are there any LCD monitors that even come close to the feeling of a CRT? I plugged in my old CRT recently and it raped my 120hz IPS when it came to gaming picture clarity, I barely even want to play any games on it anymore because it just looks like a blurry mess compared to the CRT.
CRT isn't pic-related, otherwise I'd be using it instead.
Think it's funny how this CRT is better shit became more prevalent with niggers in 3rd getting internet.
Though they aren't solely to blame. Dumb nogs with "competitive" games like Smash and what not thing they have some edge.
CRTs have been outclassed since the mid 2000s.
>>55546246
If I had OP's pic related I'd be using it as my main monitor too.
goddamn i miss a good CRT.
watched The Last Broadcast on VHS on a 4:3 CRT the other day....
man...
>>55546279
Show me a single LCD with no input lag and motion blur, you can't.
>>55546533
CRTs haven't input lag, child. You're not beating the frame time.
>mfw my crt died 2 months ago and no spare parts to fix it
At least my Syncmaster 3n from 1995 is still going strong.
>>55546246
Ever since I got a 144hz with ULMB my Trinitron's been collecting dust in a closet.
>>55546373
All FW900s in existence are approaching their end of life. Widescreen CRTs are the ONLY reason they'd be worth using over a quality IPS monitor, and in a year there will be none left.
>>55546994
Not him but they are easily repairable, I have 3 in perfect condition, no coil noise or anything.
You hate to know how to maintain your tech.
>>55546246
>People on the internet only know the fw900.
Fucking consumer normies!
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!111
>>55546963
Keep an eye out for parts.
I mostly just miss the 4:3 screens, including LCDs.
For arcade type games (MAME, etc.) the CRTs are ideal though.
>>55546994
>All FW900s in existence are approaching their end of life.
No.
>in a year there will be none left.
No.
In fact, just a week ago some website announced they'd purchase an abandoned warehouse somewhere in southern California and inside they discovered two very old tractor trailer containers and when they cracked 'em open (rusted shut) they found over 350 brand new in the box Sony FW900 monitors and a shitload of other Sony hardware from the late 1990s (most of it now useless).
Should be seeing a small flood of brand new FW900's on eBay here quite soon indeed. I already know the seller profile (hardware reseller that's been on eBay since 1999 and has like 2 million items sold with 99.9% good feedback.
Not sure what the pricing for the auctions will be but I figure at least $200 a pop + shipping. I've already got one with my name on it, just have to go pick it up this weekend.
HATERS GONNA HATE
>>55546246
Crt isn't a thing but a fucking meme
And this is coming from someone who used them for years
>>55547552
>Not sure what the pricing for the auctions will be but I figure at least $200 a pop
yea fucking right
>>55547552
LINK
INFO OF ANY SORT
ANON
>>55547552
No way man, if somebody had access to that shit they would price gouge and sell them one at a time, zero competition, learn to basic economics
>>55547734
>>55547681
>>55547636
I said AT LEAST $200 a pop since that's what I paid for the one I reserved, brand new, never opened, factory sealed since shipped from the factory.
And that's the AUCTION price, not Buy It Now - it will START at $200 and you can damned well bet the pricing will certainly go up fast as they are quite amazing displays, this will be my second one (current one was used of course, purchased in an estate sale a few years ago for $50). A brand new one for $200, it's worth the cost of traveling to San Diego this weekend to pick it up.
>>55547780
I SAID LINK YOU COCKSUCKER
ANY KIND OF INFO WOULD HELP
>>55547796
Why, so you can try to get in on the action? Yeah right.
>>55547780
You might as well say at least $1 then. You're an enormous faggot and a liar.
>>55547868
I know about it because I've done business with the seller and got a text about it and the offer to get one early because I'm a good customer, the auction is expected to start on Saturday so, keep checking eBay for "sony fw900" over the weekend and you'll find 'em.
Oh, and fuck you, jelly bastard.
>>55546977
what monitor do you have exactly?
Kek, I actually have a few FW900's in sealed boxes too, got them when a friend bought a property that used to be a computer shop, only using one myself, I'll wait for them to become even more expensive before I'll part with them.
>>55548272
It's a gamble, we have no idea how good OLED technology may end up being.
>>55548202
I got the PG278Q the first month it came out.
but crts are objectively less sharp than lcds
>>55548303
Retrofags, dipshit, they don't give a fuck about your OLED.
>>55548337
Does ULMB on your monitor have any adverse affects? Ive heard things about input lag and dimness/color loss.
>>55548380
>Does ULMB on your monitor have any adverse affects?
There is a bit of dimness but that's actually helpful as the default brightness is quite glaring.
>>55548357
Uh I guess. There's been an FW900 on sale on ebay for like the last 3 months for $1,200. How many retrofags do you think there are that are willing to spend more than that eventually?
>>55548408
They are going easily for 600-800€ right now
>there were already 1080p widescreen crt's in 1995
>>55548460
You mean 1440p
>>55548460
>>55548488
Yeah, but good luck running that 1080p or 1440p with anything then a ten thousand dollar workstation in 95.
>>55548515
The monitor itself MSRP was $2,500, I don't see your point.
>>55546246
LCD and even OLED will never look this good at 640x480. /vr/ was right about CRTs being the king of gaming displays.
>>55546246
I dunno, I'd say my 27" 5K wide gamut monitor has them pretty well beat.
>>55548605
>>55548460
Does that surprise you? Underage much?
>>55548659
No it does not. It just shows that LCD is inferior to CRT when it comes to multi-resolution support.
>>55548605
>even OLED
Have you ever seen an OLED TV? They have infinite contrast ratio and black looks exactly the same as when the TV is off.
>>55548720
All good until the blue diode degrades making it look like shit. That's probably after you suffering horrendous burn-in.
>>55548720
Yes, OLED has infinite contrast ratio but they still look blurry as fuck with older consoles. I have an 60" OLED TV and Wii looks like dogshit on it.
>>55548788
This
>>55546279
Show me a LCD monitor that has true blacks and whites while having avoiding input lag.
Good luck
>>55548890
http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/cat-monitors/cat-4ktrimasterelmonitor/product-PVMX550/
>>55548788
do you really think the wii won't look like dogshit on a fucking 60 inch CRT?
>>55549208
>60 inch CRT
those don't even exist
>>55548788
>Wii
there's your problem. you simply don't use modern TV with older hardware.
for anything made since 2007 or something, OLED is awesome.
>>55549094
Pixel response is not input latency.
>>55548788
Yeah no fucking shit, those games were not designed to be played on 60" TV's, CRT or otherwise.
>>55548460
>>55548488
>>55548515
>16:9
Fucking CRT newfags
There was that 28" one but that was it
A Sony W900 (Not to be confused with FW900) will run 1600p@59Hz
>>55549242
Yes and your point?
>>55549269
he thinks he can tell the difference between a couple of ms of delay
>>55549251
The point I was trying to make was that OLED and LCD look bad on anything other than their designed resolution.
>>55549289
>>55548788
>>55548890
>>55548890
>>55548783
>>55548676
>>55548605
>>55548408
>>55548303
>>55548272
>>55547552
>>55547054
>>55546246
>>55546533
Look at these dumb Mexicans and indians. Fucking brown peaple.
CRTs are trash. The worst contrast ratio you can ever have.
What you dumb browns mix up is black levels vs white levls as contrast. Put ANY CRT to a ANSI spect test and it fails horribly. Complete shit.
This is why those of us who aren't underage or brown don't use CRTs. White text looks like shit.
>>55549320
>implying ANSI test matters in practical usage
When the monitor is displaying 50% white and 50% black at the same time, your eyes/brain will see the black as black even if the contrast ratio is quite low.
However, when you're watching a very dark show/movie or playing a dark game in low light, your pupils will dilate and you will be able to see any background glow easily. This is where good CRTs shine and LCDs fail miserably.
>>55549280
lcds have up to 250~ ms input lag on the worse ones, and still around 50-60 on the best ones.
it may not be much, but you can feel the difference, weather this fucks you or not is down to personal skill with the game.
>>55549320
High quality bait
>>55549320
>>55549320
Been using CRT since 90s till 2k5ish, jumping to a crappy TN LCD was a good move because it saved tons of wasted desk potential and emmited heat like a Chernobyl meltdown. Room is much cooler now.
The crt is used for my small backup pc as a temporary display, might buy a smaller sub 15inch lcd soon.
only thing crts are better than lcds at is off resolution display, they handle it far better than lcds do.
they also have the best response time with oleds only matching it.
honestly miss no ghosting, fucking hate motion blur with a passion, but due to lcd monitor i have it built into the hardware.
>>55549260
How new are you yourself? 1080p and 1440p are not only 16:9 resolutions.
Also the talk was about 95, the FW900 is early 00's
>>55549386
only older games that does quick strafing like quake or ut or older arena shooters gets affected, modern games does all the cover and fast forward moving 90% of the time will not be affected.
Its all about the games that you play with, plus with cutscenes and all those shitty camera effects, you think average player these days care about image accuracy ?
>>55549386
Dude, are you nuts? Even the cheap ones today have 1ms response time, input lag is something totally different.
>>55549379
>>55549389
>>55549394
ANSI is American National Standards Institute you fucking 3rd world shitters.
>>55549417
>resolution display
yes and no, for its own native resolution yes.
Other than that it needs calibration time to time if you want above average color quality.
Not to mention some requires adjustment here and there.
The disadvantage outweighs the advantage for normal tasks, which is browser, file explorer, or even gaming.
Usually people who works with lots of photo prefer them over LCDs but nowadays with shitty effect in place, you no longer need a accurate display as much as before.
>>55549425
Who gives a shit!?
I was on about the W900. that came out 96/97
The fact still stands that older widescreen monitors are usually in 16:10 format.
As stated, It was more or less unreal to get a workstation that worked with such resolutions back then.
If they could make displays in 96/97 that still display 1600p wonderfully today imagine what CRT technology could be like right now?
>>55549545
4k 4:3 resolutions 240hz chromatic 3d with DVGA input with convex surface screen @ 350w consumption and 105c operating temperature.
>>55549545
>display 1600p wonderfully
I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. The W900, and the FW900 as well, do not have anywhere near 2560 grille stripes. I forget the exact numbers but I think they're somewhere around 1800 stripes. They can't even display 1920x1200 without some loss let alone higher.
>>55549432
I turn almost all that shit off, also dont play many cover based shooters.
>>55549435
you are thinking response time, not input lag.
also, that response time is fucking bullshit otherwise the ghosting would not be perceivable.
>>55549468
gaming, i like to sit back, recline, i hate sitting up straight to play a game, with a crt this was easily doable. I have a tn panel as my monitor, and leaning back means any dark area in a game is now completely black, I have access to one of the best ips monitors you can get before you go into pro monitors for accuracy, and looking at it from a reclined position its still fucking off enough to make everything look black.
Now, personally, the most important thing in a monitor isn't color accuracy, its contrast. this is the single biggest thing you will notice in how the monitor displays a color, its honestly amazing how off a monitor can be color wise and you dont notice it, but contrast is one thing you will always notice more pronounced.
after that comes fps, having seen a 60 and 144 right next to each other, jesus, you would never know how bad just doing normal tasks on a 60 hrz is.
i put free sync/gsync above fps when the range is down to 20 and up to max the display can show, this is because it effects when the monitor shows a new frame, holy shit, i never knew 20~fps (we down clocked the gpu to get this) would feel so good, and this is coming from playing ar around 120fps a few minutes before.
then color accuracy, personally, well calibrated tn will match most ips that a consumer would pick up, so for me, its not to much of an issue, at least not a 'holy shit, this would be worth dropping 500~$ on' as i was considering a few months back. either my monitor, a syncmaster t240hd is just that good of a tn display, or ips are way to fucking overhyped, im not sure which anymore.
and then resolution, as the most noticeable thing, so long as you have about 100ppi you are good.
>>55549606
>Even the cheap ones today have 1ms response time, input lag is something totally different.
>you are thinking response time, not input lag.
>1ms response time
>input lag is something totally different
Are you special by any change?
>>55549640
>input lag is something totally different
Not the same anon but just a quick tech lesson.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/input_lag.htm
>For LCD screens this should not be confused with pixel response time which describes the speed at which a pixel can change from one orientation to another.
>by any change?
>change
>>55549677
Holy shit you're stupid, I'm trying to tell you that response time is non related to input lag.
>blur
>blur
>blur
get one with a strobe backlight ("lightboost")
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD5gjAs1A2s
>colors
>input lag
crt still wins here
>>55546246
Not yet.
LG will be able to beat cheaper CRTs soon with W-OLED monitors.
RGB OLED can beat it now, but won't look so hot after a year of use, so unless you're happy to buy a new $5000 monitor yearly, they don't really beat it yet.
We're getting there OP.
>>55549320
>>55546279
TFT LCD is objectively shit compared to CRT in every technical aspect bar Radiation emittance, however the consumer (myself included) decided that other factors like footprint, weight and price were more important that a pure specs only comparison.
Soon we'll be able to have both worlds.
And just in case some autismo can't read properly: I'm not implying we should move back to CRTs, that would be the stupidest idea ever.
Plasma is still really nice but has it's own drawbacks.
And pixel density is a joke
It's a nice tv turned into monitor
>>55549770
>I'm not implying we should move back to CRTs
Move back to SED
Shame it's fixed rez though
>>55548788
>60" inch TV
>Why do my old consoles look blurry
You would need an emulator to upscale that shit
>>55549583
Say what you want m8 my W900 seems to somehow display 1600p perfectly.
I can have a 6px font display fine.
>>55549575
Then its a good job novelty size cooling equipment is commonplace in ICT today.
>>55549713
>I'm trying to tell you that response time is non related to input lag.
Can you fail a bit more at basic reading comprehension?
>Not the same anon
>response time is non related to input lag.
Which is what >>55549606 said but you responded with ridicule in >>55549640 which indicates disagreement, ie. you are NOT saying they are "non related"[sic] unless you insult people when they agree with you?
>>55549818
>Move back to SED
If only.
Maybe once all the patents are bust, AUO will try for it.
If it works out you know Samsung will be on that shit so fast, but only if someone else manages to commercialize it first and there isn't any patent trouble.
Canon can't do it anymore, they're broke as fuck.
Sony can't do it anymore due to being broke as fuck and selling off the FED patents (using the expired SED patents, might leave them liable to AUO due to similarity)
LG seemingly doesn't care, even W-OLED progress is slow as they're happy selling everyone shitty 1000:1 79% sRGB IPS panels...
>>55546279
CRT's weren't outclasses in mid 2000's. I'd hesitate to say they are on par or better nowadays too.
>>55546246
No there's not
>>55548720
OLED
>Fixed Pixel Dogshit(i.e anything other than native resolution looks like dogshit)
>Blue Diode Degradation
>IR/Burn-in Problems
>Input Lag
>Sample-and-Hold Blur
>Weak Uniformity
>Problems with near-black colors not displaying correctly
OLED is just another Plasma
Reminder that we will NEVER EVER have Laser Beam Steering TV's because Microvision/Sony are a bunch of faggots who prefer to let that godtier tech rot in shitty Mobile Projectors that no-one but hipster care about
>>55547552
There is no reason to pay $200 for an obsolete hunk of junk that was sitting in a humid warehouse rusting for decades.
Yes, the FW900 is a pretty good piece of technology even today but at the prices they go for (some idiot on CL was trying to offload two for $600 each), you can easily purchase a quality IPS monitor that matches the performance of it for half the cost.
Unless you have a niche need for a CRT like playing very old games, its blind nostalgia.
>>55549993
>Fixed Pixel Dogshit(i.e anything other than native resolution looks like dogshit)
True
>Blue Diode Degradation
True
>IR/Burn-in Problems
CRTs burn in as well
>Input Lag
Only on non-native resolutions
>Sample-and-Hold Blur
Only applies to certain video formats
>Weak Uniformity
Good ones don't have that problem
>Problems with near-black colors not displaying correctly
Same as above
OLED shits on any and all forms of LCD, but CRT is still better than both due to non-fixed pixels and zero input/display lag.
>>55549845
>not posting a macro photograph
I really don't doubt you that it's good enough in practice. I just wish I could see it for myself.
It seems like the W900 has a variable grille pitch from .25mm in the center to .28mm at the edges, which makes it impossible to calculate the exact number of stripes. However, if we just assume an average of a .265mm grille pitch and a width of 484cm (based on a 22.5" viewable diagonal) we end up with about 1,826 stripes. At 2560 horizontal resolution you're exceeding the physical resolution of the CRT by about 40%, which is pretty huge.
>imperfect geometry
>low resolutions (you will never have 4k or 5k on a CRT)
>less sharpness than an LCD
>worse real world contrast due to the fact the phosphors reflect and scatter incoming light
>newest consumer CRTs are all old and have tubes that are slowly dying
>huge waste of energy
>hot
>can't do anything better than sRGB
>low brightness, easily made unusable by sunlight
It's not 2003 anymore, LCDs have improved beyond the capabilities of CRTs. The only things CRTs have going for it are the ability to change resolutions and better motion quality than most LCDs.
>>55550042
No IPS LCD can come close to dark room black level performance of a good CRT or the motion performance of a good CRT.
Some VA LCDs can come close with dark room black levels nowadays, but not motion and they have other drawbacks.
Some TN LCDs can come close with motion performance, but have terrible black levels like IPS plus the usual TN drawbacks (vertical viewing angle shift, 6 bits per channel, etc.)
>>55550128
>dark room black level performance
The apparent contrast of a modern, high quality LCD will look better than a CRT in a lit room. Most people aren't using their computers in a pitch black room with a felt monitor hood.
>>55550143
>lit room
OF course, that's why I specified dark room. I do my computing in a lit room 99% of the time, but I just wish I could enjoy a dark game or dark movie without backlight glow once in a while, and that's just not possible with an IPS or TN LCD.
>>55550159
You might know that, but most CReTards don't. Too many people on /g/ are spewing how much better CRTs are without having any clue what they're talking about.
>>55550056
>Only applies to certain video formats
No
Do you even know what Sample and Hold blur means?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_and_hold
This is the same thing as in LCD's...Lightboost fixes this to some degree with strobing but it depends on your framerate/hertzrate/stroberate
>Only on non-native resolutions
No
OLED suffers from input lag same way LCD's do
There's a ton of digital processing there
There's no zero input lag like in CRT's
>CRT's burn in as well
This was never a big problem with CRT's like it was with Plasmas and now OLED
It's not better than LCD 2bh
LCD's still do some things better like higher brightness,less input lag,no IR Problems,no blue diode issues and also so far only LCD's have Lightboost on consumer LCD Monitors
>>55546246
Sorry for noon comment, but what's CRT?
>CRTs
Yeah I remember those days back in 90s and early 00s, sitting in front of those blurry, flickering, back breaking massive, overpriced screens that always had settings screwed. It felt like facing exposed Tsernobyl core too. I swear I got tan front side after playing Baldur's Gate II for 2 weeks. The images burned to the screen and you had to switch those porn windows quickly or face pissed off dad.
I think I got glaucoma because of those devil's boxes and two herniated discs.
>>55550171
Yeah I know what you mean.
Even the best anti-glare CRTs have enough reflectivity to make their black level effectively worse than any modern LCD in a lit room. I don't recall finding it bothersome back when I had a CRT, but maybe it would now if I actually went back to CRT (if only I could get a hold of a good one). Ideally, I'd use a good CRT only for gaming and my LCD for everything else, but even if I could find a good CRT I don't have space for multiple setups and it just wouldn't be practical.
>>55550171
CRT is better at the important stuff like
>Color accuracy
>No sample-and-hold blur
>Deep black levels
>No input lag
>Very good contrast
>Multi-resolutions capability
>etc.
Nobody is claiming CRT's are the best for office or work(unless you're a photo editor than a professional-tier CRT Monitor is still the best choice by far)
>>55550244
>Color accuracy
This one is just a false meme. High end LCDs have been calibrate-able to virtually perfect accuracy for over a decade.
Everything else is true as long as you keep in mind that the black level advantage is only in a dark room.
>>55546279
how does it feel to be mentally retarded?
>>55550266
There are basically three reasons left to use a CRT:
Superior motion performance for gaming
Multiple resolution performance (particularly low resolutions for legacy content which is mostly limited to gaming)
Deep black level for dark room viewing of dark content
Gaming and possibly dark shows/movies. That's it.
>>55550244
>Color accuracy
It's only the first item and you're completely wrong. CRTs require constant recalibration and their uniformity sucks shit compared to modern LCDs.
>No sample-and-hold blur
What do you think "motion quality" refers to?
>Deep black levels
Only under extremely controlled conditions that you will never have in the real world. You need to have a pitch black room for that to be true, and likely you'll need to use a monitor hood if you want "true" blacks. If you have any ambient lighting it WILL reflect off the front of the phosphors and ruin your deep blacks. Even a little bit of ambient light will do this. LCDs polarize light in both directions.
>No input lag
If professional gamers can play on their XXXtreme ROG 144hz LCDs without issues then you can too. The kinds of timescales you're talking about with input lag are imperceivable at best, and barely perceivable at worst. Again, it's not 2003 anymore.
>Very good contrast
Again, only under controlled conditions. In real world usage the contrast is shit thanks to the low luminance compared to LCDs and the fact that the phosphors reflect light off the front.
>unless you're a photo editor than a professional-tier CRT Monitor is still the best choice by far
Very VERY few CRTs can do Adobe RGB. Even if you nab one that could, it's going to be old and the phosphors will have degraded, so you probably won't even get a gamut comparable to a modern Adobe RGB screen. CRTs are shit for photography compared to modern, high quality LCDs.
I wish this CRT meme stayed in 2005 where it belongs.
>>55549868
And I said >>55549435 that input lag is something totally different then response time, yet >>55549606 tells me "you are thinking response time, not input lag" what is what I just said.
God, you people are basic.
>>55550358
>If professional gamers can play on their XXXtreme ROG 144hz LCDs without issues then you can too.
They play on whatever crap their sponsors tell them to play on. The less input lag and motion blur the better.
>>55550358
on the input lag note, you can spend nearly a grand on a monitor and still have 100ms of input lag, whereas any crt kicks its ass at that.
have a fun time figuring out what monitors input lag is, as even in the best benchmarks this shit is almost never tested (its always fucking bad)
and no, most pro gamers are either kids who never had a crt, or put up with it because the venue isn't going to ship a crt/they are paid to use x monitor.
>unless you're a photo editor than a professional-tier CRT Monitor is still the best choice by far
yes, unless you are a pro and need the colors, color largely does not matter. contrast is a far bigger thing, and even then, the best lcds deal in is 1:5000 static. crts get worse over time, but many start out in the 1:2000-15000 range
That said, my old crt is downstairs, its contrast ratio is fairly fucked after 6 years of near constant use... but its still my oh shit i need a backup monitor as every other monitor in the house can not do text so save its fucking life.
>>55550491
Yes, they do play on sponsored hardware, and that hardware happens to be LCDs, which they play fine on.
Keep in mind your reaction time is in the hundreds of milliseconds range. Moden LCDs have input lag below that.
>>55550244
>>55550491
>No input lag
Look at the picture on the left. That is MC, and he has won a total of $492,491 playing Starcraft II. Now look at the monitor sitting in front of him. It's an LCD. His entire livelihood depends on him being able to do things a split second before his competition. And yet, none of the professional players use CRTs. It's not a sponsorship thing, since they don't use them at home on their personal time either. Even if it was a sponsorship thing, you'd still see non-sponsored players lugging CRTs to events where they use their own equipment. It doesn't happen.
You are not a world championship player. You aren't even close. You're not encountering input lag on an LCD that is perceptible to you.
>>55550595
>Starcraft II
>reaction time
Kek
Also, CRT's are awesome for games, but it's personal preference in the end.
>>55550620
The same thing applies to CS:GO or whatever faggy game you prefer.
>>55550547
oh god, i'm loling hard... yea, some are that low, while others are in the 500 range, think is most lcds are either used for causal web browsing, some videos and what not, not gameing, these things are doable on those monitors, most people won't even notice the difference, but holy shit when that lag is bad... one lcd we have that is about 4 years old had about 1 second of lag between when you start moving the mouse and it moves, that was only ever used as a secondary monitor for video, so an offset on the audio and it served its purpose, but it was non functional for anything else.
>>55550595
what are sponsorship deals for 200
>>55550628
Was that a TV or a monitor? I've never seen a computer monitor with an entire second of lag.
>>55550595
There is no point for the pros to play on a CRT when the tourneys supply their own monitors. Rapha is the best dueller in Quake and he plays on a "average" monitor at home because the monitors they're supplied with at tourneys are average
By the way, the best online Quake dueller is Evil who uses a CRT.
>>55550628
>one lcd we have that is about 4 years old had about 1 second of lag between when you start moving the mouse and it moves
Yeah and some CRTs can only show green or orange text on a black background. Just because a shitty monitor exists, and you happen to own one because you're ultrapoorfag, doesn't make that the standard for the technology. If you need a well performing LCD you can buy one. Hell, you could get one of those bootleg Korean ones with no OSD that go direct to DVI if input lag matters so much to you.
>>55550634
You should probably learn to read because that was addressed in the post.
>>55550496
100ms is below your reaction time. Even Navy fighter pilots have reaction times well above 100 at best.
>The distribution of simple reaction times for 62 pilots is shown in Figure 2. Simple reaction times ranged from 143 to 461 msec, with a mean of 223 msec (SD = 0.055).
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a178485.pdf
If you are photo editing you will benefit from the wider gamut, unless by "photo editing" you mean pasting anime vectors on a flat background.
And yet again, CRTs have worse apparent contrast thanks to the fact light reflects off the front of the phosphors, making black actually appear slightly brown/grey.
>>55550628
>while others are in the 500 range
500? As in milliseconds? Are you kidding? You realize 1000ms = 1 second, right?
>>55550652
>One guy uses a CRT
>He's a Quake player
There's always going to be someone that still fell for the meme. 99.99% of professional players do not.
>>55550627
Nah, RTS take's no where near as much reaction as FPS.
>>55550688
see >>55550670
100ms of input lag means nothing when your reaction time is going to be well above that.
>>55550672
>99.99% of professional players do not.
For the reason I explained why, they're going to train on whatever they're going to play on the tourneys. Why would you go through the hassle of tracking down a good working CRT when you're going to be given a LCD in the tourneys anyways?
Also Evil is not just "a Quake player", he's THE BEST online Dueller. He rapes face and he uses a CRT.
>>55550688
And? None of them use CRTs.
If you think it's a big deal, go challenge a decent FPS player. Let them use an LCD and you use a CRT. All of a sudden you've got input lag on your CRT, because you're just making shit up.
>>55550714
>Why would you go through the hassle of tracking down a good working CRT when you're going to be given a LCD in the tourneys anyways?
Not everyone is a tourney player. Even high ranked people that are unsponsored and do not attend tournaments do not use them. Nobody uses CRTs except a small handful of people, usually from places like South Africa, and only because they have been using them for years (because they are poor) and are used to them.
>>55550711
it still means that there are 5-10 frames at best behind what you do and what you see, this is noticeable, but in most practical situations, its meaningless. however, when you play a game that has frame perfect inputs, the lag will fuck you over, more modern games take this into account when they build them so the frame perfect inputs are now frame perfectish inputs.
and yea, no fucking kidding, some lcds are really that god damn bad at lag, its part of the reason i didn't get a lcd till around 2010, every time i tested one, i moved the mouse but the cursor would move, every goddamn monitor, then the ghosting... i bit the bullet due to massive headaches and nosebleeds and i just couldn't deal with it anymore. it may be coincidence, but the nosebleeds and headaches largely stopped. still fucking hate the ghosting, but what can i do? not like there is any monitor that will fix that, and no, i dont want a strobe monitor just as a risk that i waste that much money on something i cant use due to headaches (I think the flicker on the crt is what gave me them)
>>55550640
Ill concede that the monitor was likely broken, gave it to my brother a while back when his monitor died, he uses it as a video monitor now too.
>>55550657
yea, when you are sponsored to use something, or the tournament is largely paid for by sponsors, you dont get to tell them fuck off give me my crt, doesn't matter that he won or not, as his opponent likely used the same monitor, even playing field, but i would be shocked if they used them by choice and not because they are paid to use them.
>>55548605
*looks at image on my LCD monitor* wow it's amazingly crisp! beautiful!
>>55550876
Good. Now run a game at 640x480 and post a picture of your monitor.
>>55550883
I'm on a retina display Macbook so that's almost cheating.
>>55546246
You could install a van de graaff generator behind an lcd and maybe some squeeling transformers in some tuned circuits a around 12 khz or so and maybe a little hot plate set on low. Maybe an opaque textured screen in front. Just some thoughts to get you started.
>>55550901
Yes. It'll look horribly blurry on something like that, so it is cheating.
>>55549233
oh, they fucking do.
>>55549235
its simple, use a fucking upscaler.
>>55549320
many PS2 games had unreadable text. you had to either guess or ignore it.
CRT was garbage, made a loud fucking humming noise and was a complete pain to repair. OLED is far better than CRT ever was.
>hurr durr myy memories as a child
fuck your gay nostalgia
>>55550711
>>55550738
Hm, did I say ANYTHING about LCD's or input lag?
I just said FPS need better reaction then RTS games, I also said >>55550620 that it's personal preference in the end.
Holy shit you faggots get mad just for the sake of it, fucking kek.
>>55548605
It's like build in anti aliasing, great for older games.
>>55550923
>oh, they fucking do.
They don't, because they'd implode under air pressure from outside.
>its simple, use a fucking upscaler.
And introduce even more lag.
>loud fucking humming noise
Only for a few seconds after it's turned on.
>complete pain to repair
And how are OLED monitors easier to repair?
>>55550908
Older games look better on TVs because of blur caused from scanlines and stupidly low resolutions. They look just as shit on a "good" CRT as they do on an LCD. This is usually somewhat fixable with a scanline filter.
>>55550930
Oh, so you just posted something irrelevant in a way that could be misinterpreted. Good on you anon, you sure showed us!
>>55550947
The image I posted is a Trinitron CRT, which are generally considered to be high end and it displays 480 lines without blurring.
>>55550968
Nah, I told my personal opinion in >>55550620
>CRT's are awesome for games, but it's personal preference in the end.
You're probably too busy shitposting to notice anything relevant.
I've been doing some CRT/LCD research lately (yes i play Smash but don't currently have a CRT hence the research)
>Not all CRT are the same. Some have LCD levels of lag. Closer to 2000 models are likely to be the worst
>Measuring input lag (which is 100% different to GTG/response time AND what really matters) is really hard. The best test procedure is to measure at 3 points; top middle and bottom and then average them. Most people post a single number that probably corresponds to the top because that is fastest.
>The Benq RL2455HM is one of the top monitors in terms of input lag (https://youtu.be/UTNUIQtreXQ) that was testes in the way i mentioned above
>The Asus VG248QE is also top tier, but the testing is a little bit unclear as the most reputable site is in German and doesn't have a video of in real-time testing (http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2013/test-asus-vg248qe-teil7.html#Bildaufbauzeit)
Those two monitors have roughly 4ms more lag than the best CRT's, so realistically they're pretty much ok to replace CRT's apparent from difficulty converting analogue signals to digital, quality-wise
>>55550991
Yeah, I have one. Like I said, games look like shit on them. They suffer from the same problems as LCDs in that regard.
>>55547827
not him but LINK TO THE INFO ABOUT FINDING THE TRAILER
>m-muh resolution
>muh colors
kek at the qualityfags in this thread. dont you understand that clarity of motion and response time will always be more important than "muh aesthetics"
About to pick up a Syncmaster 794MG. Good choice, /g/? I want dat low res performance and dank overclocking potential.
>>55552221
Mediocre, only 24 inch multisync NEC or LaCie and of course the ever so popular FW900 are the ones worth using. At least as far as VGA monitors go.
>>55552455
Does it at least have nice colours and contrast? I just wanted an okay monitor to play Atomic Bomberman on and to overclock.
>>55552572
It's an OK monitor, I remember our school ahd those like 10 years ago.
>>55550116
>newest consumer CRTs are all old and have tubes that are slowly dying
nigger I have multiple CRTs from the early-mid 80s that still work just fine
CRTs have pretty damn long lifespans
>>55552652
Thanks, I'm off to pick it up now and will report if I get it up and running!
>>55547552
Source? If it's true, thanks for the tip.
>>55552725
Picked it up. Contrast sucks balls but colours are okay. Currently playing PS2 on it using PCSX2.
>>55554140
Turn the brightness setting all the way down and contrast all the way up.
>>55552711
CRT monitor are rated for about 10 years of average use. If you've never seen one fail its because you have extremely limited exposure to them. Shove your memes up your ass.
I have a shitty 120hz LCD monitor here.
If I use black frame insertion (let's say for example, in retroarch) it gets quite darker, but it's almost as if I were using my CRT TV. I can barely notice the difference.
>>55546246
Dell UP3017Q
