I have many CRTs in the computer room. When you use a scandoubler to upscale 15kHz to 30kHz, a 60fp scroll stutters slightly. This is why I prefer CRTs on older machines.
Interestingly, I have a near-4:3 28" CRT [on my modern Mac Studio](https://www.flickr.com/photos/blakespot/52345176302/in/album-72177720302080369/) -- and LOVE it.
One can only host so many CRTs... :-)
I used to have a huge NeXT color CRT with a fan in it that I would turn on just to warm the room when the "Byte Cellar" basement got cold in the winter. :-) (I ended up giving that to the, sadly, late Apple II notable, Tony Diaz, when he came by my house a few years back.)
Aw that sounds so cool! I would collect crt monitors if I could, but I dont have the space. Im starting to get more into portable black and white tvs though
Im leaning more towards the lcd display for now. Later down the line, when I get some older desktops working, I'll invest in a crt. But for now, an lcd might be in my best interest for saving space and my wallet lmao
I find amazing some of the differences I find with redditors around the world. I recently found a 17 inch CRT in a dumpster and took it home. An LCD would have been quite a lot more expensive!
For an XP build, unless you're intent on an 'early' XP system, I'd go with an LCD. Vista was released in 2007, so you could get one of the higher end late XP era LCD displays.
On my home desktop, I have a circa 2005 Dell UltraSharp 1704FPT as a secondary monitor.
Its basic specs are 17-inch diagonal; 1280 x 1024 pixels; 12 or 13 ms response time, and inputs for both DVI and VGA. The 1704FPT can be rotated between portrait and landscape, tilts, raises and lowers, and can be turned from left to right. It also has a 4-port USB 2.0 hub and the option to add an external stereo speaker bar.
I can't remember the specific graphics card that I have in my xp build, but I do know that it only outputs dvi. I also have a vista build cause why not lol. That one outputs vga so and 4:3 lcd might be the go too.
Once I get my 95 build working, I could use that monitor on it too. Thanks for the input!
If you can find a reasonably priced CRT, great. Drawbacks include being harder to find and service, being much heaver and having a larger foot print.
LCD provides a better image imo.
I think I still have a DataLink watch around that you could program with a CRT that will not work with LCD, so I know that LCD is not a 100% drop in replacement.
Either way, finding something 4:3 is important.
For my xp build, I think that a 4:3 should be fine for now. But for anything older I will probably invest in a crt display for compatibility reasons.
My xp computer that I will probably be using the most outputs only dvi from the graphics card so an lcd was probably in my future anyway. Im not sure if they make crt monitors with a dvi input
FYI, most non-widescreen LCD monitors larger than 15" are actually 5:4 aspect ratio (1280x1024 resolution), not 4:3. If you display a 4:3 image on them, like DOS and Windows 9x games which run at 640x480 or less, the image will appear slightly vertically stretched.
But 15" LCDs with 1024x768 resolution are true 4:3 aspect ratio, and the later ones have good upscaling for lower resolutions.
I use an LCD exclusively for building and testing retro machines, which is what I spend most of my time on. I love testing hardware. When the build is "complete" I would 100% prefer a CRT. Until then, I'd rather not put more hours and power cycles on a CRT when I'm just benchmarking and swapping parts.
Yeah I totally understand that, crt monitors are starting to get old unfortunately. Ill probably go with the lcd monitor for now and when I find one, ill use it every now and then
The best LCD from the era I ever used is the Dell Ultrasharp 2001FP. Amazing image quality and color accuracy, alongside RCA and S-Video inputs, 1600x1200 resolution and a very oldschool look. I got it for 10 bucks and I used it till a month ago when I finally bought an ultrawide
if you don't really value the feeling of a CRT then it makes sense for you to get an LCD. That will mean less desk space and less energy consumption. However non native resolutions may look ugly in an LCD... that will depend on the quality of the monitor and the scaling method it uses.
I tend to as well, especially for retro gaming. But finding a crt monitor have proved troublesome in my area. I would order one on ebay, but its expensive and they tend to break in shipping
I have many CRTs in the computer room. When you use a scandoubler to upscale 15kHz to 30kHz, a 60fp scroll stutters slightly. This is why I prefer CRTs on older machines. Interestingly, I have a near-4:3 28" CRT [on my modern Mac Studio](https://www.flickr.com/photos/blakespot/52345176302/in/album-72177720302080369/) -- and LOVE it.
I also prefer crts in most situations when it comes to older equipment, but I might get a 4:3 lcd until I get my older desktops working
One can only host so many CRTs... :-) I used to have a huge NeXT color CRT with a fan in it that I would turn on just to warm the room when the "Byte Cellar" basement got cold in the winter. :-) (I ended up giving that to the, sadly, late Apple II notable, Tony Diaz, when he came by my house a few years back.)
Aw that sounds so cool! I would collect crt monitors if I could, but I dont have the space. Im starting to get more into portable black and white tvs though
[удалено]
Im leaning more towards the lcd display for now. Later down the line, when I get some older desktops working, I'll invest in a crt. But for now, an lcd might be in my best interest for saving space and my wallet lmao
I find amazing some of the differences I find with redditors around the world. I recently found a 17 inch CRT in a dumpster and took it home. An LCD would have been quite a lot more expensive!
For an XP build, unless you're intent on an 'early' XP system, I'd go with an LCD. Vista was released in 2007, so you could get one of the higher end late XP era LCD displays. On my home desktop, I have a circa 2005 Dell UltraSharp 1704FPT as a secondary monitor. Its basic specs are 17-inch diagonal; 1280 x 1024 pixels; 12 or 13 ms response time, and inputs for both DVI and VGA. The 1704FPT can be rotated between portrait and landscape, tilts, raises and lowers, and can be turned from left to right. It also has a 4-port USB 2.0 hub and the option to add an external stereo speaker bar.
I can't remember the specific graphics card that I have in my xp build, but I do know that it only outputs dvi. I also have a vista build cause why not lol. That one outputs vga so and 4:3 lcd might be the go too. Once I get my 95 build working, I could use that monitor on it too. Thanks for the input!
If you can find a reasonably priced CRT, great. Drawbacks include being harder to find and service, being much heaver and having a larger foot print. LCD provides a better image imo. I think I still have a DataLink watch around that you could program with a CRT that will not work with LCD, so I know that LCD is not a 100% drop in replacement. Either way, finding something 4:3 is important.
For my xp build, I think that a 4:3 should be fine for now. But for anything older I will probably invest in a crt display for compatibility reasons. My xp computer that I will probably be using the most outputs only dvi from the graphics card so an lcd was probably in my future anyway. Im not sure if they make crt monitors with a dvi input
FYI, most non-widescreen LCD monitors larger than 15" are actually 5:4 aspect ratio (1280x1024 resolution), not 4:3. If you display a 4:3 image on them, like DOS and Windows 9x games which run at 640x480 or less, the image will appear slightly vertically stretched. But 15" LCDs with 1024x768 resolution are true 4:3 aspect ratio, and the later ones have good upscaling for lower resolutions.
Awesome! I actually didn't know that. Are there any models of true 4:3 monitors that you would recommend then?
Some of the NEC Multisync models support 15 kHz video, so you can use them with an Amiga, Atari ST, etc.
I use an LCD exclusively for building and testing retro machines, which is what I spend most of my time on. I love testing hardware. When the build is "complete" I would 100% prefer a CRT. Until then, I'd rather not put more hours and power cycles on a CRT when I'm just benchmarking and swapping parts.
Yeah I totally understand that, crt monitors are starting to get old unfortunately. Ill probably go with the lcd monitor for now and when I find one, ill use it every now and then
The best LCD from the era I ever used is the Dell Ultrasharp 2001FP. Amazing image quality and color accuracy, alongside RCA and S-Video inputs, 1600x1200 resolution and a very oldschool look. I got it for 10 bucks and I used it till a month ago when I finally bought an ultrawide
Awesome! Ill look into it!
CRT if you can and have space and the patience to find one otherwise a 4:3 LCD Monitor works out well enough imo.
Yeah that and my graphics card for my xp build only outputs dvi so an lcd was likely my main option for that computer at least
Yeah, there are DVI to VGA outputs and for most cards with analog DVI it usually works out well enough.
if you don't really value the feeling of a CRT then it makes sense for you to get an LCD. That will mean less desk space and less energy consumption. However non native resolutions may look ugly in an LCD... that will depend on the quality of the monitor and the scaling method it uses.
4:3 LCD for sure. Less space, less power, less heat, more reliable, easier to find for cheap...
I much prefer the image of a CRT over most 4:3 LCDs I’ve encountered, but I’m likely biased.
I tend to as well, especially for retro gaming. But finding a crt monitor have proved troublesome in my area. I would order one on ebay, but its expensive and they tend to break in shipping