• IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Here’s one for the other direction. 24" CRT uses about 90 watts per hour, 24" LED TV uses about 30 watts per hour.

    • Psythik@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh man, wouldn’t it be great to have a CRT with modern features? Widescreen, 4K, 240Hz with Variable Refresh Rate, HDMI 2.1a, DP 2.1, RGB input, runs on Android (or no smart features at all). Everything would look amazing on it no matter what era it came from.

      I’d gladly sell my OLED without thinking twice if I could have this.

      • Nobsi@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re wearing your pink glasses too much mate. A “4k” CRT will not look good.

        • Psythik@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Says the guy who obviously never used a high-end CRT monitor in the late 90s/early 2000s. The one I had could do 1536p at 85Hz (2560x1536, which was basically 1440p in 4:3. Yes, I had this in 1999). It looked way better than you think. As sharp and clear as any modern LCD, except with much better contrast (until OLEDs appeared on the scene, that is; before those came out, blacks on flatscreens just couldn’t go as dark as they could on a quality CRT).

          I can confirm this because just last year I had to pull mine out of storage to use for awhile when my old display died. It still looked great, even for 23-year-old tech. A modern CRT could look so much better. Especially for older games, since unlike modern displays, they CRTs can display any resolution natively without the need for upscaling.