If you mean two TYPES of monitors then there are FLAT SCREENS and CRT monitors. Flatscreens are good because they save space and energy. CRT monitors take much more space but give better colours.
if you are using CRT moitor than computer will use more energy if you are using lcd monitor than TV will use more energy . i am not saying for laptops .they (laptop) also use very less energy compared to desktop .but totally depend upon type of monitor.
CRT is cheaper than LED.
LCD projector televisions are more reliable than CRT televisions in numerous ways. There sizes are comparable but the pictures and the way you will view everything isn't. Get the one that you think has the best picture.
You need to be more specific about the criteria to be used in the comparison, but energy wise the lcd uses less power than a crt and that is good for the planet. LCD televisions also take up less space. Although an LCD costs less energy to run, their production processes use more energy than the production of CRT televisions, which may make an LCD more costly in energy, depending on the life of the TV. LCD televisions are starting to incorporate LED backlights, with have the advantage of allowing individual areas to be switched on and off. This enhances contrast (including deep blacks) and picture quality. Picture motion 'smoothness' remains a key advantage of CRT, as the images can "scan" across the screen rather than being limited to jumping between pixels. For optimum picture quality, a HD CRT TV with HDMI input (not upscaling) is better if you can live with the bigger size and higher running cost. A CRT produces a better picture then a LCD. Color standards were set for film and television years ago. As of 05-25-2009 LCD's still can not meet or surpass this standard. 'Deep black' a standard set years ago for film and television is the ability of film and television 'CRT' to show shades of color and gray all the way to complete deep black. An LCD can not meet or surpass this standard. An Lcd can show colors in a Bright kind of way , I call this LCD 'Eye Candy' , it is not true colors and deep black. All this is researchable on the net. And No a plasma screen can not meet or surpass the standard of film and television CRT.
32 inch tv is worse quality than 27inch because the pixals have to spread out more try sitting further away. As for the CRT better than LCD that seems to happen to me but watching in HD is much better than CRT.
LCD monitors are NOT faster than CRT's, CRT images move at the speed of light and have almost no input lag. LCDs have input lag and this is why good ones are so expensive.
there is 10 more crt in 24crtgold than 14crt gold
Yes, flat screen TVs generally consume less energy than older, bulkier CRT TVs. This is because flat screen TVs use newer technology such as LED or OLED which are more energy-efficient than the cathode-ray tubes used in regular TVs.
LCD monitors are more expensive when compared to CRTs, they introduce the problem of viewing angles, and generally have less accurate color replication. other then the cost the rest is almost straight lies. LCDs do not have viewing angle problems that is plasmas they also have almost the same color replication except for black where is almost right
At this point, I would say that a CRT had no advantages over a LCD monitor. The LCD is probably cheaper, it takes up less space, is easier on the eyes, and provides better revolutions.
Blackle saves energy IF you use a CRT or a Plasma screen as these require more energy in produce lighter colours and in particular white. HOWEVER, if you use an LCD screen it uses up to 6% more energy to produce black rather than white. This means that in the case of most modern computers Google itself saves more energy than Blackle does. This is because LCD screens have for many years natively shown white rather than black.