 |
Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kls85
I post too much
 Reputation: 22
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2757
Location: Under ur bed
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| NeverForgotten wrote: | | JamesHan1 wrote: | | Konata Izumi wrote: | | JamesHan1 wrote: | | I'd say its pretty close to 20 pounds, but then again, it's a 19 inch moniter. |
is it a huge box, or flatscreen? |
It's a flatscreen. |
then you have a LCD |
There are flatscreen CRTs.
It's a CRT, but their screen is flat unlike the other CRT where their screen has a slight curve.
Today flatscreen are referred to as LCDs. unless the person specifies.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
xMurtaghx
I post too much
 Reputation: 1
Joined: 13 Apr 2008
Posts: 3611
Location: Gayville, South Dakota, 57031, United States of America
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CRTs and Acers are good. I have a Acer currently and had a CRT but
I upgraded to the Acer because it was bigger. They both worked well.
_________________
Scania- Lvl 117 DK✔
WE WILL MISS GMS!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yuki953
Grandmaster Cheater
 Reputation: 0
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 558
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i have a 15'' LCD screen, at 60 mhz, 1280/1024 and its perfect for me..., heres a tip, if you have eye strain, turn the brightness down a bit, and respawns time....wtf? i never even thought about that... does it REALY matter?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frostbyt3
Master Cheater
 Reputation: 0
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 323
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thlump wrote: | | Frostbyt3 wrote: | | CRT's are generally worse for you since your are, in essence, being bombarded with various radiations. An LCD does not function in this way, no radiation is being pushed into your eyes. |
I see. But can a big widescreen LCD harm your eyes as well?
Also, can my NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE Integrated Graphics GPU support 1680x1050 resolution without any problems? |
The widescreen will be the same, and your 6150 should run it without a hitch.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mozilla Firefox
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
 Reputation: 0
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Posts: 1250
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yuki953 wrote: | | i have a 15'' LCD screen, at 60 mhz, 1280/1024 and its perfect for me..., heres a tip, if you have eye strain, turn the brightness down a bit, and respawns time....wtf? i never even thought about that... does it REALY matter? |
"respawns"?, I assume you mean, 'response'? Well, in regards to that, you seriously can't decrease the response time at all.
And OP, I'd recommend these manufacturers/brands:
I'm about to purchase a Samsung 2493HM. It's a 24" inch, TN panel with a good response rate and no input lag. I was considering the Dell 2408WFP, although, that's a S-PVA panel(generally used for PhotoShop and professionals in that aspect that need very good color reproduction, although, if you're after substantial color reproductions, you should check out the S-IPS panels) and when I was gaming, I had input lag experiences and very bad response rate timings which made me get frustrated whilst gaming. I returned the monitor and had chose the Samsung 2493HM. It's a good monitor, check out the reviews, great monitor. It can be adjustable to your preference with these options:
height, swivel, tilt, pivot
It also has HDMI and built-in speakers, although, obviously, 4-watt speakers are seriously crap. And normal computer/desktop speakers are way better and efficient-wise. And the Samsung 2493HM also has a 10000:1 dynamic contrast ratio. The maximum resolution is 1920 x 1200, and therefore, 16:10. Unfortunately, this has very poor scaling and stretches. Although, that's pretty much all. Great monitor, overall.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheetah
I post too much
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 11 Nov 2007
Posts: 2758
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you still have eyestrain at 85Hz, it may be something else causing it, such as being too bright etc.
| Frostbyt3 wrote: | | CRT's are generally worse for you since your are, in essence, being bombarded with various radiations. An LCD does not function in this way, no radiation is being pushed into your eyes. |
It's never been proven the radiation from CRT's is harmful.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hackset
Grandmaster Cheater
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 524
Location: Confined space, in an asylum probably.
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheetah wrote: | If you still have eyestrain at 85Hz, it may be something else causing it, such as being too bright etc.
| Frostbyt3 wrote: | | CRT's are generally worse for you since your are, in essence, being bombarded with various radiations. An LCD does not function in this way, no radiation is being pushed into your eyes. |
It's never been proven the radiation from CRT's is harmful. |
I thought all radiation was harmful (science). Doesn't it damage your DNA or some shit?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SFP+
Comp. talk moderator
 Reputation: 26
Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 1228
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Uhm, I'm about to buy a HP 2207h, (21 or 22" widescreen) it's a good monitor, my friend has it. I've never had eye strain or such a thing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcavolsdsadgadsg
I'm a spammer
![]() Reputation: 26
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 5801
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LCD's don't flicker, and generally don't output past 60hz. (ideally I'd still like it higher though  ) Even if you switch the refresh rate, you won't be going past 60.
Undoubtedly, 16:9 is going to become the 'standard' as well, as it seems with the power of marketing, and 16:9 being cheaper to manufacture, some are already jumping on this bandwagon. I really don't care personally, since I'm usually gaming, where I'd simply gain viewing area.
Honestly, my LCD looks much better than my old CRT did, and it's no where near what LCD's you'd find today are like. The picture is simply crisp as shit in comparison. Maybe it was my CRT, but I can't see it getting much better than pixel perfect. Ghosting is so ridiculously minimal, and is entirely unnoticeable in games, even something like Quake.
TN panels are looking fantastic these days, response times are ridiculously low, and the dithering algorithms have become so advanced by this point on some newer panels (like the BenQ 16:9 ones) that one might be surprised. I doubt anything overthrowing TN panels in the cheap / gaming area.
I want an OLED screen.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dm47
Master Cheater
 Reputation: 0
Joined: 06 Jun 2006
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheetah wrote: | A good CRT with a fast refresh rate won't have any issues with flicker. A lot of idiots would run their CRT's at 60Hz and wonder why they get eye strain and headaches.
|
my screen refresh rate is at 60Hz right now.
i also have options for 70, 72, and 75.
which is the best? lol. i know nothing about this o_O
_________________
| yanno wrote: | | Is the gameguard CRC bypass supposed to shut off the computer or did u do that to trick me? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcavolsdsadgadsg
I'm a spammer
![]() Reputation: 26
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 5801
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You'll find the fastest possible at your given resolution the best.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frostbyt3
Master Cheater
Reputation: 0
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 323
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| slovach wrote: |
Undoubtedly, 16:9 is going to become the 'standard' as well, as it seems with the power of marketing, and 16:9 being cheaper to manufacture, some are already jumping on this bandwagon. I really don't care personally, since I'm usually gaming, where I'd simply gain viewing area.
|
Unless I'm mistaken, I thought desktop computer widescreens had an aspect ratio of 16:10? And that TVs were 16:9.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcavolsdsadgadsg
I'm a spammer
![]() Reputation: 26
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 5801
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Frostbyt3 wrote: | | slovach wrote: |
Undoubtedly, 16:9 is going to become the 'standard' as well, as it seems with the power of marketing, and 16:9 being cheaper to manufacture, some are already jumping on this bandwagon. I really don't care personally, since I'm usually gaming, where I'd simply gain viewing area.
|
Unless I'm mistaken, I thought desktop computer widescreens had an aspect ratio of 16:10? And that TVs were 16:9. |
They are, and I gave the reason as to why one will probably see more 16:9 monitors in the future.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheetah
I post too much
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 11 Nov 2007
Posts: 2758
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JamesHan1 wrote: | | Cheetah wrote: | If you still have eyestrain at 85Hz, it may be something else causing it, such as being too bright etc.
| Frostbyt3 wrote: | | CRT's are generally worse for you since your are, in essence, being bombarded with various radiations. An LCD does not function in this way, no radiation is being pushed into your eyes. |
It's never been proven the radiation from CRT's is harmful. |
I thought all radiation was harmful (science). Doesn't it damage your DNA or some shit? |
Nope. Light is a form of radiation, heat is a form of radiation, etc. It depends on the wavelength and strength of the radiation.
If you're really worried about harmful radiation, you better make sure you don't have any wireless networks, because those have been proven to be harmful(though it's common sense really if you look at the frequency bands.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thlump
Grandmaster Cheater
![]() Reputation: 0
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 964
Location: 206.51.226.121
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cheetah wrote: | | If you still have eyestrain at 85Hz, it may be something else causing it, such as being too bright etc. |
You're right... I'd checked the brightness setting for my CRT... The setting is 100(max).
And thanks for everyone who gave me suggestions, although I can't buy 24' monitors because my intergated graphics that dates back to 2005 can't support such a high resolution but thanks anyway 
| Quote: | | I thought all radiation was harmful (science). Doesn't it damage your DNA or some shit? |
I'm not sure if all radiation is harmful, but if you're working with radiation in a lab and you spill it, that can harm your DNA and do nasty shit.
_________________
| Symbol wrote: | LOL!
Then its not a UCE, its UWF. (Undetected Windows Form. WITH BUTTONS!  ) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
