Anyone remember crt displays?

[postmortemIA]

Still better than LCD in just about every way. I miss my 21" NEC

The one serious advantage that I miss was support of multiple resolutions. But the picture does get worse as resolution goes up. 4K/Retina displays can effectively work on multiple resolutions as well

Other advantage is response time. I haven't seen LCD that can match CRTs there. However refresh rate of 60Hz at higher resolutions was painful.

 

[therealnickdanger]

So, how do you make a 4K CRT? The capacitance of the tube will limit the frequency and therefore resolution unless you can handle frame rates of, say, 10Hz.

You might be interested to know that some high end CRT projectors are able to resolve 4K at varying refresh rates and aspect ratios, but the problem is delivering the signal (most CRT projectors weren't built with anything beyond 1920x1200 HDMI input). There's a very small, but dedicated niche of individuals that have actually paid to have their old CRT projectors upgraded with newer HDMI controllers in order to feed 4K signals, but even in a perfect scenario using massive 9" lenses, it is still very difficult and expensive to attempt. Some people go "the easy route" and use two projectors aligned together to achieve 4K higher than 60Hz and it works pretty well. I'm not even joking.

The technology is dead, I wish it wasn't, but it is. Hipsters have brought back vinyl, VHS, and cassettes, but CRTs are too expensive and complicated, even for them.

 

[StrangerGuy]

If you ask me it's pretty sad we are still unable to surpass a 20+ year old CRT tech in every aspect for a PC monitor.

 

[gibster]

If you ask me it's pretty sad we are still unable to surpass a 20+ year old CRT tech in every aspect for a PC monitor.

I'd say it's probably more like nearly 150 year old technology, so I would imagine we still have time to surpass it

 

[UaVaj]

RIP in peace, FW900. I miss it so much.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

when lcd ramped up production and crt finally cease production. lcd quality was literally garbage compare to crt.

now a days in 2016. lcd has come along ways. it is definitely a worthy replacement.

 

[MrTeal]

I'd love to get a new CRT to replace my 43" 4k. Once I get the new footings poured in the basement, I'll start shopping around.

 

[Rakehellion]

Total: 12195 lbs

 

[amenx]

If you ask me it's pretty sad we are still unable to surpass a 20+ year old CRT tech in every aspect for a PC monitor.

I facepalm at reading most of the comments here. My last CRT I ditched in 2004 and couldnt have been happier with the crappy (by todays standards) LCD that replaced it. For one thing, razor sharp clarity where the tiniest fonts are immediately readable vs the blurred detail of CRTs with horrible screen flicker if not over 72hz. Only thing going for them was the immediate response times in gaming - nothing more - vs todays LCDs which are light years ahead of the crap that began to appear some 12-15 years ago. Blacks? Contrast? Yep, CRT was indeed king then. But seems they are still being compared to the LCDs of that time period. That period is long gone, thankfully.

 

[RaistlinZ]

I prefer the sharper image, aspect ratio, light weight, slim design, lower power draw, lower heat output, portability, modern I/O of today's PC monitors.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I facepalm at reading most of the comments here. My last CRT I ditched in 2004 and couldnt have been happier with the crappy (by todays standards) LCD that replaced it. For one thing, razor sharp clarity where the tiniest fonts are immediately readable vs the blurred detail of CRTs with horrible screen flicker if not over 72hz. Only thing going for them was the immediate response times in gaming - nothing more - vs todays LCDs which are light years ahead of the crap that began to appear some 12-15 years ago. Blacks? Contrast? Yep, CRT was indeed king then. But seems they are still being compared to the LCDs of that time period. That period is long gone, thankfully.

I also facepalm when somebody think they are clever but don't know what "every aspect" means.

 

[NAC4EV]

I facepalm at reading most of the comments here. My last CRT I ditched in 2004 and couldnt have been happier with the crappy (by todays standards) LCD that replaced it. For one thing, razor sharp clarity where the tiniest fonts are immediately readable vs the blurred detail of CRTs with horrible screen flicker if not over 72hz. Only thing going for them was the immediate response times in gaming - nothing more - vs todays LCDs which are light years ahead of the crap that began to appear some 12-15 years ago. Blacks? Contrast? Yep, CRT was indeed king then. But seems they are still being compared to the LCDs of that time period. That period is long gone, thankfully.

This.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Total: 12195 lbs

At least you got one of the light ones.

There was some gaming event in Denmark here in the easter. And I saw a few people still using CRT with CS gaming. I assume its because they think they are faster screens. But the sole existence of CRT screens in an event, where the CRT screens at this point may be older than the users was quite awkward.

 

[Sheep221]

On and off I used CRTs till August 2010 when I retired the last one(it's still somewhere in basement at my friend's house).
If nothing else I'm glad that CRTs are gone due to environmental factors, they were overly complicated to manufacture, used alot of power and their weight and size compared to flat panels. LCDs really did huge material off-load of this planet, for virtually no technological drawback.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

I assume its because they think they are faster screens.

Well, they are.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Still better than LCD in just about every way. I miss my 21" NEC

Except for:
size
weight
suseptance to interference
Brightness/contrast loss over time
screen burn
flicker
power consumption
screen resolution
colour distortion at corners
aperture grille tube leaves lines across the screen
uneven geometry and geometry drift

Don't get me wrong I had high end CRTs from Sony and Iiyama back in the day in fact I still have my Iiyama VMP454 which is a 2048x1536/75hz screen, but the above list is pretty much true for all but the most exceptional CRTs.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

There was some gaming event in Denmark here in the easter. And I saw a few people still using CRT with CS gaming. I assume its because they think they are faster screens.

In some cases they might be, many pro gamers want extremely fast refresh rates and really good CRTs at low screen resolutions pushed 240hz or above, modern LCDs at about 144hz are finally quite a bit closer to that. CRTs were also well know for having next to no input latency which many LCDs do have.

 

[TestKing123]

If you ask me it's pretty sad we are still unable to surpass a 20+ year old CRT tech in every aspect for a PC monitor.

I'd like to see 1 CRT that provides a better picture than my 65" LG 4k display in 4k gaming.

Someone made a comment earlier in another thread how CRT's still provide a superior "naturally aliased" image.

"Naturally aliased" LOL.

 

[funboy6942]

What gives? I hooked up my 22" crt and it gives a max rez of 1280x1024, I know for a fact it went MUCH higher then that, why is it not going past that?

http://www.overstock.com/Electronic...-CRT-Monitor-Refurbished/1100944/product.html

That link proves it was made to go MUCH higher!

So why wont my son's GTX 770 push it to its max?

And as far as a CRT looking better then a lcd, its all about the dot pitch IMO, mine is a .24, and even at 1280x1024, it still looks stunning sitting next to my kids other wide screen 27", and if I could get it to its max, OMG, at 4:3 its still a beautiful display, IMO again.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

Probably not detected properly? Maybe restart the system?

Or try some custom resolutions in the nvidia control panel.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Find a way to hook it up to the NES. Duck Hunt!

 

[StrangerGuy]

I'd like to see 1 CRT that provides a better picture than my 65" LG 4k display in 4k gaming.

Someone made a comment earlier in another thread how CRT's still provide a superior "naturally aliased" image.

"Naturally aliased" LOL.

I never said CRTs are better than LCD on an overall basis, asshole. It's amazing how people can be so smug about their blatant lack of reading comprehension.

I, too would like to see your LCD beating a CRT in input lag, response time and black levels. Nobody can make the same case for something like fiber vs dial-up.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

I'd like to see 1 CRT that provides a better picture than my 65" LG 4k display in 4k gaming.

Someone made a comment earlier in another thread how CRT's still provide a superior "naturally aliased" image.

"Naturally aliased" LOL.

I guess he said naturally antialiased.

I wouldn't say it's ridiculous. With different pixel shape and layout the jagged edges can be less noticable.

 

[therealnickdanger]

What gives? I hooked up my 22" crt and it gives a max rez of 1280x1024, I know for a fact it went MUCH higher then that, why is it not going past that?

You'll have to manually create new custom resolutions through the NVIDIA control panel and test them. My FW900 would do 2560x1600@75Hz, 2560x1440@80Hz, 1920x1200@96Hz, and 1080p@110Hz, but only using custom resolutions. AFAIK, all NVIDIA cards still have 400MHz RAMDACs, but who knows how much longer that will last. That's why I got rid of my 290X, it had no analog output, requiring me to buy an adapter that fell short anyway.

 

[guskline]

Oh I remember CRTs. Especially the ones I carried up 4 floors of the dorms for my daughters in college in 2000-2001.

Sorry, but the nostalgia just went out the window remembering those treks!

 

[TestKing123]

I never said CRTs are better than LCD on an overall basis, asshole. It's amazing how people can be so smug about their blatant lack of reading comprehension.

I, too would like to see your LCD beating a CRT in input lag, response time and black levels. Nobody can make the same case for something like fiber vs dial-up.

You can call people assholes on this forum? Cool!

LCD's don't have a problem with input lag in 2016. Same with response time. Nobody here plays Quake 1 at 300fps where a CRT's advantage in this area would be noticeable/worthwhile.

Black levels? You must think this is 2002 and not 2016. Pretty much all high end panels, especially the newer OLEDs swarming the market now, have excellent black levels and more importantly contrast. Yes, CRTs hold this advantage but the difference is neglible compared to what LCDs offer overall, especialling for 4k gaming. NOT like fiber optic vs dial up :lol:

You sound like someone who is stuck at 1600x1200 19" CRT gaming and has never experienced 4k gaming on a 40+ inch LG/Samsung.