vladislavmedvednikov wrote:So currently I'm using XL2411Z. Buying a GDM-FW900 wouldn't be an upgrade? I've seen people getting 125hz on 1440x900 or 160hz on 1152x720. How is the Hz of CRT compared to LCD's? I've read somewhere that for example 85Hz CRT is still faster than 120Hz LCD due to it's technology nature.
Depends. Could be an upgrade in some ways. If you're downscaling on your XL2411Z anyway and if you can pull off ~125Hz on the W900, you can pretty much have similar resolution and refresh. Then it will likely be an upgrade latency-wise without the loss of the latency-randomization (since 125Hz is not much lower than 144Hz).
On the other hand, if I was choosing a new display, and had a choice between a W900/FW900 versus a 240Hz monitor, I'd be getting the 240Hz monitor for eSports use at this time. But your mileage may vary given your specific priorities (e.g. blur reduction, absolute lag, and lag randomization), your needs, and your budget.
Priority Blur Reduction == Favours CRT (no blur reduction lag) or strobe backlights (adds average half-refresh-cycle lag)
Priority Lowest Absolute Lag == Favours CRT (if you have native analog output available)
Priority Lowest Lag MIN/MAX Variance == Favours Highest Hz (240Hz eSports monitors)
It ends up becoming a "pick two of the three" game.
How competitive are you? Are you playing professionally in paid eSports tournaments in your country? If you are playing professionally and you are allowed to choose your own display, maybe try both (Both the W900 CRT and the 240Hz LCD), you need all the advantage you can muster. But if you are invited to eSports tournament arenas/stadium that forces to use their sponsored monitors, then I highly recommend training on the 240Hz LCD instead. This is because whatever the sponsors put in the stadium will be much more similar to the display that you choose to train on.
Display-changes are sometimes somewhat jarring to seasoned professional eSports players that visits tournaments, especially if they're trained their aiming to a specific display -- even a 1ms lag difference, while not directly felt, sometimes create changes in hitrates (e.g. precise mouse turns, 8000 pixels per second sideways turning + 1ms extra lag = 8 pixel average offset in aim, at least until you get used to the new aimfeel of the new display latency). You train on a CRT at home, then you get invited to an eSports tournament, and then required play on their sponsored monitors (now becoming increasingly 144Hz or 240Hz LCDs), and bam, you're not playing homefield advantage anymore. Obviously, it depends on the country you are in.
If you never play at sites that requires you to use their sponsored monitors, then all of this doesn't matter, and single milliseconds typically don't matter to more than 99% of average people, but it's a consideration worth mentioning since milliseconds certainly begin to matter in the elite leagues.