>CRT monitors are the best for games, I have a 21" Sony>Trinitron monitor (best 600 bucks I ever spent) and have not>looked back ever since. For the same price as mine you can get>a 17 LCD that when you play certain games that move the camera>around fast, you can see the blurry textures because of the>low refresh rates on the LCD monitors.This was true a while back, now LCD monitors are not blurry anymore, they are as good as CRT's in this respect.I play UT, BF1942 and other "fast" games, I have no blur, also you need to remember that the quoted size for a CRT includes the bezel too.So a 19" CRT has , roughly, a 17" Screen size, this is different for LCD's, an 18" LCD will have an 18" screen.Try out a new LCD, you will be amazed at how good they really are ;).Dan.

Hi Hasan,No if you get a decent make LCD you will not get blurry textures, this used to be true, but LCD's are alot better now.I would suggest you go to a local shop and try one out, I think you will be amazed at how good it is.Dan.

Hii Danwhat is the most crucial technical data I should compare between the alternative brands ? and What minimums I must be carefull ? ( as an example a friend here earliersaid , as I should pay an attention for minimum 16 ms )all my besthasan

Hi Hasan,Word of advice, take the manufacturer's quoted response time with a pinch of salt. Many are optimistic to say the least and many use different criteria when making the calculation.I agree with the others, you won't be disappointed if you go for a good LCD TFT Monitor with a quoted response time of 20ms or less. However, some monitors with higher response times also perform well in the fast moving gaming environment. Refresh rates are not the issue here as most LCD TFT's refresh at 60Hz at their native resolution and, I promise you, you won't see any flicker. They just work differently to CRTs. The golden rules are first, do your research and read all the reviews and second, persuade the vendor to allow you to try before you buy. The one downside is the useful viewing angle as it tends to be a little restrictive as compared to CRTs. Not really a problem until you are showing off your photographic skills to another and then it can get quite intimate - on reflection, perhaps this isn't a downside after all ;)I suggest a visit to www.tomshardware.com might help you along.FS2004 and FS2002 both look great on an LCD TFT. In fact I am sure this is how the developers intended they should be enjoyed. You will need a pretty good (and expensive) CRT to match this quality of image. Sure you can pick up some good CRTs quite cheaply now but, despite what others may say, I seriously doubt they can match the competition in all respects. And then there is the question of desk footprint - nuff said! MikeP4 2.4GHz (400FSB), 1Gig PC2100 DDR Crucial, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB (Omega 2.4.96c), Hyundai ImageQuest Q17 17" Monitor (1280x1024x32), Gigabyte GA-8IRXP MoBo, Ultra-Quiet PSU 400W, WinXP Home (SP1), DirectX 9.0b

Yeah, like he said ;).Your right tomshardware is a great site.Dan.

The colours to me look less accurate in LCD than CRT.If the machine is also used for Photoshop or an applicationwhich needs accurate colour, I'd investigate further.Peter Sydney Australia

I beg to disagree, but I'm sure it depends on the chosen monitor, the care taken to set it up correctly, the installed colour profile and the user's vision ;). My experience has been very good and, while not an expert by any means, I'm quite a keen photographer. The colours appear pretty accurate to me and the output to my HP Photosmart printer closely matches what I see onscreen.Mike

pay attention to one slight incovinient of the LCD's: NATIVE RESOLUTION, i.e if you dont' have an allaround good computer you may not play games well: Imagine that you currently play FS in 1280*960 32bits @80 mhz but you can't run a recent game well enough so you downgrade your resolution in your CRT to 800*600! well this does the trick in CRT but not in LCD......

Thanks alot MikeRgdsHasan

Thanks Dan , I will surely check this site..RgdsHasan

>pay attention to one slight incovinient of the LCD's: NATIVE>RESOLUTION, i.e if you dont' have an allaround good computer>you may not play games well: Imagine that you currently play>FS in 1280*960 32bits @80 mhz but you can't run a recent game>well enough so you downgrade your resolution in your CRT to>800*600! well this does the trick in CRT but not in LCD......>Excellent point! If your software does not support the NATIVE RESOLUTION, either it runs on a smaller part of your screen or some kind of funky expansion kicks in to fill the screen. Depending on the ratio of the expansion, this can go from looking perfectly good to looking absolutely horrible.Be warned about this because it can make you VERY unhappy suddenly.

I run the sim on both monitors 1024x768 at CRT 100 hz and secondary LCD 75 hz.I am so far very happy .My Graphic Card ATI 9800 Pro 128 DDR, Do you think I might get unsatisfactory result with 18" or 19" LCD ?I did not much understand what you said about ( Native Resolution )Do You mean that LCD monitor's resolutions can not be adjusted ?If yes , pls note ; My secondary LCD Philips can be down adjusted to different resolution settings and can give different refresh rate at every resolution , like I usually do in my CRT ..

LCD panels are made up of physical locations that can be turned on or off.The panel has a fixed number of these locations. This is the native resolution of the panel. The number of locations (x by y).Using scaling factors, they can scale for a different x by y, but unless it is exactly the same scaling rate, things do not work well. You can consider it something similar to how the old Anti-Aliasing brute force method worked. Some panels will do this conversion rather well. Some do it extremely poorly.Ensure you test the panel in ALL resolutions that you will be running it in to ensure you don't get any nasty surprises.

Just to add my two cents, I was also recently looking to upgrade my monitor, but I wanted a 20" viewable screen.After looking at the prices for 20" LCD units, roughly $1200.00 in my area, I went with a Viewsonic P225F CRT, $700.00, and find it a great monitor.Also, after changing I found that when used with FS2004 I no longer had to use the "Window" mode to select aircraft, etc. I thought this was a purely graphics card issue (black screen when adressing some menu functions), but now I can use FSNavigator and do not need to change viewing mode during use. No change at all on graphics card configuration. Hmmm ...LCD's are great looking, but for my money this will do for now.CheersBob C.

Hii DanI have checked Tomshardware site and really found nice articles.There was a comparision article between 16 ms and 20 ms LCD monitors and surprised me alot .On several tests 20 ms monitors showed better performance then 16 ms ( especially at games for After glow - Trailing of pictures..)Since Response Time is very crucial criteria but now I understand judging the monitor brand only by comparing ms will not be enough.Therefore ;What are the other Key Technical features we have to be patient ?If in my area founding 18" LCD with a good technical features ( like 16 ms ) can I go back to 20 ms ?( unfortunately dealers here are not accepting to give me temporarily for testing then buy ) Is Your monitor 16 ms or 20 ms ?How is the performance at FS2004 ?Thanks fyr furnishing infoRgdsHasan