We investigated prospectively in 128 patients (140 eyes) the role of six routine clinical tests in the differentiation of ischemic central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) from non-ischemic CRVO during its early acute phase. There were four functional tests [visual acuity, visual fields, relative afferent pupillary defect (RAPD), electroretinography (ERG)] and two morphologic tests (ophthalmoscopy and fluorescein fundus angiography). We found that none of the six tests had 100% sensitivity and specificity in such a differentiation during the early, acute phase, so that no one test can be considered a "gold standard"; however, combined information from all six is almost always reliable. Overall, the four functional tests proved far superior to the two morphologic tests in differentiating ischemic from non-ischemic CRVO:RAPD was most reliable in uniocular CRVO (with a normal fellow eye), followed closely by ERG in all cases; combined information from RAPD and ERG differentiated 97% of cases; perimetry was the next most reliable, followed by visual acuity. The two morphologic tests performed worst; fluorescein angiography provided either no information at all on retinal capillary nonperfusion (in at least one-third of the eyes during the early, acute phase) because of multiple limitations, or sometimes provided misleading information. Ophthalmoscopic appearance is the least reliable, most misleading parameter.