24" Widescreen CRT (FW900) From Ebay arrived,Comments.

[spacediver]

Just wanted to drop by and see how my CRT buddies are doing. I picked up a 9-inch PVM monitor yesterday to have in my toolshed (I have some tools that have video output that would benefit from having a portable CRT monitor) and let's just say I get the hype now. It doesn't have a ton of resolution but it's basically like a little TV on steroids. Most likely will upgrade to a bigger PVM/BVM for video games in the future.

Good to hear from you

Glad you're still riding the analog wave. Still going strong here. The ability to connect my work laptop to FW900 @ 1920x1200, 85 hz means that when I work from home I can be super productive.

 

[NamelessPFG]

I still don't have any PVMs or BVMs, but I'd prioritize resurrecting my GDMs (especially my dearly departed FW900) over getting one of those. Got a 24" WEGA for retrogaming; just need an RGB-to-component transcoder to make the most of it from a 15 KHz standpoint.

No, the consumer WEGA isn't PVM/BVM/GDM quality; I notice horizontal bloom distortion depending on what colors are shown on the image, which can only be mitigated by turning the brightness down considerably. Still beats the pants off of most SDTVs that I would've played those consoles with back in the '90s, though, and light guns like my GunCon work fine with it.

I might aim more for an NEC XM29/XV29/XP29 to replace the WEGA, though. Can't go wrong with that sheer size, especially if light gun games are your jam, and they're not all that convex by shadow mask standards. The tricky part is finding one without screwed-up geometry that can't be corrected in the OSD, like what happened with the XV29 Plus I used to have 'til I replaced it with the WEGA because the geometry was THAT bad. Flared on top, or pinched on bottom, with linearity errors in between...

 

[worm_bagged]

Got my FW900 home after fixing G2 drift via WinDAS. I have to do it again because now it's too dark and im locked out of the OSD. I think you have to finalize the settings with the final step under "procedure" to get the OSD to unlock. It's useable at the least. Also, the image occasionally loses focus and waves for a split second then shuts off on even rarer occasion. But I used it for several hours with no issue so it's not prevalent. I'm not sure what the cause is.

 

[Aktan]

I have great news! I just received the SUNIX DPU3000 and I got a resolution of 2048x1536 at 80 Hz in CVT timing! According to the linux command CVT, that's a pixel clock of 362.50 MHz! My CRT can't handle higher resoltuon/refresh rate, so I can't test the limit, but what SUNIX says on their website for resolution support of 2560x2160@60 Hz might be true!

 

[Strat_84]

That's interesting indeed. There are 2 pending questions now:
- how is the image quality ?
- is there any added input lag ?

 

[Aktan]

That's interesting indeed. There are 2 pending questions now:
- how is the image quality ?
- is there any added input lag ?

Image quality looks fine, I'll be using it for a while to test. I need to get a mini DP to DP cable first to use my new GPU as it came with only a mini DP to mini DP cable, which my old GPU supports.

I've not noticed input lag, but again, I'll be testing for a while.

Edit: AMD Radeon Settings says I'm using 5.4 Gbps x 4 link which is indeed DP 1.2 speeds.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

I have great news! I just received the SUNIX DPU3000 and I got a resolution of 2048x1536 at 80 Hz in CVT timing! According to the linux command CVT, that's a pixel clock of 362.50 MHz! My CRT can't handle higher resoltuon/refresh rate, so I can't test the limit, but what SUNIX says on their website for resolution support of 2560x2160@60 Hz might be true!

Wow, that's pretty good. That high of a pixel clock is good for some of the fastest-scanning 4:3 CRT's. But for widescreen resolutions it might not be enough, depending on how high it can go. An FW900 can easily display 4k at 48hz interlaced (96hz technically), but that's over a 550mHz pixel clock.

So there's always room to grow, but if this Sunix device is zero-lag with good color reproduction, it's going to meed the needs of most users here.

EDIT: Aktan , speaking of interlaced, since you're on an AMD card, can you try creating a high interlaced resolution in CRU, like 3200x2400? I'm wondering if there's a max interlaced resolution for displayport. When I make interlaced resolutions on my AMD card over VGA, I can't use anything that has more than 2720 pixels horizontally. It just doesn't show up in my display settings

 

[Aktan]

EDIT: Aktan , speaking of interlaced, since you're on an AMD card, can you try creating a high interlaced resolution in CRU, like 3200x2400? I'm wondering if there's a max interlaced resolution for displayport. When I make interlaced resolutions on my AMD card over VGA, I can't use anything that has more than 2720 pixels horizontally. It just doesn't show up in my display settings

Actually I use Radeon Adrenalin to add custom resolutions instead of CRU. Do you want me to just add a custom resolution and see if it's an option? I don't think my CRT supports resolutions that high, lol.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

Actually I use Radeon Adrenalin to add custom resolutions instead of CRU. Do you want me to just add a custom resolution and see if it's an option? I don't think my CRT supports resolutions that high, lol.

If your monitor supports 2048x1536@80hz progressive, then it will support 3200x2400@30hz (actually 60) interlaced. 2400i is only about a 74kHz horizontal scan rate, whereass 1536p is closer to 130. As far as your monitor is concerned 3200x2400i is no different from 1600x1200p. It's the graphics card and DAC that have to work harder.

So in Adrenalin, make sure you set it to interlaced, and enter 30 for your refresh rate. It will actually send 60hz half-res to your monitor, like 480i on the old SDTV's.

 

[Aktan]

If your monitor supports 2048x1536@80hz progressive, then it will support 3200x2400@30hz (actually 60) interlaced. 2400i is only about a 74kHz horizontal scan rate, whereass 1536p is closer to 130

So in Adrenalin, make sure you set it to interlaced, and enter 30 for your refresh rate. It will actually send 60hz half-res to your monitor, like 480i on the old SDTV's.

I added it with CVT timing. It added fine, but I can't select that resolution in Windows Settings.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

I added it with CVT timing. It added fine, but I can't select that resolution in Windows Settings.

Dang it. I was hoping displayport wouldn't have the same limitation. I guess it's a universal restriction AMD puts on interlaced resolutions. On Nvidia, you can go as high as you wish.

Thanks for testing it out though

 

[Aktan]

Dang it. I was hoping displayport wouldn't have the same limitation. I guess it's a universal restriction AMD puts on interlaced resolutions. On Nvidia, you can go as high as you wish.

Thanks for testing it out though

No problem, I'll try it again on my newer GPU when I get the cable for it.

 

[Derupter]

Wow,amazing chip that Synaptics,do you have info from them?
To find the limit use CRU,set 2048x1536 80 Hz with CRT timings,then manually increase only the total horizontal pixels
Set always a stable resolution before restart the driver,if you can't use CRU try with another utility or with the AMD panel,increase only the horizontal pixels.
Oh and check if it's 24 bit,but with four HBR2 lanes it should be.

 

[Aktan]

EnhancedInterrogator: I forgot that I could also try it in Linux where it be harder for AMD to limit assuming it's driver limitation. I'll try tomorrow.

Derupter: Sunix didn't have the info, and I tried to get in touch of Synaptics, but couldn't find their support email. I guess I could try their press email, lol. As for finding the limit, are you sure increasing total horizontal pixels won't kill my CRT? The last thing I want is a dead CRT =/. Also, what do you mean check if it's 24-bit. I don't think you mean the color?

 

[Derupter]

On AMD Radeon Setting,under screen tab,do you see color depth 8 bpc?
When you increase the horizontal total,you increase the total blanking time,there is nothing to worry about.
Actually you can increase the active horizontal without problems,if you use the AMD panel do this:
Set 2056x1536 80Hz with CVT
then 2064x1536 and so on,8 pixel at a time
It's just to increase the pixel clock,fast tests to find the limit
Which graphic card do you have?

 

[Aktan]

On AMD Radeon Setting,under screen tab,do you see color depth 8 bpc?
When you increase the horizontal total,you increase the total blanking time,there is nothing to worry about.
Actually you can increase the active horizontal without problems,if you use the AMD panel do this:
Set 2056x1536 80Hz with CVT
then 2064x1536 and so on,8 pixel at a time
It's just to increase the pixel clock,fast tests to find the limit
Which graphic card do you have?

Yea, it says 8 bpc. My old card is a R9 280X. My new card is a RX 480. I'll test the increase of horizontal in a bit.

Edit: I forgot to mention Windows also says the color depth is 32-bit.

 

[Aktan]

Okay, I did some tests. I do see images on my CRT when I went to 2848x1536@80, but I kept going until 3448x1536@80 which CVT command says has a pixel clock of 613 MHz. I didn't bother to try more. When I tried 3200x2400 interlace, my monitor showed 1600x1200 interlace so I guess it doesn't work.

Edit: Actually when I do 3448x1536 interlace, it does seem to work though my monitor reports 1024x768 interlace. So I'm not sure if the monitor is just reporting wrong or not. I mean I can definitely tell both interlace modes were interlace.
Edit 2: 3648x1536@80 works. 649 MHz pclk.
Edit 3: 4648x1536@80 827.25 MHz pclk took, but again it's all black screen. I'm not sure now if my monitor is blacking or the device just isn't outputing it, lol. The last res I saw something on my monitor is 2848x1536@80 which has a pclk of 506.75, which I think is still pretty good. I'm done testing.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

Edit 2: 3648x1536@80 works. 649 MHz pclk.

Holy crap! Thanks for testing man. Sunix probably owes you money now because this post just sold a bunch of these things.

So did you ever notice degradation in color or stability or anything as you went up in resolution?

And yeah, your monitor was mis-reporting interlaced stuff. Using interlaced resolutions was never common on PC CRT's, so they didn't both to configure them to tell a difference between stuff 1200p and 2400i. Good to hear that it works

 

[Aktan]

Holy crap! Thanks for testing man. Sunix probably owes you money now because this post just sold a bunch of these things.

So did you ever notice degradation in color or stability or anything as you went up in resolution?

And yeah, your monitor was mis-reporting interlaced stuff. Using interlaced resolutions was never common on PC CRT's, so they didn't both to configure them to tell a difference between stuff 1200p and 2400i. Good to hear that it works

Well I hope someone else gets this device to test to make sure it wasn't a fluke on my part or something, lol.

I did notice my monitor blank out once last night at my regular 1600x1200@100, but after I reseat the mini DP connection, it was fine. Color never changed though.

I guess AMD drivers or Windows put a limit on the interlace resolution then. Works fine in Ubuntu. As for the 4648x1536@80, using xwininfo blindly, it says the X window is indeed that large, but again all I see is a black screen so I am not sure if it's the monitor or the adapter causing it. I did notice a monitor OSD blink of a message at some high resolution before. It was way too quick to read what it said.

Edit: Yea I should email that contact back thanking him =)

 

[Strat_84]

Well, I took the gamble and ordered one yesterday, it looks like I was right. At least that's an adapter that'll display the 2304x1440@80hz. Still eager to check the image quality and input lag. Answer in 3 weeks ...

I'm a bit afraid this is an old device that is getting phased out though, there are few sellers listing it, always in the USA and some are out of stock (newegg for instance).

 

[Aktan]

Well, I took the gamble and ordered one yesterday, it looks like I was right. At least that's an adapter that'll display the 2304x1440@80hz. Still eager to check the image quality and input lag. Answer in 3 weeks ...

I'm a bit afraid this is an old device that is getting phased out though, there are few sellers listing it, always in the USA and some are out of stock (newegg for instance).

I see it on Amazon sold by them, so I don't think it is being phased out. The fact that the company responded to my inquires promptly makes me think they are still selling it.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

Well I hope someone else gets this device to test to make sure it wasn't a fluke on my part or something, lol.

I did notice my monitor blank out once last night at my regular 1600x1200@100, but after I reseat the mini DP connection, it was fine. Color never changed though.

I guess AMD drivers or Windows put a limit on the interlace resolution then. Works fine in Ubuntu. As for the 4648x1536@80, using xwininfo blindly, it says the X window is indeed that large, but again all I see is a black screen so I am not sure if it's the monitor or the adapter causing it. I did notice a monitor OSD blink of a message at some high resolution before. It was way too quick to read what it said.

Oh, so you only got 3200x2400 interlaced to work in Ubuntu? Got my hopes up there for a second

As far as the 4648x1536@80 that didn't display, my guess is you finally hit the limit of the adapter. That's why my Nano GX does when I go beyond it's max limit (which was around 280mHz if I remember correctly)

Well, I took the gamble and ordered one yesterday, it looks like I was right. At least that's an adapter that'll display the 2304x1440@80hz. Still eager to check the image quality and input lag. Answer in 3 weeks ...

Looking forward to hearing about the input leg especially. What's your method of testing?

 

[Aktan]

Oh, so you only got 3200x2400 interlaced to work in Ubuntu? Got my hopes up there for a second

As far as the 4648x1536@80 that didn't display, my guess is you finally hit the limit of the adapter. That's why my Nano GX does when I go beyond it's max limit (which was around 280mHz if I remember correctly)

Yea sorry if I wasn't clear, as I mention before, I was going to test in Linux (Ubuntu). As for the black screen, still not sure as even just 2056x1536@80 showed a black screen but 2848x1536@80 didn't.

 

[Mumble]

have you tried CRu tool by toastyX for windows?

on a side not those with linux, there is a KVM project called looking glass, the detial discussion in on level1.

Its a shared framebuffer, I am going just to use my 750TI and KVM my windows games with a newer gard and output to my VGA out, is my current plan.

 

[Strat_84]

I see it on Amazon sold by them, so I don't think it is being phased out. The fact that the company responded to my inquires promptly makes me think they are still selling it.

Phased out means the product isn't produced anymore or production is intended to cease soon, but there is still stock to sell.

But I may be wrong. Given the very specific use and the pretty high price, the product may just not be widely distributed.

Looking forward to hearing about the input leg especially. What's your method of testing?

What I can do is to put 2 CRTs in clone mode, one on a native VGA output, the other one on the adapter, display a clock on both and take a picture with a fast camera. I only have access to pretty "basic" clocks though, if I remember well what someone did somewhere in this thread, an enhanced software is required to measure very small delays.

Another pretty subjective way is to watch a movie and check synchronisation between voices and pictures.

 

[Aktan]

Phased out means the product isn't produced anymore or production is intended to cease soon, but there is still stock to sell.

But I may be wrong. Given the very specific use and the pretty high price, the product may just not be widely distributed..

I see what you mean. I got mine for around 20 bucks from Amazon, but it was the last one. Sunix on Amazon has it for ~$58 here:

https://www.amazon.com/Sunix-DisplayPort-miniDP-DP-Cable-DPU3000-D3/dp/B00JARYTVK

It does say only 3 left, but more are coming. So hopefully it's true. There is also the Delock 87685 found here:

http://www.delock.de/produkte/H/87685/merkmale.html?setLanguage=en

These use the same chip has the Sunix DPU3000 and should be easier to get in Europe.

 

[aeliusg]

I see what you mean. I got mine for around 20 bucks from Amazon, but it was the last one. Sunix on Amazon has it for ~$58 here:

https://www.amazon.com/Sunix-DisplayPort-miniDP-DP-Cable-DPU3000-D3/dp/B00JARYTVK

It does say only 3 left, but more are coming. So hopefully it's true. There is also the Delock 87685 found here:

http://www.delock.de/produkte/H/87685/merkmale.html?setLanguage=en

These use the same chip has the Sunix DPU3000 and should be easier to get in Europe.

Is yours DPU3000-D3 or -D2?

 

[Aktan]

Is yours DPU3000-D3 or -D2?

Wow good question, I didn't even notice but mine is the DPU3000-D2. On the device itself, it says only DPU3000. The instructions manual says first edition. I'll ask my contact in Sunix now and also ask if they are still being produced.

 

[Strat_84]

Yes, I also found the Delock one. It's just not completely garantied to perform the same as the Sunix and more important, it's sold 90€ by the cheapest sellers.

 

[aeliusg]

Wow good question, I didn't even notice but mine is the DPU3000-D2. On the device itself, it says only DPU3000. The instructions manual says first edition. I'll ask my contact in Sunix now and also ask if they are still being produced.

Well, they are now selling the DPU3000-D3. The question is will they perform the same, or is the D3 a cut-down revision.

 

[Aktan]

Yes, I also found the Delock one. It's just not completely garantied to perform the same as the Sunix and more important, it's sold 90€ by the cheapest sellers.

Oh, it's more expensive, dang it. That's true it might not perform as well but if it is the same chip, I don't see why not. I may open mine later to see what chip is inside but for now, I'll leave it alone since it's working for my needs, lol.

 

[Aktan]

Here you go, response from Sunix:

The only differences between DPU3000-D2 vs DPU3000-D3 is the bundled cable;

DPU3000-D2 comes with a mini-DP to mini-DP 10cm cable

DPU3000-D3 comes with a mini-DP to standard-DP 10cm cable

Both DPU3000-D2 & DPU3000-D3 still currently in production and in stock products. Amazon just not stocking a lot from us; but, if you need more; I can make arrangement with Amazon or with our other online retailers partners; such as, Walmart.com & Newegg.com

Hope these help, and let us know if you need additional info and updates from us.

Thank you for choosing our product.

Cheers!

Awesome news!

 

[Derupter]

So,what is the max progressive resolution with a good image and without strange things like noise or ghost?

Yea sorry if I wasn't clear, as I mention before, I was going to test in Linux (Ubuntu). As for the black screen, still not sure as even just 2056x1536@80 showed a black screen but 2848x1536@80 didn't.

This is indeed strange,try with multiples of 32 like 2080x1536 - 2112x1536 - 2144x1536 and so on,or a resolution you want but divisible by 32.
I can ask Delock for informations about that 87685,specially about the VMM2322,the availability in Europe is high.
About the input lag,the software is SMTT 2.0 and it need:
a card with at least one analog output,two CRT and a camera with a fast shutter speed or high fps video
or a digital only card with one CRT and a LCD whose the lag is known
Delock 87685 has all kinds of cables inside and the price is 80 euro

 

[Aktan]

So,what is the max progressive resolution with a good image and without strange things like noise or ghost?

The last resolution I can see an image with the image squashed but looks fine is 2848x1536@80. Mind you I tested in steps of 200 pixels, so my next test was 3048x1536@80. I could I guess test in a smaller step, but again I'm not sure if it's a limit of the CRT or a limit of the Sunix adapter. At 2848x1536@80, the pixel clock is 506.75 MHz, so that's still pretty good. I'm sick of testing for a bit, so maybe some time later I'll test some more to see when I start to see black.

 

[Derupter]

Ok thanks for testing,i edited my post,when you want try with multiples of 32(when you are near the limit)
500 MHz is amazing

 

[Aktan]

Ok thanks for testing,i edited my post,when you want try with multiples of 32
500 MHz is amazing

I should mention I was only at that resolution for like 10 seconds as it was only a test. I don't know if it will be unstable after a while.

 

[Derupter]

Yea better to focus on testing usable resolutions.
How is the quality at 2048x1536 80 Hz compared to native DAC? (AMD 280x)

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

Would probably also be worth it to pop the top off and monitor temperature when running the super-high pixel clocks.

 

[Aktan]

Yea better to focus on testing usable resolutions.
How is the quality at 2048x1536 80 Hz compared to native DAC? (AMD 280x)

From the limited testing of 2048x1536@80 Hz, I couldn't tell a difference. I mean I was on that resolution for a bit while when testing and reading stuff on the web. I'd say a 30 min test with no problems or lag. My normal resolution is 1600x1200@100. At that resolution, I couldn't tell a difference either. Only thing was that one blip last night which hasn't happened after I reseat the connection but it's been perfect so far.

Would probably also be worth it to pop the top off and monitor temperature when running the super-high pixel clocks.

I'm still hesitant on modifying it, lol. Also my room is cold and it's winter here, so a better test would probably be in the summer.

 

[Strat_84]

Anyway, it's funny to see how high pixel clock can climb but it's not really necessary to find the limit: none of our CRTs can use more than 400 Mhz.