I'm curious what people are using these days, after seeing TFT's being used for FPS games at EC11. Are CPL going to move to TFT's next year? I'd imagine there's strong pressure from their sponsors to use TFT technology.

Sponsor pressure it is... Haven't Toxic and Jibo complained about them TFTs, among others ? Not that it's a new complaint either.

czm has been using a benq for a fair amount of time now?

This guy not minding LCD quality does not mean nobody else can't.

I know, I am just stating that they are playable.

Most make it out to be impossible.

Playable? It's playable on 10" B/W monitors too. ;)

My BenQ 937s+ works just fine. Noticed a difference when I switch from my Trinitron 19", but now it's just fine. Play both Q3 and HL2DM pretty good on it. Notice that it's an LCD more in Q3 of course due to higher and more stable FPS.

irb didn't lik em

TFT's have come a long way for gaming, I have a hyunday l90d+(lcd) along with a viewsonic p95f+(crt) and when I got this lcd I got it for the purpose of gaming on it. During the time I was playing a lot of cpma and I really didn't notice ghosting I would notice with lcds in the past, and after a couple months I got totally used to it, it was easy on the eyes and I didn't feel like there was any ghosting or jitteryness until i played cpma on a crt again. The picture brightness and contrast on my lcd is 5x better than the picture on my crt, but the max 75hz refresh rate on the lcd makes it feel cheap.

Wouldn't be a good thing for CPL to use TFTs but it wouldn't be terrible, would just give a few weak players headaches when they try to adapt to lower refresh rate.

Got my two Dell 2001fp yesterday. But I don't really play computer games these days, mostly poker.

Might have to pick up a ninja graphics card if I want to play 3D games since the native resolution is 1600*1200.

Non-native resolutions aren't as noticable in games though.

Is that an absolute concrete fact though Sujoy? I ask because a friend is selling a very decent TFT at a very decent price. Thing is the native resolution is 1280x1024 which my GC can handle within Windows, but that in games such as Q4 is way out of reach.

Not a fact as such, just how it appears to me.

Better LCD's are very adept at scaling. My Viewsonic VX910 is 19", 12ms response time with a native resolution of 1280.

However, Q4 (or any game for that matter) can be played at 800x600 @ 85Hz, and you would *never* notice its being scaled at all - looks sharp. No ghosting either, at all. 85hz is great for gaming too, uber smooth. The diff between 85 and 120Hz is pretty negligible, but the difference between 60 and 85 is huge, so make sure the LCD is at least 85@ 800x600.

The only people who bleat about LCD's are die hard CRT users; most who buy a *good* gaming LCD never look back. Having to game at the native resolution is an 'urban myth' (as such) also.

Edit: Eating my own words now! Just bought iiyama 454 and its far superior for gaming than my TFT :) Just goes to show how getting used to something makes you biased.

I use vsync at 60HZ, teh smoothest.

I get noticeable mouse lag with vsync and hence never, ever use it.

i have the same, my tft has a native res of 1280 but i usually game in 1024 and i cant really see a big diff in q4

I use a TFT... 19".... 12ms Response time...

Whats the standard response time of a CRT ? might have to knock that 12ms off my "ping"


TT

it doesn't work that way but it think its 7ms or something, can't remember really.

Isn't it 0ms or something :P

0ms is impossible, but i know what you mean.
i have no facts but i was told that in school when i asked, i dunno how much the teacher knew though (datorhantering, lolkurs ;D)

Well, there are 4ms LCDs so I'm guessing your teacher is just making stuff up to not look clueless :P

Technically CRT monitors don't have response time I think. So you could say they are 0ms even though they aren't "any ms" as they dont have response time (instant).

lolbarn till lärare :P

Standard on a CRT is 0.

a _really_ bad way of comparing refresh rates to hz is think that they are almost the same thing.

so a Hz of 120 gives you a refresh rate of 1000/120: 8.3ms.
and a refresh rate of 16ms gives you a Hz of 1000/16: 62.5.

however this information should be taken with the biggest grain of salt money can buy.

on another note, i use crt for gaming, but tft [2001fp] for gaming at lans, and the tft isnt that bad, at whatever resolution.

Actually CRT's are known to have about 2-4 ms.

-J.

atm I'm forced to play on a TFT as I only got my notebook left (no more desktop PC), but it plain and simply said sucks for fps such as Q3. At home I used to play on a 19" CRT with 120Hz, and it's so way way way way way much better than any TFT I've ever seen. It became better when I started to use the default resolution (1280x800) in games too, but still it's not even close to the comfy quality of any CRT I guess (for fast games like fps that is).

Also so far I've only heard complains of gamers whenever they were forced to play on TFTs so I guess it's not just the TFTs I got my hands on but a problem in general as big tournaments are supposed to have the brand new and best stuff from their sponsors, right?

notebook tft's are usually alot worse for gaming though than regular tft's

Well I can only tell what I've experienced myself (and what most competitive gamers seem to think too), so far every TFT I got my hands on was pretty much 'not great' for gaming.

15" TFT!!!

I also use a 19" CRT but I usually get headaches if I use it for too long.

CRT, really want a TFT though :(

same 8(

you'll want your CRT back (for gaming) once you got your TFT, trust me :>

depends on what games you play duder.

yep i had the same problem:> glad i got crt back

crt gives me headaches now.. no matter what refresh rate or anything :(

tft ftw !

TFTs are definately very comfortable for the eyes, still I'd prefer a decent 19" CRT @ 120 Hz - for gaming at least.

iiyama 22" CRT - nothing beats having to use your peripheral vision to see your health and armour :P

17" CRT monitor here.. i dont have anything against TFT monitors as long as they're not ghosting :)

Got me a very cute VX912 19" 8ms, never going back to crt

CRT, CRT!
A good TFT monitor is still a lot of $$$ for students ;(
I bought a 2nd hand 21" Cornerstone p1500 CRT last year, never want anything smaller now.

how is that monitor, im looking to replace my dell p1110 21inch crt at the moment, and ive been considering the cornerstone p1750 22inch crt jobbie??

Mine is great, looking at the age of the monitor it's still in great shape. Don't know about that type though :)

TFT monitors are FAR behind CRT:s in fast paced FPS such as Quake 3, and Quake 4 seems to be a faster game. In close combat the entire scene moves too fast for the TFT to keep up, and I find precise flick shots alot more difficult.

The lower refresh rate is just unbearable. It's so flickery your eyes are likely to die. Compared to a CRT / Quake3 / 125 Hz / Vsync enabled.. the diffrence is - to say the least - HUGE.
(On a side note - I've got an highend 19" CRT)

However, if I didn't play Quake, I'd like to have a TFT. For regular computer use (surfing, IRC, (porn? -_-), etc) they are really easy on your eyes, take up less desktop space, less power consumption...

WoW ^^

True dat.

LCDs don't flicker..

i think he is talking about ingame when a game runs at say 125fps and the monitor 60/75hz the gfx will tear/flicker especially without vsync(wich would cap the fps@hz)

Wouldn't hardcore porn ghost on LCD's? I mean, it is pretty fast and hard...

Score 1 for teh CRT's!

wtf...

you people on crack. TFT can go as low as 2ms now and its only about 350$ for a 19 inch monitor

19`` iiyama 455 pro. its ok had it ages nps.

Id just add here that the intension for EC was to have CRT, but I was told by the cowworks guys that its almost impossible to source a bulk lot of CRT's these days as so few are mass making them.

In the states at quakecon they had CRT and TFT mixed in, though in the players area it was only CRT from what I remember.

Certainly these news "thinner" CRT's could be the perfect answer between space saving/weight saving and perfect imaging in FPS games.

I have tried a 4ms samsung TFT and sent it back after 3 days because it was ghosting so badly, particularly in faster FPS games such Q3 and UT/UT2004. In CS:S and BF2 for instance it was much better than the CRT.

Did you try it with a DVI cable???

DVI removes all ghosting... well it did on my 12ms LG TFT

In my experience -- the ghosting on LCDs is much less severe at its native resolution in DVI, or some lower multiple of its resolution in DVI (640x480 with nvidia drivers set to 'maintain aspect ratio' mode as an example for my 1280x1024 lcd).

I have been playing on a 8ms sony somethingorother for a while now due to space restrictions, and while it is noticably slower than my CRT, it is not bad enough that I want to change back.

19" iiyama tft

i'm sick of people bringing up response time when it means nothing.

in tft it does =)

no

i can honestly say that i tell difference between 25ms and 8ms, and they were both samsung so i guess it's the same quality, kinda.

because they're both samsung so they probably used the same response time method. i bet i could find several so called 4ms response time lcd's, that don't respond as quick as several other 8ms lcd's (that is by using the same method to test response time).

might be!

I think what offo means is that the standards for reporting response times are so hazy that the actual ms time means very little in terms of real performance of the screen.

It means grayscale transition time.

and?

which tft's did they use at EC ? i could make out that they were samsung, but which model ?

one of the 4ms ones, there isnt that many.

well the 4ms is black. the ones on the picture seemed anthrzitish... so possibly the 913 8ms one ? dunno, maybe different models depending on the country.

TFT have been defuse!

CRT all the way.

17" crt

i own a Benq FP937 s 19" tft and havent got any problems in faster games. although going to lower resolutions than the native is sometimes a pain in the ass, but that depends on the game youre playing

I got a 19" ViewSonic UltraBrite E92f+ CRT monitor and it truly rox.

I have tried different TFT's at friends houses and so on but the feeling of playing q3 on a TFT is not the same.
Still I do want a TFT monitor but only for working issues and videoediting and such. And there should be dual vision on those TFT's aswell =D

I have both a 19" LCD screen and an ilyama 19" , when i use the tft screen for gaming my eyes start to water after about 15-20 mins , there is blurring and ghosting and a host of other things you dont expect from a screen (such as single lcd "pixels" doing there own thing) i have 0 problems with my crt at all and overall everything looks both more solid and easier on the eye.

TFT's give me eye strain after a while, i really dislike them..

I've been looking at buying a 19" 4ms one

Might be added that I wouldn't be surprised if CRT's are replaced in gaming by LCD's within 2 years.

TFT's are sexy but their just not for gaming

love my eizo L768 tft :)

it's all a question of getting used to it and having the motivation of doing so :p

I liked the 4ms on the samsung tft's, but they still go sorta blurry when you're fast. if they'd fix that I'd go for tft and never go back

gay ass poll, and to whoever votes tft, get a clue pls

of course crt's are the only option for quake games

saying that ic did ok on tft's at the ec :)

They didn't have much of a choice did they ? ;)

nope, but it shows that you can play at or very close to the highest level on a tft, its just a case of gettng used to it

of course 120hz crt is much easier on the eyes, and more comfortable to play with, any competative advantage gained over tft ms lag/jerky gfx is clearly only very small

nah, neither fox toxic cooller or jibo were near their highest level at that EC.

well, got used to my hyundai L90D+ now and i'm quite happy of it

GPS

tft for long time work in front of the pc and crt for gaming

I use a 19" TFT: Samsung SyncMaster 913 and I must say it works really well for those games I play (UT2004 on pretty high level and warcraft III)

TFT's > CRT's. but if ppl wants to play q3 only @640x480/800x600/(1024x768), just forget it, imho =)

Edit : TFT's >= CRT's to make (almost) everyone happy : P

im not happy.

...of your CRT ? i can understand ^^

hoho...

tft + cordless input devices.. YES!!

I switched to a 17" TFT with 16ms response time some 2 years ago and it was fine for Quake3 but when I started playing CSS it was useless.

I think the type of gfx the game is displaying has alot to do with how good the screen is - Q3 is nice and bright, CSS is a more modern "realistic" looking which didn't work too well on my TFT.

Anyway I switched back to CRT now and everything is sooo much better!!

That something is modern and more realistic has nothing to do with it though. HL2 runs just fine on my LCD. But it's a new 19" 8ms one, not a two year old 16ms one.

The ViewSonic VP930b seems to be pretty good, if I were to buy a new LCD it would be this one.

the frozen throne :D

tft is the future

CRT is the present ;)

Are they not pimping tft's that do 4ms refresh rate?

Pc gamer did a big article on them. Yes they look slick but are they not shit for quake?

I think i'll stick to my crt until they get superfast.

its so much better when surfing / working on tfts i dont mind them to be not as good as crts in gaming.
but current TFTs with amazingly low reaction times do the job pretty well!

crt is better but Im waiting for the new OLEd? or something.

ive gotten quite used to my TFT screen, saves space too \:D/

How The hell can a monitor be 0ms? Wouldent that be no picture? :p

I've been getting by quite happily on a 19inch hyundai imagequest l90D+ if im honest its better than the crt i had and having desk space again is welcome bonus

provided it is sub 8ms, then tft's are fine

i switched over to an LCD spring of 2003. i got a hitachi cml 174, one of the first sub 20ms reponse screens. advertised as 16ms. anyway, yeah, it's really hard to adjust to FPS games at first, but you slowly get used to it. most people here complain about it so much because they went from CRT straight to LCD, and then immediately hated it and went back to CRT.

i stuck it out for a few months and all my skills came back and i didn't feel the need to go back to CRT. i am also interested in seeing what the latest-and-greatest LCDs look like for games. should be interesting.

would consider buying one in a couple of years =P but not sooner :D

can't notice a diff but my eyes are very bad!

TFT

Just saves place on my Desk and I do not believe in "faster screen, better player"

cu

I just got rid of my 17" CRT and got 3 19" 8ms TFT's, imo the TFT is no where near as good as my old CRT for gaming - the screen cant keep up with my fast movements :( but I will probably get used to it in time.

There's some new tech coming soon which combines the best of both screens - SED http://www.behardware.com/articles/593-1/clos...d-sed.html

SED monitors are on their way and well the promises of the companies creating realy gives something to look forward to. It's gonna be as cheap as a crt / tft of today, while having a shorter reaction time as the crt while being able to show more fps on higher resolutions etc.
So if they can back up what they claim... around the same time next year everyone will have a SED monitor :P

TFT's just need a little getting used to, and most cant get used to it quick enough at lan events which is why they moan, it takes 1 to 2 days to get used to them i found which is far to long at a lan.

So make the switch or pay the price ! because tfts will be used at most tournaments in the future.

hmm crt or tft i cant choose : )

Why do you guys run your CRTs at 120hz? Why not higher?