Shoutbox

commenting on the LCD post at the end of page 2 your parents ever told you not to sit so close to the t.v?
crt screens work on the same concept and damage your eyes if you sit to close or long periods of time LCDs don't damage your eyes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by xen0h
LCDs don't damage your eyes.

---

they actually can!

That is, they damage your eyes just as much or as little as a CRTs.

There are more forms of eye damage than radiation.

In fact, years ago, CRTs already were made with a extremely low radiation. And if you use a CRT properly (thus not sit with your noose against the screen), your eyes will not be damaged at all by radiation.

In those same years ago, LCDs damaged your eyes a lot, because the backlight used worked very slowly and this caused flickering (you wouldn't see the flickering, but your eyes will notice it). And thus this put a lot of strain on your eyes, no matter how far you were from the screen.

Now, CRTs have evolved even more and produce as good as no radiation anymore, even with your noose at 5cm of the screen, whereas there are still LCDs which flicker.

In general CRTs have still a more 'stable' picture. Not to mention the more ghosting and the slower response time which LCDs always will have compared to CRTs of the same age.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS: manufacters of LCDs use a different calculation for response times than CRTs manufacters, this to trick the buyer into believing that LCDs are almost as fast, if not faster, than CRTs.

To make matters worse, there are even among LCD manufactures differences in how they calculate the response time... On top of that, if it isn't already chaotic enough, they quite often give the fastest response time measured with overdrive (which on its turn often produces artifacts or ghosting on the screen). Bottom line: response time says nothing... It is as accurate as saying that processor A is faster than processor B just by comparing the GHz.

If you compare all the relevant and proper timings in a fair way and taking in account the amount of the display updated, you'll see that CRTs are still much faster.

So, some people say LCDs have a lower response time, but it doesn't say anything about the total response time needed to update the complete picture. CRTs update the screen in one go, LCDs not. Also a LCD will always have an input lag, CRTs not. This again adds to the total time needed to update the complete picture. And this input lag is almost never given or added to the response time (which is already inaccurate) in the specs, let alone in advertisements.

If you compare everything properly, LCDs are not better than CRTs at all, and certainly not speed-wise.



EDIT: and just found this which lists the most pros and cons of both: http://bravotech.us/info/crt-lcd.htm

And here some videos showing some examples of how LCDs are slower compared to CRTs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi2OE6hSh00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuV_-hsau0k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlLlKrlkp9M

And some extensive comparisson:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/632-1/lcds-ima...d-to-crts-yes.html

as long as mum doesn't know that it's alright

yup i gotta say it,

Cookie's replys r jus awesome sometimes lol

To backup this alot of gamers tend to stay with CRT's.

or they buy the really really expensive TFT's/LCD's

that come as close as possible to CRT's.

Crt's our generally better for gaming but there huge so i stopped using mine