> The core argument for CRT's is their low latency and high refresh rate
The article is outdated (like you said) because LCD/OLED displays have long since surpassed CRTs in latency and refresh rate.
A modern gaming LCD can refresh the entire screen multiple times over before an old CRT scans the entire frame and returns to the top to redraw the next one.
Yeah, and 90% of the commenters in this discussion clearly haven't looked at TV or computer monitor made in the last few years; they're at least 5 years behind the market.
There are Samsung TVs that have around ~6ms input delay, and many, many gaming monitors have 1-2ms input delay.
If you spend $400 you can get a 1440p monitor with 1ms input delay, 2-3ms grey-to-grey timing, that will do 240hz.
All with more contrast, color gamut, and resolution.
Point being? Your modern LCD still uses buffers and sample and hold. They will always have inherent input latency compared to CRT regardless how fast they can refresh.
The article is outdated (like you said) because LCD/OLED displays have long since surpassed CRTs in latency and refresh rate.
A modern gaming LCD can refresh the entire screen multiple times over before an old CRT scans the entire frame and returns to the top to redraw the next one.