Hello i would like a big question of mine answered please. which is better TFT or CRT,

first of all i would like to know generally, which is better, response time, radiation(?) clarity and other bits.

Then i am saving for a new pc and i am wondering to spend nearly triple on a TFT than a CRT and is it worth it, seeming as i am very tight for money and getting a TFT would mean more saving?

and any tid bits of information and simple explanations would be gratefull aswell.... :cool: :) :cool: :D

LCD's are brighter, have less eye strain, and generally more expensive than CRT's. What's your budget? YOu can get a neat 19" LCD for $500 or less these days...and any preferable screen size?

Right now, it hardly pays to get a CRT. A good 17" CRT will cost between $110.00 and $195.00. Unless you are going to buy one at a local shop, count on the cost of shipping a 35-40lb package. An equivalen LCD which will be 15" will cost anywhere from $200.00 to $300.00 and weigh about 10 lbs.

The LCD will use 50-60% less electricity, take up a whole lot less desk space and generally are better monitors. I will never buy or sell a CRT again.

If you want, I will sell you a nice used 21" crt for $25.00+ shipping. I just repkaced my daughterts CRT with an ACER 17" LCD for $229.00. It's great.

If really on a tight budget, I would go CRT right now. Response for CRT is better, and only the latest generation LCDs (newer = more expensive) respond quickly.
LCDs do use less power and take up less space, and are easier to move around.
They also give larger viewing areas vs CRT with equal diagonal sizes.

Even better, there are used CRTs out there from users upgrading to LCD displays so you can get them cheap or free.

If really on a tight budget, I would go CRT right now.I agree. If you have less than $200 in your budget for a display, a used good-quality CRT is the way to go. Better color reproduction and cheap up-front cost. My own 19" Viewsonic is a great display and has served me well.

The LCD will use 50-60% less electricityAnd this electricity savings will only increase with size. For instance, at the 19" level, an LCD would use a tiny fraction of the power of a CRT.

There are many implications either way, but if you can swing the cost of a 17" or 19" LCD, that would be my preference as well. LCD monitors have gotten really good lately, and I think ghosting is a thing of the past. 16ms or faster LCD monitors are now the norm, and these are more than fast enough even for gaming. And if you have multiple PC's in your home (like I do) then you'll appreciate the reduction in your electric bill by using LCD monitors. ;)

At the same time, I don't think CRT's are dead yet. Until OLED matures and blows them both out of the water, CRT's still have an edge in certain areas. Price is the main factor at the low-end, but as mentioned, CRT's also have better color reproduction. And they are more configurable in their screen controls. Also, you'll never have to worry about the refresh rate of a CRT - the pixel change times are measured in nanoseconds, not milliseconds like an LCD. And of course CRT's never have dead pixels or lines of locked color, so in that sense they are slightly more reliable.

It's your choice of course, but if you're like most of us, then your budget will be the primary decision-maker. ;)

If you want, I will sell you a nice used 21" crt for $25.00+ shipping. I just repkaced my daughterts CRT with an ACER 17" LCD for $229.00. It's great.


thank you for the offer, but i think i am gonna have to pass on it, i live in england and the shipping for that would be quite alot of money, atm i am skint, and am having to work in a cafe to get some money for this PC, i think that by the time i have enough LCD's will reign supreme, and all faults ironed out, and CRT's will have become a thing of the past, and when that happens the monitors will come down in price. so i'll have to wait and see how it stands when i have enough money.

I bought a used 21 inch Viewsonic CRT and a halfway decent video card. The card and monitor support resolutions up to 2048 x 1536 @ 75hz. In reality text becomes very difficult to read and quite an eyestrain at anything over, and sometimes including 1600 x 1200.

I don't know if this is the result of an underpowered graphics card (measley 9200se), the dot pitch of the screen, or both. If you have the opportunity, it might be to your advantage to take a look at your selected monitor in action before your throw down your hard earned money.

There are a LOT of options to fine tune the display that I don't understand yet. Its a safe bet that this could be the source of my problem too. It's also a little frustrating that this thing eats up nearly 2 feet of depth on my cramped desk.

When the money is available I'd much rather have a 19 inch lcd. Sacrificing a little screen size will be no big deal if its easier on the only set of eyeballs I've got.