So i just bought a Sony CPD-G520 CRT monitor..

studer117

n00b
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
4
And its HUGE. Unfortunately the stand broke of in the car ride home but i'm going to try eproxy glue to fix that. I would really appreciate if anyone could recommend a modern graphics card for me to run games on this beast. cheers!
 
980Ti or newer with a Sunix adapter or equivalent. Oh and enjoy l have a P1115 and still love it
 
980Ti or newer with a Sunix adapter or equivalent. Oh and enjoy l have a P1115 and still love it
awesome! what card do you run it with? Would a 2080ti graphics card be overkill for this monitor do you think? they look really awesome and would surely provide loads of headroom.
 
Depends on the resolution and game. With the 2080Ti you will need an adapter.
 
The G520 has a 140kHz max horizontal range, which is huge. You can do 2880X2160@60Hz, which is basically the 4:3 middle part of 4k.

So yeah, 2080Ti and a Sunix is what you need. I have a GTX 1080 and I'm still not maxing out the abilities of my monitor. Like I play Apex Legend at 1920x1440@75hz, and I still have adaptive resolution enabled because even my GPU can't keep up 100% of the time at that res. I do play most games on highest settings though.
 
Thanks for the input. How would you go about when thinking about the rate (hz) when it comes to CRT monitors vs resolution. I have been taught that higher refresh rate is better (144hz, 240hz LCD monitors for example) is this still true with CRT's? 75hz would seem quite low vs 144hz and 240hz.
 
When you hear "144hz or bust", it's usually from some sweaty try-hards that are looking for every competitive edge they can find, including using the "black equalizer" feature most gaming monitors have that washes out the picture so they can see things in the dark better. And then most of the time they aren't actually maintaining 144fps, it's usually something like 90-130 or something. So their frame rate never syncs up with their refresh rate, unless they're using g-sync or freesync.

So on my CRT, I'm aiming to actually have my refresh rate match my frame rate. So, depending on the game, I'll use S-sync from RTSS, or a frame rate limiter, or use plain old vsync. With Apex, I want to play at a high-ish resolution, with a smooth frame rate, and on Ultra settings. I found 1920x1440@75hz as that sweet spot, with s-sync from RTSS to keep the frame rate synced with my refresh rate and my input lag as low as it can possibly go. And keep in mind, 75hz on a CRT looks WAY more clear than 75hz on a LCD panel, because of how CRT's scan in the picture.
 
When you hear "144hz or bust", it's usually from some sweaty try-hards that are looking for every competitive edge they can find, including using the "black equalizer" feature most gaming monitors have that washes out the picture so they can see things in the dark better. And then most of the time they aren't actually maintaining 144fps, it's usually something like 90-130 or something. So their frame rate never syncs up with their refresh rate, unless they're using g-sync or freesync.

So on my CRT, I'm aiming to actually have my refresh rate match my frame rate. So, depending on the game, I'll use S-sync from RTSS, or a frame rate limiter, or use plain old vsync. With Apex, I want to play at a high-ish resolution, with a smooth frame rate, and on Ultra settings. I found 1920x1440@75hz as that sweet spot, with s-sync from RTSS to keep the frame rate synced with my refresh rate and my input lag as low as it can possibly go. And keep in mind, 75hz on a CRT looks WAY more clear than 75hz on a LCD panel, because of how CRT's scan in the picture.

Pretty much any refresh rate on CRT will look clearer in motion than any LCD. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Yes, a lot of the reason to go to higher refresh on LCD is due to blur introduced by sample and hold.

On a CRT you would not have this issue, they are low persistence by nature, but you do have to manage with the flicker.

If you can get to above 85Hz that should be acceptable, but 100 would probably be better (over that is good but with diminishing returns).

And I want to see pictures as well.
 
I'd go for 100-120Hz and the highest resolution the monitor supports at that, probably 1600x1200. For me 100-120Hz is roughly the sweetspot for a CRT to experience a not noticeable flickering experience, it's hard to notice any obvious motion smoothness gains either when you go over that and resolution becomes more important at that point.

Pretty much any refresh rate on CRT will look clearer in motion than any LCD. :)

A CRT will look clearer motion-wise yes at low refresh rate than a LCD at low refresh rate but a CRT at low refresh rate won't look/feel smoother than a LCD with high refresh rate as the refresh rate obviously also plays a big role too and not just how much the picture smears but motion smoothness or fluidness of the motion percieved on screen is obviously affected by how high the refresh rate is even if there's zero smearing. I did notice changes up to 120Hz on a CRT, between 100 and 120Hz it's fairly small though already and it usually allows one step higher resolution so whichever becomes more important when you pick between 100 and 120Hz imo.

In my non-scientific test I'd say 144Hz on a modern day LCD with motion blur reducing technology turned on (ie. BenQ Blur Reduction, ULMB etc when it introduces flicker which helps to reduce sample-n-hold effect) is roughly equal to around 100~120Hz on a CRT in motion smoothness.
 
Last edited:
I'd go for 100-120Hz and the highest resolution the monitor supports at that, probably 1600x1200. For me 100-120Hz is roughly the sweetspot for a CRT to experience a not noticeable flickering experience, it's hard to notice any obvious motion smoothness gains either when you go over that and resolution becomes more important at that point.



A CRT will look clearer motion-wise yes at low refresh rate than a LCD at low refresh rate but a CRT at low refresh rate won't look/feel smoother than a LCD with high refresh rate as the refresh rate obviously also plays a big role too and not just how much the picture smears but motion smoothness or fluidness of the motion percieved on screen is obviously affected by how high the refresh rate is even if there's zero smearing. I did notice changes up to 120Hz on a CRT, between 100 and 120Hz it's fairly small though already and it usually allows one step higher resolution so whichever becomes more important when you pick between 100 and 120Hz imo.

In my non-scientific test I'd say 144Hz on a modern day LCD with motion blur reducing technology turned on (ie. BenQ Blur Reduction, ULMB etc when it introduces flicker which helps to reduce sample-n-hold effect) is roughly equal to around 100~120Hz on a CRT in motion smoothness.

I know what you're talking about. I didn't actually sell my Samsung VA 144hz. It's close enough to a CRT (except more demanding with the higher refresh) that I'm fine with it. I prefer my CRT for games though, but the LCD ain't bad.
 
I'd go for 100-120Hz and the highest resolution the monitor supports at that, probably 1600x1200.

My 140kHz monitor supports 1600x1200 up to 100hz, but I find 1920x1440@90hz or 2240x1680@80hz way more visually impressive. I doubt anybody would perceive flicker at 80hz when playing a game or watching video. Maybe, maybe if they were looking at a mostly white webpage, but even then it's doubtful.
 
When you hear "144hz or bust", it's usually from some sweaty try-hards that are looking for every competitive edge they can find, including using the "black equalizer" feature most gaming monitors have that washes out the picture so they can see things in the dark better. And then most of the time they aren't actually maintaining 144fps, it's usually something like 90-130 or something. So their frame rate never syncs up with their refresh rate, unless they're using g-sync or freesync.

So on my CRT, I'm aiming to actually have my refresh rate match my frame rate. So, depending on the game, I'll use S-sync from RTSS, or a frame rate limiter, or use plain old vsync. With Apex, I want to play at a high-ish resolution, with a smooth frame rate, and on Ultra settings. I found 1920x1440@75hz as that sweet spot, with s-sync from RTSS to keep the frame rate synced with my refresh rate and my input lag as low as it can possibly go. And keep in mind, 75hz on a CRT looks WAY more clear than 75hz on a LCD panel, because of how CRT's scan in the picture.

You do realize that the vast majority of 144hz monitors also support variable refresh, so pretending that it's even an issue is a little disingenuous.
 
You do realize that the vast majority of 144hz monitors also support variable refresh, so pretending that it's even an issue is a little disingenuous.

It's only a very recent development that Nvidia actually added support for Freesync, so I imagine it was still not used by a significant number of people until then. Gsync monitors were priced out of most people's range, and then Radeon was much lower share of the market.

So yeah, good first step, but now they need to support simultaneous strobing as well.
 
Depends on the resolution and game. With the 2080Ti you will need an adapter.

Thanks for the input. How would you go about when thinking about the rate (hz) when it comes to CRT monitors vs resolution. I have been taught that higher refresh rate is better (144hz, 240hz LCD monitors for example) is this still true with CRT's? 75hz would seem quite low vs 144hz and 240hz.

I smell freshmeat XD
 
Sorry for the delay but here is a requested picture. I think the GDM g520 turned out really nice in combination with the DELL at 102 keyboard. I also ordered 200x80cm furniture leather and "dressed" the table with it which i also think turned out nice, there is alot less friction now and no things sliding around uncontrolled.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5842[356].JPG
    IMG_5842[356].JPG
    334.3 KB · Views: 0
I had a G520 up to 10 years ago. If memory serves, it wasn't very sharp at higher resolutions + max hz at that res. I ended up running it 72hz ~1600 horizontal hz. for desktop use but would switch to higher res or higher frame rates for specific games. I kept this as a 2nd monitor (later 3rd) after I had a AW Gsync 23" monitor as my other display for several years before I decided not to take it with me when I moved.
The quality of the RAMDAC (VGA out) mattered a lot, IIRC. I picked a specific video card and very high quality VGA cable at the time to max out my picture quality. Analog issues.. so nostalgic.
 
G520 vs my Eizo Forris FS2331 VA panel (right), pic taken 6 years ago, which I'm still using as main monitor.
The black levels and contrast match up to the CRT :)

hdbq0vS.jpg
 
Back
Top