E-Mail:

LCD vs CRT

  • No Related Post

linux_user_73 writes:

Which has better life span? I have had issues with laptop screens going bad, which, to my knowledge, are LCD’s! I am in the process of saving up money to purchase a high end maxed out Linux PC. I want to purchase a PC with a dual core 64-bit processor, 3.0 gigaherts minimum. With 2 gigabytes ram installed, and a 500GB SATA hard drive. A nNvidia GeForce 8800 Ultra Video card, and a Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Professional Series sound card.

What sort of monitor will give me the best resolution, view angle, and color depth, while having a long lifespan, a LCD or CRT monitor? I have had 2 Laptops and each have given me problems with the screen after only 2 years of use! Especially around the edges, bottom and middle white out and fade a little! I do use my Laptops/Notebook PC as my main/only machine, so spend many hours per day using it.

Well, Linux_User_73, the question of CRT or LCD is really starting to boil down to availability. If you’re going to buy a high-end monitor, you might as well go for the gusto and pick up a 30″ LCD monitor. I recommend LCD for several reasons:

  • Cost - a similarly sized LCD monitor is going to cost less than a CRT monitor. While you may not be able to get the same resolution out of a 19″ LCD monitor as you could a 19″ CRT monitor
  • Resolution - the truth is that CRT monitors are built and optimized for a specific resolution, so you’ll get optimal video quality as that resolution than you would at a higher or lower one. The same holds true for LCD monitors.
  • Space - CRT’s are big, LCD’s are not. A 30″ LCD monitor isn’t going to take up as much space as a 30″ CRT monitor
  • Availability - Every major computer supplier, from what I have seen, has seriously limited their supply of CRT monitors, some stores to the point where you won’t be able to find anything but LCD monitors.
  • Lifespan - the top of the line LCD monitors will last for a few good years before they kick the bucket.
  • Color Depth and Viewing Angle - for the low-end of the LCD spectrum you’ll run into serious problems with limited color depth and viewing angles, but the top of the line LCD’s offer a very wide viewing angle and color depth that CRT’s have a very hard time matching.

Ultimately the choice is up to you. Personally, I’d go with a high-end LCD monitor and get the extended warranty.

2 Comments

The most important question here appears to have been missed: what is the rig going to be used for? If you are doing Video or Photo work, then you still get the best colour quality from a CRT.

This is an old and new problem (not for me)…

( http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/10/11/tips-for-buying-a-monitor/#comment-548712 )

Everything depends on what do you want to use it for.

If the final product will be on a paper, like a photo or a review, maybe you’ll stick with a CRT. Not only the high refresh rates or the smalest pixel will help you to have a beter image and no stress, but also a contrast and brightness without competition.

If you just see a movie sometimes, or watch photos, but your main work is to programs, or text files (even excell…), will like the LCD since is just 2″ deep. And clear enough for this kind of work… I know, some modern technologies like LED projectors can give more contrast ( >10.000 ) to a slim monitor, but still do not comes close to a CRT performance…

About the size, practical I am intrested in the maximum rezolution the display can handle more than the display size. a 3″ monitor with DHTV will be used at 3″ to see exactly like an 60″ monitor at 60″. The space around you and how you will manage, will give the optimal size for display. I know some laptops manufacturers who offer a 15″ display with 1920×1200 pixels… For a laptop, it should be enough…

The cost, I’m out of market, but my CRT monitor cost me $2000 ten years ago. I guess that now a similar monitor should cost less $500… And allways “the industry” will ofer the “top” at about the same price…

Like allways, everything is up to you…

What Do You Think?

 
62 queries / 0.164 seconds.