![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
24" Widescreen CRT (FW900) From Ebay arrived,Comments.
- Thread starter mathesar
- Start date
Awesome, another person who has it now =). I can't answer your question since I don't have your monitor but I do want to know what GPU you are using and if you needed to use USB power for it to work.
I did the input lag test with SMTT 2.0, 2 FW900 at 1280x1024@85hz, V-sync off:
There is none or it is too low to be detected.
(right click, then display image and zoom or you won't see anything)
Proper quality assessment will come later though, as I can't manage to select the right resolutions through the adapter on that computer.
1920x1200 was a nighmare to get and is only displayed @60hz, CRU can't enforce higher refresh rates. Also with only the displayport connected color depth is stuck at 6 bpc while 8bpc can also be selected when there's another monitor connected on the DVI port, it's a total mess.
I suspect the issue comes from the shiny crappy Crimson interface. It worked with the older computer and the less shiny, but functionnal Catalyst center.
There is none or it is too low to be detected.
(right click, then display image and zoom or you won't see anything)
Proper quality assessment will come later though, as I can't manage to select the right resolutions through the adapter on that computer.
1920x1200 was a nighmare to get and is only displayed @60hz, CRU can't enforce higher refresh rates. Also with only the displayport connected color depth is stuck at 6 bpc while 8bpc can also be selected when there's another monitor connected on the DVI port, it's a total mess.
I suspect the issue comes from the shiny crappy Crimson interface. It worked with the older computer and the less shiny, but functionnal Catalyst center.
Yea Crimson is a nightmare with multi monitor,specially if one monitor is seen like non plug and play.
If i remember correctly,to resolve some problems with clone mode i used CRU with only one detailed resolution on both the monitors,the rest of the EDID blank.
Does the adapter correctly read the monitor EDID or you see "monitor non plug and play"?
For me, the EDID is read correctly from my two different CRT monitors here. The names of the monitors shows up.
danny_discus
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2006
- Messages
- 612
I'm using a 980 GTX on WIndows 10 and the EDID is reading correctly as well. I am setting the resolutions via CRU.
Did you need to use an extra USB cable for power?
danny_discus
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2006
- Messages
- 612
I was running 1920x1080@85 and it was working fine then noticed some random rippling effect after an hour or so of use. I then plugged the usb cable in for power and have not experienced this anymore. This was before upping the resolution any.
I have that rippling effect on one of mine too, but it had no USB power. I have a theory that the adapter is very sensitive to voltage drops. I've plug one of my adapters to a dedicated USB brick (aka a spare phone charger) and so far no problems. I'll test a few days like this.
Nope, when plugged on the adapter the monitor isn't detected at all, in both single or dual monitor configuration. It only detects default resolutions from the adapter (1920x1080@60hz and 1280x1024@60hz if I remember correctly).
So the monitor is seen non plug and play?
This happen only with crimson driver?
Which monitors do you have?
Did you see differences in quality between Sunix and Delock 62967 adapter?
I just tried with the 2nd computer (HD5850/ catalysts 14.12), hooking up on the adapter the GDM-5410 I'm investigating the electronics. It is detected properly. EDID is wrong but that's normal for that monitor.
The first computer (R9 380X / Crimson 16.4.2) normally has a FW900 on DVI port and I plugged another spare one on the adapter for the SMTT test. Whatever I do the FW900 plugged on the adapter is not recognized at all while the one on DVI is. It's a driver version I already know some problems about, for example the custom resolution function was broken maybe since 16.1.1, it required a dialog box to be checked to work but that dialog box did work only when having a display on HDMI or displayport. That means that anyone with only a display on analog output was stuck. It is currently impossible to set a custom resolution through the Crimsons.
I haven't tried to update the drivers since then because the next versions have a bug making Windows boot extremely slow and it was still not fixed 6 months later ...
With my card if the monitor is not recognized (non plug and play),it is impossible to use CRU with crimson driver,black screen after load the sytem.
This not happen with previous catalyst driver and i have this problem only with Samsung monitors and only with adapters,on analog port it's all ok.
Custom resolution through crimson panel at least work when my secondary Samsung is seen non plug and play (50% of the time)
I remember problems in the past with Samsung monitors and their strange EDID
I have that slow boot problem every time the monitor is not recognized,when the edid is read correctly,the boot is normal,it happen only with crimson driver and up.
If i connect the FW900 to the adapter and the secondary Samsung on analog output there are no problems,so these adapters have problems to read the EDID only with some monitors,on Nvidia cards i never seen this problem.
When you have time try with an updated or an old driver
This not happen with previous catalyst driver and i have this problem only with Samsung monitors and only with adapters,on analog port it's all ok.
Custom resolution through crimson panel at least work when my secondary Samsung is seen non plug and play (50% of the time)
I remember problems in the past with Samsung monitors and their strange EDID
I have that slow boot problem every time the monitor is not recognized,when the edid is read correctly,the boot is normal,it happen only with crimson driver and up.
If i connect the FW900 to the adapter and the secondary Samsung on analog output there are no problems,so these adapters have problems to read the EDID only with some monitors,on Nvidia cards i never seen this problem.
When you have time try with an updated or an old driver
Last edited:
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
This great news! And there'll be no point in me doing the test either since I'm also currently using the 380x (2 of them actually). But I still might try it with high refresh rates (say 640x480 160hz) and low refresh rates ( 2400x1800 @ 50hz) to see if there is any detectable differences at high and low refresh intervals.
But I do have a LaCie electron blue IV, which I believe has a higher max scan rate (140kHz) than the FW900. So let me know if you guys can think of any high resolution-related tests I should try.
I moved the beast again (
) and replugged it for the sake of accuracy.When I say the FW900 isn't recognized at all when plugged on the adapter, I mean:
- the screen is called "display peripheral on laptop display" in the windows where you can set resolution in Windows 7 (right click on desktop -> screen resolution)
- clicking on "advanced parameters" -> screen tab it is then simply called "generic plug and play monitor"
I did try with 1280x800@120hz in the first place (funny enough the Crimsons accept 120hz refresh rates when they refuse 85hz), but had too much trouble reading the figures on pictures. The sweep was probably too narrow/too fast.
I was going to ask what OS, but I'm guessing Windows 7 from your later post. You do have a very old drivers which are basically over a year old now. I am guessing you tried the latest of 17.12.1 or even 18.1.1? Weird bug to have Windows boot extremely slowly, did you do a complete driver uninstall first? Maybe other software conflicting?
Petrasescu_Lucian
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2010
- Messages
- 99
Google the subject, problems are not specific to my computer or softwares, or whatever. It's just that AMD keeps breaking working things inside drivers everytime something new is added since the Crimsons. For example they managed to break DirectX9 support for some games in 17.12.x ...
You'll certainly understand I'm reluctant to waste my time looking for one without too many issues when I have an old one that more or less does its job.
Wow that is a pretty big mess up. Lucky for me the only DX9 game I play, which is League of Legends, didn't have a problem. Actually one time it did crash and I thought my CPU overclock was the blame, now at least I know it wasn't, lol. I did just get a new computer in December after all. I guess I've been lucky and have not run into many AMD problems, though I did run into the dual monitor flicker problem on my old GPU which is fixed on the new one. I mean if I were you, I would try a new driver every 3 months or something. I do like to troubleshoot so maybe that is the difference.
First. Wow. this is still rocking the top of the display thread without sticky. Grats to that!
Second. I'm not wanting to thread jack but I have one of these in my basement. Any interested party? Send me a PM. I can relist in FS section if needed.
Second. I'm not wanting to thread jack but I have one of these in my basement. Any interested party? Send me a PM. I can relist in FS section if needed.
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Can somebody with a Sunix adapter import my CRU profile and see what resolutions are available to you? Especially if you're on AMD. I'm not seeing any resolutions above 2176x1224.
I'm wondering if it's the cheap DP cable I'm using. I am using USB power with it.
I'm wondering if it's the cheap DP cable I'm using. I am using USB power with it.
I guess you got a Sunix adapter too? How is it for you?
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Don't know yet, I'm running into the issue I stated above and it's really bugging me.
Any chance you could download that bin file and load it into CRU and see what you have available (you have to restart PC or use restart64.exe for changes to take effect)? I'm pretty sure it won't overwrite AMD's custom resolutions.
Alternatively, just make a custom resolution in Adrenalin that's higher than 1536 vertical. Say, 2304x1728@60hz progressive. I'm trying to figure out if this is a Sunix issue or just my cable.
I added that res in Adrenalin and it's select-able in Windows resolution change. I didn't actually apply it to my monitor, however.
For the european users there is the Delock 87685,look here:
https://geizhals.eu/1198543599
Jacob.de has the best shipping costs out of Germany
The Delock one has not been tested but it is an identical product to Sunix
https://geizhals.eu/1198543599
Jacob.de has the best shipping costs out of Germany
The Delock one has not been tested but it is an identical product to Sunix
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Ok, so I guess my GPU is detecting my crappy cable and refusing to let me see higher resolutions? That's my best guess, since I've read that bad DP cables will prevent people from selecting 4k60 on DP 1.2.
My Sunix adapter is used but seems to be working fine at the resolutions I can send to it, so I doubt theres a problem with it. Could also be a driver issue, but I'm on 18.1.1 like you are, so that's doubtful.
Actually I'm on 17.12.2. What does Radeon Settings Spec say is your link connection? Mine says 5.4 Gbps x 4.
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Mine says that too, which is the confusing part. If Adrenalin was limiting my pixel clock due to cable issues, you think it would say something different there
Silly question since pretty sure you tried it, but did you try adding the resolution via Radeon Settings instead of CRU?
Edit: I used CVT timing.
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Ok, well this took a turn for the strange. Yesterday, I was hooking the Sunix up to my Dell p992, which has a max horizontal scan of 107kHz.. Today, I tried it with my LaCie 22 blue IV, which tops out at 140kHz, and I was able to select WAY higher resolutions. Stuff like 2560x1920@70hz (495mHz pixel clock) or 2720x1530 @ 86Hz (520mHz) pixel clock, and they were all stable.
But I still eventually hit point where windows wasn't showing some resolutions. Like I couldn't select 2880x2160@60 on the Sunix, even though I could over VGA.
So now I'm starting to think the issue is not my cable. Could it be some weird limit the Sunix is creating based on the monitor's EDID? Could Radeon settings be limiting based on EDID, even though I'm supposed to overriding via CRU? This is all very strange and I can't figure out why I'm being limited here.
Yep, I get the "this isn't supported by your monitor" message, even though I can add the resolution over VGA.
Did you ever hit a point where Radeon settings wasn't letting you add stuff? Did it seem to be based on horizontal pixel count or overall pixel clock? And I'm talking about Adrenalin in Windows, of course. Seems like Ubuntu gives a lot more leeway
Also, I noticed my Sunix doesn't like interlaced resolutions, it blanks out even though my monitor is showing the correct timings on the OSD. Were any of the interlaced resolutions you tried actually visible?
But I still eventually hit point where windows wasn't showing some resolutions. Like I couldn't select 2880x2160@60 on the Sunix, even though I could over VGA.
So now I'm starting to think the issue is not my cable. Could it be some weird limit the Sunix is creating based on the monitor's EDID? Could Radeon settings be limiting based on EDID, even though I'm supposed to overriding via CRU? This is all very strange and I can't figure out why I'm being limited here.
Yep, I get the "this isn't supported by your monitor" message, even though I can add the resolution over VGA.
Did you ever hit a point where Radeon settings wasn't letting you add stuff? Did it seem to be based on horizontal pixel count or overall pixel clock? And I'm talking about Adrenalin in Windows, of course. Seems like Ubuntu gives a lot more leeway
Also, I noticed my Sunix doesn't like interlaced resolutions, it blanks out even though my monitor is showing the correct timings on the OSD. Were any of the interlaced resolutions you tried actually visible?
I didn't really try much as the resolution I want works right off the bat, lol. Sorry not really helpful there. When I added interlaced resolutions, they showed up fine and also looked interlace on screen, but again I did this in Ubuntu Live CD, so maybe a AMD Windows driver limit.
Edit: I did notice for progressive resolutions that some small jumps in resolution shows blank screen while larger jumps showed stuff. Not sure if that's related or not.
Edit 2: For the heck of it, I tried 3200x2400 interlace at 30 Hz from Radeon Settings and I got a black screen. I believe this worked in Ubuntu Live CD, so I guess that's a driver limit.
Last edited:
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Ok, well if you feel like it, try adding some higher resolutions in Windows when you get a chance and see if Adrenalin stops letting you add them at a certain point. I'm curious if it's just some flaw on my system (GPU, OS, etc.), or some weird issue with how Sunix uses the EDID it reads off the monitor (or possibly what the Windows drivers are doing after they see the EDID).
And if any Nvidia cards want to give this a shot, that could help us narrow down the issue too.
It just bugs me that even though the Sunix seems as capable (or perhaps more capable) as the DAC in recent video cards, there's some issue that stopping me from adding all the same super high resolutions.
But for the high pixel clocks I could try, the Sunix didn't seem to be getting crazy hot or anything. There was a slight bit of warmth, but not any warmer than my HD Fury DACs. Maybe I should borrow an infrared thermometer from somebody and pop the top off the Sunix and see the precise temperature on the chip.
EDIT:
How about one that isn't at a crazy high pixel clock, like 1680x1260@135hz (you would enter this as 67.5 in Adrenalin)? This is one that wouldn't display for me on either monitor, though on the Lacie I could still bring up the OSD and it was reporting the right timings
And if any Nvidia cards want to give this a shot, that could help us narrow down the issue too.
It just bugs me that even though the Sunix seems as capable (or perhaps more capable) as the DAC in recent video cards, there's some issue that stopping me from adding all the same super high resolutions.
But for the high pixel clocks I could try, the Sunix didn't seem to be getting crazy hot or anything. There was a slight bit of warmth, but not any warmer than my HD Fury DACs. Maybe I should borrow an infrared thermometer from somebody and pop the top off the Sunix and see the precise temperature on the chip.
EDIT:
How about one that isn't at a crazy high pixel clock, like 1680x1260@135hz (you would enter this as 67.5 in Adrenalin)? This is one that wouldn't display for me on either monitor, though on the Lacie I could still bring up the OSD and it was reporting the right timings
Well I just tried 2848x1536@80 in Radeon Settings which works fine in Ubuntu Live CD, and no go. I got the error message "The custom resolution settings are not compatible with this display. Reconfigure your settings and try again." So safe to say it's AMD Windows driver limit?
Edit: 2648x1536@80 wouldn't add, but 2448x1536@80 added fine. It also shows picture.
Edit 2: I tried 1680x1260@68hz (67.5 wouldn't take) interlaced and while it added fine, I got a blank screen on choosing the resolution.
Edit: 2648x1536@80 wouldn't add, but 2448x1536@80 added fine. It also shows picture.
Edit 2: I tried 1680x1260@68hz (67.5 wouldn't take) interlaced and while it added fine, I got a blank screen on choosing the resolution.
Last edited:
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
Thanks for checking it out. Definitely a driver limit for AMD in Windows. What's strange is that it's giving me different limits for different monitors, even when I'm altering the EDID via CRU. So my best guess here is that AMD is saving some info about the (reported) max capabilities of the monitor and sticking to them even if CRU tries to override. I wish the Sunix would just always report itself to Windows as a 4k display, that would take care of this issue
I think I'll submit a bug report, and I'll make sure to describe as a problem for MST displayport adapters becasue if they see I'm using a CRT they'll just bin the whole report, haha! And really, there's no need to limit the end user like this, especially since it's way safer than something like overclocking.
Yep, since it's not happening in Ubuntu, this sounds like another issue with AMD's Windows driver. Well, I remember interlaced working over HDMI>VGA on my Nano GX, so that could always be something to fall back on in those rare instances where I want inerlaced, even though pixel clock would be pretty restricted.
Here I was about to ask if you needed help in trying in Ubuntu to see if it is really a driver limit, lol. I mean you can Google how easy, but a lot of people aren't comfortable with command line.
Edit: Does all the resolutions you want work fine in Ubuntu?
Edit 2: Oh, I misread, you were going off on what I said. Want help in trying in Ubuntu Live?
Last edited:
Enhanced Interrogator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,429
It sounds like you pretty much narrowed down the issues, but I still might give it a try later. I use Lubuntu on my laptop, and I've used Live CD's before so I know my way around it somewhat.
I think the next step is having some Nvidia people try some of this stuff.
I think the next step is having some Nvidia people try some of this stuff.