Anyone still use a CRT monitor?

[Worzyl]

I own an IPS LCD; AOC 24 inch monitor with Onkyo Speakers and Miracast* and I also have a Sony 24 trinitron 16:10 widescreen CRT (gdm-fw900) that I paid £80 for.

I really do like the CRT and it's nice to have a selection of different resolution running at 85hz, which makes it easy on the eyes. I also like my AOC as it takes less desk space. I'm not concerned by the weight of either monitors as I don't move them around as once they are set up, they stay there.
I'll need to buy a HDCP converter for the CRT VGA port at some point, if I decide I want to buy a PS4 etc, but I like the colours on the CRT monitor and there are no problems with viewing angles either. Also, though I'm not a hardcore gamer, I do remember when I was playing Ultra StreetFighter 4 on my tv and then switched to my AOC monitor, that there was less lag on the AOC. I suspect that it will be better on the CRT because of smaller response times and input lag, although I doubt that I would even notice the difference.

So - does anyone else still use a CRT?





*I haven't tested miracast yet, but the speakers, though loud and clear, has no base! I dont know if the 24 inch HP Beats Audio monitors fare any better.

[brchan]

I haven't used CRT monitors in years. The main issues I see with CRT monitors are power consumption and radiation compared to LCD and newer monitors.

However, being able to set lower resolutions without the screen becoming blurry or fuzzy is nice. Contrast and viewing angles are usually greater as well, when compared to cheaper newer monitors.

[Puppy]

No. Current LCD technology delivers better quality than any CRT, if the manufacturer wants to deliver it (NEC, Eizo).

I used to have 19" Sony G400P with true flat Trinitron tube but I would not like to use it anymore Don't mention the weight almost 30 kg. Currently I have 19" NEC 2090Uxi 1600x1200 that delivers better quality because of CCFL backlight. Most of office line LCD monitors are horrible crap, no doubt. But it was similar in CRT era as well. Quality costs money. Also aging effect was more noticeable on the Sony CRT (decreasing contrast, bad convergence) than on the NEC LCD one. The NEC still looks like a new one after 8 years of 14 hours / day usage due backlight uniformity compensation.

[MrMaguire]

I haven't used a CRT monitor in a long time. Mostly because for a long time all I had were laptops, only in the last 5 years have I started using desktops again, and CRT monitors aren't terribly easy to get hold of where I live.

I would really like to get a Sony Trinitron monitor from the mid to late '90s, 14" or 15" inches is a good size. You can't beat those old cylindrical Trinitrons, they're fantastic. That being said, I never want to experience a CRT monitor with its anti-glare coating worn away again.

[Worzyl]

In regard to losing contrast and other specs over time due to age; i'm not sure about other CRT's, but i know that this Sony can have it's specs reseted to get it back to normal by tweaking the options.

What's nice about LCD is that they are more eco friendly when it comes to power consumption and radiation. The heat from my CRT will make a good radiator:)

However - I really like the options for resolution on the CRT, being able to switch from 1920x1200 to 1920x1080 for films/games to an even lower resolution for when I do a pixel artwork without flicker burning my eyes. This T60p (1600x1200), I've got used to doing pixel artwok on it, but it's not really ideal.

I wonder what it would take to create an LCD with more resolution options.

[MrMaguire]

It's probably not possible to be honest. LCDs are a matrix of pixels, so they have one true resolution. CRTs consist of a phosphor surface that's scanned from behind by three electron beams, so really they have no fixed resolution.

I've heard before that 1600x1200 LCD panels handle 800x600 well, since it's exactly half of the native resolution. However I have yet to try that, despite owning a few 1600x1200 monitors.

[Puppy]

i'm not sure about other CRT's, but i know that this Sony can have it's specs reseted to get it back to normal by tweaking the options.

I know, it was called Image Restoration but it worked to some extent only. Even after repair and tube readjustment in the Sony repair service centre it had broke again within two years and the tube got damaged. Moreover sharpness of text on (good) LCD monitor connected via digital interface is much better than any CRT monitor had been able to deliver with high quality analog VGA output of Matrox video card.

[Worzyl]

It's probably not possible to be honest. LCDs are a matrix of pixels, so they have one true resolution. CRTs consist of a phosphor surface that's scanned from behind by three electron beams, so really they have no fixed resolution.

I've heard before that 1600x1200 LCD panels handle 800x600 well, since it's exactly half of the native resolution. However I have yet to try that, despite owning a few 1600x1200 monitors.

Hmm - that's true. How about a CRT and LCD hybrid

Aren't the OLED's capable of multiple resolution changes?

[Adda]

I use a Sony Multiscan CPD-G420 19" FD Trinitron monitor.
As good contrast as the best plasma displays, no latency, no ghosting or blurry image when things are moved around on the screen, unlimited color resolution too.
It can recalibrate it self to fit the SRGB standard, and after convergence has been fixed using WinDAS, it is pretty much perfect.

Handles the following resolutions:
800x600@170Hz
1152x864@120Hz
1400x1050@100Hz
1920x1080@95Hz
1600x1200@88Hz
1920x1200@88Hz
1920x1440@75Hz
2048x1536@@70Hz

I have never seen a TFT or plasma screen come close to the color reproduction and clear image when things are moving, as on this 14 year old monitor.
TFT's just feel sluggish but are good for office applications.

The only current display technology that doesn't have fixed pixels is CRT.
OLED is a fixed pixel display as well.

[Worzyl]

Those are some nice resolutions your monitor is sporting there. I notice that it also has a USB hub too.

How are you getting 100Hz on1400x1050 as well as 170Hz on the 800x600? What graphics card are you using?

[Adda]

Those are some nice resolutions your monitor is sporting there. I notice that it also has a USB hub too.

How are you getting 100Hz on1400x1050 as well as 170Hz on the 800x600? What graphics card are you using?

The USB hub doesn't support USB 2.0 so it's not very useful, so I removed it (this monitor has a completely modular design).

I'm using the Quadro FX880M in my W510.

Setting up a CRT to get the most of it is no trivial task, and it's best to use an nVidia GPU as the configuration software that comes with it, supports custom resolutions and timings.
Also there is an app called CRU (Custom Resolution Utility) witch is very useful, Hotkey Resolution Changer is very useful as well.

All CRT's have a limit as to how high they go, the value to look out for is horizontal and vertical refresh rate.
The G420 has a horizontal refresh rate of 110kHz and vertical refresh rate of 170Hz max (no resolution can go higher then 170Hz, even of it doesn't exceed 110kHz vertical).
The FW900 has a horizontal refresh rate of 121kHz and vertical of 160Hz max.

It would be very difficult for me to explain how to set up custom display timings to get the highest possible refresh rates, but more vertical lines = lower refresh rate, but too few blank vertical and /or horizontal lines results in warped geometry near the edge of the image.
That is why 1920x1200 and 1600x1200 can be used at the same refresh rate, as they have the same number of vertical lines (1200).

HDMI to VGA converters have limited bandwidth, you won't get the most of your monitor with one of those.
Go for video cards with DVI-I outputs in stead, they can output an analogue signal, then get a DVI-I to VGA cable, too bad they don't make DVI-I to BNC.

[Unknown_K]

My main systems use LCD screens (23" DELL IPS 1080p, 24" DELL 1080p, 19" 1280x1024) but I still have quite a few CRT's by SONY in use on old systems because of the resolution needed. I also have old CGA, Commodore, Atari, Tandy monitors for vintage machines.

[MrMaguire]

It's probably not possible to be honest. LCDs are a matrix of pixels, so they have one true resolution. CRTs consist of a phosphor surface that's scanned from behind by three electron beams, so really they have no fixed resolution.

I've heard before that 1600x1200 LCD panels handle 800x600 well, since it's exactly half of the native resolution. However I have yet to try that, despite owning a few 1600x1200 monitors.

Hmm - that's true. How about a CRT and LCD hybrid

Aren't the OLED's capable of multiple resolution changes?

There actually does exist a LCD/CRT hybrid display technology. Somebody linked me to it about 6 months ago, and I now I can't find it if my life depended on it.

[Neil]

Yeah I still us CRT monitors. I have both LCD and CRT monitors on my desk at work, and have a CRT on my workbench here at the house. Mainly use them because I already have them, and they still work, plus I'm too cheap to buy something else.

[killer]

CRT screens use so much energy compared with LCD/LED screens, especially when in stand-by mode. For example, most LCD screens consume 0.3 Watts per hour when in stand-by. LEDs use less power whether in full use or stand-by. For the environment's sake please stop using CRTs, and recycle your old CRT components.

Mind you, I am speaking to an audience where most people live in an unsustainable environment where air-con is the norm. Air-con is killing the polar ice caps ... and polar bears.

Do you want to lose nature so you don't need to sweat?

[MrMaguire]

CRT screens use so much energy compared with LCD/LED screens, especially when in stand-by mode. For example, most LCD screens consume 0.3 Watts per hour when in stand-by. LEDs use less power whether in full use or stand-by. For the environment's sake please stop using CRTs, and recycle your old CRT components.

Mind you, I am speaking to an audience where most people live in an unsustainable environment where air-con is the norm. Air-con is killing the polar ice caps ... and polar bears.

Do you want to lose nature so you don't need to sweat?

CRTs don't use so much power that they contribute to killing the environment. LCDs with very bright CCFL back lights use just as much power.

Making monitors (and any electrical equipment) out of plastic, and then just disposing them after a few short years does more actual harm to the environment than anything else. Plastic comes from oil, ya know.

If somebody keeps their CRT around for 15, or maybe even 50 years, they're preventing damage to the environment by it not being in the land fill, or in West Africa or India or China, contaminating the ground and putting the health of the locals that don't know better at risk. I'll agree that if you're going to recycle a CRT, do it properly.

How are air conditioners killing the polar ice caps?

[rkawakami]

I dumped my last computer CRT over 13 years ago; it was a 17" NEC MultiSync. Replaced it with an oddball Sharp LCD whose model and size escapes me at the moment. I think it's a 16" SXGA but don't quote me until I can get home and read the label. It is used with my Gateway tower system that sees a boot about once every 3 or 4 months. The monitor is used more often than that as I have it connected through a KVM switch that goes to the Gateway and a loose VGA cable that I can plug into a laptop when I need to. While CRTs are good for handling a wide variety of screen resolutions (assuming auto-syncing covers them) and blur-free motion, LCDs have them beat for smaller physical size/weight given the same diagonal screen dimension, less heat and convergence-free, focus-free problems. I remember having to re-focus the NEC several times during its lifetime and degauss the thing when it was moved.

edit: I couldn't find any label on the Sharp monitor but a little poking around the net and in Windows 98 and it looks like it's an LL-T1610W; 16" SXGA (1280x1024)

ref: http://www.manualslib.com/manual/151450 ... ml?page=27

[Norway Pad]

If somebody keeps their CRT around for 15, or maybe even 50 years, they're preventing damage to the environment by it not being in the land fill, or in West Africa or India or China, contaminating the ground and putting the health of the locals that don't know better at risk.

Quite correct. From what I read in different posts, I would dare say that people on this forum are among the people least likely to create excess e-waste. That's simply because most of us keep, repair, maintain and use the old equipment instead of throwing it away.

I moved away from CRT monitors in favor of LCD panels many years ago. I wanted to replace my 14" CRT with a 17", but CRTs of that size were so big that there simply wasn't enough room for it on my computer desk. So the first LCD was a big step up, even though the price was 3 times the price of the CRT. The 14" CRT is btw. still sitting on a shelf in my mom's garage, and not that long ago I had plans of bringing it back home to use it as a permanent monitor for my server.

[Adda]

CRT's usually use 2-4x as much power as TFT's, but tend to last a lot longer, a lot of people use multiple TFT's, so energy consumption not much of a concern.

With regards to the environment, it takes a more power to manufacture a TFT display and ship it to your doorstep, then a CRT monitor consumes in it's lifetime.
The CRT's are already here, recycling them consumes a lot of power, so the right thing to do from an environmental point of view, is use them as long as it makes sense to do so.
It's a brilliant technology, with unique capabilities and a 100 years of R&D behind it, it feels like such a shame to just throw it away.

[Worzyl]

Those are some nice resolutions your monitor is sporting there. I notice that it also has a USB hub too.

How are you getting 100Hz on1400x1050 as well as 170Hz on the 800x600? What graphics card are you using?

The USB hub doesn't support USB 2.0 so it's not very useful, so I removed it (this monitor has a completely modular design).

I'm using the Quadro FX880M in my W510.

Setting up a CRT to get the most of it is no trivial task, and it's best to use an nVidia GPU as the configuration software that comes with it, supports custom resolutions and timings.
Also there is an app called CRU (Custom Resolution Utility) witch is very useful, Hotkey Resolution Changer is very useful as well.

All CRT's have a limit as to how high they go, the value to look out for is horizontal and vertical refresh rate.
The G420 has a horizontal refresh rate of 110kHz and vertical refresh rate of 170Hz max (no resolution can go higher then 170Hz, even of it doesn't exceed 110kHz vertical).
The FW900 has a horizontal refresh rate of 121kHz and vertical of 160Hz max.

It would be very difficult for me to explain how to set up custom display timings to get the highest possible refresh rates, but more vertical lines = lower refresh rate, but too few blank vertical and /or horizontal lines results in warped geometry near the edge of the image.
That is why 1920x1200 and 1600x1200 can be used at the same refresh rate, as they have the same number of vertical lines (1200).

HDMI to VGA converters have limited bandwidth, you won't get the most of your monitor with one of those.
Go for video cards with DVI-I outputs in stead, they can output an analogue signal, then get a DVI-I to VGA cable, too bad they don't make DVI-I to BNC.

I use a BNC cable on my PC which leaves the VGA opened for my XBOX 360. You can get DVI to BNC cables here:
http://video2video.co.uk/products/dvi-a ... =216832858

There are also many other shops that sell them. There are some really good HDMI to VGA converters out there now (HD FURY etc) that work with consoles, sky boxes/digital boxes and all other shennanigans.

My graphics card is REALLY old. I think it's from 2008 and it wasn't top of the range as it was a rather cheap NVidia card. I usually build a desk top PC once every 5 years and it's usually when I need to create a new short animation.

I was just thinking that when people play retro games on their LCD, they have to buy scalers and synch in order to achieve the resolutions of the computers and consoles they attach to the monitor, as these old computers do not display on LCD. These devices are built to do multiple resolutions from C64, Megadrive, SNES to the likes of the NEO GEO, Saturn and N64, all in one device. If this is the case, then one could build an LCD monitor with built in scaler and synch? This in turn would me multiple resolutions ion the LCD. Then - this same process could be used for even higher definitions?

[Adda]

Being a PC only kind of person, I donno anything about scalers and such.

I do know that all HDMI to VGA converters I have seen are limited to 1920x1080@60Hz max, or something like that, low horizontal refresh limit.
Using a CRT at 60Hz is painful.

As for video cards that get the most of CRT's, any video card with a 400MHz RAMDAC will do (most video cards have that, even really old ones), of course some video cards have better picture quality then others, and some drivers have more relevant features.
An old classic with EXCELLENT picture quality is the Matrox G400 or later Matrox video cards with VGA output.
AMD/Ati video cards with VGA output are good too, as long as they sport the 400MHz RAMDAC, the FGL V3200 in a T43p lacks color depth though, even compared to older Matrox cards.
I have had trouble with one ATi GPU and high refresh rates, that was a X1950 Pro with DVI-I only.
The Quadro FX880M is great (better then the old Matrox cards) and I plan on using an nVidia card in my next system (desktop) probably a Geforce GTX 750 series with VGA.

[Worzyl]

Being a PC only kind of person, I donno anything about scalers and such.

I do know that all HDMI to VGA converters I have seen are limited to 1920x1080@60Hz max, or something like that, low horizontal refresh limit.
Using a CRT at 60Hz is painful.

Really?!? I use my XBOX 360 on my Sony fw900 and it looks fantastic running at 60hz. No flicker or lag issues. But it's probably due to them being consoles.
I would never set my CRT to 60 Hz for everyday PC use unless I wanted to induce a headache in 20 seconds.

[Adda]

Being a PC only kind of person, I donno anything about scalers and such.

I do know that all HDMI to VGA converters I have seen are limited to 1920x1080@60Hz max, or something like that, low horizontal refresh limit.
Using a CRT at 60Hz is painful.

Really?!? I use my XBOX 360 on my Sony fw900 and it looks fantastic running at 60hz. No flicker or lag issues. But it's probably due to them being consoles.
I would never set my CRT to 60 Hz for everyday PC use unless I wanted to induce a headache in 20 seconds.

If there is no flicker, it's not operating at 60Hz, above 85Hz the flicker will start going away completely, check the menu on the FW900, it should tell you what refresh rate it's operating at.
Of course not everyone is equally sensitive to flicker, and you can get used to watching 60Hz, not long ago, people would watch TV on 50Hz CRT's for hours a day
For me 85Hz is absolute minimum, I prefer 120Hz (super fluid motion), but 100Hz (completely flicker free) is just fine.

[Worzyl]

When I press the menu knob/button it says "45. 0Khz / 60Hz."

[Adda]

Well, I wouldn't be able to watch that for long, I'd get dry eyes and feel kind of dizzy after a while, I'd prefer a TFT if I couldn't increase the refresh rate.

[Worzyl]

Well, I wouldn't be able to watch that for long, I'd get dry eyes and feel kind of dizzy after a while, I'd prefer a TFT if I couldn't increase the refresh rate.

Well - it's the standard XBOX 360 resolution. Even if I were to play it on a 120Hz, it would still only output at 60 Hz. Your probably thinking that it display like a 60 Hz desktop PC, but this is not the case. My 24" LCD IPS which came out last year only runs at 60 Hz and they both look identical side by side in terms of consoles.

[Adda]

Well, I wouldn't be able to watch that for long, I'd get dry eyes and feel kind of dizzy after a while, I'd prefer a TFT if I couldn't increase the refresh rate.

Well - it's the standard XBOX 360 resolution. Even if I were to play it on a 120Hz, it would still only output at 60 Hz. Your probably thinking that it display like a 60 Hz desktop PC, but this is not the case. My 24" LCD IPS which came out last year only runs at 60 Hz and they both look identical side by side in terms of consoles.

The number of frames the display adapter outputs is irrelevant with regards to CRT's and flicker.
A CRT will blank the screen and redraw it from lines moving from left to right one line at the time, below ~85Hz this process is visible and perceived as flicker.
The refresh rate is the number of times per second the entire screen is redrawn.
A TFT doesn't work that way and will have no flicker even at 25Hz (it will have severe lag and latency as such a low refresh rate though).
Flicker is the main reason why most people hate CRT's, a lot of people never cared to configure them and ended up looking at 60Hz until they where saved by TFT's.

[MisterB]

It's been years since I've used a CRT monitor. They take up way too much space and power. I've preferred LCD displays since I got my first laptop.

I've got an HDMI scaler that outputs component video. It's a handy device but I haven't found any computer application for it. It is useful for using newer video devices like blu-ray players with old monitors that don't support HDCP. The quality is good but limited to 720P. Converting component to VGA is not difficult and I have several adapters that do that. I have an older SXGA LCD monitor that I'm fond of that needs some of these dongles to be able to be used with some of my video equipment.

[Adda]

I just bought a Sony Multiscan GDM-F520!

[MrMaguire]

I was just thinking that when people play retro games on their LCD, they have to buy scalers and synch in order to achieve the resolutions of the computers and consoles they attach to the monitor, as these old computers do not display on LCD. These devices are built to do multiple resolutions from C64, Megadrive, SNES to the likes of the NEO GEO, Saturn and N64, all in one device. If this is the case, then one could build an LCD monitor with built in scaler and synch? This in turn would me multiple resolutions ion the LCD. Then - this same process could be used for even higher definitions?

LCDs already have scaling and sync circuitry in them, that's how they can run at resolutions other than their native. The quality of the scaler is everything. There probably are LCD monitors/TVs with good quality scalers in them, but they're probably quite expensive. By the time you start finding an LCD display like that, and getting appropriate cables for your consoles (Good luck finding the component cable for the Nintendo GameCube), you might as well have gotten an old Sony Trinitron TV for free (or very little) from Craigslist or similar, and instead use the consoles the way they were intended. Even RF and composite look fantastic on a Trinitron, one that's working properly anyway. Trinitron TVs and monitors often fail quickly compared to shadow mask CRT TVs and monitors, it depends on the quality of the chassis and its component.