bleh, crts are heavy, bulky, screen is not flat, glare is terrible and they damage ur eyes a lot. LCD might have lower hz, but it compensates for the bad factors of crts i have 2 19" running at 75hz and 125fps is smooth as anything. it might be another factor making it look crappy, i remember when my mouse was set to 125hz the crosshair was really sharp and appeared like the screen was jagged a lot, maybe if u increase this you could find its not ur monitor but in fact smt else?

Vanguard explained it pretty well on lem priv,in short refresh rate will matter on older games,like quake III,where u need 125 FPS,but newer games dont need 125 FPS anymore.I hope he joins this discussion cause things he said had very much sense.

LCD monitors on TN matrixes have fast reponse times,latest samsung 206BW has a bit improved TN matrix over 226BW model and picture quality is now acceptable,altho if u compare it to dell 2007WFP which has an S-IPS matrix u will notice a huge difference (in picture quality,and also dell has a 1:1 pixel aspect ratio,meaning u can use lower resolutions then native,about this specific feature I need to find out more myself,Im still learning along the way).

But ppl still do recommend this samsung,if ur short on cash,and yes,they recommend it for gaming.But u wont have a good viewing angle like on dell for example,which personally wouldnt bother me,my screen is always straight infront of me.

Measured response time in the review I posted was arround 4ms IIRC,dell which I want had 6 ms.There is NO GHOSTING on modern LCD's.Im active lately on some other cro forums and asking arround pretty much cause I wanna replace my CRT as well.A friend of mine has the specific dell and I might see the performance in COD at least if Im lucky.He swears he didnt notice a difference when he switched from CRT..and I consider him a hardware expert.

Trance wrote:
"Plus you can't compare response times between a CRT and a LCD monitor because of the different kind of technologies used."

Xactly,and u also cant compare refresh rates,cause LCD and CRT work in a completely different way.U will only need high refresh rate for a high FPS game like quake III is,on newer games high fps/high refresh rate isnt important anymore.

Trance wrote:

I have to disagree,have u seen some MODERN LCD's lately? On TN or S-IPS matrixes? If yes,u wouldnt write this nonsense,cause there is no ghosting on them,ofc u need to look at response time as well.But if u replace the word gaming with quake III,I would have to agree,CRT's are a better solution for this game,cause 125 fps is needed,and 120Hz is desireable.

@ratz, LCD will be always worse in q3, i have at home iiyama 2ms and its quite fast but still video in q3 isint correct as it is on crt

it is important! playing on vsync on, witch solve the problem with screen on LCD monitor, make rendering delayed, its how i do feel it, if u wont turn on vsync it still will can split screen

talked about these matters also in board while i should expect experienced users, and well they dont notice ghosting on way slower monitors while i do notice it on 2ms... how come? personal mater witch depends to what u do use screen, some ppl on the top ranked board dont see a sense for changing usb rate... same sytuation with lcd its war agains windmils, if u think lcd will be good for u but it, and have fun with it but please dont say such a thing that there are no ghosting, its seriously reduced on 2ms but i still see it, mater of fact only on 2ms monitors im able to play q3 all abvoue 2ms was for me totaly unplayable

viewing angles on lcd was always most flustarating me thing ever, i cant stand when colors get messed up due to angles

LCD structure is always 1:1 so im not exacly know what about u talking pixels on LCD emiting light or not, the ratio wich will not make eny influence on graphic look is 1:1 (native) and 4:1 cuz u cant make light on 2 or 3 pix only withnout macro geometry issues

thats how LCD are bulid and we CANT skip that issue at all, the system for scaling picture in some monitors do work good in lower res but picture quality isint the same as native at all we can only say its good enought but it never be the same good as native

beside most LCD do run in mode 5:4 not as they should 4:3, so to have good geometry u are forced to buy *wide* LCD monitor with aspect 16:9

wrote:

as long as i get a picture of what i´m doin in this game its enough for me

Very good, the question is though when do you want it ?

I have a 2ms viewsonic, i like it but this thread is making me wonder if i should get the old crt out of the attic and give it boothes day in the sun