Tech Talk, Support and Help

GrendelKhan{TSU} · 06-04-2006, 08:30 AM

how ppl use CRT and how many use LCD?

I have a dual monitor set up so actually use both.. .but the forums looks Soooooooooooooooooo much better on the LCD.
colors are soo different on CRT.

**LizardKing{TSU}** · 06-04-2006, 02:44 PM

CRT

I have access to a LCD monitor though.. maybe I should check the forums out on it if you say they're better looking

**StarFire{TSU}** · 06-05-2006, 06:55 AM

Well, I have heard LCD's are great. So my husband and I just got a 26 in. hd LCD tv/monitor and it looks and plays real SWEET!! Wonderful pic quality etc. But if you buy a LCD make sure that you get one with a low response time. Usually 10ms or under for response time. The lower the response time the better for gaming. I been playing on a lousy 15 in. monitor forever. Now I got my husbands old 19 in. CRT monitor!! whooo hoooo and he gets the new LCD...

GrendelKhan{TSU} · 06-05-2006, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by Star

Well, I have heard LCD's are great. So my husband and I just got a 26 in. hd LCD tv/monitor and it looks and plays real SWEET!! Wonderful pic quality etc. But if you buy a LCD make sure that you get one with a low response time. Usually 10ms or under for response time. The lower the response time the better for gaming. I been playing on a lousy 15 in. monitor forever. Now I got my husbands old 19 in. CRT monitor!! whooo hoooo and he gets the new LCD...

\26 in?

daaaaaannnnnnnnggg now THAT's some UT playing!

but you'd be hard pressed to find an LCD below 10ms from what I understand (or am I outdated -- entirely likely

). but yah... you need at 20ms below or else you'll probably get ghosting on your screen. which is icky

**Drizzt{TSU}** · 06-05-2006, 07:30 AM

I also run dual mons. Primary is 19"LCD. secondary is 21" CRT. I love the LCD, much better quality, and soo much less space used

it has a 6ms response rate, not the best but is tolerable. I see all of my 200 fps

**StarFire{TSU}** · 06-06-2006, 12:44 AM

Originally Posted by GrendelKhan{TSU}

\26 in? daaaaaannnnnnnnggg now THAT's some UT playing!

but you'd be hard pressed to find an LCD below 10ms from what I understand (or am I outdated -- entirely likely ). but yah... you need at 20ms below or else you'll probably get ghosting on your screen. which is icky

Well it is 10 ms and it is a HD monitor so the quality is super good. We have played css on it already and no ghosting or skipping.

GrendelKhan{TSU} · 06-06-2006, 07:16 AM

Originally Posted by Drizzt{TSU}

I also run dual mons. Primary is 19"LCD. secondary is 21" CRT. I love the LCD, much better quality, and soo much less space used it has a 6ms response rate, not the best but is tolerable. I see all of my 200 fps

6ms!!! ?? or do you 16??

if its 6... what brand?

**YodasUncle{TSU}** · 06-07-2006, 01:10 PM

For the type of work that I do, I require monitors that at least have a 1600x1200 resolution. So most LCD monitors that could do that res were not fast enough for fps gaming... until now. I finally picked up a Samsung 204b (20.1") LCD and so far no horrible ghosting when playing ut99 @ 1600x1200. I've gone through so many 20.1" monitors before, and all have been crap when playing fps or dvds.

The 204b is 5ms g/g, which really doesn't mean sh!t except for marketing purposes. The viewing angle is a little wack on the horiztonal due to it being a STN type panel, but for me the response time is what matters. The other part I like is that these monitors are now under $400usd... and makes then justifable budget-wise to get a few of them.

Otherwise my mainstay monitors will always be trinitron based CRTs...

GrendelKhan{TSU} · 06-07-2006, 11:19 PM

Originally Posted by YodasUncle{TSU}

For the type of work that I do, I require monitors that at least have a 1600x1200 resolution. So most LCD monitors that could do that res were not fast enough for fps gaming... until now. I finally picked up a Samsung 204b (20.1") LCD and so far no horrible ghosting when playing ut99 @ 1600x1200. I've gone through so many 20.1" monitors before, and all have been crap when playing fps or dvds.

The 204b is 5ms g/g, which really doesn't mean sh!t except for marketing purposes. The viewing angle is a little wack on the horiztonal due to it being a STN type panel, but for me the response time is what matters. The other part I like is that these monitors are now under $400usd... and makes then justifable budget-wise to get a few of them.

Otherwise my mainstay monitors will always be trinitron based CRTs...

have you checked out the new LG (another big korean company pushing out top notch LCD monitors)?

quality, pricing and ms all top notch and they beat the samsung monitors in popularity here in the local Korean market.

and you play UT at 1600X1200 on an LCD? ddannnng how times have changed.

lol

(btw, aren't the players too small -- small targets --at 1600x1200? I used to play at that, but my game shot up when I reduced it (1280x1024). took a bit to get used to as I really liked the graphics at 1600... but in the end a balance in fps size beat out the slick and pride factor of high res.

**YodasUncle{TSU}** · 06-08-2006, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by GrendelKhan{TSU}

have you checked out the new LG (another big korean company pushing out top notch LCD monitors)?

quality, pricing and ms all top notch and they beat the samsung monitors in popularity here in the local Korean market.

and you play UT at 1600X1200 on an LCD? ddannnng how times have changed. lol

(btw, aren't the players too small -- small targets --at 1600x1200? I used to play at that, but my game shot up when I reduced it (1280x1024). took a bit to get used to as I really liked the graphics at 1600... but in the end a balance in fps size beat out the slick and pride factor of high res.

The problem here in the US is that Samsung USA is able to push out monitors into the retail stores much butter and faster then LG. I tend to get my LCD monitors at retail stores (uggh) so I can return them if they have any dead/stuck pixels without having to ship the damn things back and take a hit on restock fees.

But yeah playing ut at 1600x1200 makes targets smaller, so it makes it more challenging to play. Was getting boring @ the smaller res. And since I'm so rusty nowadays, makes it even more interesting. I switch back to lower res when I actually want to not be dead last in the scores LOL.