Monitor Question

Hi

My new PC comes with a 17" LCD TFT and has been bought to replace my old PC which has a 19" CRT. The obvious benefits are less bulk, and (so I am led to believe) an improved image quality. I was also under the impression that I would sacrifice 2" on the overall screen size...however, I recently read that a 17" LCD has the same screen size as a 19" CRT. Is this true, and is the image quality of LCD a great improvement over CRT ?

Views would be most welcome....

ftwynne59

 

Most 19' CRT's have an 18' view, as for the "image quality" between the two, it depends on what CRT vs what LCD ?

 

Refresh rates come into play too, especially if you play games or watch movies......oops meant response not refresh

 

Yup, you're right about a 17" flat panel having the viewing size of a regular 19" CRT monitor. And unless you have one of the more expensive, high-end LCD monitors, your monitor refresh rate should be set to 60 Hertz...which obviously isn't the greatest when it comes to pc gaming..

 

LCD display quality is better in some areas, but in most it is not. For text editing and viewing, LCDs are great because the they do not have problems with convergence. This is because LCD displays do not have to focus a beam onto the display.

When it comes to viewing and editing photographs, CRTs are much better. One reason is contrast ratio. LCD displays are really limited here because a CRTs contrast ratio is nearly unlimited, while even the best LCDs are 500:1. A CRT will provide much wider range of shades in a color, so transitions from lite to dark will look smoother. Details in dark backgrounds will be more apparent.

Viewing and editing videos have the same issue with contrast, but also refresh rate. Refresh rate for LCDs is measured in milliseconds (1 ms = .001 seconds). Refresh rate for CRTs is measured in Hertz (Hz). If we convert the Hertz to milliseconds, then we can get a better idea as to why a CRT is better for displaying movies.

CRTs by default are configured to display at 60Hz. To convert this to ms, we need to divide 1000 by 60Hz, and we get 16.67ms. LCDs are just now catching up to the this rate. But CRTs, even cheap ones can display much faster. From 85 to 120Hz (12 to 8ms). 8ms is claimed by Viewsonic, but some sparkle affects in action scense.

Video cards measure their refresh rate in Frames Per Second (fps). 60fps is equal to 60Hz is equal 16.67ms. To convert ms to fps, just divide 1000 by ms.

Now we start to see something that a lot of gamers miss when they buy systems for gaming. They will buy a $500 video card that is capable of 150fps at 1024x768, and a 17" display that only has a 24ms refresh rate (42fps).

They also make the mistake of turning VSYNC off. VSYNC matches the fps of the video card with the refresh rate of the display. They turn it of thinking that they will get a faster frame rate. True, but the extra frames are lost, due to the slow refresh rate of the monitor. If your monitor displays 1024x758 @ 85Hz, then no matter what you do, the max frame rate that you will see is 85fps.

Personally, I have a Sony G500 21" CRT and I don't plan on replacing it soon. I edit photos, videos, and play a lot of games. I can play games at 2048x1536 resolution, and still get 60fps with all of the details set to the highest. But I usually play at 1280x1024 and 85fps, which is more than enough for me.

 

Hi CH,

That is a brilliant list of info you've posted there, which i hope will enlighten a lot of people !

I also mentioned recently in a Poll about CRT's V LCD's that seems to have dissapeared ? that CRT's have much better Contrast/Brightness/Colour quality etc than LCD's etc.They also are capable of more actual Real Resolution and apparent Depth too.

Just put a good CRT side by side with any LCD and it's no contest. The only positive thing about LCD's is their size, but i'd rather have top quality any day over deskspace !

Thanks


StevieO

 

Here are some screen size/quality recommendations:

14" 15" 17" 19" 21"
640x480 BEST GOOD TOO BIG HUGE TERRIBLE
800x600 GOOD BEST GOOD TOO BIG HUGE
1024x768 TOO SMALL GOOD BEST GOOD STILL GOOD
1280x1024 TINY TOO SMALL GOOD BEST GOOD
1600x1200 TERRIBLE TINY TOO SMALL GOOD BEST

 

Sorry about my previous post. I thought it was gonna be WYSIWIG...

 

Not much to add to all the great posts, but here's what I have found.
The way LCD's are built, they have a tendency to have a persistent image. As others have said, they also have worse contrast and color rendition then CRTs.
So if you want fast moving action like a video game, then go for a CRT. You will have instant refresh rate with no subtle ghosting. And with the better contrast, you will be able to see better what is lurking in the shadows around the corner. Playing videos will be better on a CRT also.
Although I've found videos play more than acceptably on a 25ms LCD.

That said, the picture quality of LCDs in the last few years has significantly improved along with response time and contrast.
The negative aspect of LCDs with a persistent image is also one of its greatest strengths. It means no flicker, none. You can work all day on a 60Hz LCD with no headache and practically no eye strain. At 60Hz, CRTs are really terrible with a visible flicker (to me at least). 75Hz is a little better but headaches are common after long sessions. 85Hz would be the minimum tolerable refresh rate. 100Hz and higher are good, but it does not compare to the comfort of working with an LCD. It is one of the main reasons corporations are replacing CRTs with LCDs, less work related injury.
You will also find the pixel definition to be much sharper on an LCD. CRTs tend to be slightly blurry even when adjusted. This makes a big difference when reading text.

So it really depends on what you want to do.
Playing games, videos, or editing photos for precise color accuracy: CRT
Everything else: LCD
If you mainly want to edit videos and photos, then go for one of each with a dual output video card: LCD for main work and CRT for previewing videos.

Lastly, I think 19" is now the sweet spot for LCDs although some real bargains can be had on smaller models. No matter what size you get, you will wish you ordered a bigger one. Computers come and go, but monitors seem to hang around longer.

 

Thanks for all the responses to this thread...Close Hauled and Devinco have given me some excellent background and clairification here. Just thought I'd give you the spec. of my new Video Card and Monitor and wether you have any views as to how they will behave in all the major aspects of PC activity :

Card :Radeon ATI X700 Pro
Monitor : Viewsonic VE710b with 8ms Response Time

ftwynne

 

Sorry, I said refresh earlier, I meant response times

My monitor has 8ms resoponse time and it plays games ok, but then different manufacturers measure response times in different ways. I use a IIyama Prolite E435S. Not an expensive model but I'm haapy with it. The only downfall I find is for photoediting, but then I dont do a lot of that

 

One other good thing about LCDs I forgot to mention. The flatness of the screen. LCDs are truly flat. Even the so called "flat" CRTs still have a slight curve. This creates a convex effect that causes more lights and windows to be reflected on the monitor. This increases glare and makes it harder to read. In addition, the anti-reflective coating on CRTs does not appear to be as good as on LCDs (just don't get one of those stupid LCDs with glass on the front as it kind of defeats the purpose). This makes CRTs have a shinier surface and more glare. This becomes important if your monitor is opposite a window.

A while ago I posted about the LCD monitor dead pixel/stuck on pixel problem and how to test for them at a local store where you buy it. Until manufacturers perfect the process, this will be a problem. Would I choose a CRT over an LCD with a stuck on red pixel? No, the LCD benefits outweigh the rarely seen(only on dark backgrounds) red pixel.

It sounds like you already have these items. After you have them is not the time to research what is the best for you. If you do, you will always find something better and feel bad about what you have.

But if you didn't buy them yet, now is the time to research.
Keep you options open and consider getting a computer without the monitor (buy it separately). Sometimes the computer mfg. will put in a monitor that is the best deal for them, not the best for you. It will cost more than the one they bundled the system with, but if its the monitor you want than it is worth it. And don't forget to shop locally for the monitor, besides helping your local economy, you can see the product in action and compare with your own eyes before you buy.

Here are some places to learn more:

for reviews, articles, and forums
http://www.tomshardware.com/
http://www.anandtech.com/
http://www.hardocp.com/

sometimes useful reviews (beware the shills and anti-shills)
http://www.epinions.com/

 

There is a new article in Tom's Hardware on this subject that I thought would help:

A Revolution? The First LumiLED LCD Display

A related article:

LCD Or Plasma - What's Your Pleasure? Understanding Modern Flat-Panel TV Technologies

And finally:

THG Unveils New LCD Benchmarking Method

 

Another THG article:

Reader Opinion: CRTs aren't dead yet

The author touches on the pixel size of LCDs vs. CRTs, plus some other items that I missed in my previous post.