Is a CRT / Box monitor worth it for osu?

posted
Total Posts
37
show more
placeholder
Pretty much any 19''+ crt will get 120+hz (a few screens can do 200hz+ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdDKazOtjM8) on lower resolutions. CRTs do usuallly have better blacks, contrast, viewing angles and colors than any fast response/high refresh rate lcd. First person shooters are the only game with enough movement on screen to notice and really appreciate the higher hz (the steps visible when you do a quick turn are smaller, it feels more fluid). The input delay difference to good lcds is probably so small it's hard to notice vs a gaming monitor.

I don't think it's worth it for osu!. If you want to play with one and do find a good one, it'll outperform lcds in many areas.

A good crt is an all in one gaming/image editing screen.
ZenithPhantasm
Yes because 0 motion blur due to phosphor decay being much faster than lcd pixel transitions
mashedpopoto
What year was it again?
Topic Starter
ninjastarr

Philantropist wrote:

What year was it again?
20XX
lolcubes

YayMii wrote:

Speaking of Taiko: I just remembered that I took a bunch of LCD vs CRT comparison shots almost 2 years ago that are relevant to this question.
It's been forever since I played standard mode on an LCD so I don't know really how much of an advantage it gives, but it makes scrolling modes like Taiko so much more comfortable to play (again, assuming it's set to a refresh rate that doesn't murder your eyes).
That was then, today you have LightBoost technology. :D

http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
pandaBee
Only if you've been a good boy this year.
ZenithPhantasm

lolcubes wrote:

YayMii wrote:

Speaking of Taiko: I just remembered that I took a bunch of LCD vs CRT comparison shots almost 2 years ago that are relevant to this question.
It's been forever since I played standard mode on an LCD so I don't know really how much of an advantage it gives, but it makes scrolling modes like Taiko so much more comfortable to play (again, assuming it's set to a refresh rate that doesn't murder your eyes).
That was then, today you have LightBoost technology. :D

http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
LCD=Display lag (more so with lightboost)
CRT=No display lag
autoteleology

ZenithPhantasm wrote:

LCD=Display lag (more so with lightboost)
CRT=No display lag
This isn't true at all. All monitors have display lag simply for the fact that the picture is updated in frames. Your fancy pants 60Hz CRT monitor can still have a display lag of up to 16.6ms. If I'm using an LCD with 144Hz refresh rate, I might end up having less display lag than your CRT, even after response time (which is not instant on a CRT either, which is why you can see the strobe refresh on recordings - usually around 1ms).

By the way, strobing backlights only add, on average, 4ms of display lag to a monitor, which is virtually negligible. On my monitor, you can even adjust the duration of the strobe to decrease input lag (shorter strobe) or decrease motion blur (longer strobe)
xasuma
If you are going to buy one. No.
If you have one laying there and that is all u can afford, yes. Why not.


Not the prettiest thing to look at though.
TakuMii

lolcubes wrote:

That was then, today you have LightBoost technology. :D

http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
Yeah, of course, but 144Hz LCDs are expensive :x I got my trusty CRT for $40 when LightBoost was already a thing.

Philosofikal wrote:

ZenithPhantasm wrote:

LCD=Display lag (more so with lightboost)
CRT=No display lag
This isn't true at all. All monitors have display lag simply for the fact that the picture is updated in frames. Your fancy pants 60Hz CRT monitor can still have a display lag of up to 16.6ms. If I'm using an LCD with 144Hz refresh rate, I might end up having less display lag than your CRT, even after response time (which is not instant on a CRT either, which is why you can see the strobe refresh on recordings - usually around 1ms).
First things first: 60Hz CRT and "fancy" do not belong in the same sentence... the CRT's strobe can cause harm to your eyes if you run at such a low refresh rate. The flicker is actually visible to the human eye when the refresh rate is that low.
It's generally recommended to at least go above 85Hz, but there are plenty of high-end CRTs that blast past that. In fact, mine goes up to 180Hz.

That being said, refresh rate is only one component of display lag. For the most part, CRTs still have LCDs beat in that department, if even by a little when compared to high end gaming LCDs.
autoteleology

YayMii wrote:

In fact, mine goes up to 180Hz.
Five dollars says that refresh rate is at 640x480 (or maaaaybe 800x600) resolution
TakuMii

Philosofikal wrote:

YayMii wrote:

In fact, mine goes up to 180Hz.
Five dollars says that refresh rate is at 640x480 (or maaaaybe 800x600) resolution
Yeah, of course... but I can still go up to 140Hz at 1366x768 which is all I need for osu!.
And there are still better CRTs than this one out there. But as I said, I spent only $40 on this thing, so I'm okay.
ZenithPhantasm

Philosofikal wrote:

On my monitor, you can even adjust the duration of the strobe to decrease input lag (shorter strobe) or decrease motion blur (longer strobe)
Lol you have it backwards
autoteleology

ZenithPhantasm wrote:

Philosofikal wrote:

On my monitor, you can even adjust the duration of the strobe to decrease input lag (shorter strobe) or decrease motion blur (longer strobe)
Lol you have it backwards
No, I do not. The shorter the strobe time, the less the input lag, since the strobe occurs at the beginning of the frame.

Your post would suggest that you believe that a strobing backlight functions like a CRT. A backlight is on, not off, for the majority of the duration.

YayMii wrote:

Yeah, of course... but I can still go up to 140Hz at 1366x768 which is all I need for osu!.
And there are still better CRTs than this one out there. But as I said, I spent only $40 on this thing, so I'm okay.
If you can do 140Hz at 1366x768, then your CRT is utterly exceptional. It's better than the Sony FW900, from what I've read, actually. What is the model of this screen?
TakuMii

Philosofikal wrote:

If you can do 140Hz at 1366x768, then your CRT is utterly exceptional. It's better than the Sony FW900, from what I've read, actually. What is the model of this screen?
It's a Viewsonic PF815. It actually has around the same specs refresh-rate-wise and resolution-wise compared to the FW900 (both have 121kHz horizontal refresh rate, so both monitors can handle 1366x768@140Hz, but the FW900 only maxes out at 160Hz vertical compared to my 180Hz). The only thing that the FW900 has over this is a wider screen size and aspect ratio (22.5" 16:10 vs 20" 4:3), but I'm completely fine running osu! in a letterbox and playing my FPSes in 4:3 so it doesn't really bother me.
ZenithPhantasm

Philosofikal wrote:

No, I do not. The shorter the strobe time, the less the input lag, since the strobe occurs at the beginning of the frame.

Your post would suggest that you believe that a strobing backlight functions like a CRT. A backlight is on, not off, for the majority of the duration.
The backlight is only on when the frame is completed. For the majority of the time it is off.

Taken from blurbusters.com
autoteleology
When I said "strobe", I meant when the backlight is off (I realize now after reading more that it is used to refer when it is turning on, and not turning off).

It's also variable how long the strobe lasts. You can set it anywhere from 0.5ms to 5ms on my monitor. Usually, it's correct that it's off the majority of the time (the shorter it is, the less motion blur, but the screen can get very dark). It's a fixed time, however (unless you have variable refresh like Freesync) - the page on Blur Busters is technically correct, but quite misleading.
ZenithPhantasm

Philosofikal wrote:

When I said "strobe", I meant when the backlight is off (I realize now after reading more that it is used to refer when it is turning on, and not turning off).

It's also variable how long the strobe lasts. You can set it anywhere from 0.5ms to 5ms on my monitor. Usually, it's correct that it's off the majority of the time (the shorter it is, the less motion blur, but the screen can get very dark). It's a fixed time, however (unless you have variable refresh like Freesync) - the page on Blur Busters is technically correct, but quite misleading.
Or rather they were correct and you were wrong
autoteleology
The only part that I was wrong about is almost completely trivial, you're still wrong about the fact that Lightboost is a significant contributor to input lag on an LCD monitor, unless you're some kind of superhuman that can detect a 4ms delay (and you're not because you have a hit accuracy of 90% which is pathetic). On any LCD with Lightboost, you're already playing at 120fps where the input lag is already fast approaching CRT levels, and when LCDs get fast enough to strobe in the middle or beginning of a frame, at a lower strobe duration and faster FPS than a CRT, it won't matter.

As for whether or not a CRT is worth it? If you can easily find the right one in good condition for a reasonable price, and your primary concern is gaming, right now the answer is yes. If you care about resolution, color, eye health, aesthetics, durability, space, or the fact they weigh a ton (I had a 36'' WEGA Trinitron in my bedroom before I moved out that weighed 250 pounds) more than gaming, then no.
Endaris

Philosofikal wrote:

(and you're not because you have a hit accuracy of 90% which is pathetic)
You're realizing that you're talking to RSI-Relax-chan with most topplays being a year old?
Also why shouldn't you be able to detect a constant 4ms delay when you can also get the offsets of uninherited timing sections on the perfect ms-value+-1ms by closely watching and comparing?
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply