Looking for a CRT monitor

R

real1g

n00b
Joined
May 4, 2011
Messages
45
I'm looking for a 19inch flatscreen CRT monitor for counter-strike. Does anyone know where to get one and which would be the best? Thanks!
 
Ebay or Amazon would probably be your best bet. Good luck finding a new one and used ones tend to crap out within a few years from my own experience.

Is there a reason why you want a CRT over an LCD?
 
dark_reign said:
Is there a reason why you want a CRT over an LCD?
Click to expand...

LOL why wouldn't he?

If I could find a BRAND NEW, unused, Sony FW900 -- I'd happily pay ~2500 USD for it! ;)

I mean, come on...

Good luck finding used CRT in good condition, it probably won't happen. But then if you only need it for FPS then maybe it won't matter so much that text is hard to read, etc...

Try finding a 22".

19" only have 18 or so inch screen surface.

Or even better, try finding an FW900, even if it's not a "real" FW900 (not sure what that's about, but I remember there being different versions of it...), it would be better since it's widescreen.

19" kinda sucks, trust me.
 
dark_reign said:
Ebay or Amazon would probably be your best bet. Good luck finding a new one and used ones tend to crap out within a few years from my own experience.

Is there a reason why you want a CRT over an LCD?
Click to expand...

i dont like widescreen, also i want 100+hz refresh rate.
 
If you get ahold of an FW900 you don't have to use it in widescreen, of course... You could just set a 4:3 res and then tweak the settings so that it displays as 4:3. Or if you want slightly wider than 4:3, you could make a custom res that's somewhere inbetween 16:9 and 4:3 and then adjust the monitor accordingly.
 
The >100Hz rate is a big request -- what resolution were you hoping for at 100Hz?
 
Tamahagane said:
LOL why wouldn't he?

If I could find a BRAND NEW, unused, Sony FW900 -- I'd happily pay ~2500 USD for it! ;)

I mean, come on...

Good luck finding used CRT in good condition, it probably won't happen. But then if you only need it for FPS then maybe it won't matter so much that text is hard to read, etc...
Click to expand...

My experience with CRTs that were made after 1999 wasn't so good. Even the later Sony CRTs are crap compared to the ones that were made in Japan pre-2000. I went through three of them over a period of 2 years. One died while the other two developed display issues. Two of them were bought brand new. Bad luck? I think not. The FW900 is probably an exception, but it was marketed toward professionals and not affordable to most people. Used ones are still way expensive.

To the OP, I'd say you might have better luck with an off-brand one. But I had good luck with Samsung CRTs. The only problem is anything used is going to be very hit or miss.
 
The ViewSonic CRTs made in 2004~2006 were pretty good. They made at least one 22" version sometime back then. They had 400 to 500 nits.

I have one of their 19" CRTs made sometime back then and it's worn out to hell (out of focus etc), it's still pretty bright though.
 
real1g said:
i dont like widescreen, also i want 100+hz refresh rate.
Click to expand...
Tamahagane said:
If you get ahold of an FW900 you don't have to use it in widescreen, of course... You could just set a 4:3 res and then tweak the settings so that it displays as 4:3. Or if you want slightly wider than 4:3, you could make a custom res that's somewhere inbetween 16:9 and 4:3 and then adjust the monitor accordingly.
Click to expand...

If you don't like widescreen and prefer 4:3 then the Sony GDM-F500 (or GDM-F500R) would be better. It has a true constant 0.22 mm grille pitch, as opposed to the GDM-FW900 which has a 0.238 to 0.277 mm variable grille pitch (not even 0.23 to 0.27 as the specs claim). The GDM-F500 can do a very sharp (for a CRT) 2560x1920. It also has a much darker black level in ambient light than the GDM-FW900. Oh, and it can do 920x690 at 160 Hz (or 800x600 if you don't want to create a custom mode) and 1528x1146 at 100 Hz.

The GDM-F500/F500R seems to be almost impossible to find, though... and sadly mine developed a color problem (it's possible to clear the color problem using a precisely-wielded magnet, but then the next time the monitor self-degausses, the problem comes right back).
 
Last edited:
Brand new trinitrons right here


If I didn't have three already I'd jump on these in a heatrtbeat
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I have two minty GDM-F520s in boxes with everything originally supplied. Both were used by me personally in dim (i.e. brightness and contrast were not cranked) environments from new (2002 IIRC) until taken out of service in 2006 and 2008. No burn, no scratches, calibrate nicely. The catches are:

1/ they aren't widescreen, but have finer dot pitch than the FW900

2/ I'm in Canada - shipping...
 
Note to anyone considering getting GDM-F500/F500R/F520...

I've only seen (and owned) a GDM-F500, but the F500R seems to be almost identical except having extra stuff (sRGB mode, 170 Hz instead of just 160 Hz).

The GDM-F520, however, seems to be more like the GDM-FW900, in that it probably has the same worse screen controls (forces you to control horizontal and vertical centering in separate menu items (same with size), whereas the F500 has a single menu item that intuitively lets you use the joystick to control horizontal and vertical together). I'd be willing to bet the GDM-F520 also has the paler gray black level in ambient light like the FW900, too.

A Google Products search turns up this.
 
mathesar said:
Wow thats a nice find.
Click to expand...

I've been aginizing over these for the past week. I have three HP 1230's sitting on my desk right now. Beautiful in every way, but it seems almost against nature to not hop on at least two of these. LOL! He also has some 22" NEC's that are sweet!
 
MetaGenie said:
Note to anyone considering getting GDM-F500/F500R/F520...

I've only seen (and owned) a GDM-F500, but the F500R seems to be almost identical except having extra stuff (sRGB mode, 170 Hz instead of just 160 Hz).

The GDM-F520, however, seems to be more like the GDM-FW900, in that it probably has the same worse screen controls (forces you to control horizontal and vertical centering in separate menu items (same with size), whereas the F500 has a single menu item that intuitively lets you use the joystick to control horizontal and vertical together). I'd be willing to bet the GDM-F520 also has the paler gray black level in ambient light like the FW900, too.

A Google Products search turns up this.
Click to expand...

Another feature I wish the FW900's had was the Picture Effect button found on the 21" Sony G520P CRT.

You could choose from Professional / Standard or Dynamic and it wasnt merely a contrast / brightness preset (the current brightness / contrast values remained the same between modes).

I used to run Dynamic when watching movies or playing games and it looked great.

From what I understand the G520P wasnt introduced until after the FW900 was discontinued (not to be confused with the older G520,without the P), It makes me wonder what other features current CRT's would have had if they were still in production.
 
Last edited:
I had a pair of GDM-F400s in the early 2000s which should be "identical" to the GDM-F500. The joystick control was groovy and the bezel was nice, but the GDM-F520 blew the -F400 away in terms of picture quality in every way imaginable: geometry, focus, convergence, dot pitch, uniformity. I had no bones to pick with it's black level and the AG coating was great. I did prefer the -F400/-F500 stand mechanism though.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
real1g said:
well i play counter-strike at 600x480. and My desktop res is usually 1020x768.
Click to expand...

Oh, then that's not a huge request -- I've got a (not-flat) Nokia 445xPro 21 inch that does 1920*1440 at 80Hz, but it'll do 150Hz at 1280x1024.

It's massive, and not flat, but 1920x1440 is such a nice resolution.
 
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
real1g said:
I found four interesting CRT's on eBay. Thoughts on which one?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Dell-P992-19-Fl...ter_Monitors&hash=item3a652bec06#ht_500wt_960

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEC-MultiSync-F...er_Monitors&hash=item4cf6d597aa#ht_500wt_1193

http://cgi.ebay.com/Samsung-Syncmas...r_Monitors&hash=item2eb49e1499#ht_4341wt_1178

http://cgi.ebay.com/Viewsonic-G90fb...er_Monitors&hash=item2a1039df05#ht_576wt_1442

Please keep in mind I want 100+ hz at 1024x768. Thanks guys!
Click to expand...

Out of those options, going by the specs alone, I would go with the Dell P992. It has the best maximum horizontal sync frequency (meaning it'll have the highest maximum resolution at any given vertical refresh rate), and uses an aperture grille.

The Dell P992 will be able to do 1344x1008 at 100 Hz and has a fixed stripe pitch of 0.24 mm.

The NEC MultiSync FE950 has a variable stripe pitch, 0.25 to 0.27 mm. It will do 1208x906 at 100 Hz.

The Samsung Syncmaster 955DF will only do 880x660 at 100 Hz (not even within your requirements), and it's a shadow mask (aperture grille is much better).

The ViewSonic G90FB will do 1228x918 at 100 Hz, but it's also a shadow mask.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I can actually get the HP version of the FW900 in 22" for like 25$.. but I just got a ZR30w and... the hp is 66lbs lol... I'm still kind of debating it though.
 
MetaGenie said:
Out of those options, going by the specs alone, I would go with the Dell P992. It has the best maximum horizontal sync frequency (meaning it'll have the highest maximum resolution at any given vertical refresh rate), and uses an aperture grille.

The Dell P992 will be able to do 1344x1008 at 100 Hz and has a fixed stripe pitch of 0.24 mm.

The NEC MultiSync FE950 has a variable stripe pitch, 0.25 to 0.27 mm. It will do 1208x906 at 100 Hz.

The Samsung Syncmaster 955DF will only do 880x660 at 100 Hz (not even within your requirements), and it's a shadow mask (aperture grille is much better).

The ViewSonic G90FB will do 1228x918 at 100 Hz, but it's also a shadow mask.
Click to expand...

what's a shadowmask?
 
MetaGenie said:
I'd be willing to bet the GDM-F520 also has the paler gray black level in ambient light like the FW900, too.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. The F520 is superior all-around compared to the F500 & F500R (which were more limited in frequency range), unless you are really hung up about the menu controls.

mathesar said:
Another feature I wish the FW900's had was the Picture Effect button found on the 21" Sony G520P CRT.

From what I understand the G520P wasnt introduced until after the FW900 was discontinued (not to be confused with the older G520,without the P), It makes me wonder what other features current CRT's would have had if they were still in production.
Click to expand...

The F520 has that feature as well, and it was introduced in the same time-frame as the FW900, so it was a clear choice by Sony not to include that on FW900.

I personally find Dynamic mode pretty useless, since it really messes with your display gamma, basically being a torch-mode for the CRT. Standard and Professional on the other hand are very nice to have and don't have the unpredictability of Dynamic.
 
Cyberbeing said:
The F520 has that feature as well, and it was introduced in the same time-frame as the FW900, so it was a clear choice by Sony not to include that on FW900.

I personally find Dynamic mode pretty useless, since it really messes with your display gamma, basically being a torch-mode for the CRT. Standard and Professional on the other hand are very nice to have and don't have the unpredictability of Dynamic.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you check with a colorimeter they are all "useless". "Professional" has a nice looking effect but it introduces crazy non-linearities in the response of the display. My -F520 never left the normal mode.

It's also worth noting that the built in aging correction is amazingly effective to restore proper grey scale if it has started wandering, even without a true colorimeter profiling.
 
real1g said:
so is a shadow mask bad?
Click to expand...
Well that might be subjective, but I like an aperture grille much better. A shadow mask's image looks more fuzzy to me and less aesthetic.

The only downside of an aperture grille is that there will be one or two very very thin "damper wires" (much thinner than a pixel row even at the maximum resolution) going horizontally, to keep the grille stripes from moving. At a low resolution like 1024x768 it might not even be visible.

Cyberbeing said:
MetaGenie said:
I'd be willing to bet the GDM-F520 also has the paler gray black level in ambient light like the FW900, too.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. The F520 is superior all-around compared to the F500 & F500R (which were more limited in frequency range), unless you are really hung up about the menu controls.
Click to expand...

I'm very interested to learn this, so I hope you'll answer a further question:

Do you agree that the FW900 reflects more ambient from its aperture grille, compared to the F500, even when the monitor is turned off? (This is what I meant by having a paler black level in ambient light.) And that specifically, the F520 definitely does not have this problem?
 
Last edited:
That is what I assumed you were referring to.

I've only compared a FW900 (prospective purchase) & F520. I've never owned a F500, only read about them. From what I've heard the F500 supposedly has better reliability then the F520. The older Sony monitors were more reliable in general.

I believe it has to do with the FW900 having normal glass with an anti-glare film while the F520 (and it sounds like F500 as well) has tinted glass with an anti-glare coating. The FW900 is more of a medium grey (light grey with film removed) when sun shines on it, while the F520 always maintains a very dark gray. This was actually one of the main reasons I didn't end up purchasing a FW900 at that time and have just stuck with F520s (on my 2nd pair currently).
 
Last edited:
No there isn't. 1600x1200 @120Hz is too abusive on Horizontal frequency. Somewhere around 1440x1080 to 1536x1152 @120Hz is usually where high-end CRTs max out for 4:3 resolutions.

Wide-screen resolutions on the other hand, are much easier to drive. 1920x1080@120Hz is easily doable on any CRT supporting 137Khz+ Horizontal frequency.
 
Cyberbeing, thanks, that is quite interesting.

Cyberbeing said:
I believe it has to do with the FW900 having normal glass with an anti-glare film while the F520 (and it sounds like F500 as well) has tinted glass with an anti-glare coating.
Click to expand...
What makes you say the F520 has tinted glass? This wouldn't make much sense, as it would tint the output from the phosphors, darkening the overall output.

My theory is that the aperture grille is matte black in the FW900, and shiny black in the F500. Shiny black is darker, but can have specular reflections — and sure enough, with the F500 adjusted so that its black level is perfectly black, bright objects against a dark background shown on-screen have a visible reflection behind them that can be seen if you move your head from side to side. I first noticed this effect when viewing star field photos.
 
Last edited:
cesarioarce said:
I've been aginizing over these for the past week. I have three HP 1230's sitting on my desk right now. Beautiful in every way, but it seems almost against nature to not hop on at least two of these. LOL! He also has some 22" NEC's that are sweet!
Click to expand...

what kind the max hz on the lower resolutions?
 
dark_reign said:
Ebay or Amazon would probably be your best bet. Good luck finding a new one and used ones tend to crap out within a few years from my own experience.

Is there a reason why you want a CRT over an LCD?
Click to expand...

Besides No lag, No blur, superior color, superior viewing angles basically anything to do with actual picture save convergence..No nothing.:p

real1g said:
what's a shadowmask?
Click to expand...


Garbage. You don't want it. Makes CRT's weakest point, convergence even worser.
 
Aperture Grille allows more light to pass through resulting in a brighter picture.. all the Shadow Mask CRTs Ive seen or owned always had the Contrast setting cranked to max and they still looked darker in comparison to an AG / Trinitron monitor.

The one advantage SM had over AG is text clarity.
 
Surly73 said:
I have two minty GDM-F520s in boxes with everything originally supplied. Both were used by me personally in dim (i.e. brightness and contrast were not cranked) environments from new (2002 IIRC) until taken out of service in 2006 and 2008. No burn, no scratches, calibrate nicely. The catches are:

1/ they aren't widescreen, but have finer dot pitch than the FW900

2/ I'm in Canada - shipping...
Click to expand...


Where in Canada are you?
 
MetaGenie said:
Out of those options, going by the specs alone, I would go with the Dell P992. It has the best maximum horizontal sync frequency (meaning it'll have the highest maximum resolution at any given vertical refresh rate), and uses an aperture grille.

The Dell P992 will be able to do 1344x1008 at 100 Hz and has a fixed stripe pitch of 0.24 mm.

The NEC MultiSync FE950 has a variable stripe pitch, 0.25 to 0.27 mm. It will do 1208x906 at 100 Hz.

The Samsung Syncmaster 955DF will only do 880x660 at 100 Hz (not even within your requirements), and it's a shadow mask (aperture grille is much better).

The ViewSonic G90FB will do 1228x918 at 100 Hz, but it's also a shadow mask.
Click to expand...

do you know if any of these CRT's can reach 120hz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top