Why CRT monitors were better

You could spend a grand or more for a 20-year-old widescreen 24" Sony Trinitron, still have to pay for adapters and shipping, and you'd still end up with a giant, heavy, clunky box on your desk. But its 1440p resolution at 80hz is still respectable for games, the blacks are pure, and there's no input lag or motion blur. Vice's Jared Newman explains why CRTs—or at least that CRT—is better than a modern 4K LCD.

Raymond Soneira, the president of display research firm DisplayMate, has found that this issue even persists on panels with faster refresh rates than the usual 60 Hz. This may explain why Digital Foundry's John Linneman described the CRT experience as "cleaner, smoother, [and] nicer" compared to even the best LCDs.

"The issue here is that you're comparing an electronic conversion—that is, from an electron to a photon—with physically twisting the liquid crystal," Young said. "The faster something moves across the panel, the less capable an LCD is with keeping up with the movement."

The future is OLEDs, but OLED displays are still pricey. An OLED computer monitor was still thousands of dollars last time I looked, and while OLED TVs are somewhat cheaper, they're all way too big for desktop use.