144hz hah
prepare for eye fatigue at 2x faster pace
prepare for eye fatigue at 2x faster pace
forum
Which kind of Monitor is good for Osu! ?
posted
Total Posts
33
I have a CRT monitor that I run osu! at 140Hz (or 176Hz when I'm in the mood to drop the resolution to play osu!mania), and I've found that the high refresh rate reduces eyestrain when playing Taiko or osu!mania. It does make a difference in Standard mode (the cursor is quite a bit easier to follow, making spaced patterns somewhat easier to land), although I'm not sure about how significant the benefit really is, or how it compares to a 144Hz LCD.
But anyone who says that CRTs have terrible image quality simply hasn't seen a high-end CRT monitor, which trumps over most standard LCDs in a lot of ways. They can achieve high resolutions with great clarity (mine handles 2048x1536 if I'm willing to drop down to 75Hz, but I'd rather run a lower resolution with a higher refresh rate), generally have better contrast ratios, and natively support just about any resolution you throw at it without any blurring (low resolutions, custom resolutions, etc. as long as you don't exceed the max). And since they're discontinued, you might be able to get lucky and pick one up for a very good price (I got mine for $40 a few months ago).
The only real negatives to having a good CRT is the manual initial calibration needed, as well as the footprint on your desk and your energy bill. That, and the aspect ratio, but that's not that big of a deal IMO (I play letterboxed on some games, which I can deal with since my monitor's more than big enough. There are also widescreen CRTs that exist, and while they're the cream of the crop, they're much more rare than a high end 4:3 CRT).
But anyone who says that CRTs have terrible image quality simply hasn't seen a high-end CRT monitor, which trumps over most standard LCDs in a lot of ways. They can achieve high resolutions with great clarity (mine handles 2048x1536 if I'm willing to drop down to 75Hz, but I'd rather run a lower resolution with a higher refresh rate), generally have better contrast ratios, and natively support just about any resolution you throw at it without any blurring (low resolutions, custom resolutions, etc. as long as you don't exceed the max). And since they're discontinued, you might be able to get lucky and pick one up for a very good price (I got mine for $40 a few months ago).
The only real negatives to having a good CRT is the manual initial calibration needed, as well as the footprint on your desk and your energy bill. That, and the aspect ratio, but that's not that big of a deal IMO (I play letterboxed on some games, which I can deal with since my monitor's more than big enough. There are also widescreen CRTs that exist, and while they're the cream of the crop, they're much more rare than a high end 4:3 CRT).
"High-end"YayMii wrote:
But anyone who says that CRTs have terrible image quality simply hasn't seen a high-end CRT monitor, which trumps over most standard LCDs in a lot of ways.
Sorry, but when you compare the best CRT vs the normally available LCD, there is usually going to be this sort of argument.
But from a cost-effective point of view, standard consumer level LCD's trump standard consumer level CRT's of the past. That's what I was getting at.
Then there's also the the max resolution of CRT's. With software, games and viewing material going the way they are these days, you don't really want to settle for anything less than a 1920x1080 LCD if you are going to buy anything "new." A CRT running at that resolution will experience "noise" and won't have a high refresh rate.
Input lag on regular LCDs is just horrible. Especially if you just had a CRT monitor
120-144 hz monitors are great for this kind of stuff
If you are going to get Benq - get Z models like XL2411Z or XL2420Z e.t.c. cause they have PWM-free strobe (in short - it's better for your eyes)
Keep in mind that using lightboost with these kind of monitors you get almost no motion blur BUT input lag becomes similar to usual LCDs.
Lightboost is awesome for shooters though
120-144 hz monitors are great for this kind of stuff
If you are going to get Benq - get Z models like XL2411Z or XL2420Z e.t.c. cause they have PWM-free strobe (in short - it's better for your eyes)
Keep in mind that using lightboost with these kind of monitors you get almost no motion blur BUT input lag becomes similar to usual LCDs.
Lightboost is awesome for shooters though
What I was getting at is that a high end CRT does go for pretty cheap nowadays (that is, if you can find one), so it could be potentially a more cost-effective option. But as I said, the max resolution of a CRT can exceed 1920x1080 (and I can still get 1920x1200@90Hz on mine and it looks just fine), so that point is somewhat irrelevant.
Also, CRTs still have a few advantages over high-end LCDs, mainly (especially) in latency. And unlike LCDs, CRTs don't compromise between color accuracy and motion clarity/low-latency (you either get one or the other on a high-end LCD, although this has been improving in the past while or so).
That isn't to say that CRT is the best option though. They do have a purpose, but they're not for everyone.
Also, CRTs still have a few advantages over high-end LCDs, mainly (especially) in latency. And unlike LCDs, CRTs don't compromise between color accuracy and motion clarity/low-latency (you either get one or the other on a high-end LCD, although this has been improving in the past while or so).
That isn't to say that CRT is the best option though. They do have a purpose, but they're not for everyone.
Almost all the points people made in here about CRTs being better than LCDs are not true anymore (when they used to be). The only thing a CRT still wins on is being able to scale graphics at non-integral factors (which is something people want when playing emulators, for example). Otherwise, you can get a rapid LCD easily. I suppose if you spent 4 minutes picking out an LCD from Wal-Mart and comparing it to your well made CRT you've kept around for decades, you'll get the confirmation bias you were looking for.
(Ironically, they had a demo set up with a scrolling picture on several high frame rate LCD models to show you the difference in the higher refresh rate screens there at Wal-Mart around where I live)
Even when LCDs were the dull slow things back when they were new, I really don't miss that high screeching noise (they all do that, the higher end ones are worse), I don't miss the burning eyes, the excessive size and weight, and fiddling with the picture knobs for hours never being satisfied.
(Ironically, they had a demo set up with a scrolling picture on several high frame rate LCD models to show you the difference in the higher refresh rate screens there at Wal-Mart around where I live)
Even when LCDs were the dull slow things back when they were new, I really don't miss that high screeching noise (they all do that, the higher end ones are worse), I don't miss the burning eyes, the excessive size and weight, and fiddling with the picture knobs for hours never being satisfied.
These are usually signs of a dying CRT.WolfCoder wrote:
I really don't miss that high screeching noise (they all do that, the higher end ones are worse), I don't miss the burning eyes, the excessive size and weight, and fiddling with the picture knobs for hours never being satisfied.
Unfortunately they don't last forever. That's the one thing working against us in picking up an old CRT. My current one has a screeching noise, the capacitors are dying.
The rest of what you said is true. The fact people are still arguing over input lag just baffles me. It's only a problem on 8bit panels, IPS panels etc. A typical TN panel will be just fine. I couldn't tell more than 10ms input lag between my CRT and my 2006 LCD (lasting 8 years is pretty good).
my LCD monitor has a high pitched whine too, it's had it for 3 years but it's settled down recently or maybe i just cant notice it as much even if i try anymore.
Oh, LCD? My bad.Bassist Vinyl wrote:
my LCD monitor has a high pitched whine too, it's had it for 3 years but it's settled down recently or maybe i just cant notice it as much even if i try anymore.
But mine is 8 years old and is not screeching at all. In fact it works just fine and I plan on using it as a second monitor.
eh my case isnt related to the other guys CRT just mentioned it because why notRaneFire wrote:
Oh, LCD? My bad.Bassist Vinyl wrote:
my LCD monitor has a high pitched whine too, it's had it for 3 years but it's settled down recently or maybe i just cant notice it as much even if i try anymore.
But mine is 8 years old and is not screeching at all. In fact it works just fine and I plan on using it as a second monitor.
The high-pitched noise on a CRT isn't abnormal; it is not a sign of impending doom unless it's associated with other symptoms. The thing is, it really depends on a lot of variables (the components within the monitor, the refresh rate, the acoustics in the room, the user's hearing range and/or tolerance for high-pitched noises, etc). It's not a dealbreaker IMO, as I find it barely noticeable, not to mention I'm using headphones most of the time.
As for the burning eyes: I can't say that I've ever had that problem with mine. But it might be the refresh rates I'm running it at. I have experienced all sorts of eyestrain from LCDs though, but that's a completely different story entirely (it probably has more to do with the surrounding environment than the type of monitor anyways).
But what I said earlier still holds true. CRTs (especially the higher-end ones) may be a viable choice, but they're not for everyone.
To be completely honest, the main reason I got mine was the price ($40 for a high refresh-rate/high-resolution monitor, regardless of the type, is a pretty sweet deal. Especially when the seller insisted that it was barely used).
As for the burning eyes: I can't say that I've ever had that problem with mine. But it might be the refresh rates I'm running it at. I have experienced all sorts of eyestrain from LCDs though, but that's a completely different story entirely (it probably has more to do with the surrounding environment than the type of monitor anyways).
But what I said earlier still holds true. CRTs (especially the higher-end ones) may be a viable choice, but they're not for everyone.
To be completely honest, the main reason I got mine was the price ($40 for a high refresh-rate/high-resolution monitor, regardless of the type, is a pretty sweet deal. Especially when the seller insisted that it was barely used).
Super late reply, but how do you get to this screen?Mathsma wrote:
B1rd wrote:
I'm going to replace my old 60hz 1440x900 monitor with a BenQ 24" 1080p 144hz 1ms response time monitor soon.
Play on 1440x900 windowed with aero disabled and http://puu.sh/7YYgf.png
That is if you play with mouse like your profile says.
Right click your osu!.exe and click on 'properties'Zup wrote:
Super late reply, but how do you get to this screen?
this monitor broke a year ago thankfullyxxjesus1412fanx wrote:
my LCD monitor has a high pitched whine too, it's had it for 3 years but it's settled down recently or maybe i just cant notice it as much even if i try anymore.
Right click on the osu! desktop icon and then click 'properties'.Zup wrote:
Super late reply, but how do you get to this screen?
I play full screen letterboxing at 1440x900 with 144hz monitor, Its niceB1rd wrote:
I'm going to replace my old 60hz 1440x900 monitor with a BenQ 24" 1080p 144hz 1ms response time monitor soon.
Any advice though what I should do about the resolution change? Should I keep Osu! at 1440x900, would that create any cursor lag? Or should I play Osu! at 1080p, would the image quality be much better? And would such a slight sensitivty adjustment stuff up my aim for a long time?
many hz is gud
Bashing on crts makes me sad, can't very well imagine better picture quality than what i get on a HP A217A (same screen as sony gdm-fw900). 1920*1200 @ 94 hz on desktop, more hz and lower res for games (125hz...160hz).
Bashing on crts makes me sad, can't very well imagine better picture quality than what i get on a HP A217A (same screen as sony gdm-fw900). 1920*1200 @ 94 hz on desktop, more hz and lower res for games (125hz...160hz).
You get used to new sensitivity really fast, if you play maps where you can follow cursor and concentrate on hitting the middle of circles (or see where you land).B1rd wrote:
would such a slight sensitivty adjustment stuff up my aim for a long time?
I saw a brand new OLED TV a few days ago, and dayum, that picture quality.
The only thing I would be afraid of (at least from the first OLED monitor generation) would be the burn ins, playing osu in windowed mode for a long time could cause a burn in (actually it caused a burn in into my normal LCD screen too considering how long it has been up).
I know they will fix them, but the question is when. :p
The only thing I would be afraid of (at least from the first OLED monitor generation) would be the burn ins, playing osu in windowed mode for a long time could cause a burn in (actually it caused a burn in into my normal LCD screen too considering how long it has been up).
I know they will fix them, but the question is when. :p
ZenithPhantasm
There would be no burn in because when the rgb value is 0,0,0 that particular pixel is off...lolcubes wrote:
I saw a brand new OLED TV a few days ago, and dayum, that picture quality.
The only thing I would be afraid of (at least from the first OLED monitor generation) would be the burn ins, playing osu in windowed mode for a long time could cause a burn in (actually it caused a burn in into my normal LCD screen too considering how long it has been up).
I know they will fix them, but the question is when. :p
Not from the black, but from the borders which are not black. Static pictures are known to burn in pretty fast on current OLEDs sadly (tablets and phones at least).
ZenithPhantasm
Nah, 27" is too big for taiko. 
My 32ish inch 60hz monitor