Live data from Hacker News

A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

vice.com

11–20 of 288 posts

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#11
post #6

There was a really good article shared a few weeks ago about video memory on old systems that didn't use a frame buffer, instead the video data was streamed to only a couple of bytes and calculated in real time. This had the effect of nearly zero lag because sprite location could be calculated right up until the moment the first row was drawn to the screen. I wish I could remember exactly what that article was.

This was quite a popular technique to achieve fancy video effects on low powered hardware.

A good example is the various parallax and scrolling effects in the intro cinematic to Link’s Awakening on the Game Boy/Color, achieved by changing various hardware scroll registers in the horizontal blanking interval (time between one line being finished and the other starting). The main limitation is that you can only do horizontal effects, not vertical.

I’m wondering if the article you’re thinking of was the Wired piece on the Atari 2600? That famously ran all of its game logic in the H- and V-blank intervals.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#12
post #8

My eyes used to hurt a lot on CRTs. A few hours every day in front of one and I could not go outside without sunglasses, anything would make my eyes hurt. Everything was fine if I went a week without using a computer. With LCDs, that's not a problem anymore, and I like it.

I guess most people can’t see the flicker on a CRT set at 60Hz, but I can. It’s especially bad in a room with fluorescent lights. First thing I’d do upon sitting down at a new computer with a CRT monitor was to bump up the refresh rate to 75Hz so I didn’t get a headache.

Taking standardized tests in the early 2000s on locked down computers in fluorescent-lit test centers was torture.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#13
post #10
post #8

My eyes used to hurt a lot on CRTs. A few hours every day in front of one and I could not go outside without sunglasses, anything would make my eyes hurt. Everything was fine if I went a week without using a computer. With LCDs, that's not a problem anymore, and I like it.

I think this had a lot to do with low quality fluorescent light ballasts in offices. I agree that it seemed to happen a lot more with CRT, but I have experienced it with LCD too.

On LCD monitors, I could notice that on very low brightness settings, which was likely due to PWM flicker. I guess I'm sensitive to it.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#14
post #8

My eyes used to hurt a lot on CRTs. A few hours every day in front of one and I could not go outside without sunglasses, anything would make my eyes hurt. Everything was fine if I went a week without using a computer. With LCDs, that's not a problem anymore, and I like it.

I guess most people can’t see the flicker on a CRT set at 60Hz, but I can. It’s especially bad in a room with fluorescent lights. First thing I’d do upon sitting down at a new computer with a CRT monitor was to bump up the refresh rate to 75Hz so I didn’t get a headache. Taking standardized tests in the early 2000s on locked down computers in fluorescent-lit test centers was torture.

Yeah, I used the highest refresh rate I could force, usually 75-80 Hz. Some monitors could handle 90, and it made a difference, but it was still worse than LCD PWM flicker.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#15
post #5
post #3

TL;DR: For gaming, because ‘input lag’. [In a CRT] the electron-to-photon exchange happens instantly. While CRTs do have some sources of lag —namely, the time spent buffering each video frame and scanning each line of the frame from top to bottom on the screen —those delays are on the order of microseconds. When you move your mouse or press a button on the keyboard, the response time is imperceptible... By contrast,…

> a digital-to-analog converter. How much latency would that typically add?

If you're using DVI-D -> VGA or HDMI -> VGA, probably a couple of pixels worth on a simple converter, as it would be expensive and unnecessary to cache a whole frame.

DP has incompatible timings so I would expect a frame or so on a cheap (though significantly more expensive) converter.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#16
post #6

There was a really good article shared a few weeks ago about video memory on old systems that didn't use a frame buffer, instead the video data was streamed to only a couple of bytes and calculated in real time. This had the effect of nearly zero lag because sprite location could be calculated right up until the moment the first row was drawn to the screen. I wish I could remember exactly what that article was.

This was quite a popular technique to achieve fancy video effects on low powered hardware. A good example is the various parallax and scrolling effects in the intro cinematic to Link’s Awakening on the Game Boy/Color, achieved by changing various hardware scroll registers in the horizontal blanking interval (time between one line being finished and the other starting). The main limitation is that you can only do hori…

I seem to recall the article being about Apple II hardware, but it might have been Atari 2600. They are of similar generations.

edit: Yep, you are right - the article is titled "Racing the Beam"

https://www.wired.com/2009/03/racing-the-beam/

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#17
I wonder if there’ll eventually be enough demand for new CRTs, and if manufacturing technology has improved enough to make a CRT that is less of an ecological menace. If cost were only partly a constraint, how good could we build a CRT today?

I am still mesmerized by new display technologies / display technologies that I haven’t seen in a long time. Like the vector CRTs that exist in old Asteroids cabinets. The phosphors are really bright—brighter than you can imagine an LCD being.

I also remember the first time I saw e-ink and being shocked to see something so inert looking shift to a new image.

This article really captured my imagination. I’ve not seen a modern GPU driving high frame rates on a CRT, but now I’m very curious to do so. I’d imagine the experience would defy my intuitions the same as it appears to have done for the authors here.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#18
post #4

I have a different problem with LCDs. I still think they're too bright. With a CRT you could set everything to white on black and you had almost no light coming out of the screen. Also brightness meant brightness and you could turn it way down for when working in dim light or darkness. Of course i'm talking about text work here. Maybe when OLED monitors become affordable we'll go back to monitors that aren't basicall…

It's mildly annoying but easily fixed with a touch of ambient lighting or a software tool looks f.lux.

Brightness isn't nearly as bad for eye strain has contrast between the screen and ambient light.

Re: A 20-year-old CRT monitor can be better than a 4K LCD (2019)

#20
post #7

Gaming LCDs these days boast response times in the low single digit millisecond range. Even at 144Hz that’s less than a frame. If there’s framebuffer-to-photons lag, I’d point my finger at DVI decoding before the physical movement of liquid crystals. Also, for all the focus on “physical changes” there’s no mention of phosphor fade rate, which is a physical property of the CRT screen with a built-in trade off between…

The gray to gray response time is heavily gamed. There's some tech reporter investigation on it that shows how most monitors that game the GTG response time have slower overall response than monitors with a ~7ms time.
Post reply on HN