CRT

>CRT
+great color reproduction
+great blacks
+no motion blur
+very little ghosting, fast response
+easily overclockable
+can display any supported resolution easily
+low input lag for gaming
-burn in
-takes some time to "warm up"
-heavy
-hot and high power consumption
-geometry issues

>LCD
+relatively lightweight
+lower power consumption
+sharp text
-motion blur
-bad ghosting outside of TN
-backlight bleed
-poor colors outside of IPS which is a premium
-only one resolution
-until recently very high refresh rates were impossible, almost all LCD's are 60Hz
-poor input lag
-terrible blacks
-backlight bleeding
-dead pixels

I don't understand why LCD's replaced CRT's. Why couldn't we just keep investing money into CRT's and make them better, instead of abandoning them? LCD monitors and TV's have been around for more than a decade and they still suck outside of ludicrously expensive professional monitors. OLED has a lot of benefits but they're very expensive and have color degradation.

because crts hurt muh eyes

Jesus christ you people are so fucking lacking in any self awareness.

Huh I wonder why something that takes up a fuck ton of space, soaks up tons of electricity, and often only came in 4:3(muh Sony ultra expensive and rare 1080 widescreen CRT) was killed as soon as possible

Believe it or not, most people quite frankly don't give a shit. Most people aren't using their monitor for detailed schematics, photo editing, or film production. Most people use it for facebook, video games, word processors and general web browsing. which, does not need 100% color accuracy, or really high refresh rates.

If you want a really nice flat panel display, you're going to have to pay for it. Just like if you wanted a really nice CRT display, you had to pay a premium for it, hence why there was only maybe 3 CRT models that did half the shit you imagine they do.

Learn 2 economics. Most people dont want a giant ass cube in their living room, or taking up 90% of their workspace you fucking retard. I think CRT's are cool too. I think vinyls are neat as well. but not being able to understand why they arent around anymore is just inane. Fuck its like everyone here is 17 years old and just trying to be trendy on fucking Sup Forums of all places. end your life holy shit

Sent from my iPad

>lacking self awareness
Sounds like most of Sup Forums lmao

>+great color reproduction
Compared to TN panels maybe. In terms of color LCD is far superior to CRT these days. OLED is even beyond that.

>+great blacks
Only in ideal conditions. In a well lit room you'll have light scatter and reflect on the front of the phosphors.

>+easily overclockable
Modern LCDs can do refresh rates are high resolutions. The best CRTs could maybe manage 1280x960 at 96-100hz, maybe 120hz for the absolute best.

>-motion blur
>-bad ghosting outside of TN
Strobed backlights fix this.

>-poor colors outside of IPS which is a premium
IPS is cheap. It's even in chromebooks these days. The best of the best are expensive, but even those aren't THAT expensive.

>-poor input lag
Depends on the display.

>-terrible blacks
Black levels are far from terrible in 2017. In decently lit to bright conditions LCDs actually outdo CRTs thanks to the fact that LCDs polarize incoming light as well as outgoing, whereas CRTs reflect and scatter it.

LCDs replaced CRTs because they're far cheaper to produce, can be made into a far greater variety of sizes, and are incredibly cheap to ship compared to CRTs. The capabilities of modern LCDs is beyond what CRTs would have ever achieved in the real world. Rec2020 color spaces, HDR, High PPI are just three huge quality improvements that would have all been difficult on CRTs.

>The best of the best
Consumer displays obviously. Professional displays are always going to be expensive while relevant.

>Great blacks
no such thing as a good black

...

...

>Modern LCDs can do refresh rates are high resolutions. The best CRTs could maybe manage 1280x960 at 96-100hz, maybe 120hz for the absolute best.
That's only because they stopped being produced though. They had Interpolation/Black Frame Insertion TV's pretty soon, as even TV manufacturers had to admit LCD's look like blurry garbage for anything fast paced. But true 120Hz LCD monitors didn't come out until 2009 for 3D, and only later did they become cheaper and more common. You had to either gamble on a cheap overclockable Korean panel to get higher refresh rates, or buy an expensive 3D Lightboost monitor. Even now it's difficult to find something that's both a high refresh rate and a quality panel at the same time.

It's even more difficult to find a CRT with a high quality picture. Most are garbage shadow mask displays which are on their last leg. The fast IPS panels are going to get cheaper and more numerous over time. CRTs are just going to get rarer and rarer.

Two words:

Shipping weight

People who prefer crts are like those audiophiles that insist record players have a warmer sound. Garbage technology outclassed in almost every way. Ugly heavy monstrosity

my dick has warmer sound in your mom

Literally every LCD without backlight strobing looks like blurry trash. Again, even LCD manufacturers knew this was an issue, as they quickly came up with interpolation and BFR to solve the issue the best they could. Remember when we use to be able to read scrolling text easily? Not unless you have a CRT, plasma or projector. At 144Hz text is more readable but it's no where near a CRT.

>CRT
=Dead.

>LCD
+REC.2020
+8K Resolutions
+High refresh rates
+HDR
+More than one input
+A future

>8K Resolution with high refresh rate
>oh shit so crystal clear
>move 1 inch
>BLUR EVERYWHERE

>Modern LCDs can do refresh rates are high resolutions. The best CRTs could maybe manage 1280x960 at 96-100hz, maybe 120hz for the absolute best.
this is bullshit and you know it
typically bigger sized CRTs could do bigger resolutions and refresh rates
CRTs starting from 20" are the only good ones
my 21" CRT I bought for $30 some years ago can do 1600x1200@95hz and I use 1088x680@160hz to play FPS games
no burn in
great colors and brightness
and for anything else besides gaming I use my 4k IPS LCD
the perfect combo
just because you only used 15" CRTs with recommended resolution of 1024x768@75hz doesn't mean the tech itself is not good

>LCD strobing
enjoy your crosstalk

>this is bullshit and you know it
You can literally go buy 1920x1080 120hz+ monitors right now.

>typically bigger sized CRTs could do bigger resolutions and refresh rates
CRTs were limited by the horizontal scan rate and RAMDAC. The highest RAMDAC output you'll see on consumer hardware was 400MHz. The best horizontal scan rate you could wish for, even on professional CRTs, was 144kHz. CRTs of that caliber couldn't physically do 1920x1080@120hz, they can't scan the beam fast enough in the vertical direction.
Even if you had a magical CRT that didn't have this problem, the RAMDAC issue is still going to bottle neck your CRT's resolution and refresh rate. If I remember right you'd be lucky to get somewhere around 75-80hz at 1080p on a CRT. After that point any video card you'd want to use would simply not be able to transmit that much data. It's also a big issue considering most modern video cards don't even have a RAMDAC.

>CRTs starting from 20" are the only good ones
No, the good ones were aperture grill displays such as Sony Trinitrons. They came in all sizes.

>my 21" CRT I bought for $30 some years ago can do 1600x1200@95hz and I use 1088x680@160hz to play FPS games
no burn in
Post your timing values then.

>great colors and brightness
CRTs have objectively low brightness compared to modern displays. They're literally unusable in sunlight even.

>the perfect combo
Or just get another quality LCD that has a strobed backlight.

>just because you only used 15" CRTs with recommended resolution of 1024x768@75hz doesn't mean the tech itself is not good
That's a nice assumption, but it's wrong.

LCD
- lightguns doesn't work

any long range pointing device works like fucking shit on them.

also NES zapper is not a real lightgun.

>It's also a big issue considering most modern video cards don't even have a RAMDAC
the last generation to have analog output was the nvidia gtx900 series
I have a gtx980 and its around gtx1060 level perforance and I can get 160+fps at 680p easily in any game

>my 21" CRT I bought for $30 some years ago can do 1600x1200@95hz and I use 1088x680@160hz to play FPS games
>no burn in
>Post your timing values then.
see pic
sorry for not english language

this

that's racist.

I bought a used gtx 980 ti over a gtx 1070 or 1080 just so I can play games on my SyncMaster 1200 NF. I also own a 144hz lcd panel so it's not like i'm a poor fag

Maybe higher-end optical mice are nice and actually work, but I've gone through a half dozen shitty red laser mice and have since moved to an old Dell Ball mouse that is less error-prone, works on virtually any surface, never catches, and has survived not only however long it was used for its first run but 4 years of use now. And while the rollers do need to be cleaned every 6 months or so it's better than getting tiny hairs and fibers caught in its sensor every other day leading to it spazzing out until you clean it.

>Why couldn't we just keep investing money into CRT's
You can't put a CRT on a laptop or phone.

>video games
>does not need really high refresh rates

>I don't understand how manufacturing cost, weight, and form factor could play a role in display technology

Sounds like you're retarded then.

Get an OLED or QLED display and you get the best of both technologies.

stop hyping it fags
quality shit's like 500 here

Are you sponsored and take part in competitions?

I bet you can't even wipe your ass without getting shit on the back of your hand, you ditsy fuck.

>no mention of SED/FED or similar technologies
kill yourselves you fools

>SED/FED
Fixed-resolution bullshit just like LCD. The only things they have going for them is black levels and contrast which OLED also has.

CRT's they are pretty cozy

Even the most casual normie gamer ever can tell the difference between 60 and 90fps, much less 60 and 120fps. The fact that LCD monitors made 60Hz the standard is fucking garbage, and they were stuck there for the longest time due to the response times not being able to keep up with the refresh rate. Regardless of how you feel about CRT vs. LCD, the loss of higher refresh rates was a DOWNGRADE. 75-90Hz used to be recommended, now it's 60. That's an objective downgrade regardless of if you care or not.

Wash your hands.

Plasma was the replacement technology to CRT but retard normies didn't understand how to use it so the tech got BTFO. Now only OLED can match 6 year old plasma tech.

They're great for Quake.

>I don't understand why LCD's replaced CRT's.
easier to ship, cheaper to manufacture

>Why couldn't we just keep investing money into CRT's and make them better
remember CED/FED? they tried that, but some patent bullshit killed it, and that was the end of that

nice things aren't allowed

question is, why did you take the bait?

that hat is bait right?

belongs to my grandfather he gave it to me some time a go its close to 60 years old

cool. throw it out

Love the setup like always. Also, still jelly of that Mignonne.
Rude.

>literal fedora on top of his monitor

So... this is the power of animu/MAGApede technological hipsters

Lmao

I usally have it way up on the shelves out of sight i think I knocked it down and instead of putting it back up i just sat it on the monitor and nah not a hipster my good pal

thanks

>wears fedoras while watching animu in his CRT monitor
>not a hipster turboautist

> Wears
Who the fuck said I wear it?

If you can't see it physically scanning and the images appear to be fluidly blending together to give they illusion of motion than its plenty fest enough for you. Take it easy.

yeah but "most people" such so who cares about them

LCDs are shit for gaming and always will be. They will never be as good as CRTs period.

what did he mean by this

He isn't wrong. What killed CRTs is how much they weigh. It's just not practical and it costs an arm and a leg to ship. Also you typically want to improve on power consumption over time not increase it. If monitors kept getting wider, bigger, whatever, CRTs would not only weigh more but also use more power.

Is that lube behind dell monitor?

which dell monitor they're both dell and no its 91% Isopropyl rubbing alcohol

Because HP Dreamcolour LED Monitors exist.

...

Me

Neat. I guess I remembered wrong.

72Hz is the sweet spot for smooth motion actually, it's why 3d monitors changed from 120Hz to 144Hz. (72Hz for each eye) 60fps has never been good enough.

So you like to play on your CRT better?

I think people have rose-tinted glasses with respect to CRTs, they really weren't that great. I'd take a good LCD for gaming over my old Trinitron any day. Yes it had some advantages but come on, it's huge, uses tonnes of power, the picture is never a perfect rectangle, contrast isn't as good as most people like to claim (try switching from a fully black to half-white image and see the black areas increase in brightness significantly due to light bleed).

Having said that, I can't wait for OLEDs to get good at motion so I can replace my plasma.

crt: always looks like shit
>-motion blur
>-bad ghosting outside of TN
>-backlight bleeding (2 times lol)
not really. most of these things are already fixed in most expensive displays
>-poor colors outside of IPS which is a premium
it's not a premium, youre just a poorfag who never tried a good one. they're the best by far for now, maybe only oled or plasma couldve been better
>-poor input lag
oh no 4 ms lag this renders the os and typing unusable
back in the teletype days lag was like 0.1s per character. and they wrote many good programs still used today
>-terrible blacks
actually, just pretty good
>-dead pixels
get a new one
>-until recently very high refresh rates were impossible, almost all LCD's are 60Hz
more than 60 would be pretty useless. and they do exist.
>-only one resolution
well, here's the thing. on lcd, it's sharp enough to actually matter. there is a pixel, and it gets light up. on crt, its always gonna be blurry.

>I think people have rose-tinted glasses with respect to CRTs
Do you actually think people here don't have several CRTs they still use on daily basics here?

Never forget FEDs and SEDs

You can blame the patent system for their failure.

>(((intellectual property)))
>2017

But without the slow death of the display that OLED has

and by sweet spot you mean absolute minimum right?

I'm sure they do, doesn't mean they are objectively better for anything. Some people here use iPhones mate.

I like to play twitch shooters on it or watch old 4:3 anime on it. The colors are way better than my other screens. I can also go all the way down to 800x600 and play at 180hz I score around 146 on humanbenchmark consistently compared to 177+ on my 144hz lcd. All the resolutions scale perfectly on CRT btw so they don't look bad.

>MOJ MIKRO

filthy serb detected

Nick, is that you?

72Hz is the lowest multiple of 24Hz that doesn't strobe to an annoying level
that's why film projectors strobe at 72Hz, displaying each frame 3 times