i building a gaming comp and i need to know what monitor to use and the response time. is 16ms good for games? i saw a 2ms 19'' monitor for 200 bucks should i get that?
2006-07-01 10:28:18 · 11 answers · asked by Jon2 1 in Computers & Internet ➔ Hardware ➔ Monitors
hey there, lcd has better quality, and crt is old school, plus crt gives off lots of radiation, and crt takes up lots of space, soo i think you should get lcd.
2006-07-01 10:32:46 · answer #1 · answered by Romashkin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would advise going with the LCD. My 8ms response time LCD plays games incredibly well with 0 ghosting or other noticeable blurs or artifiacts.
Crt has way better response time but takes up all that room and are so unsexy.
The 2ms LCD panels these folks are talking about are VERY expensive.
You can get 8ms 19 inch lcd's for $200 if you shop around. The flat panels look way wider/bigger than 19 inch's suggest. If you are a gamer, you may agree that having a wide field of vision is much preferrable to having a tall field of vision. I do not believe they make widescreen aspect crts.... They rock for movies too.
2006-07-01 23:12:14 · answer #2 · answered by fusuikan 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
CRT (Cathode Ray Tube) are monitors used in the old age of computing. They can have clear quality and are ok for gaming but take up a lot of space. LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) monitors anr flatter and most of the time will have a clearer crisp display I think is better for gaming. LCD usually takes up less space as well.
2006-07-01 17:36:28 · answer #3 · answered by electronicjoker 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that really depends on ur gaming rig
because there is a little problem in LCD which is it have something called native reslution,if u go lower than this res. the image quality will be crap,and this native reslution in relativly high"1600X1200" for 19'' "i think so"
so if ur gaming rig can handel 1600X1200 with good frame rates then go for the LCD, if not gor for CRT which is not that bad as u think.
note:16ms will not make any lag as that boy said, u can't even notice the diff. between 16 and 2ms
2006-07-01 17:40:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD of course, go for the 2ms, its pricey but look at it this way, CRT monitors use more power just to to turn it on, in the long run you'll save electricity with LCD and its easy for the eyes. specially for a game warrior like you.
Rock on dude!
2006-07-01 22:15:08 · answer #5 · answered by Panday05 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is nothing better than an analog CRT.
Now, the trade offs...
bulky, heavy, consumes a great deal of power, uses a lot of desk space, generates copious amounts of heat, etc. etc.
I just bought an Acer AL2416W 24" LCD monitor.
Yeah, it bit me in the bum for $849.00 but I gotta tell ya - it was worth every freakin' penny!
2006-07-08 15:01:43 · answer #6 · answered by T-Bone DeRage 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
in the old days, when lcd monitors first came out, they were crap for gaming. they had ghosting(picture smear) and lag issues. today lcd's have evolved to the point where they are suitable for gaming. As was stated in other answers, get one with a low response time. the lower the better(less then 12ms).
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=232500
this is what i have and i love it!
2006-07-01 18:17:34 · answer #7 · answered by medic391 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes. go for the "2ms" one. the lower your "ms" the better your monitor is.... "16ms" is gonna give you a lot of frame lag... so 2ms is BEST!
2006-07-01 17:33:04 · answer #8 · answered by Λir§trikę X³ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
lcds are better as they support higher resolutions and their refresh rate is much better than crt...
2006-07-02 04:17:10 · answer #9 · answered by MARS 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD , sure :)
2006-07-01 17:50:17 · answer #10 · answered by gavroche 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋