Too bad it would only be available for inferior Nvidia GPUs.
Also I don't think you could push most games to run at 1700mhz
also there's probably a ton of draw backs to the display that would make it impractical.
>>54106068
>1700mhz
>1.700.000.000 hz
not even minesweeper can output that much fps
>>54106117
I've run loading screens at 1000fps
>>54086784
the good ones are still good.
mfw rocking a phillips brilliance with a GTX 970
im pushing 1920x1440 at 85hz and honestly the colors are great. (since its a rebranded trinitron)
Bought it from a guy who did color work for 20 bucks, he even calibrated it for me.
>>54106155
>>54106196
how are your CRT's brightness?
I use mine at 40 so I have real blacks
but even when I turn brightness up to 100 my LCD is still brighter (250cd/m2)
pic related is spec sheet
>>54106652
I forgot to include pic
>>54106155
Sir, do you mind sharing your pape please?
>>54106652
totally depends on your rooms brightness and color type.
>>54106746
>rooms brightness
it's bright
>color type
uhh...
>>54106746
>>54106799
>room brightness
I mean its darker than an LCD even in complete dark room
but I mostly use it in bright room
Mouse pointer what are you doing get back on the screen
>>54086784
>Analogue standard
>best
they are never best.
>>54106844
noice Barco :3
>>54086784
I seriously don't understand companies pushing 4k. We don't even have a 1080p standard on digital media. Hell there is so much to improve on monitors like 0 input lag, 120HZ+, build quality, fixing clouding and so much more.
But hey lets push for the newest 4k meme
Do this with an LCD
Oh wait
CRTs can't do this.
CRT phosphors reflect light off the front, meaning your "infinite" contrast is actually far worse than a typical 1000:1 LCD. LCDs also polarize light in both directions, so the more well lit your room the better your perceived contrast will be. With an ATW polarizer on a good IPS display you get really nice, deep blacks.
LCDs have had sRGB colors forever now. Many LCDs even do things like AdobeRGB, which CRTs don't.
LCDs allow you to have much larger screens as well. Imagine having a 40" 4k CRT.
>>54108854
The top one looks better.
>>54108854
I never notice any real difference from my CRT and IPS display in that regard
>>54087445
>I fell for it and weighed my 4K monitor
fuck off cunt
>>54108854
the cat in the top one looks much better though.
>>54108854
I have an NEC display with an ATW-equipped IPS panel and while the blacks are free of extra glow effects and imperceptible in a moderately lit room, they are far too bright for viewing dark content in a dark room. That is where CRTs really shine (or not shine, in the case of black level). I really miss having a CRT when I feel like watching a dark show/movie or playing a dark game with the light off. Such things are just not enjoyable to me with the black levels IPS panels are capable of.
>>54109322
Stop using computer screens in a dark room. That's not good for your eyes or you sleep. Use bias lighting. Even a CRT looks better with bias lighting.
Pic related.
>>54109356
I'm all for bias lighting for shows/movies, but bias lighting just isn't realistic when trying to get fully immersed in a game that takes place in darkness. I'm also not sure bias lighting would suffice for a display with only 1000:1 contrast, or in my case only about 700:1.
99.999% of the time I use my computer displays in a fully lit room, and a few hours of gaming in the dark once in a while would not harm my eyes or sleep. It's just a nice experience that I miss from the CRT days.
>>54108877
>>54109167
*tips*
>>54108854
LCDs can't do this without the image become a blurry mess. I'll say that the bottom image looks a lot better, but that's because it's at the display's native resolution. CRT is still the king of multi-resolution and response time though. For games that don't run at native resolution it's objectively better to use a CRT monitor.
inb4 >>>/v/
>>54088808
>Nothing beats the GDM-FW900.
actually pretty much everything does because every FW900 in existence has phosphors degraded to the point where the contrast is complete garbage
>>54110528
I'm sure there are some around that are still in good condition.
Also phosphor degradation is usually fairly minor unless it's uneven (AKA burn-in). Loss of white level is for the most part due to weakening guns. The later Trinitron PC monitors would also suffer from raising black levels due to a built-in G2 compensation feature that didn't quite work correctly, but they can often be corrected or at least improved with firmware adjustment to get a bit more useful life out of them.
>>54086814
Am turbo hipster, can confirm. I prefer CRTs any day of the week.
