24" Sony CRT or Dell 24" LCD

[Ðïëgo Ðëlgådo]

I'm a hardcore COD2 gamer and currently I'm using a P1110 Trinitron FD 21" CRT that runs 1280x1024@100hz, 1600x1200@85hz, 1880x1440@75hz

Most the time I'm at 1280x1024 to play COD2 w/ 4xAA 16xAF on Directx9 around 200fps, but everyonce in a while I do 1880x1440 and get around 80-100fps with 4xAA 8xAF on Directx9

I have (2) 7800GTX's(520/1300) and a 3700+(2.75Ghz) so I'm pretty sure I can handle gaming at 1920x1200 and still be close to 100fps if I just use 2xAA and 8xAF.

So now to get back on the main subject, I would like to know everyones honest opinions from either personal experiance or hearing from a close friend in regards to gaming on the...

Dell 24" 2405FPW Widescreen LCD that everyone is getting for around $800
or
The Sony GDMFW900 24" CRT Monitor (http://www.superwarehouse.com/Sony_GDMFW900_24_CRT_Monitor/GDMFW900/p/105660) that you can pick up for around $400.

I have a good amount of room for either choice too
http://img458.imageshack.us/img458/4710/pccase14hj0km.jpg

[infinitevalence]

Well if all your doing is gaming then dont bother with the CRT, get the Dell but if you use any graphics or video applications then the CRT is the way to go. I love my 24" CRT its great for both games and video/graphics work.

[futura2001]

If you have the desktop space, don't mind a monitor that weighs 90+ pounds, and aren't going to be moving it any time soon, I would go for the Sony. The quality is superb, excellent contrast and vibrant colors; it truly is worth far more than the $400 it can be had for these days.
If price isn't the issue, get two. 3840x1200 is absolutely amazing to behold.
the 2405 is great for a portable system that will be moved around a lot, but if you are going to be stationary, get the CRT.

[Ðïëgo Ðëlgådo]

OMG 180lbs of CRT on the table would be amazing !!!! I think the table would need a support beam in the middle of it :P

[futura2001]

OMG 180lbs of CRT on the table would be amazing !!!! I think the table would need a support beam in the middle of it :P
I have 2 21" CRTs on my crappy Ikea desk. One is 85+, the other is 90+, and along with my Wacom, keyboard, subwoofer, and junk, I must be pushing close to 225-250lbs on the poor desk.
Been like that for over two years now and aside from a half inch bow in the desk, it is holding up fine.
Still waiting for the day it snaps in half while I'm sitting there and pins my legs under the combined weight of it all...

[Ðïëgo Ðëlgådo]

I have 2 21" CRTs on my crappy Ikea desk. One is 85+, the other is 90+, and along with my Wacom, keyboard, subwoofer, and junk, I must be pushing close to 225-250lbs on the poor desk.
Been like that for over two years now and aside from a half inch bow in the desk, it is holding up fine.
Still waiting for the day it snaps in half while I'm sitting there and pins my legs under the combined weight of it all...

LOL dang that would suck :P

[Echo_]

why are you playing on a 5:4 ratio on a 4:3 ratio screen?

[Ðïëgo Ðëlgådo]

why are you playing on a 5:4 ratio on a 4:3 ratio screen?

I'm running a 5:4 on a 4:3 ratio screen because the 2 times of going to Quakecon while lugging my monitor with me and about 30 LAN parties over 2 year time period no one has ever said that the format for my monitor is incorrect or looks incorrect, I have only heard very positive comments coming from people... I guess thats why I'm running a 5:4 on a 4:3 - I don't know you stumped me :shrug: can you or someone else please tell me why?

XGA 1024×768 4:3 786K
XGA+ 1152×864 4:3 995K <-- so I should run this format?
SXGA 1280×1024 5:4 1.3M
SXGA+ 1400×1050 4:3 1.5M <-- so I should run this format?

[infinitevalence]

whooo hooo QuakeCON!!! i had my 24" CRT there this year :)

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c214/infinitevalence/yves.jpg

[dfonda]

The 2405 is way cooler. :cool:

Nice looking set up by the way. I always wondered what my Saitek keyboard looked like from above. :p

[infinitevalence]

well you can see the 2405 next to mine, my roommate has one :)

[rseven]

I think this is a personal preference kind of thing that only you can decide. I use a 22 inch Mitsubishi Diamontron CRT and I really love it. Everyone else in my 4 computer household has LCD's, but I prefer my screen hands down. If I were choosing, I'd go for the Sony, no questions asked, but that's me. Good luck with whichever you pick.

[d94]

bro, if you can afford it grab the 30" dell for $1400 if you know somone living in canada :p

[Echo_]

I'm running a 5:4 on a 4:3 ratio screen because the 2 times of going to Quakecon while lugging my monitor with me and about 30 LAN parties over 2 year time period no one has ever said that the format for my monitor is incorrect or looks incorrect, I have only heard very positive comments coming from people... I guess thats why I'm running a 5:4 on a 4:3 - I don't know you stumped me :shrug: can you or someone else please tell me why?

XGA 1024×768 4:3 786K
XGA+ 1152×864 4:3 995K <-- so I should run this format?
SXGA 1280×1024 5:4 1.3M
SXGA+ 1400×1050 4:3 1.5M <-- so I should run this format?
play 1600x1200 your comp can handle it unless its stuff is too small for you then 1400x1050 would work

[jivetrky]

I just got my 2405FPW today...and I am THOUROUGHLY impressed. I got it for $860 through Dell. w/ 5 year warranty
It Is BEAUTIFUL

[infinitevalence]

I can say that having the Dell 2405 next to my Dell P1690 24" Trinitron the choice is an easy one. The LCD does not have the black depth, tends to look red, and does not handel any other res very well IMO. Most people who have not had a large CRT will sit infront of a large LCD and be blown away, but for thoes of us that know how colors are supposed to look or our jobs depend on it, then the CRT is the only way to go.

[futura2001]

I can say that having the Dell 2405 next to my Dell P1690 24" Trinitron the choice is an easy one. The LCD does not have the black depth, tends to look red, and does not handel any other res very well IMO. Most people who have not had a large CRT will sit infront of a large LCD and be blown away, but for thoes of us that know how colors are supposed to look or our jobs depend on it, then the CRT is the only way to go.

I know exactly what you mean. I've had fellow artist friends tell me "Hey, LCDs aren't that bad... they look black."
And then I tell them that LCDs are the "2b pencils" of monitors. Like pencils, they look black when you have nothing darker such as charcoal or ink to compare it to, but as soon as you put an LCD right next to a properly calibrated CRT, it looks terrible...

[jivetrky]

I totally agree with you...but for those of us that are not job-dependant on our display should be quite happy with the LCD (a good one anyway)

For me, all the pluses (small footprint, DVI, true 24" display, I'm sure there's others I can't think of) outweigh the negatives.

before deciding on this display I was totally againt LCD's for the reasons you are talking about (color accuracy, limited res settings, etc) ...but after just having played D3 in ultra settings at 16x12 (black bars on the side didn't bother me like I thought they would) and FEAR in max settings @ 1920x1200 .....I think this display is perfect for me. I couldn't be happier. But I suppose if I was a graphics related professional...I'd probably have to go for the CRT.

[infinitevalence]

Dont get me wrong im all for the LCDs i think the are great for 99% of people out there, i was just trying to give as much info to help the descision making process.

[yo4444]

Where can this CRT monitor be had for about $400.00? Looks nice!!

[jivetrky]

I'm pretty sure that CRT will cost way more than $400...maybe you can find a refurb for around $600 or so

[d94]

Where can this CRT monitor be had for about $400.00? Looks nice!!
i can get a used one for $250 locally :)
OR LESSS WHOLLY **** imma get this one if it doesnt get too xpensive
http://cgi.ebay.com/24-HP-Sony-Trinitron-GDM-FW900-Flat-Screen-Monitor_W0QQitemZ8754419706QQcategoryZ116350QQssPa geNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
plz dont bid on it :D

[Richard]

If you're a hard core gamer there is no alternative. CRT is the only choice. Perhaps sometime in the future (hopefully near) I'll have to ammend that statement. Though right now, there is nothing that compares.

[futura2001]

If you're a hard core gamer there is no alternative. CRT is the only choice. Perhaps sometime in the future (hopefully near) I'll have to ammend that statement. Though right now, there is nothing that compares.
Nah, I would actually recommend 17" 3ms LCDs to the gaming/lan party crowd. Lugging a CRT around without a Sherpa to do it for you is a pain in the butt... and the spine... and the shoulders... and the arms.

[wa77ss]

I have both and LCD is the only way to go IMO. I have very good eyes and with the newest LCD's you cant tell a difference between the two besides the fact that a LCD is a lot smaller in general than a CRT. LCD > CRT

Dell 2405FPW is a very good choice.

[jivetrky]

Yeah....My eyes are very sensitive...I would get sick if my refresh rate wasn't at least 85, and gaming with the 2405 has been wonderful so far....I've played FEAR, GTA:SA, Splinter Cell:CT at 1920x1200, BF2, D3, Q4 @ 1600x1200 ...and so far while playing, everyone looked better than when I played on a CRT...and I noticed no ghosting whatsoever.

but if the 80lb difference, space, heat, price, etc doesn't matter to you....than either way you will win!

[dfonda]

Logic goes out the window when compared to the LCD Coolness factor! :p

[Silversinksam]

Where can this CRT monitor be had for about $400.00? Looks nice!!

If you do an Ebay search for 24" Sony Monitor, there are several, some as low as Buy it Now $310 Shipped, naturally these are uses ;)


http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?cgiurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcgi.ebay.com%2Fws%2 F&fkr=1&from=R8&satitle=24%22+Sony+monitor&category0=

PS, I'm getting one of these, I tried the LCD's and my cat keeps knocking them over, she spends 90% of her time sleeping on my 21" Crt, so this is my next upgrade.

[d94]

PS, I'm getting one of these, I tried the LCD's and my cat keeps knocking them over, she spends 90% of her time sleeping on my 21" Crt, so this is my next upgrade.
pix!? :D

on a sidenote..i feel sorry for whomever is going to win this!
http://cgi.ebay.com/SONY-24-GDM-FW900-CRT-MONITOR-RETAIL-OVER-2-500_W0QQitemZ8752818240QQcategoryZ99235QQssPageNam eZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
there's a sratch on the thing and for the same price one could get a scratch-less screen, i bet they're not even reading the whole page!

[twEEkerAreUs]

Wow I can't believe how much the Sony GDM-FW900 has dropped in price, when I picked up this 21 Inch Monitor roughly Hmmmmmm maybe 2 years ago? I can't even remember, but those were still easily going on eBay for high $800. Damn you guys for showing me this, I'm going to end up buying one of these things in the future.

GDM-FW900>LCD

I'm passionate about CRT's what can I say Lol.

[sJetski]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it but your local Craigslist often has 19" 21" 22" and 24" crt's selling for a song. I found a local dealer here in northern NJ (Futureconnection in Garfield) selling the 24" FW900 for $375 and the older W900 (same as the dell 24") for $250. The difference between them: the FW900 has somewhat flatter glass .24mm dot pitch, higher max resolution.

Still deciding myself if i'm going to buy either, but the good part is the fellas at Futureconnection allow trade-ins of your old hardware and give you credit towards your purchase, which can come in handy (got a bunch of clean 17" crt's given to me recently which i can off-load ;))

OP: Personally i'd pick out a big, clean CRT and use that until SED displays become mainstream. You can always have a LCD down the line for another rig, or as a television ;)

linkage:

Craigslist: http://www.craigslist.org/

[futura2001]

I just picked up a Lacie 21" Diamondtron off my local craigslist for a steal.
Been in heaven ever since.
I plugged it in and set it to 1600x1200 to match my Nokia 445xi and was like, "HOLY S*** those pixels are crisp, HOLY S*** those colors are beautiful" at which point I entered a state of nirvana (or a seizure, not quite sure yet) and sat in epileptic bliss at my desk...
Now I just need to save up enough money to buy a Cintiq 21ux and I will be set.

[Adrayic]

Yeah....My eyes are very sensitive...I would get sick if my refresh rate wasn't at least 85, and gaming with the 2405 has been wonderful so far....I've played FEAR, GTA:SA, Splinter Cell:CT at 1920x1200, BF2, D3, Q4 @ 1600x1200 ...and so far while playing, everyone looked better than when I played on a CRT...and I noticed no ghosting whatsoever.



I have to disagree with this statement. I know that ghosting is a subjective topic but I just can't see how anybody could fail to notice the ghosting on a Dell 2405 monitor, especially when compared with a good CRT.

I'll start off by saying that I have been gaming on a CRT monitor for as long as I can remember. When the new dell widescreen LCD's came on the market I decided I'de jump on the bandwagon and try one out. I ordered a 2005FPW and was blown away by how crisp it was -- very bright, very sharp, and the colors are very saturated.

I had my doubts about it being able to compete with my CRT (Viewsonic P95F+B) for gaming but was anxious to try it out. I'm a huge fan of the UT series and play UT2004 very often (15-20hrs / week). First run through a CTF match and I noticed the ghosting. I will admit that it is not a huge issue and I'm sure that some people would have no problem living with it. I decided that I would give it an honest attempt and try "living" with it for a couple weeks. For the next 2 months I played UT2004 religiously on my 2005FPW and it didn't take long before the ghosting no longer bothered me.

Well... a few months later one of my memory modules cratered and I had to send it back to OCZ for RMA. With my main rig down, I went back to my old P4 3.0C to play UT (monitor is also a P95F+B). I fired up UT and immediately noticed the CRT goodness. I dont really know how to explain it other than to say that the CRT feels so much smoother. I find it easier to track opponents and my accuracy with hitscan weapons (LG and shock) definately improves while using the CRT.

When my memory modules came back from RMA, I tried to go back to the Dell monitor but after playing on the CRT for a couple weeks, there was just no way that was going to happen. So.... i decided to run a dual monitor setup -- Dell 2005FPW, with a Viewsonic P95F+B.

A few things I should mention:

For fast FPS games like UTK4 -- I prefer the CRT hands down. While the Dell's image is much crisper (sharp and vibrant), the CRT is just so much smoother.

For slower paced games (where ghosting is not very noticable) like WOW, Dungeon Seige 2, AOEIII, etc... I prefer the Dell Monitor. I love the "pop" from the dell monitor. My CRT just can't compare with the sharpness / vibrancy of the Dell.

So I guess you have to decide what is important to you. With respect to the original poster:

If you are a hardcore COD2 gamer I highly recommend going with a good quality CRT. I own a Dell 2005FPW, Viewsonic P95F+B, and a Mitsubishi DiamondPro 930SB.... I have tested fast pased games on all these monitors and can tell you without a shred of doubt that the CRT's are definately superior.

Do you have anybody you could borrow and LCD from? If so, i would highly recommend you give it a try for a few days. Perhaps you will be able to live with the ghosting. There are many people on this forum who are very happy with the Dell monitors for fast FPS games. Unfortunately, I am not one of them.

-Adrayic

[jivetrky]

All I can say is that there must be a difference between the 2005 and the 2405 because I have been playing multiplayer in FEAR, BF2, and HL2DM for the last 3 days a a little mini lan party at my house.....and 5 or 6 people have played on this monitor (not including myself) and each of them experienced NO ghosting.
I suppose that it IS subjective...but, I would say, that with the 6 ppl that used mine this weekend and myself not experiencing any ghosting....I'd say that (my monitor at least) doesn't have problems with refresh.

[dfonda]

I haven't even bothered worrying about ghosting because if its there I don't see it.

[Adrayic]

jive -- I'm pretty sure the response times for the 2005 and 2405 are the same but there may be other differences between the two that result in one ghosting more than the other. I'm beginning to think that I am the only one who notices ghosting on the 2005FPW. Nevertheless, I feel that I should inform the original poster of my experiences..... even if they contradict the majority of other people.

Love your avator by the way :)

-Adrayic

[tenchi86]

I would say CRT. If you have the room to support that monitor, then I don't see why not save yourself 400 bucks and get it. Also I have not had a very knew one to compare with but I know some of the older (2 yrs maybe) LCD screens really lack in quality compared to a CRT.

[MoreGooder]

A new twist has been added to the CRT vs LCD discussion, so I decided to revive this thread.

It has been discovered recently that LCDs suffer from signal lag. No, I'm not talking about ghosting or pixel response. It has been demonstrated at Anandtech, HardOCP forums and Widescreen Gamers forums that an LCD will display an image from 30 to 50ms later than an LCD. This can translate to 3 frames. On a fast action FPS this can mean you lose the battle because you see the image delayed compaired to your competitor if they have a CRT and you don't, (given that the ping is the same of course).

As I write this, HardOCP forums is down, and I've lost the link to Anandtechs forum entry. However, here's the WSGF thread on this topic: Clicky (http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=23722)

I've seen pretty conclusive evidence. LCD image lag is a real issue if it is as much as 50ms. If you're playing an online game with a ping of, say, 60, you can pretty much add 50 to it for your real lag.

This is yet another reason why I'm leaning towards a $400 FW900 rather than a $1400 Samsung 244T. Granted, the FW900 is not a true 24 inch widescreen, but I can select from more resolutions too. I won't have to go to an SLI setup because a single 7800GT can't display 1900X1200 at >60FPS. I prefer a lower res higher fps display with eye candy turned on compared to high res, low fps with the IQ dumbed down.

[rseven]

That is a very interesting piece of information. It makes me happy I use a CRT because when it comes to online gaming my 55 year old reflexes need every advantage I can fairly obtain.:)

[texuspete00]

I bought the 2405FPW first. I tried to get used to the blur and then I found out the FW900 even existed. I didn't even know they had 24" widescreen CRTs. Well, I ended up trying both and then selling the LCD. I will wait for SEDs or something before replacing this FW900. It kicks butt. I think most if they did a head to head test with these two and was an fps gamer, would chose the FW900.

I saw all the articles on the lag and stuff, but at that point I had already decided to get rid of the 2405. I didn't want to find out.

[damarble]

I myself can't bear to look at LCD's anymore after using my 22" CRT. So I say get the Sony!

A new twist has been added to the CRT vs LCD discussion, so I decided to revive this thread.


Interesting, thanks.


I'm beginning to think that I am the only one who notices ghosting on the 2005FPW.


You're not the only one. I had a 2005FPW for about 2 weeks before I couldnt stand to look at it. Sure, it was pretty looking at a bright, still desktop, but fire up a dark game like Doom 3 and things got ugly. Blacks looked purple, and the ghosting was terrible. It was impossible to play Farcry on it because I couldn't see where my gun was pointing.

[SuperFarStucker]

The reason you find these for so cheap is becaue they are total pieces of ****. Burned tubes, seriousl geometry and convergence problems, heavily magnetized grilles, been sitting in a warehouse for about 3 years. You name it.

If you go look at one yourself and it is in good shape for 400.00 USD by all means jump on it. I'm just skeptical that you'll have any luck finding one. I looked at 3 in the local area and they were all total ****. I would rather use a photocopier as a monitor.

I've bought CRTs off eBay in the past and I'll tell you the 'you get what you pay for' addage really applies here. I recently picked up a CRT off one of those warehouse wholesalers (accureit.com) for my girlfriend's brother as he is on a tight budget and the first one was DOA and the replacement had convergence and geometry issues.

Many people are still hunting down good tube monitors, it is difficult to find one that is in good shape because of their age. People who know what they have will want 1000+ for one.

Finding a good crt for a decent price is akin to finding an old muscle car that isn't rusted out and the guy not knowing what he has (an old man). It's possible, just not likely.


I've never really liked LCD panels but the truth is a good crt can easily cost more than an average LCD panel and they are much more difficult to find. If you think 30 ms latency is going to affect your 'game' that bad you're delusional. Pixel latency is visible but I'd rather that than a seriously ****ed up tube. If SED is half as good as it is supposed to be and can be obtained for a reasonable price I don't think there will be any other display technologies left to compete.

[adriana]

your room looks nice

[MoreGooder]

Huh?
****** Edit ****** adriana, I see now the reason for your post. My apologies

Anyway......back on topic,
Over at widescreengamers formums, there are numerous people reporting great CRT quality on this old tubes, and one dude that has geometry problems.

Out of all of the old CRT's at work, all varying in manufacturer, screen size and vintage, only ONE of them has a problem. It can only display a green image. I think as time went on, CRT's got better and better. Once they finally had all of the kinks out, well, along came the LCD.

I believe I"m going to risk this and buy one. If I don't like it for gaming, I'll take it to the office for CAD work.

[larva]

It took a 2005fpw over the sony. I just can't rationalize spending 3-400 dollars on a used monitor without a warranty that could die tomorrow. If I'm spending that kind of money, I'm getting a warranty. The only reason I bought the 2005 was that my Nokia 21" CRT died, and the sony could well do the same. I love the 2005 and the 2405 is that much sweeter. And while the CRTs may do better on blacks, the LCDs do better on the other colors while offering text crispness that no CRT can match. At 125fps in games the 2005 is fine.

[jivetrky]

Yeah...I'm gonna have to say that if you blame your crappy gaming on 3 FPS because there is a signal lag on your DVI connector, you should re-evaluate your gaming strategy.

BTW I have yet to find a game that doesn't look awesome on this 2405. And my gaming hasn't gotten any better or worse because of a new display, only prettier.

[tom10167]

I want a 2405 so bad, but I don't want one with crappy backlight bleed issues.

[jivetrky]

I guess I got lucky with that one...but I specifically asked before buying (direct from Dell) and the lady said that if I ever had problems like that, it would be covered by the 5 year warranty I got

[MoreGooder]

Yeah...I'm gonna have to say that if you blame your crappy gaming on 3 FPS because there is a signal lag on your DVI connector, you should re-evaluate your gaming strategy.

BTW I have yet to find a game that doesn't look awesome on this 2405. And my gaming hasn't gotten any better or worse because of a new display, only prettier.

Well, I wouldn't say my gaming is "crappy". However, I don't see the reason to search for low ping servers when gaming if its going to be the equivalent to a mid to horrible ping server due to LCD image display lag. THAT is the point of bring this whole issue to light. For most of the servers I play on, this 50ms delay essentially doubles the overall lag that I have to compensate for, and when flying a jet or Helo, yes, it makes a difference. I've seen the impact of lag. It's hard to compensate for it because it requires that you guess where your opponent will be then fire in that direction. The more lag, the more of a guess it becomes. For competitive gaming, every edge is required to win. These people are so good at it that they invest in high end hardware so that the only major lag is the ping to the server. Well, now you can add more lag that is uncontrollable to that.

/rant on

What upsets me more about this is that ALL of the LCD manufacturers have hidden this trait from us. It's like buying a brand new sports car sight unseen only to find that it has a Chevette engine in it. People pay BIG dollars for these screens right? We should get top notch performance, with all of the characteristics clearly spelled out.

Here's the typical mindset for (fill in your LCD manufacturer here):

Lets claim an 8ms pixel response! on black to white transitions that you will typically never encounter when watching a movie or paying a game. It's really 35 ms response for color transitions, but we won't tell them that until multiple review sites start doing independent testing at considerable cost and labor. Oh, and lets just randomly change the panel we put in LCD model XYZ123 without telling the customer. The silly customers don't have any way of testing them for themselves, so we don't need to tell them (Yeah, I'm speaking to you, Viewsonics). Plus, it's such a hassle to return an LCD to an e-tailer, so once we have the LCD in their homes, we are nearly completely absolved of any issues they might have. Let's make sure that only the really crappy LCD's are available at all of the brick-and-mortar stores just so this hassle factor is maintained. Let's keep them dependent on anecdotal information about LCD's performance rather than letting them see one in person! Only marketing is required, and we can cheat on specs/hide traits all we want to! Yay!

/rant off

[Haste266]

"Factory certified refurbished FW900s" (http://www.azatek.com/details.asp?iid=786)
$479 w/free ship 6 month replacement warranty.

i bought one from here and it cant get any better. \
my brother has a 20" apple cinema display and the ghosting bothered me when using it. one of the reasons i went with a crt

[SuperFarStucker]

Hell for that price I'll take one if they are actually a truly reconditioned unit. Could you post some pictures? make sure your stop speed is slower than the fresh rate otherwise the scanline will be noticeable. 1/30 is probably fine, just experiment with it a bit, you may need a tripod or some makeshift surface to keep the image from blurring too. No big deal if you can't do it. Does anything look wrong with the tube (any dark/light areas, wonky colours, geometry problems, focus, etc?).

They say it is 'grade a' but I've seen the monitor sell for upwards of a 1000 for ones that are actually reconditioned so I think their idea of this is probably taking the case off and blowing the dust out.

[Haste266]

i tried taking some pictures but they just didnt come out right. i'll try again at some point and fool around with my camera settings a bit.

you can't go wrong with the monitor from azatek. you might want to call them though and see exactly how the return policy works. it says free exchange but i'm not sure if they pay to have it shipped back to them or not.
my screen was perfect as in no scratches/smooth anti-glare coating. after a little tweaking my convergence is spot on from corner to corner and the color reproduction is top notch. i have no complaints about this monitor cept for its weight and warm-up time(30 min.) but of course thats a given for a CRT of this size.

[Richard]

Post #33 by Adrayic is exactly the experience a lot of FPS gamers.

For people that fight for every nanosecond; a lot of you seem willing to compromise where it shows the most. If you have the means, a multi-monitor setup is the best solution. (LCD and CRT) If you must decide between the two. Then, it depends on what you're buying all this gear for. If it's to have the lowest latency display where smoothness matters, there is no alternative to CRT.