Hi,

The primary issue with modern games is that they no longer really take 4:3 aspect ratio into account, so widescreen panels will have an advantage when playing modern games, because sometimes they even forget to make the UI layout work properly on 4:3 any-more.

I have a 4K Samsung Panel for my primary computer display now, but I hold onto some old CRTs for retro gaming as well. I don't see any reason to not have both if you have the storage space, and using the one which fits the game better.

About the Moiré and focus issues, while some amount of these are always present on all CRTs because of how the technology works (Unless if it is a Monochromatic CRT, then Moiré is not an issue as there are no shadow mask or aperture grille, just a nice surface of blueish-white, green or amber phosphor 😀), good quality CRTs can make it basically unnoticeable unless looking for it.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:50:

Hi, […]
Show full quote

Hi,

The primary issue with modern games is that they no longer really take 4:3 aspect ratio into account, so widescreen panels will have an advantage when playing modern games, because sometimes they even forget to make the UI layout work properly on 4:3 any-more.

I have a 4K Samsung Panel for my primary computer display now, but I hold onto some old CRTs for retro gaming as well. I don't see any reason to not have both if you have the storage space, and using the one which fits the game better.

About the Moiré and focus issues, while some amount of these are always present on all CRTs because of how the technology works (Unless if it is a Monochromatic CRT, then Moiré is not an issue as there are no shadow mask or aperture grille, just a nice surface of blueish-white, green or amber phosphor 😀), good quality CRTs can make it basically unnoticeable unless looking for it.

Thanks for the input!
Just to clarify: modern game engines actually scale perfectly fine at 4:3 nowadays. Also, my Moiré issue happens even with a
single active gun (pure green), so it's a physical mask/pitch limitation of this budget Samsung, not a color/RGB issue.

My main dilemma is: if I get the LG F700P (96kHz Slot Mask) to run progressive resolutions like 1280x960 @ 95hz or 1600x1200 interlaced 120-140hz , will the image clarity be good enough so I can just buy a budget IPS for daily tasks, instead of wasting money on an expensive gaming IPS?

I am a huge CRT fan but only when it comes to old stuff that are supposed to be shown on CRT , I cannot imagine using a CRT for modern stuff tbh
I would advice you get an IPS panel for your 4060 and if possible one that supports at least 144+ hz with g-sync and/or freesync support - even under windows the higher refresh rate makes things smoother

keropi wrote on 2026-06-16, 12:40:

I am a huge CRT fan but only when it comes to old stuff that are supposed to be shown on CRT , I cannot imagine using a CRT for modern stuff tbh
I would advice you get an IPS panel for your 4060 and if possible one that supports at least 144+ hz with g-sync and/or freesync support - even under windows the higher refresh rate makes things smoother

Thanks for the input
I don't know why I tested a few modern games on my CRT and they were great, except for Scorn, where the focus was a bit off. I don't know why I thought it was good because I didn't have a 1080p LCD panel next to it to compare or something.

Where are you planning to get a cheap IPS monitor with a native resolution suitable for retro games?

I’ve had a look at the prices for 15-inch 1024×768 IPS monitors with DVI/HDMI, and they’re really steep.
They’re all marketed for business use, with prices to match. 😀

Sorry, I didn’t quite get the question at first.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

3.Or should I just give up on CRT for modern gaming and buy a 1080p IPS panel? (Or maybe a dual setup: budget IPS + F700P?) ​Do […]
Show full quote

3.Or should I just give up on CRT for modern gaming and buy a 1080p IPS panel? (Or maybe a dual setup: budget IPS + F700P?)
​Do modern games just look inherently sharper, clearer, and more coherent on a native digital IPS compared to a 17" CRT?
​
Thanks

CRT and TFT monitors have different pixel structures.
As a result, when a designer checks an image, its appearance is slightly altered.
This is precisely why modern games no longer look the same on a CRT monitor as they used to—just as, incidentally, older games no longer look the same on a TFT monitor.

A modern IPS display with a high refresh rate – yes, that’s the best solution.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

1.Is this Moiré mess just the limitation of a budget Shadow Mask tube?
​

No, moire can be present on any CRT, be it budget or high end.
Generally, shadow mask monitors are more prone to showing moire than Sony/Mitsubishi with apperture grille. But then those have their own set of disadvantages, so I can't say I necessarily recommend them over shadow mask.

I think the main issue here is that you are trying to push way too high of a resolution (and refresh rate) on your monitor than what it is capable of displaying well (the focus issues are 100% because of that.) In particular, your horizontal resolution is way too high. The higher the resolution you push, the more moire you'll get - that's just how it goes with CRTs.

Also, interlaced modes always look much crappier compared to progressive. 1080i should be supposedly superior to 540p... but in reality, I'll take 720p any day over 1080i, even if it's at half the refresh rate (e.g. 720p @ 60 Hz vs 1080i @ 120 Hz).

That said, "720p" refers to 1280x720 resolution... which isn't 4:3. The "correct" 4:3 equivalent - at least in terms of horizontal resolution, would be 1280x960. And in my experience playing with (and still using) various CRTs over the years (including for some (now-not-so-modern anymore) gaming) , I don't recommend going over 1280x960 on 17" CRTs. Most actually look best at 1152x864 IMO. Generally, apperture grille tends to degrade in (horizontal) focus even faster at higher resolutions and higher refresh rates compared to shadow mask. So for Sony/Mitsubishi, I tend to stay at 75 Hz or less. For shadow mask monitors, I might push up to 85 Hz... but that will depend on each monitor separately.

In summary, I try 1280x960 first... and if that has too much moire or looks too soft in focus, I drop down to 1152x864. On a few very VERY budget CRTs, I even had to drop down to 1024x768, since even 1152x864 was too blurry to display text clearly.
So I think you should ditch the weird interlaced high-resolution mode you're trying to push and use something more standard.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

2.Would upgrading to an LG Flatron F700P (17" Slot Mask, 96kHz) fix the focus/Moiré at higher resolutions?
​

I wouldn't use the word "fix" here. At best, the moire might just improve a little. But no telling for sure. Again, moire is inherently present on all shadow mask monitors. How visible it is or isn't will directly depend on what resolution (and under and/or over -scanning) you set on your monitor. After all, CRTs are completely analog technology, so in order to improve in one area/aspect, you probably have to give up something in another.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

3.Or should I just give up on CRT for modern gaming and buy a 1080p IPS panel? (Or maybe a dual setup: budget IPS + F700P?)
​Do modern games just look inherently sharper, clearer, and more coherent on a native digital IPS compared to a 17" CRT?
​

I think MagefromAntares put it pretty well.
My own experience trying to push some (again, maybe not-so-modern anymore) games on CRT is that indeed either their HUD or their FOV was not created with 4:3 resolutions in mind, and hence they might actually look worse or at least the view could feel "off". The latter, for example, is something I've ran into with Fortnite - the view just feels very limited in 4:3, regardless of what resolution I am using. The game's FOV certainly looks better on a 16:9 and 16:10 monitor.

That said, and to answer your questions more directly:
Whether games look sharper/clearer on an IPS vs a CRT will depend on a lot of things.
The output resolution is not everything. If you're standing still in a game and nothing moves, then YES, an LCD monitor should look much sharper and clearer than a CRT - especially considering that modern LCDs are capable of much higher resolutions. But when things start moving around, that advantage may degrade or completely disappear. And indeed, as you probably noticed yourself, the "motion resolution" on a CRT is infinitely better compared to any LCD - basically it's much easier to track moving objects, because the image on the screen simply does not blur, unlike with LCDs. Of course, modern LCDs have improved quite a bit compared to the LCDs of the 2000's. So IMO, most modern IPS displays have finally become "good enough" in terms of motion resolution that I don't need to try to push my CRTs anymore for modern gaming. (For old games and lower / more "block-y" resolutions, of course, I still think CRT is king - especially smaller CRTs for DOS and Win9x gaming.)

And YES, I am a die-hard CRT supporter. But even then, I have come to terms that this technology has its limitations and isn't always "the best" solution.

shevalier wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:09:

Where are you planning to get a cheap IPS monitor with a native resolution suitable for retro games? I’ve had a look at the pri […]
Show full quote

Where are you planning to get a cheap IPS monitor with a native resolution suitable for retro games?

I’ve had a look at the prices for 15-inch 1024×768 IPS monitors with DVI/HDMI, and they’re really steep.
They’re all marketed for business use, with prices to match. 😀

Sorry, I didn’t quite get the question at first.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

3.Or should I just give up on CRT for modern gaming and buy a 1080p IPS panel? (Or maybe a dual setup: budget IPS + F700P?) ​Do […]
Show full quote

3.Or should I just give up on CRT for modern gaming and buy a 1080p IPS panel? (Or maybe a dual setup: budget IPS + F700P?)
​Do modern games just look inherently sharper, clearer, and more coherent on a native digital IPS compared to a 17" CRT?
​
Thanks

CRT and TFT monitors have different pixel structures.
As a result, when a designer checks an image, its appearance is slightly altered.
This is precisely why modern games no longer look the same on a CRT monitor as they used to—just as, incidentally, older games no longer look the same on a TFT monitor.

A modern IPS display with a high refresh rate – yes, that’s the best solution.

Thanks for the input
So you mean an LG flatron F700p is a waste of money for modern gaming? (It costs 1/13 of an IPS gaming monitor)

A slot mask or aperture grille will likely have less moire issues due to less vertical inteference pattern on the mask, but you will still have a soft image I think. The resolution sharpness tends to scale with physical size, the resolutions you want to use are more suited to 19-21" CRT monitors

momaka wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:31:

No, moire can be present on any CRT, be it budget or high end. Generally, shadow mask monitors are more prone to showing moire t […]
Show full quote

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

1.Is this Moiré mess just the limitation of a budget Shadow Mask tube?
​

No, moire can be present on any CRT, be it budget or high end.
Generally, shadow mask monitors are more prone to showing moire than Sony/Mitsubishi with apperture grille. But then those have their own set of disadvantages, so I can't say I necessarily recommend them over shadow mask.

I think the main issue here is that you are trying to push way too high of a resolution (and refresh rate) on your monitor than what it is capable of displaying well (the focus issues are 100% because of that.) In particular, your horizontal resolution is way too high. The higher the resolution you push, the more moire you'll get - that's just how it goes with CRTs.

Also, interlaced modes always look much crappier compared to progressive. 1080i should be supposedly superior to 540p... but in reality, I'll take 720p any day over 1080i, even if it's at half the refresh rate (e.g. 720p @ 60 Hz vs 1080i @ 120 Hz).

That said, "720p" refers to 1280x720 resolution... which isn't 4:3. The "correct" 4:3 equivalent - at least in terms of horizontal resolution, would be 1280x960. And in my experience playing with (and still using) various CRTs over the years (including for some (now-not-so-modern anymore) gaming) , I don't recommend going over 1280x960 on 17" CRTs. Most actually look best at 1152x864 IMO. Generally, apperture grille tends to degrade in (horizontal) focus even faster at higher resolutions and higher refresh rates compared to shadow mask. So for Sony/Mitsubishi, I tend to stay at 75 Hz or less. For shadow mask monitors, I might push up to 85 Hz... but that will depend on each monitor separately.

In summary, I try 1280x960 first... and if that has too much moire or looks too soft in focus, I drop down to 1152x864. On a few very VERY budget CRTs, I even had to drop down to 1024x768, since even 1152x864 was too blurry to display text clearly.
So I think you should ditch the weird interlaced high-resolution mode you're trying to push and use something more standard.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

2.Would upgrading to an LG Flatron F700P (17" Slot Mask, 96kHz) fix the focus/Moiré at higher resolutions?
​

I wouldn't use the word "fix" here. At best, the moire might just improve a little. But no telling for sure. Again, moire is inherently present on all shadow mask monitors. How visible it is or isn't will directly depend on what resolution (and under and/or over -scanning) you set on your monitor. After all, CRTs are completely analog technology, so in order to improve in one area/aspect, you probably have to give up something in another.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 11:16:

3.Or should I just give up on CRT for modern gaming and buy a 1080p IPS panel? (Or maybe a dual setup: budget IPS + F700P?)
​Do modern games just look inherently sharper, clearer, and more coherent on a native digital IPS compared to a 17" CRT?
​

I think MagefromAntares put it pretty well.
My own experience trying to push some (again, maybe not-so-modern anymore) games on CRT is that indeed either their HUD or their FOV was not created with 4:3 resolutions in mind, and hence they might actually look worse or at least the view could feel "off". The latter, for example, is something I've ran into with Fortnite - the view just feels very limited in 4:3, regardless of what resolution I am using. The game's FOV certainly looks better on a 16:9 and 16:10 monitor.

That said, and to answer your questions more directly:
Whether games look sharper/clearer on an IPS vs a CRT will depend on a lot of things.
The output resolution is not everything. If you're standing still in a game and nothing moves, then YES, an LCD monitor should look much sharper and clearer than a CRT - especially considering that modern LCDs are capable of much higher resolutions. But when things start moving around, that advantage may degrade or completely disappear. And indeed, as you probably noticed yourself, the "motion resolution" on a CRT is infinitely better compared to any LCD - basically it's much easier to track moving objects, because the image on the screen simply does not blur, unlike with LCDs. Of course, modern LCDs have improved quite a bit compared to the LCDs of the 2000's. So IMO, most modern IPS displays have finally become "good enough" in terms of motion resolution that I don't need to try to push my CRTs anymore for modern gaming. (For old games and lower / more "block-y" resolutions, of course, I still think CRT is king - especially smaller CRTs for DOS and Win9x gaming.)

Thanks for the incredibly detailed breakdown That completely makes sense. I’ll definitely ditch the interlaced modes and stick to progressive i tested 1152x864p 77hz on my current monitor And in the Morie test the squares were indeed squarer (but still very different from LCD)
So, based on what you said about the sweet spot for 17" CRTs, do you think upgrading to that LG Flatron F700P and running it at a native 1280x960p @ 85Hz or 95hz would be a solid choice?

NeoG_ wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:42:

A slot mask or aperture grille will likely have less moire issues due to less vertical inteference pattern on the mask, but you will still have a soft image I think. The resolution sharpness tends to scale with physical size, the resolutions you want to use are more suited to 19-21" CRT monitors

Thanks for the input
i can get a LG flatron F700P on my country but Monitors larger than 17 inches are very rare.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:47:

Thanks for the input
i can get a LG flatron F700P on my country but Monitors larger than 17 inches are very rare.

LG recommends 1024x768@85hz for that monitor, which means it will reduce in sharpness above that

NeoG_ wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:55:

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:47:

Thanks for the input
i can get a LG flatron F700P on my country but Monitors larger than 17 inches are very rare.

LG recommends 1024x768@85hz for that monitor, which means it will reduce in sharpness above that

no no The monitor catalog lists the recommended resolution as 1280x1024 85hz, and since the monitor is 98khz, it is capable of displaying 1280x960p 90-95hz.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:59:

no no The monitor catalog lists the recommended resolution as 1280x1024 85hz, and since the monitor is 98khz, it is capable of displaying 1280x960 90-95hz.

I must have been looking at a different model, maybe it will be fine

NeoG_ wrote on 2026-06-16, 14:06:

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:59:

no no The monitor catalog lists the recommended resolution as 1280x1024 85hz, and since the monitor is 98khz, it is capable of displaying 1280x960 90-95hz.

I must have been looking at a different model, maybe it will be fine

You've probably seen the F700B.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:46:

Thanks for the incredibly detailed breakdown That completely makes sense. I’ll definitely ditch the interlaced modes and stick to progressive i tested 1152x864p 77hz on my current monitor And in the Morie test the squares were indeed squarer (but still very different from LCD)
So, based on what you said about the sweet spot for 17" CRTs, do you think upgrading to that LG Flatron F700P and running it at a native 1280x960p @ 85Hz or 95hz would be a solid choice?

You're welcome!
Well, it's still a 17" CRT, so even if it is an upgrade compared to your current CRT monitor, don't expect mind-blowing miracles.

That said, and particularly since you mentioned this...

So you mean an LG flatron F700p is a waste of money for modern gaming? (It costs 1/13 of an IPS gaming monitor)

... you probably should get that LG if it's that cheap - if you have the space, of course.
As it currently stands, CRTs are starting to disappear in many places globally. In the more developed "Western" parts of the world, they are considered as rare and collectible now. So if you do have the space, collect them while they are still available. That's what I did when I was in the US 15 years ago, and I don't regret it one single bit. In fact, I regret that I didn't take the opportunity to collect every CRT monitor that was offered to me. I truly missed some good stuff. Still, even with that, I have a good collection of 19" and 21" CRTs.... and even a 24" widescreen (for those of you who know your CRTs, you probably know which one in particular I'm talking about 😉 ). Where I am now, though, it's much harder to find 19" and 21" CRTs, simply because most people were poor back then and couldn't really afford anything more than a 17". But even then, I did spot a few listing for some 19" and 21" a few years back and still do for the occasional 17"... so probably some are still in existence. I just need to put ads locally, because people tend to thrown them away rather than sell them online. And when they do that, the copper scrappers beat them to pulp for the copper in their deflection coils. Fun fact in regards to the timing of this thread: I just picked up the (badly beaten) boards from a 17" and 19" LG CRTs next to a dumpster. If only I had passed by there a few days earlier, I might have seen them and saved them. Ah well.. :\

Back to the topic at hand, though: if that LG Flatron F700p is affordable enough for you and you have the space, then yes, get it.
I find it amusing when CRT manufacturers at the end would recommend resolutions like 1280x1024, since that is a 5:4 resolution and isn't "right" for a CRT. But if the manufacturer did indeed recommend that, then 1280x960 should look and work just fine. At 85 Hz refresh and v-sync turned on, things should look super-smooth. No need for anti-aliasing either, especially when the CRT is ran at close to its "maximum" resolution. So if you want sharper picture on a CRT, usually you should turn AA off.

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:36:

Thanks for the input
So you mean an LG flatron F700p is a waste of money for modern gaming? (It costs 1/13 of an IPS gaming monitor)

Absolutely.
As for prices, it’s a bit strange for someone who bought a 4060 RTX to talk about saving money at a basic FHD Gen 2 IPS monitor with true 8-bit panel (not 6bit+FRC).
Gen 1 (60 Hz, 75 when overclocked), Gen 2 (100, overclocked to 144). We’re now on Generation 3 – 250 Hz.

I’ve got a Full HD IPS monitor myself, and to be honest, that resolution is already a bit underwhelming. But that was the absolute limit for CRT monitors; there were only a handful of models like that.
Alas, with a 17-inch CRT monitor—given its resolution, aspect ratio, absence of a DisplayPort (important for FreeSync) and pixel structure—there’s nothing to be had in modern games. 🙁

momaka wrote on 2026-06-16, 14:07:

You're welcome! Well, it's still a 17" CRT, so even if it is an upgrade compared to your current CRT monitor, don't expect mind- […]
Show full quote

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:46:

Thanks for the incredibly detailed breakdown That completely makes sense. I’ll definitely ditch the interlaced modes and stick to progressive i tested 1152x864p 77hz on my current monitor And in the Morie test the squares were indeed squarer (but still very different from LCD)
So, based on what you said about the sweet spot for 17" CRTs, do you think upgrading to that LG Flatron F700P and running it at a native 1280x960p @ 85Hz or 95hz would be a solid choice?

You're welcome!
Well, it's still a 17" CRT, so even if it is an upgrade compared to your current CRT monitor, don't expect mind-blowing miracles.

That said, and particularly since you mentioned this...

So you mean an LG flatron F700p is a waste of money for modern gaming? (It costs 1/13 of an IPS gaming monitor)

... you probably should get that LG if it's that cheap - if you have the space, of course.
As it currently stands, CRTs are starting to disappear in many places globally. In the more developed "Western" parts of the world, they are considered as rare and collectible now. So if you do have the space, collect them while they are still available. That's what I did when I was in the US 15 years ago, and I don't regret it one single bit. In fact, I regret that I didn't take the opportunity to collect every CRT monitor that was offered to me. I truly missed some good stuff. Still, even with that, I have a good collection of 19" and 21" CRTs.... and even a 24" widescreen (for those of you who know your CRTs, you probably know which one in particular I'm talking about 😉 ). Where I am now, though, it's much harder to find 19" and 21" CRTs, simply because most people were poor back then and couldn't really afford anything more than a 17". But even then, I did spot a few listing for some 19" and 21" a few years back and still do for the occasional 17"... so probably some are still in existence. I just need to put ads locally, because people tend to thrown them away rather than sell them online. And when they do that, the copper scrappers beat them to pulp for the copper in their deflection coils. Fun fact in regards to the timing of this thread: I just picked up the (badly beaten) boards from a 17" and 19" LG CRTs next to a dumpster. If only I had passed by there a few days earlier, I might have seen them and saved them. Ah well.. :\

Back to the topic at hand, though: if that LG Flatron F700p is affordable enough for you and you have the space, then yes, get it.
I find it amusing when CRT manufacturers at the end would recommend resolutions like 1280x1024, since that is a 5:4 resolution and isn't "right" for a CRT. But if the manufacturer did indeed recommend that, then 1280x960 should look and work just fine. At 85 Hz refresh and v-sync turned on, things should look super-smooth. No need for anti-aliasing either, especially when the CRT is ran at close to its "maximum" resolution. So if you want sharper picture on a CRT, usually you should turn AA off.

Ah, thanks for the advice, so I'll buy an LG flatron F700p or if I find one, an LG flatron F900p. I'll see what I can do about IPS later. I'm sure you're very happy with that Sony fw900😄

shevalier wrote on 2026-06-16, 14:15:

Absolutely. As for prices, it’s a bit strange for someone who bought a 4060 RTX to talk about saving money at a basic FHD Gen 2 […]
Show full quote

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:36:

Thanks for the input
So you mean an LG flatron F700p is a waste of money for modern gaming? (It costs 1/13 of an IPS gaming monitor)

Absolutely.
As for prices, it’s a bit strange for someone who bought a 4060 RTX to talk about saving money at a basic FHD Gen 2 IPS monitor with true 8-bit panel (not 6bit+FRC).
Gen 1 (60 Hz, 75 when overclocked), Gen 2 (100, overclocked to 144). We’re now on Generation 3 – 250 Hz.

I’ve got a Full HD IPS monitor myself, and to be honest, that resolution is already a bit underwhelming. But that was the absolute limit for CRT monitors; there were only a handful of models like that.
Alas, with a 17-inch CRT monitor—given its resolution, aspect ratio, absence of a DisplayPort (important for FreeSync) and pixel structure—there’s nothing to be had in modern games. 🙁

You make a fair point about the newer IPS generations. To be honest, I'm still weighing my options and haven't made a final decision yet—IPS might very well end up being the better choice for me. I'm just trying to see if I can get away with a cheaper setup since my hardware (i3-13100 / RTX 4060) won't hit those ultra-high frame rates on the games I play anyway. Still testing things out

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 14:28:

shevalier wrote on 2026-06-16, 14:15:

Absolutely. As for prices, it’s a bit strange for someone who bought a 4060 RTX to talk about saving money at a basic FHD Gen 2 […]
Show full quote

afshin6760 wrote on 2026-06-16, 13:36:

Thanks for the input
So you mean an LG flatron F700p is a waste of money for modern gaming? (It costs 1/13 of an IPS gaming monitor)

Absolutely.
As for prices, it’s a bit strange for someone who bought a 4060 RTX to talk about saving money at a basic FHD Gen 2 IPS monitor with true 8-bit panel (not 6bit+FRC).
Gen 1 (60 Hz, 75 when overclocked), Gen 2 (100, overclocked to 144). We’re now on Generation 3 – 250 Hz.

I’ve got a Full HD IPS monitor myself, and to be honest, that resolution is already a bit underwhelming. But that was the absolute limit for CRT monitors; there were only a handful of models like that.
Alas, with a 17-inch CRT monitor—given its resolution, aspect ratio, absence of a DisplayPort (important for FreeSync) and pixel structure—there’s nothing to be had in modern games. 🙁

You make a fair point about the newer IPS generations. To be honest, I'm still weighing my options and haven't made a final decision yet—IPS might very well end up being the better choice for me. I'm just trying to see if I can get away with a cheaper setup since my hardware (i3-13100 / RTX 4060) won't hit those ultra-high frame rates on the games I play anyway. Still testing things out

I’m not suggesting you go for the HDR Gen 3 with Micro-LED backlighting.

But if it’s this particular LG CRT monitor you’re after and you’ve got room for it — by all means, go ahead and buy that one too (but not instead of another).
All 4 RTX games will be finished in the blink of an eye, and it’ll be a pleasure to replay all the other timeless classics from the early 2000s on a CRT monitor.
That said, modern websites and operating system interfaces are now practically impossible to use on a monitor with a 4:3 aspect ratio.