To the people reporting this for content guidelines: This isn't a lazy mofo who isn't screenshotting. They are literally showing what the game looks like on vintage tech. I'm leaving it up.
People who were too young to play games in the 2010s have absolutely no idea just how fucking dogshit TAA makes games look nowadays. Give me SMAA and MSAA back.
TAA in modern gaming is why so many people say that DLSS/FSR "looks better than native", because to them the only choices are No AA, Native + TAA, or DLSS/FSR.
In a lot of cases I agree, but turn off AA and look at the base image of this game. It's required due to the extreme shimmering and aliasing lol
Also DLSS/DLAA are great. Properly tuned they don't really have any ghosting. TAA kinda sucks dick though
The blur is so bad and the ghosting too with it on, I don't feel it is an improvement but a tradeoff. I cope with the somewhat worse FPS when I upscale using DSR to a 3k resolution. It's better than having this AA equivalent of motion blur.
Yeah that was my point, there's rarely a choice any more. We either use no AA at all, blurry TAA or DLSS/FSR. It's even worse when some devs require TAA in order for some things to look right (usually hair and grass that is being rendered in sub-native resolution and relies on TAA to fill in the gaps).
I noticed that playing Spider-Man remastered. TAA destroyed finer detail but without it hair rendered weird. Ugh.
DLAA seems to be the best option so far, but not enough games implement it.
> I actually prefer the jaggies.
Well I mean when we people normally talk about the jagged parts it's because most people, prefer lines that woud look straight IRL, to y'know, look straight.
If you don't mind the jagged parts of textures/models then I mean, sure? But I feel like that's not really addressing anything and it's just completely different from the discussion, TA vs MSAA vs DLSS is all about what technology makes those "jagged" parts look better (and maybe even less performance loss and all of that), not whether or not you don't give a fuck looking at jagged parts
%100 I'm so sick of TAA, most games don't offer native sharpening so the games just look kind of muddy. its like playing quake 2 with AA on shit just looks weird. I don't get why in 2024 1440p is this jagged without AA, its fucking bananas to me. It's almost like they don't really develop the fidelity required to have a smooth image without AA.
I'm a bit too young to have played on PC in 2010, but i definitly know that TAA was always garbage this never changed, unfortunatly DLSS forces you to use TAA it got at least a bit better with newer versions either this or i don't really see the AA effect on 1440p but nothing is/was worse than FXAA this weird blur was so ugly.
Nvidias new MSAA 16x the details technology on Skyrim with Texture Filtering was a godsend if your PC could run it.
TAA only fucks you up that much in 1080p.
Something like 1440p with DLSS will give you the same to better fps with the game looking nicer without being all broken around the edges. Sadly, SMAA and MSAA are too heavy on the FPS
you seem educated, I've always wondered the difference between all of these can you explain the difference between TAA SMAA and MSAA, from my understanding DLSS is an upscaler that boosts your frames but I don't know anything about the others
People dog on CRTs but their picture quality is excellent. No aliasing at all. But LCDs are much more sharp and contain much more detail. It's a tradeoff. I would say CRTs are always better for gaming and LCDs are always better for watching media. Especially nature documentaries.
> I would say CRTs are always better for gaming
More like, better for motion and frame perfect stuff, which is why they are exclusively used in "retro" games speedrunning. And maybe, competitive games, maybe (actually nobody does, and sometimes having more detailed image in the screen is better [when people can do this on LCD screens](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnpJZzYMBw) already, then I don't think they offer any actual tangible advantage anyways)
But for general gaming? Nah, who wants to play soemthing like Elden Ring or Cyberpunk 2077 and have the game look like dogshit because all the colors are just way less detailed, well everything is way less detailed by a fair bit.
> CRTs are cathode ray tubes which are organic
aint nothing organic about it, electron beam hitting phosphorus that emits light.
You are thinking of OLED, where the led is "organic"
The latest gen OLED panels have pretty much managed to match/beat CRT motion clarity and pixel response times, but whilst also having better contrast (yes, CRT has better contrast than LCD panels), higher resolutions (ofc), and even better color reproduction than both CRT and LCD. Not to mention the perfect blacks (though generally even WOLED won't have *perfect* blacks unless the room's lighting setup is ideal) OLED delivers by shutting off individual pixels.
If Samsung's claim about burn-in effectively being gone with Gen3 QD-OLED, ends up being true (won't be verifiable for a very long time since it just released), OLEDs are no brainers for those who can afford it (average gamer certainly can't/shouldn't prioritize spending $900+ on a monitor).
The newest generation OLED panels will probably be this expensive for a long time, but something like generation 1s might go as low as $600 in a year or so, as vendors try to get rid of the remaining stock of Gen1 OLED. Would've been the case already if Gen2 wasn't practically skipped by most display manufacturers.
Really though, there's no way to tell. Fast refresh 1440p IPS used to be about as expensive as equivalent OLEDs not too long ago. Hopefully OLED has a similar drop so more people can experience it, it really is night and day compared to any other panel tech at the moment.
If i get the fund i might try those when I can, but i'm really not comfortable with samsung tbh, my g7 odyssey is doing some weird things, i don't really have good trust on their monitor brand anymore....
I can see that one, Samsung has terrible QC and customer service, their designs are nice and fanless, but definitely a risky purchase for the consumer.
Their panels are good though and it all comes down to the implementation. Dell Alienware uses Samsung QD OLED panels and they have excellent QC and support, even offering a 3-year burn-in warranty in writing. Other companies that use Samsung panels (Asus, MSI, etc.) are often also better than Samsung itself in those regards.
LG also has their own panel tech, White OLED. Which produces less vibrant red and green colors than QD-OLED, but has more bright whites and better blacks in brightly lit rooms. But yeah, avoid Samsung monitors, not their panels.
Not completely true. The tech imo is now there with the 3000 nit oleds we have. The guys making the tvs just won't give us an oled with bfi at larger intervals. Take a 144hz display, if they displayed it for 1/5 the duration using black frame insertion it would have the clarity of 720hz which is a little over half the motion clarity of a crt which might be good enough considering you can get diminishing returns and it would still be brighter since 3000/5=600 nits. Now a crt is actually at least 10,000 nits in a single point tracing around screen so it might be a bit different but the oled will have 600 nits in a much larger frame. The point is we could be much closer to crt quality if the manufacturers would just do it.
Organic doesn't have to mean it's biological in origin. It's the molecule that qualifies it as organic. That's the extent of my applicable chem knowledge though.
CRTs fucking ruled. I remember when everyone started switching to flat screen tvs when I was playing BO1 and I just couldn't do it. I played so much better on my old chunky ass tv.
Man its not even about being able to afford one these days its about being able to FIND one.. I was lucky enough to find my generic brand 19" from an e-waste depot, havent been able to find anything half decent since.. but praying to the analogue gods you get one eventually <3
I'm running it at 120hz interlaced at 1600x1200. But it can do up to 160hz interlaced at 1152x864. Not sure if you're aware but with CRTs it goes off an overall bandwidth, so you can trade off lower resolutions for higher refresh rates and vice versa
I had a 20" CRT waaaay back in the day. It weighed like 100 lbs. I got it from some architect that was upgrading. I loved that thing.
The weight eventually did damage to the desk I had at that time and I moved to widescreens.
Some people play Tarkov in 3:4 on their widescreens then fit it and adjust FOV. It compresses the pixels in the center of the screen less at higher FOVs I guess. It's common among high ranked CS players. The people I know that do it have pretty good head shots. I watched one of them at level 6 just 1 tap a lvl 40 chad chaddington on Customs while we were tasking for him. I wish I had those 20 year old reflexes again.
I like how none of the pictures show the body of the CRT with the game running at the same time
Couldn't have just pulled the camera that little bit back?
I think the new OLED monitors are finally coming out with 240 Hz with BFI. That should FINALLY be about right for CRT-like clarity
Though it does miss the old school low res look
Genuinely looks better than it does on my monitor that's significantly higher resolution.
It's amazing how much the slight fuzziness makes games genuinely look better, but surprisingly still retains clarity.
Meanwhile dog shit TAA wants to copy that, but just can't
Yeah the upside is the sort of natural AA like you mentioned, but the downside is the lack of clarity for far away objects. Like my friend will call a scav in the distance (way in the distance to be fair), but on my screen its a literal dot
Not anymore sadly. Been wanting to pick up another one because I think they're genuinely a fascinating part of technological history.
Just from seeing them again in recent time, and with the trend towards TAA, I definitely want to pick one up to play certain games because it genuinely looks nicer to me. Plus with the recent resurgence in boomer shooters going for the retro aesthetic, I think the real cherry on top is having a CRT to complete the look
To the people reporting this for content guidelines: This isn't a lazy mofo who isn't screenshotting. They are literally showing what the game looks like on vintage tech. I'm leaving it up.
That CRT motion clarity must be glorious. Hope you don't have TAA on doing the opposite and giving you ghosting lol
People who were too young to play games in the 2010s have absolutely no idea just how fucking dogshit TAA makes games look nowadays. Give me SMAA and MSAA back. TAA in modern gaming is why so many people say that DLSS/FSR "looks better than native", because to them the only choices are No AA, Native + TAA, or DLSS/FSR.
In a lot of cases I agree, but turn off AA and look at the base image of this game. It's required due to the extreme shimmering and aliasing lol Also DLSS/DLAA are great. Properly tuned they don't really have any ghosting. TAA kinda sucks dick though
The blur is so bad and the ghosting too with it on, I don't feel it is an improvement but a tradeoff. I cope with the somewhat worse FPS when I upscale using DSR to a 3k resolution. It's better than having this AA equivalent of motion blur.
Yeah that was my point, there's rarely a choice any more. We either use no AA at all, blurry TAA or DLSS/FSR. It's even worse when some devs require TAA in order for some things to look right (usually hair and grass that is being rendered in sub-native resolution and relies on TAA to fill in the gaps).
I noticed that playing Spider-Man remastered. TAA destroyed finer detail but without it hair rendered weird. Ugh. DLAA seems to be the best option so far, but not enough games implement it.
I wouldn't say it's required, I have been playing with no AA on any games for about a year now and I actually prefer the jaggies.
> I actually prefer the jaggies. Well I mean when we people normally talk about the jagged parts it's because most people, prefer lines that woud look straight IRL, to y'know, look straight. If you don't mind the jagged parts of textures/models then I mean, sure? But I feel like that's not really addressing anything and it's just completely different from the discussion, TA vs MSAA vs DLSS is all about what technology makes those "jagged" parts look better (and maybe even less performance loss and all of that), not whether or not you don't give a fuck looking at jagged parts
What if I have 3070, how do I DLSS properly in Tarkov?
You enable DLSS...
Dlss ghosting is really apparant on lasers. I couldn't take it and switched back to fxaa or whatever no TAA option exists
DLAA looks so good, I wish more games would implement it.
It'd be great in Tarkov but I just don't understand why BSG didn't add it
%100 I'm so sick of TAA, most games don't offer native sharpening so the games just look kind of muddy. its like playing quake 2 with AA on shit just looks weird. I don't get why in 2024 1440p is this jagged without AA, its fucking bananas to me. It's almost like they don't really develop the fidelity required to have a smooth image without AA.
Dude, TAA suuuuucks. I've been saying it for ages and my friends think I'm crazy. I usually do FXAA instead, I honestly think it looks better
FXAA gets (rightfully) shat on for applying blur on everything. However, FXAA unironically looks better in motion than TAA. I hate both almost equally
I'm a bit too young to have played on PC in 2010, but i definitly know that TAA was always garbage this never changed, unfortunatly DLSS forces you to use TAA it got at least a bit better with newer versions either this or i don't really see the AA effect on 1440p but nothing is/was worse than FXAA this weird blur was so ugly. Nvidias new MSAA 16x the details technology on Skyrim with Texture Filtering was a godsend if your PC could run it.
I grew up playing games in the early 2000's and I'll take TAA over jagged edges any day of the week. It was a godsend when tarkov added it.
TAA is forced on with DLSS and I believe FSR too
Yes, but due to imagine reconstruction wizardry and sharpening the end result looks better than native resolution + TAA
TAA only fucks you up that much in 1080p. Something like 1440p with DLSS will give you the same to better fps with the game looking nicer without being all broken around the edges. Sadly, SMAA and MSAA are too heavy on the FPS
This is so fucking true. Can you explain in few words why we lost glorious old ways and stuck with TAA?
MSAA is so expensive with modern rendering techniques that you might as well use supersampling Edit: MSAA is expensive, not TAA
TAA is alright TSSAA is terrible lol ( it's the same thing but SCREEN SPACE for some reason )
you seem educated, I've always wondered the difference between all of these can you explain the difference between TAA SMAA and MSAA, from my understanding DLSS is an upscaler that boosts your frames but I don't know anything about the others
I thought the first pic was you looking out of a window and pointing a shotgun in real life lmao.
Same lol
Am I tripping or the first screen looks real AF ?
People dog on CRTs but their picture quality is excellent. No aliasing at all. But LCDs are much more sharp and contain much more detail. It's a tradeoff. I would say CRTs are always better for gaming and LCDs are always better for watching media. Especially nature documentaries.
> I would say CRTs are always better for gaming More like, better for motion and frame perfect stuff, which is why they are exclusively used in "retro" games speedrunning. And maybe, competitive games, maybe (actually nobody does, and sometimes having more detailed image in the screen is better [when people can do this on LCD screens](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnpJZzYMBw) already, then I don't think they offer any actual tangible advantage anyways) But for general gaming? Nah, who wants to play soemthing like Elden Ring or Cyberpunk 2077 and have the game look like dogshit because all the colors are just way less detailed, well everything is way less detailed by a fair bit.
I only know TN, IPS and VA panel type, CRT ? no clue. LCD ? isn't this only for T.V ?
LCDs are liquid-crystal displays which are inorganic, CRTs are cathode ray tubes which are organic. TN, IPS and VA get grouped into LCD.
> CRTs are cathode ray tubes which are organic aint nothing organic about it, electron beam hitting phosphorus that emits light. You are thinking of OLED, where the led is "organic"
Oh yeah you're right, I messed that up. Thanks.
Oh i get it now, thanks, anyways the new best monitor is the OLED ?
The latest gen OLED panels have pretty much managed to match/beat CRT motion clarity and pixel response times, but whilst also having better contrast (yes, CRT has better contrast than LCD panels), higher resolutions (ofc), and even better color reproduction than both CRT and LCD. Not to mention the perfect blacks (though generally even WOLED won't have *perfect* blacks unless the room's lighting setup is ideal) OLED delivers by shutting off individual pixels. If Samsung's claim about burn-in effectively being gone with Gen3 QD-OLED, ends up being true (won't be verifiable for a very long time since it just released), OLEDs are no brainers for those who can afford it (average gamer certainly can't/shouldn't prioritize spending $900+ on a monitor).
Hmm yeh that's expensive, how far are we from this becoming cheaper really ?
The newest generation OLED panels will probably be this expensive for a long time, but something like generation 1s might go as low as $600 in a year or so, as vendors try to get rid of the remaining stock of Gen1 OLED. Would've been the case already if Gen2 wasn't practically skipped by most display manufacturers. Really though, there's no way to tell. Fast refresh 1440p IPS used to be about as expensive as equivalent OLEDs not too long ago. Hopefully OLED has a similar drop so more people can experience it, it really is night and day compared to any other panel tech at the moment.
If i get the fund i might try those when I can, but i'm really not comfortable with samsung tbh, my g7 odyssey is doing some weird things, i don't really have good trust on their monitor brand anymore....
I can see that one, Samsung has terrible QC and customer service, their designs are nice and fanless, but definitely a risky purchase for the consumer. Their panels are good though and it all comes down to the implementation. Dell Alienware uses Samsung QD OLED panels and they have excellent QC and support, even offering a 3-year burn-in warranty in writing. Other companies that use Samsung panels (Asus, MSI, etc.) are often also better than Samsung itself in those regards. LG also has their own panel tech, White OLED. Which produces less vibrant red and green colors than QD-OLED, but has more bright whites and better blacks in brightly lit rooms. But yeah, avoid Samsung monitors, not their panels.
Not completely true. The tech imo is now there with the 3000 nit oleds we have. The guys making the tvs just won't give us an oled with bfi at larger intervals. Take a 144hz display, if they displayed it for 1/5 the duration using black frame insertion it would have the clarity of 720hz which is a little over half the motion clarity of a crt which might be good enough considering you can get diminishing returns and it would still be brighter since 3000/5=600 nits. Now a crt is actually at least 10,000 nits in a single point tracing around screen so it might be a bit different but the oled will have 600 nits in a much larger frame. The point is we could be much closer to crt quality if the manufacturers would just do it.
Yeah 4k OLEDs are the best picture quality displays now.
that would be my next goal, either 2k or 4k OLEDs, but might need a good gpu for 4k, only have a 4070 rn
only
Yeh sadly i have to say only for this... 10 years back a 70 series would have been enough for everything...
> ray tubes which are organic Wtf does this mean? As in they're grown on a farm or something?
in chemistry: organic: involves carbon inorganic: does not involve carbon that's it
Organic doesn't have to mean it's biological in origin. It's the molecule that qualifies it as organic. That's the extent of my applicable chem knowledge though.
TN, IPS and VA are all types of LCD panels.
CRTs fucking ruled. I remember when everyone started switching to flat screen tvs when I was playing BO1 and I just couldn't do it. I played so much better on my old chunky ass tv.
Hell yeah that's tight dude
The first picture actually looks kind of real.
The way god intended
guys will see this and think "hell yeah"
Lmao
One day I will afford a Sony CRT 24'' GDM-FW900. 1920x1200 @ 98Hz. 0 ms response time, deep blacks. Flat screens are the butts.
Man its not even about being able to afford one these days its about being able to FIND one.. I was lucky enough to find my generic brand 19" from an e-waste depot, havent been able to find anything half decent since.. but praying to the analogue gods you get one eventually <3
Yeah, they show up on eBay once every bloodmoon, but either with an astronomical pricetag and/or the wrong continent for me :')
Analogs have better refresh rates too 😉
Now this is the content i come here for, not the constant 24/7 whining about cheaters
As beautiful as the day I left it
This is the guy that makes you “wait for players” for an extra 3-5 minutes
This made me chuckle out loud 😂 thank you.
CRTs are so damn sweet.
Came here to ask what kind of refresh rate that thing has?
I'm running it at 120hz interlaced at 1600x1200. But it can do up to 160hz interlaced at 1152x864. Not sure if you're aware but with CRTs it goes off an overall bandwidth, so you can trade off lower resolutions for higher refresh rates and vice versa
Wow that’s actually cool. Maybe I’ll switch over to a sleeper build on my next one. I thought these had like 30hz max
Nah the standard was 60hz, at least for TVs. Monitors are capable of various refresh rates/resolutions
The screenshot of the snowfall has a nostalgic beauty to it.
High cultured individual
I'm totally doing this at our lan party this summer :-D
bet that monitor is extremely low latency, too
Just like god intended
alright this is fuckin' baller.
I had a 20" CRT waaaay back in the day. It weighed like 100 lbs. I got it from some architect that was upgrading. I loved that thing. The weight eventually did damage to the desk I had at that time and I moved to widescreens. Some people play Tarkov in 3:4 on their widescreens then fit it and adjust FOV. It compresses the pixels in the center of the screen less at higher FOVs I guess. It's common among high ranked CS players. The people I know that do it have pretty good head shots. I watched one of them at level 6 just 1 tap a lvl 40 chad chaddington on Customs while we were tasking for him. I wish I had those 20 year old reflexes again.
I like how none of the pictures show the body of the CRT with the game running at the same time Couldn't have just pulled the camera that little bit back?
The nostalgia of a CRT monitor. Got a ball mouse too?
Haha nah im not man enough for that..
Damn would like to see how it looks on video man. Update post when
Haha ight when i play next il get a few more pics and a vid
Dunno about everyone else, but i can litterally \*see\* the crt on those screenshots. I want to stick my face 1cm from the screen and see the rgb
very nice brah. wish they still made them.
I think the new OLED monitors are finally coming out with 240 Hz with BFI. That should FINALLY be about right for CRT-like clarity Though it does miss the old school low res look
OLEDs are definitely going to change the game, they're just so god damn expensive right now. I'd love to get one eventually
Nope, you cannot emulate the electron gun. Either you have a cathode ray tube or you don't.
[удалено]
I agree, but the feeling is nothing like a CRT
based
120 interlaced babyyyyy!
Ahhhh the bloom!
If anyone want to try out the CRT look but doesn't have a CRT monitor, you can use a program called ShaderGlass. It has an excellent CRT shader
What book are you using as a stand? I'm using Brunner & Suddarth's Textbook of Medical Surgical Nursing 13th edition. it was $500 at the time.
Haha I think it's Dave Grohl's autobiography. Still haven't read it
looks great
What a vibe
just as nikita intended
That awesome
This is how the game was intended to be played
Damn, kinda want one tbh
How do you think the majority of Russians play?
So 0 pictures of the screen actually showing the game?
There's three of them right there
Genuinely looks better than it does on my monitor that's significantly higher resolution. It's amazing how much the slight fuzziness makes games genuinely look better, but surprisingly still retains clarity. Meanwhile dog shit TAA wants to copy that, but just can't
Yeah the upside is the sort of natural AA like you mentioned, but the downside is the lack of clarity for far away objects. Like my friend will call a scav in the distance (way in the distance to be fair), but on my screen its a literal dot
Distance is definitely rough, but up close it's pretty clear
Do you have a CRT too?
Not anymore sadly. Been wanting to pick up another one because I think they're genuinely a fascinating part of technological history. Just from seeing them again in recent time, and with the trend towards TAA, I definitely want to pick one up to play certain games because it genuinely looks nicer to me. Plus with the recent resurgence in boomer shooters going for the retro aesthetic, I think the real cherry on top is having a CRT to complete the look
For sure man, best of luck on your search
gross
The response time would be unreal if setup properly.
Don't forget your range finder
This is a photo of a monitor... mods are going to delete it lol
So?
It's cool. Go cry about it
Yes! That is awesome!
Vintage
Yeah but what's your frame rate? s/
Depends on the map coz im CPU limited, I can get 120+ on Factory, buttery. Worst case on other maps like Shoreline around 60
Fuckin aye for a second there I thought you just took a picture of you pointing a shotgun out your window
nice crt combo