choices

by absorb • 4 Feb 2009, 02:13 • Journals
crt monitor @ 85 hz @ 1024 * 768

or

lcd monitor @ 75 hz @ 1280 * 1024


then what r_mode / displayrefresh to use?
Comments
55
▼
beggin 4 Feb 2009, 02:17
CRTs are overrated. Most people don't give TFTs enough time. Sorry if this was a little off topic >.<
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 02:24
this is the most stupid thing I've heard in a while !
Parent
▼
beggin 4 Feb 2009, 02:32
At least explain yourself.
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 02:35
Explain yourself first. Why are CRTs overrated? And how could "time" make any difference when it comes to tfts?
Parent
▼
beggin 4 Feb 2009, 02:39
I don't need to explain myself because if you had a common sense it would seem pretty straight forward. But I will try and put it in more simple terms just for you. Most people are used to CRTs for gaming, but when they try a TFT they just aren't used to the sudden change. If will take time to get used to a TFT. You simply can't expect to like them instantly, but unfortunately most people can't see that.

Now please explain why my comment was "stupid"
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 02:45
Well, TFTs lack some abilities, like refreshing the screen any fast, which is kinda vital for gaming (that contain tracking etc). It's harder to track moving objects if u can see the screen blinking or at least it feels as if the screen was warping (yes I know some ppl don't feel this, although human eye is cabale of noticing refresh rates up to 500Hz).
On the other hand TFTs got better colors in general which is why I prefer them for games that don't need such instant action or precise mouse movement (let's say warcraft 3 eg.). Also I like to watch movies on them. And ofc, I use tft as much as I could to spare my CRT. Because the companies don't sell CRTs a lot around, u never know if u can get yourself a good CRT anywhere anymore when your current one goes broken..
If they ever made a TFT with even 100Hz, I would buy it immediately and I think it would be good for gaming, but ofc 120Hz or even more would be better.
And I think your first comment was kinda stupid because either u are incapable of noticing the difference or don't just want to see it (or never even compared the 2 actually). At least most of the ppl in here tend to see the difference.
Parent
▼
beggin 4 Feb 2009, 02:59
Obviously there is a difference in the refresh - that goes without saying. But the difference is so small no human eye will be able to notice it. Either you want to believe there is a difference or it's just something else that is distracting you/effecting the issue. I used to be like you, thinking TFT was a load of crap and impossible to play FPS games with, until one day I had no choice and had to use TFT. After about two months it didn't even effect me anymore and I was back to normal. Just say you started FPS gaming with a TFT and played frequently for a few years, then suddenly you used a CRT. I'm sure you would be complaining, but this time the other way around. There are no noticeable permanent issues to the human eye with a TFT, your simply not used to gaming with it and not willing to give it any time.

Let me ask you, how long did you try FPS gaming with a TFT? Maybe about 1 week worth of gaming or a little longer?

And your comment about 500Hz. That's absolute bullshit, where did you get that from? The human eye doesn't even work in the same way as a monitor, and there is no way to actually measure it. Google it if you don't believe me.

/sleep
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 03:12
I used TFTs for gaming about 1,5 years. I was never happy and changed them frequently because I thought the response time was proportional to the refresh times. When I finally bought a TFT with 4ms (which should equate 250Hz CRT) and compared that to my CRT, I realized that there is just something else wrong about TFTs and understood that they are also dependent on the refresh times.
So, I have a lot experience of TFTs in gaming and atm I got 5 of them myself. And when I gave up the TFT and changed to CRT my skill amended as well. A good example is butchji's LAN performance. Ppl were judging him as a haxer or whatever because of his average LAN performances. But on the latest CC Lan he was using a CRT monitor and no one is saying that he is "online only" anymore after seeing the improvement in his game when using a CRT.
Normal color variations are visible to human eye in refresh rates up to 200 Hz, and B&W blinking is noticeable even up to 500 Hz. And don't worry, I get to know enough of the human eye functionality in my studies, so no need to google about it :)
Parent
▼
fredd 4 Feb 2009, 07:43
QuoteObviously there is a difference in the refresh - that goes without saying. But the difference is so small no human eye will be able to notice it.


I'm sure 95% of people can easily tell the diffrence between a CRT @ 120hz and a LCD @ 75 hz, or even worse, 60hz. 75hz lcd is tolerable to game on, but it really doesn't compare to CRT @ 120hz AT ALL. This is coming from a person who played on a 75hz LCD (2years), moved to a 120hz CRT(3months), and now i'm back on a LCD @ 75hz (cause i need more desktop space for moviemaking and other stuff and switching between 2 is quite annoying because of my desk setup). Saying there's no diffrence to the human eye instantly makes everything you wrote meaningless, since you couldn't be more wrong. The 3 months I played with the CRT there was a noticable skill boost in movement and tracking by the way.
Parent
▼
spiROZE 4 Feb 2009, 12:12
does this explain the skill boost after you left unit 7 :o ?
Parent
▼
fredd 4 Feb 2009, 15:28
if you looked at my profile you could see im not actually perfo
Parent
▼
decem 4 Feb 2009, 03:03
CRT is not overrated, underrated rather. most of the time ignorant people suggest TFT over CRT as they cant see the difference and due to TFT having better contrast & more sharpen image. I've used & using both and the change of TFT -> CRT gaming wise was one of the best hardware side things you could do. comparable to changing into computer that has 125 fps stable while you used to have 40-50 or changing your old 2 button ballmouse into optical gaming mouse.
Parent
▼
mana 4 Feb 2009, 13:01
you are the most retarded person on crossfire. almost your every comment/journal/interviews are full of shit.
Parent
▼
beggin 4 Feb 2009, 14:04
Can I add that to my achievements? :)
Parent
▼
mana 4 Feb 2009, 15:08
be my guest.
Parent
▼
im a tree 4 Feb 2009, 02:22
for gaeman: CRT every time
for most other things: LCD
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 02:24
CRT is better ofc, but rather put it on 800*600 and u can prolly get 100Hz

I use r_mode 4 and 120Hz myself
▼
topher 4 Feb 2009, 02:29
One of these

image: 061025_tvHelmet_hmed_6p.hmedium
▼
Phemon 4 Feb 2009, 02:30
LCD is better with space on ur desk and internetting and stuff, gaming with lcd is ok 2 you need time to get used 2 it
▼
dnl 4 Feb 2009, 02:35
crt for playing, 100 hz > 60 hz :P
▼
noodle 4 Feb 2009, 02:36
whichever looks better
▼
decem 4 Feb 2009, 02:58
I wouldnt take CRT with those specs so in this case LCD. altho if ure basing the choice in sense which is better for gaming, take CRT.

I'd advice you to look for better CRT than that or just stick to the tft.
▼
destiny 4 Feb 2009, 03:02
if u can spend some money buy the 120hz LCDs :)
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 03:18
show me one and I'm ready to pay 2000e
Parent
▼
trakos 4 Feb 2009, 05:07
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4386904&SRCCODE=YAHOODF&cm_mmc_o=QztBBCjCVRqCjCVRqCjCVRq $599 Although I don't get the 3D idea :<

http://hardware.gotfrag.com/portal/forums/thread/382555/ - 120Hz LCDs are Near!

Just pasting some links as I've heard about it lately, not idea though whether this is real 120hz or some utter crap tricks ^^

Quote
This is not an interpolation trick like with the HDTVs, these monitors actually use a 120Hz input due to dual-link DVI input which no other 22" screens use. The current 60Hz LCDs lack bandwidth of doing 120Hz but with dual-Link DVI there's enough bandwidth to make it possible and 120Hz input is needed for 3D stereoscophic gaming too because the glasses splits the frames
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 06:13
hmm, according to what I read the first one is like 60Hz per eye, so not really 120 Hz and I got doubts for those classes anyway :p. But without the classes it might work as a real 120 Hz.

Quote120Hz input is needed for 3D stereoscophic gaming too because the glasses splits the frames so that if we have frame 1,2,3,4,5,6 then frame 1, 3 , 5 will be displayed for left eye and 2,4,6 will be displayed for right eye why you get 60 FPS for both eyes


But this viewsonic monitor sounds kinda promising to me :)
Have to check if ppl sell them somwhere around here !
Parent
▼
decem 4 Feb 2009, 12:40
they are absolutely overpriced - cant think of a function worth the money yet.
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 13:43
if it really works on 120Hz with normal videocards and if my CRT went broke, I'd buy this for even a high price (700+e easily :p). But I guess the prices will go down kinda fast when they get more common so u are right that it's not worth it to hurry yet
Parent
▼
seconddd 4 Feb 2009, 14:59
700e for a monitor is crazy-work.
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 18:10
u should know how much moneyz I've put to PCs and all I do really is just play ET
Parent
▼
trakos 4 Feb 2009, 15:55
yeah, I hope so, I'd go for such a lcd sooner or later cause my crt is already in a terrible condition - some minor scratches, buttons at panel not working (the brightness one^^) and it's only 19' :>
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 18:11
One matter that might hold me still is the widescreen thingy. I guess it takes some time getting used to playing on that :o
Parent
▼
trakos 4 Feb 2009, 20:58
well, in theory, it should be better - just like increasing fov is useful in ET :D
Parent
▼
Spirea 4 Feb 2009, 21:19
but the feeling must be weird.. still, I guess widescreen resolution makes it easier to cope with :p
Parent
▼
trakos 5 Feb 2009, 04:25
I must say I was always also very negative about widescreens, like it would be impossible for me to get used to even for everyday work, but when I came across some nice widescreens @ uni I realized it makes sense :) Oh well, and human got two eyes, so the screen should be much wider than taller :D
Parent
▼
Spirea 5 Feb 2009, 11:24
yeh, u got a point in there. I have got kinda accustomed to them as well in everyday use :)
Parent
▼
Ryys 4 Feb 2009, 04:17
800 x 600 120Hz then ggs
▼
qwik 4 Feb 2009, 10:59
i paly with lcd 22'' wide/screen - 1650x1050 @ 59Hz - nP
▼
savatjee 4 Feb 2009, 11:08
I remember playing on my CRT and it fuckn owned, been playing on a TFT for a couple of months and I can say that there's a huge difference in playing games (ET, cs etc)
▼
squalli 4 Feb 2009, 11:10
But you will get used to it
Parent
▼
savatjee 4 Feb 2009, 11:11
Ye of course, but there's still a huge difference :)
Parent
▼
spiROZE 4 Feb 2009, 12:00
But you will get used to it, so imo there ain't a problem in one more month
Parent
▼
savatjee 4 Feb 2009, 12:05
I am already used to it, but it's STILL a difference :D I clearly notice the differences when playing.

I'd go back to my CRT anytime I could. But for now my TFT will do. :)
Parent
▼
mEklAri 4 Feb 2009, 12:03
for the hertz u need graphic card what gives u like 200+ hertz what many cards dont give.. like my old g/card didnt give me 200+ but 85 was max. srry my english
▼
artlove 4 Feb 2009, 12:04
for ET: LCD

for other stuff: crt
▼
blackboy 4 Feb 2009, 12:05
qualitative very good contributions...
it's infrequent reading good contributions.. but it is funny reading radom cmmt's indeed
edit: off topic ofc..


humm...
give ldc screens 2 years and they will beat crt screens..
there is a battle which the crts would win atm..
ofc a lcd screens is convenient for works at a buro or smth in that way..
but professional gamers will prefers crt's
▼
blackboy 4 Feb 2009, 12:05
btw..
you know the weight of a 28 crt ?
:DD
▼
qwik 4 Feb 2009, 12:09
so schwer wie mein peniz? :o
Parent
▼
Ryys 4 Feb 2009, 18:14
about the same as a house! But its a sacrifice that must be made!!!
Parent
▼
blackboy 4 Feb 2009, 12:10
nicht ganz mein junge :)
Back to top