Which Really is Beter ?

[D_block]

I remember when i was doing A+ sum yrs a back, this was one of the questions !!

what i want to know is , if the standard is the same on a basic LCD an CRT . Is the CRT stil giving betetr Video for like picture editing etc..

[neo]

LCD 1+

[puntoMX]

Very few use CRTs these days, and LCD screens have become so much better the last years that I would not see why you would like to go with a CRT, unless you want to see more colors then the LCD could produce (Gradients indeed look better on CRT).

[CoffeeFiend]

Very few use CRTs these days, and LCD screens have become so much better the last years that I would not see why you would like to go with a CRT, unless you want to see more colors then the LCD could produce (Gradients indeed look better on CRT).

I agree here. A couple years (or more) ago, CRTs were still a LOT better than LCDs picture quality-wise. Better blacks, FAR better angles of view, better contrast, none of the 6 bit dithering nonsense, often higher maximum resolution -- well, that and not being stuck at a fixed resolution, none of the response time artifacts, no dead pixels (bad warranty against them too), better gamut/color reproduction, often brighter, etc. Back then, LCDs were a lot more expensive too. The only nice thing they had, were the lack of flicker that cheap CRTs have (below certain refresh frequencies), and they were physically smaller/lighter.

Nowadays, things have changed a LOT. There are some very nice panels being used in some screens that look just as good as CRT (IMO), but you very much have to check out what you're buying. Most people shop using only 3 metrics: size, price, and response time (they just pick the biggest they can afford, with the lowest response time possible), and as an afterthought contrast.

That might be good for gamers who notice motion artifacts in high action stuff perhaps, but in general I think it's a mistake:

-big and cheap = garbage TN panel

-big, cheap and fast response times = garbage severely-overdriven TN panel

Nevermind the response times are more often than not marketing lies (severely overdriven, calculated gray-to-gray), and the contrast is equally made up (dynamic BS), and the viewing angles are grossly over-stated.

TN panels are awful IMO. I can tell just about instantly when I see one... You move your head an inch, and part of the screen becomes darker/brighter, contrast is mostly lost, and colors are often way off. The cheap ones are also the ones most likely to be a 6 bit panel (with dithering), and they tend to have more noise too.

However, if you look around, you can find some monitors made from nicer panels -- MVA, PVA, and IPS panels. Those look a whole lot nicer, but they are more expensive (you TOTALLY get what you pay for here!). Here, you get good color reproduction, good blacks, good contrast, and GREAT angles of view compared to TN panels. Their response times are slower, but most people won't notice.

There's a bunch of other little things you might want to look for, like a decent set of inputs (mine has Composite, S-Video, Component, VGA, DVI and HDMI). 1:1 pixel mapping is nice to have too. Some high-end models are starting to have features like black frame insertion, but none of that fancy stuff is really a must-have...

One other thing to look for, is a seller with a zero dead pixel warranty. It usually costs extra, but it beats being stuck with a nice expensive LCD with dead pixel(s)!

I personally don't really care who makes it (viewsonic is a nice brand seeminly, but they make a lot of LCDs from crap TN panels -- it's ALL about the panel used!)

If you can afford them, the BenQ FP241W (it's about $500) or the Dell Ultrasharp series (although I heard they were sometimes using different panels in them) are VERY VERY nice.

[Octopuss]

Thing is, CRTs are not sold anymore

Or some stores still offer some leftovers... But I strongly believe they are not manufactured anymore.

Nice post btw, crahak. I never really managed to understand the whole LCD thing; was (and still is!) majorly lost in the types of the screens and so on. Would you give me some educated links where I can enlighten myself, or even write very brief paragraph so lusers like me can catch some basics?

[puntoMX]

I use ACER screens and as far as I know they are all TN panels but:

- do have a good contrast ratio (although they state they don´t have)

- good filters, I had the FP93GW but moved to the ACER x173 (Yes, 6 bit too) and they show WAY less noise although the power cable goes side by side with the signal cable.

I have a ACER P223W - 22'' and I must say for a TN panel it can´t get much better.

[CoffeeFiend]

Thing is, CRTs are not sold anymore

Or some stores still offer some leftovers... But I strongly believe they are not manufactured anymore.

Indeed. And the vast majority of them had a 4:3 aspect ratio (aka full screen), while most LCDs now are widescreen (usually 16:10 or such).

Nice post btw, crahak. I never really managed to understand the whole LCD thing; was (and still is!) majorly lost in the types of the screens and so on. Would you give me some educated links where I can enlighten myself, or even write very brief paragraph so lusers like me can catch some basics?

Thanks! There are TONS of places on the web for LCD tech...

Wikipedia has an OK article here but I think this pureoverclock one is better.

tftcentral is a nice place. There are some GREAT reviews out there, some of them even take photos at different angles and such.

If you really wanna see what some monitors look at different angles look, try this link, and pick "viewing angles" in step 3... You'll see instantly (there are other sites with bigger pics in their reviews where it's even more apparent) Personally, I can't stand having part of my monitor too dark to see well, the center looking just OK, and the other side being washed out. I just keep moving my head trying to find the perfect spot to look from, but there never seems to be one. You're just stuck moving your head around a lot to see the different parts of the LCD optimally. I bought a LCD based on a MVA panel myself, and the viewing angle is about the same as the CRT it replaced, we can easily be like 3 or 4 ppl looking at it at the same time, standing up or sitting, from any angle, and it just looks great.

puntoMX: it's still a TN I guess (again, pick "viewing angles" in step 3) Granted, mine was more expensive, but it's also 24" (and P-MVA: better angles, etc....), is WUXGA (1920x1200), has more inputs, swivels, has 1:1 pixel mapping, etc. I think that's worth the extra 200$ or whatever.

Edited June 15, 2008 by crahak

[Octopuss]

Thanks for data. Processing now

Me myself, I got no year and half old Samsung Syncmaster 215TW. Bish cost me $950 back then, but I don't regret it. It's just awesome (un/der/educated judging, lol). Buut after getting my filthy hands on some HD movies lately, I started thinking about 24". **** technology:D

[CoffeeFiend]

Buut after getting my filthy hands on some HD movies lately, I started thinking about 24". **** technology:D

That's half the reason I bought this one. 1080p Blu-Ray/H.264 contents looks AMAZING on it --- better than most HDTVs I've seen. We havd no "normal" HDTV yet, but now I'm thinking for the price of even a cheap 50"+ 1080p LCD HDTV ($2500 and up), I can buy 2 more of them 24" P-MVA LCDs, and still have 1500$ left for PC upgrades (couple more core 2's, couple motherboards, a few more TBs of storage and what not). This way we can each watch our own movies at the same time (or whatever you wanna do, play games, surf the web...) instead of fighting for the remote of a single TV.

Besides, watching on a 24" LCD from like 1 ft away, the pic is probably bigger (field of view) than the 50" from 10ft back...

[puntoMX]

puntoMX: it's still a TN I guess (again, pick "viewing angles" in step 3) Granted, mine was more expensive, but it's also 24" (and P-MVA: better angles, etc....), is WUXGA (1920x1200), has more inputs, swivels, has 1:1 pixel mapping, etc. I think that's worth the extra 200$ or whatever.

I have a ACER P223W - 22'' and I must say for a TN panel it can´t get much better.

Well, I know it´s a TN panel, but why would I lay under my monitor to look from that angle . By the way, I got mine for 237USD (plus tax) and I don´t need HDMI or so.

Check this out... Test some screens out in real life before you buy them .

[CoffeeFiend]

Well, I know it´s a TN panel, but why would I lay under my monitor to look from that angle . By the way, I got mine for 237USD (plus tax) and I don´t need HDMI or so.

Check this out... Test some screens out in real life before you buy them .

Well, it's just more apparent at that angle, but even 10 degrees off and it's already easily noticeable IMO. I can't stand it.

And that BenQ you linked to isn't the one I got (FP241W, the one in my previous link)... But yeah, the v2400w looks awful too, it's TN based, so no surprises there.

Yes, the FP241W is more expensive, but it's still a LOT nicer (I'd invite you to have a look at it, but it's a bit of a drive -- about 4000km I think)

[puntoMX]

Yes, the FP241W is more expensive, but it's still a LOT nicer (I'd invite you to have a look at it, but it's a bit of a drive -- about 4000km I think)

That would be cool (I can´t get the FP241W here anyway, remember this is a 3rd world I live in). Soon I have my new 650cc enduro bike .

By the way, I use my screens under a 10 degree angle CCW.

[Octopuss]

What type of panel is best though? MVA, (S-)PVA, or IPS? That's not really explained anywhere (though it also must come down to personal preferences I assume). My Samsung for example is SPVA.