I have a Samsung monitor with alomost identical specs, and I can say thay I am very pleased with it. I doubt I will go back to CRT now
Mine is a Samsung SyncMaster913N 19"TFT which also has 8ms and 1280*1024 resolution.
My favourite feature on it is the 'MagicTune' which aligns the visible picture to the size of you monitor Very handy, and no more messing about with control panels and knobs.
I got it from Ebuyer I think, and i'm guessing it is similar to the one Tristan gave you a link too, although mine was cheaper (and possibly an older model).
im runnin a Mitsubishi 19" LCD 8ms.. it also re-adjusts the screen size to fit the screen.. tis damn sexy for a primary monitor while i use me 17" CRT for chat windows and s**t..
We've recently got a load of these at work. Good lord, are they beautiful. Makes me jealous, as I'm stuck on my dual sharps still
Basically look for a good constrast ratio (500:1 is generally standard, 700:1 is above average), and a good refresh rate (I'd recommend 8 or below for gaming).
I haven't checked to see the difference between it and the 930BF, but it is cheaper and has much the same stats.
8ms compared to 4ms and the DVI connection are the only differences I see at a glance. From what I have heard DVI gives a minor improvement. As for the 4ms......obviously it it quicker, but I haven't noticed an ounce of ghosting anyway.
I used to think that too, until my last one died and my replacement was cheap and nasty (my fault anyway)
I know CRT is still the best in terms of quality (i think) but IMO the differences of mid-range CRTs and TFTs is negligible to the vast majority of users.
For me, the space saving and size of a large TFT compared to a monster CRT tips the balance towards TFT.
i own 21" + 22" CRTs and my laptop has a 17" lcd..
i must say :
CRTs have much better smoothing while playing games, and much sharper graphics while working on 3dsmax, photoshop, etc.
the lcd though, is way brighter, and the colours correction is way better.
make ur choise..
i use both
As I've said many times before, though, I love my 24", 100 lb (45 kg) CRT behemoth. It also gets pretty close to the res of the aforementioned 30" LCD at 2304x1440. It's not officially supported by NVIDIA on my 6800GT, but it works. Most of the time I run at 2048x1280.
You shouldn't compare between a desktop screen and a laptop screen. Laptop TFTs in noway represent today's TFT quality. In laptops low power consumption, low weight and low thickness come in first. Quality is second.
Usually even the cheaper desktop TFT screens provide a way better picture quality than even high-end laptop displays.
However, I'm somewhat surprised with your findings. You say the CRT is sharper? Now, if there's one thing TFT screens excell at it's sharpness. No CRT monitor can match that. Are you sure you are running your laptop display in the native resolution? Because if you don't, you will get a blurry picture due to the interpolation. Unlike CRT which can use about any resolution in its working range, TFT displays have only 1 resolution they are sharp at. That's also a drawback for gaming of larger TFT displays with high resolutions. Not every graphis card can pump out smooth gameplay at 1920x1200 or higher. On a CRT you just set the resolution a tad smaller, but everything still looks fine. On a TFT any resolution other than the native will require interpolation and thus blur. Bye bye superior sharpness in games. Live For Speed on the other hand isn't that 'heavy'. With a high-end graphics card, it plays well at 1920x1200 and everything turned up.
You also find the color correction better on the TFT. Do you mean by this the way the colors look? Because no matter how good TFT has become lately, CRT still beats the crap out of TFT here. Yes, TFT is way brighter (way too bright in many cases), but the colors are usually less vibrant than with CRT screens and if you compare to a color calibrated CRT monitor the TFT is clearly different. However, the better TFT screens can get pretty close to a color calibrated CRT using a calibration spider. Still not perfect though. Especially visible in the blacks which are always grey due to the backlight leakage. Because of the different (inferior) gamut, viewing angle,... of TFT screens the colors will never be as good as CRT - well, at least not until a major technology break-through happens.
Does that mean TFT sucks? Hell no... I wouldn't want to live without it anymore. The small space it takes on my desk... I have 2 24" TFT displays and my desk still looks empty and spacy. I can't even imagine having that in CRT on my desk. It just wouldn't fit because of the CRT's depth. The colors are somewhat off, but I managed to configure it very close to a color calibrated CRT. Of course, if you're into DTP or photo retouching where colors are extremely important you may want to stick with CRT, but for most other users TFT will do just fine. TFTs are often bashed by gamers for their slow responsiveness, but every not-too-cheap modern TFT will be good enough for the casual gamer and the more expensive displays will satisfy even hardcore gamers. The bad thing is that the response time manufacturers give up doesn't say much. I've seen 8ms displays with terrible ghosting and 25ms screens on which gaming was pretty acceptable. My display is has a 12/16ms response time. I DO notice ghosting, but the amount is so small it doesn't bother me.
The only thing that really annoys me is the black level. My displays are amongst the best available in terms of black level, but in a dark room it just looks grey. THis is especially annoying when watching movies. In daylight the black level is excellent.
CRT pros & cons:
+ Color correctness
+ Resolution independant
+ Excellent black level
+ Excellent viewing angle
+ Excellent responsiveness
- Weight
- Dimensions (especially depth)
- Sharpness (although good to acceptable when new, CRT screens tend to lose sharpness over the years, especially in the corners)
- Not flickerfree. Even at 100Hz you'll notice you get less tired sitting behind a TFT
- Power consumption
Other problems that may raise depending on make and quality are: moire, convergency problems, concussion/tilting, somewhat darker in the corners,...
TFT pros & cons:
+ Excellent sharpness
+ Flickerfree. Even at only 60Hz, TFTs produce a steady flickerfree image that can keep your behind the display for hours and hours
+ Weight
+ Dimensions (especially depth)
+ Power consumption (the larger TFT displays tend to consume quite a bit too, but nowhere close what a similar CRT would consume)
- Bad black level (it always looks greyish)
- Slightly worse colors for the high-end displays to rather bad colors for the cheap TFT displays
- Only 1 native resolution: all the rest is interpolated and thus blurry
- Acceptable viewing angle for MVA/PVA panels to bad viewing angle for TN panels
- Acceptable responsiveness for fast and modern displays, bad for older displays
Other problems that may raise depending on make and quality are: inconsistent backlight (darker areas), annoying backlight leakage on the borders, dark/bright areas due to pressure on the display (bad construction) and last but not least: the infamous dead pixels.
Coming from (a good) CRT, switching to TFT will take some familiarisation. Some of the drawbacks of TFT will make you wish you went for another CRT, but in the end you'll be happy with it. CRT is a dying breed.
On the other hand, I don't think the future is in TFT, though. TFT is good for now, but technologies like OLED and SED look far more promising. Of course, TFT is here now - widely available and cheap. SED and OLED are not even available yet
As a CAD designer you probably like high resolutions so you can see more information on the screen. Since 19" TFT are only 1280x1024 and the 21" works fin at 1600x1200 (and probably even higher) the CRT wins here both hands down.
[21" CRT] 1 - 0 [19" TFT]
CAD designer - as most computer jobs - requires you to spend many hours sitting behind your display. So you would benefit from a flickerfree TFT, but on the other hand many CAD programs have a black background so you wouldn't have much issues with CRT's flicker anyway. But I'll go with the TFT because it's extra sharpness also means better readability and thus less tiring.
[21" CRT] 0 - 1 [19" TFT]
Colors are not important for a CAD designer, nor for gaming, nor for surfing. So even though the CRT is probably better at this field, the TFT has no drawbacks in your case.
[21" CRT] 1 - 1 [19" TFT]
Responsiveness is also of no importance for a CAD designer, but as LFS gamer you'll want an acceptable response time. However, you state you have a decent TFT so I guess ghosting is not an issue. No winner here either.
[21" CRT] 1 - 1 [19" TFT]
But if you're a gamer who frequently attends LAN parties I don't think you like dragging a 21" monitor with you. So the light TFT is the clear winner here.
[21" CRT] 0 - 1 [19" TFT]
If you like watching movies on your computer the 21" has obviously the advantage in size and being a CRT also in black level.
[21" CRT] 1 - 0 [19" TFT]
So in the end, it's a tie for TFT and CRT (4 - 4). It just depends where your priorities are. So to answer your question: I don't know
You also forgot actually monitor footprint and heat, I work both in the office and at home, and everytime I go back to work, I miss my TFT, I LOVE my TFT monitor, IMO a decent TFT blows a CRT out of the water in a BIG way, purely from a work point of view, sitting infront of a CRT for 8 hours is a pain in the backside, even at 100Hz, the TFT wins hands down.
Ok, so I run my work CRT at 1600x1200, it gives me more real estate , but even at a "lowly" 1280 x 1024 thats enough, and when it comes to gaming it's more than enough for me.
The way TFT displays colour and contrast make it so much more vivid and vibrant (IMO), not only that but the tiny footprint and low heat output make it a no other choice soloution.
In the summer my work CRT kicks out so much heat its unreal, its like sitting next to a cooker, if someone were to say to me I had to go back to a CRT at home I would go mad I think.
Now, if I could only get my boss to spring for a nice new TFT monitor for work........
Tell him it will save $$ a year when you factor in the difference in power consumption of the CRT and TFT and then the extra cooling costs the CRT requires (i.e. aircon working harder in summer) it should add up to abit at least it the basis of a good argument LOL then as the final ace up your sleve tell him that it can be claimed as a tax deduction
On the footprint I agree. I said that in my first post too. I have 2 24" TFT displays on my desk and I can't even imagine having 2 similar sized CRT displays on it.
But even though TFTs consume a lot less than CRT displays they still generate heat. It's not much of a problem with the smaller 17" and 19" displays, but 24" and 30" displays have huge backlights that produce a lot of heat.
I couldn't agree more. I used to have quite frequently painful eyes because of sitting too long behind a CRT monitor (programmer), even though I had high-end CRT monitors (@ 100 and 120Hz). Since I switced to TFT I could spend the same amount of time behind the screen, but without getting as tired. Of course it's still not healthy :P, but I feel a lot more comfortable.
For gaming 1280x1024 may suffice, but the days I was a gamer have passed a long time ago. Now I race occassionally for fun. For me the amount of information I can put on a single screen is important. The higher the resolution, the better. I don't think I could switch back to 1280x1024. I would get claustrophobia :P
That's not entirely true. TFT appears to be more vivid, but that's because it's way brighter than CRT. In reality the colors are somewhat off because TFT's gamut is smaller than a CRT's gamut. (gamut = color spectrum the display can show).
But just as you, I don't want to go back to CRT. TFT is way better for my needs.
Very handy, and no more messing about with control panels and knobs.
(my fault anyway)
