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

SH1

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
1,427
I remain curious as to whether a BVM using essentially the FW900 tube lacked an antiglare filter. Presumably Sony carefully engineered every aspect of their displays. So if it didn't have the filter then why?

In any case, before I put a filter back on my display, I put on a game with dark content in a dim room and compared the raw screen with swatches of the original AR and to a polarizing film. The latter two made black and the raw screen did not due to reflection. As awesome as the raw glass looked in other ways, I needed the black back.
 

Strat_84

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
398
(btw i think the original ar is darker and less reflective on the cpd-g520p than fw900. not sure since i don't have the g520p with me right now. but my fw900's reflection looks more purple than the g520p's in that post)
It's hard to be absolutely sure of how different it is regarding reflection and transmittance, but they are definively different. I'd say the filter is more yellowish on a P1130 (G520 clone) than on the FW900.
One key point is also that the FW900 has an adhesive PET film, whereas the filter is sputtered directly on the glass for the latests tubes (G520, F520, I also have a F500R which surprisingly has this feature too).
 

SH1

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
1,427
Certainly the F520 has a proper coating. I always thought most did with the FW900 being an unfortunate exception.

As to darker, the Diamondtron and older Trinitrons certainly appeared to have a darker coating. And a more aesthetically pleasing one to my eyes. (My FW900 with the original film and my F520s look greenish or something to me in a room with more light.)

Link to the press release is broken now, but back in the day Sony appeared to be quite proud of their coatings. Also I remember finding a press release or such marketing how great the FW900 was for finance just because it was widescreen for your Excels and such. Rather different than how we think of its value today.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
Saw something on Reddit a while back suggesting that the BVM that used the same or a similar tube as the FW900 didn't even have an antiglare filter. If true, that might suggest that the notion of the AR filter helping color is kind of dubious?
The tube have SMTE C phosphors which is standard used in TV.
In theory the filter could be used to boost it closer to sRGB gamut by removing certain color frequencies. These two standards especially differ in reds and somewhat greens.

This in theory and in practice I didn't see much if at all difference in color presentation after removing AG. There might be however some difference but this needs to be checked with at least good colorimeter if not spectrometer.

Here are some photos comparing FW900 to LG 915FT Plus which was the best CRT when it comes to contrast ratio I ever used and pretty much nailed it when it comes to gamut (much better than Trinitrons I used except PVM 14E2 which have the same phosphors): my post on [H]
Notice how ugly color of FW900 tube is when it is off compared to other CRT's... :confused:

That said, I tried to go without a filter, but ultimately could not. With even a small amount of light in a room, black will not resolve without a filter. Not even sure if total darkness otherwise would be good enough with the monitor itself still emitting a picture being reflected back to it.
Amount in a room that ruined FW900 contrast ratio for me was as much as light produced by FW900 itself... and I had dark wallpaper and was wearing black t-shirts for the occasion :ROFLMAO:

For me polarizer fixed most of the issues I had with FW900 and because screen appear completely black even with full light it is actually better to have small amount of ambient light.
Life of the tube will probably be shortened because of it but most likely I will need to repair electronics before that have chance to happen so who cares :ROFLMAO:
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
I had little talk with my FW900 flyback transformer and now it is a little tiny bit sharper at expense of slight more moire. It was sharp anyway though.
At 1920x1200@85Hz I can see each verical and horizontal line here http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/sharpness.php

I would really like to get the same image of the FW900 naked in the dark, but in a bright room. I would like to know how to achieve this.
Not gonna happen
Improving contrast ratio will lead to worse sharpness. This is CRT we are talking about and the harder you drive them the worse sharpness will be.
If you are talking about contrast mostly then this can be achieved by putting really dark film, preferably with good optical properties. I used polarizer film on my FW900. It does the job just fine and does not affect colors negatively.

Of course slapping something like polarizer is not an optimal solution because it blocks most of the light coming out of monitor also.
Optimal would be perhaps film that Panasonic used on their VT series plasma TV. Difference between eg. GT30 plasma and VT30 plasma is exactly what we need on our FW900. This film makes screen look completely black even with all lights on in the room so it also blocks light but it have one interesting quality: it blocks light much more from one direction, from top. Your lights are most likely located at ceiling and this is exactly what this film blocks making having these lights on not affecting black level at all.

If your AR70 film have the same quality then even with high overall transmittance it should make it pretty interesting. I however I really doubt product used for museums would block light in such way. It should only block reflections. And while it might be really excellent at it that will not make screen having blacks in bright room.
 
Last edited:

flod

Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
948
OLED displays have the same issue.
circular polarizers are the best solution. yes they block 50% outgoing light but there's no getting around that if you want blacks with ambient lighting.

in terms of making black black, and blocking as little outgoing light as possible, circular polarizer > neutral density unpolarized film > linear polarizer. though i suspect that for a crt the phosphors change polarization significantly upon reflection so it doesn't matter which choice you pick.

theoretically, a perfect circular polarizer can make blacks completely black, if the surface beneath reflects light without affecting polarization at all. current oled displays come quite close to this ideal limit.

it's pretty cool actually: watch 0:50 of
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: XoR_
like this

datspike

n00b
Joined
Jul 24, 2017
Messages
31

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
Cool, I did not know OLED panels are light gray like this.

Circular polarizes are great as they shall not pass light that came through them and then got reflected so putting one on FW900 would make screen look really dark.

I could not find circular polarizer to fit FW900. The only one lead I had happened to be a dud.
Besides circular polarizers have even less transmittance than linear ones and as the user of linear polarizer mod I can tell you that maximum screen brightness is already pretty low. My FW900 changed from one of the brightest CRT's I used to one of the darkest. Realistically 100cd/m2 is max that is usable and whites already look like they were "burning"... For desktop usage this thing must be kept pretty dark...

Perfect coating would be a kind of circular polarizer but one designed to not be perfect polarizer and instead pass some more light so that we still get benefits from its circular polarization magic and blocking light in general but it would pass more light from monitor. Also ability to block light from above like Panasonic plasmas have would be pretty great.
 

flod

Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
948
a circular polarizer is just a linear polarizer plus a quarter wave plate.

ideally the linear polarizer lets through 50% of light, and the quarter wave plate doesn't absorb any of that.

a 50% neutral density film should be better than a linear polarizer. but might be hard to find i guess?
 

SH1

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
1,427
I think the circular polarizers have a visible seam though? At least from that one place. (So I actually ended up trying a linear one from there.)

If I recall, the Kantek filter I use is a little darker than the original, but not dark like the linear polarizer. And claims to be antireflective and neutral. (And seems so.) In the picture I posted earlier, the left edge of the CRT shows the filter against a little sun coming in through the blinds.

The Sony logo some had asked about is this one: https://www.amazon.com/Emblem-Stick...U8ZMQJ&qid=1589052352&s=merchant-items&sr=1-1

Came across it and couldn't help myself. Kind of silly I suppose, but the logo helps give the CRT a symmetry with the rest of the desktop. Oh...and it's awesome. :)

(Went through two of them, one vertically centered, the other more towards the top. The latter position looked much better, because of the angle looking down on it.)
 
Last edited:

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
Data sheets of linear and circular polarizers suggest that the circular polarizers are slightly less transmissive. I had small test polarizers and circular ones were slightly thicker and darker.

I need to check if I can buy circular polarizer somewhere. Last time I checked was few years ago and then I didn't really have money to spend on such things so I grabbed what I could find in my country and installed it even though the sheet I got was sh*t. Thankfully somehow its flaws and butchered installation does not bother me. Still better than raw glass.

I think linear polarizer already does pretty good job in making screen look almost completely black. There is certainly no issue from ambient light making blacks non-existent like was the case with light original AG and especially without it. If anything ambient light makes black look blacker just like it does on LCDs and helps with perceived contrast loss from inner glass reflection.

Actually these inner glass reflections were the main reason I removed original AG because I thought this film caused them. This did not help. It did not make reflections worse either so that is not it. Polarizer did not seem to help either. My other CRT's all have this issue but less so I am wondering if this can be somehow improved.

I was wondering if maybe circular polarizer could somehow reduce this type of reflections or maybe there is something else that could be put between glass and polarizer or maybe glass can be changed somehow like removing something from it. FW900 tube have this strange blueish tint when viewed from large angle which I never saw on any other CRT and maybe it is causing more reflections... probably it is glass itself but I am not sure...
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
I think the circular polarizers have a visible seam though? At least from that one place. (So I actually ended up trying a linear one from there.)
Yes, that was the issue user RandomNameAndNumber reported.

Unfortunately that person rather than doing tests if this is even viable idea to use type of circular polarizer and checking what it does to image seems just blamed me for recommending it 😖
 

jbltecnicspro

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,804
I remain curious as to whether a BVM using essentially the FW900 tube lacked an antiglare filter. Presumably Sony carefully engineered every aspect of their displays. So if it didn't have the filter then why?

In any case, before I put a filter back on my display, I put on a game with dark content in a dim room and compared the raw screen with swatches of the original AR and to a polarizing film. The latter two made black and the raw screen did not due to reflection. As awesome as the raw glass looked in other ways, I needed the black back.
Pretty sure the reason they didn’t have the filter is that they don’t need them. They’re meant to be used in light-controlled environments. Some BVMs and PVMs do have anti-glare (“high contrast”) tubes. Notably the HR Trinitrons used in the 8-inch PVM’s (9L3, 8045q, 8044q, 9045q, to name a few). Presumably because they could be used outdoors or in well-lit environments, as they were designed to be portable.
 

Hike

n00b
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
25
After the Sony G500 white balance is adjusted, when the full screen displays white, the brightness will automatically decrease? Does anyone know the reason?

IMG_4792.JPG
 

flod

Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
948
I think the circular polarizers have a visible seam though? At least from that one place. (So I actually ended up trying a linear one from there.)
idk what that seam looks like but for sure it's not a requirement...
 

Azurfel

n00b
Joined
Dec 26, 2014
Messages
11
I couldn't find a clear answer searching around, so:

Is it possible to easily tell whether an FW-900's G2 is too *low*?

I've been adjusting one of mine which was clearly too bright (Image Restoration couldn't even complete because the monitor would shut itself off). Reducing the G2 appears to have corrected this issue, but i would rather be sure i get it where it shold be while i have it somewhere i can easily work on it (since i can't really move the beasts myself xD)
 
Last edited:

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
After the Sony G500 white balance is adjusted, when the full screen displays white, the brightness will automatically decrease? Does anyone know the reason?
You are hitting power limit.

If it is not like screen is really dim and super strange things happen like suspicious noises coming from monitor, etc. I would not worry about it. It also happens on my FW900.

This white screen effect happens on most CRT's when contrast is set to their limit. It also happens a lot on plasma panels.
On CRT screens it might happen that geometry/size changes a little when you flash white screen. This is normal and while there might be some momentary size changes it is is still rather minimal on Trinitrons/Diamontrons compared to other cheaper shadow mask CRT

In WinDAS there is setting called maximum drive or something similar. I suspect it can increase this power limit a little. If this dimming bothers you a lot you may try it 🔥

Is it possible to easily tell whether an FW-900's G2 is too *low*?
You should have just right black level (not pitch black in dark room but set to proper level to avoid clipping) at exactly Brightness set to 30 (anyone who know better: correct me if I am wrong)
Brightness if of course affected by "BIAS" setting for RGB in color setting menu but let's say for normal profile you should have it around 30.
If it is like 40-50 I would personally not care enough to change if it would be bothersome (like require anyone to lift this beast XD) but if you need to go to crazy high brightness values then better increase G2 asap.

Did you do WPB procedure? I guess not... You should consider doing it.

BTW. If you want to use CRT's then better start workin out.
age-924491214-1557166711.jpg?crop=0.670xw:1.00xh;0.jpg
LCD muscles won't cut it...
 

jbltecnicspro

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,804
You are hitting power limit.

If it is not like screen is really dim and super strange things happen like suspicious noises coming from monitor, etc. I would not worry about it. It also happens on my FW900.

This white screen effect happens on most CRT's when contrast is set to their limit. It also happens a lot on plasma panels.
On CRT screens it might happen that geometry/size changes a little when you flash white screen. This is normal and while there might be some momentary size changes it is is still rather minimal on Trinitrons/Diamontrons compared to other cheaper shadow mask CRT

In WinDAS there is setting called maximum drive or something similar. I suspect it can increase this power limit a little. If this dimming bothers you a lot you may try it 🔥


You should have just right black level (not pitch black in dark room but set to proper level to avoid clipping) at exactly Brightness set to 30 (anyone who know better: correct me if I am wrong)
Brightness if of course affected by "BIAS" setting for RGB in color setting menu but let's say for normal profile you should have it around 30.
If it is like 40-50 I would personally not care enough to change if it would be bothersome (like require anyone to lift this beast XD) but if you need to go to crazy high brightness values then better increase G2 asap.

Did you do WPB procedure? I guess not... You should consider doing it.

BTW. If you want to use CRT's then better start workin out.
View attachment 245271
LCD muscles won't cut it...
I believe that *technically* it's Brightness = 31. But yeah, you're right. :D

For the CR1 chassis models (Artisan and F520) it's Brightness = 50.

These are the values that WinDAS defaults the monitor to after you do the White Point Balance procedure. Hell, since I'm responding here's the table:

GDM-FW900
Brightness = 31, Contrast = 90

GDM-F520, Artisan (GDM-C520K) and other CR1's
Brightness = 50, Contrast = 85 picture mode set to Professional if I remember correctly...

Those are all the values that WinDAS sets after white point balance is done. As y'all can see it varies by chassis.
 

Azurfel

n00b
Joined
Dec 26, 2014
Messages
11
You should have just right black level (not pitch black in dark room but set to proper level to avoid clipping) at exactly Brightness set to 30 (anyone who know better: correct me if I am wrong)
Brightness if of course affected by "BIAS" setting for RGB in color setting menu but let's say for normal profile you should have it around 30.
If it is like 40-50 I would personally not care enough to change if it would be bothersome (like require anyone to lift this beast XD) but if you need to go to crazy high brightness values then better increase G2 asap.
Mmk, it should be right as is then. I just wanted to check that their weren't any easily identifiable but non-obvious gotchas to look out for.

Did you do WPB procedure? I guess not... You should consider doing it.
I didn't think you could without a colorimeter (which i really should get...). I will look into it!

BTW. If you want to use CRT's then better start workin out.
View attachment 245271
LCD muscles won't cut it...
xD

I've been using an FW900 for like 12 years now. I got it when i had my little brothers around to harangue into moving it for me and got too used to it to give it up in the interim, which i won't pretend hasn't caused issues. I've moved it exactly once without help in a "grandma lifts car to save grandson" style adrenaline burst (the ceiling it was under was collapsing/gushing out water. The monitor was undamaged)

The one i'm currently working on used to belong to one of my brothers, actually. Mine has been having it's own issues and i'm finally getting around to making this one usable before i start poking at mine.
 

Flybye

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
254
Anyone know the status of the Sunix DPU3000? I never get any responses from Sunix, and I can't find it anywhere.
Unless there is a good alternative digital to analog converter that can do 2304x1440 @80hz?
 

LAGRUNAUER

Gawd
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
713
I recently got a FW900. You always hear about the FBT going pop so I thought I should probably find a replacement if the inevitable happens.
As many others found out it is practically impossible to source a new FBT for the FW900. So I did some digging and found out, that the FBT of a BVM-A32 is very similar or even exactly the same.

There was one listing for a brand new FBT from a A32. I bit the bullet and ordered it.

It arrived yesterday and here you can see the result:
View attachment 224487

Left: A32
Right: FW900

They are practically identical. The only difference I can see is the length of the HV cable as the FBT from the A32 has a longer cable. That's it. I haven't tested it yet as my current FBT still works. But I thought I let you guys know.

It's this FBT: https://encompass.com/item/6596153/Sony/1-453-477-11/
Did the replacement FBT, Sony Part # 1-453-477-11 worked in your GDM-FW900?

Take care and stay safe!

Unkle Vito!
 

flod

Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
948
I have both and F500R is not much worse. Slightly lower refresh rates, much larger case, no VGA connector problems, no DynConv, but on mine convergence is very good anyway.
oh i didn't realize that it's also 0.22mm.
that makes it more interesting.

hope someone can buy it and take good care of it :p
 

spacediver

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 14, 2013
Messages
2,604
I couldn't find a clear answer searching around, so:

Is it possible to easily tell whether an FW-900's G2 is too *low*?

I've been adjusting one of mine which was clearly too bright (Image Restoration couldn't even complete because the monitor would shut itself off). Reducing the G2 appears to have corrected this issue, but i would rather be sure i get it where it shold be while i have it somewhere i can easily work on it (since i can't really move the beasts myself xD)
Setting G2 too low will cause the gamma to be very high (crushed blacks). This can be compensated for by LUT adjustments, but there are limitations involved with such an approach, depending upon how much crush there is.
 

jbltecnicspro

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,804
oh i didn't realize that it's also 0.22mm.
that makes it more interesting.

hope someone can buy it and take good care of it :p
So I tried to see actual pictures of the unit in question and I don't see any. I don't know... seems to good to be true. If I *knew* there was a F500R down there I'd think of the drive but I don't know...
 

3dfan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
153
Anyone know the status of the Sunix DPU3000? I never get any responses from Sunix, and I can't find it anywhere.
Unless there is a good alternative digital to analog converter that can do 2304x1440 @80hz?
i also tried contacting them 2 days ago, but no anwer yet,
EDIT: right know sunix replied about dpu3000 availability:
"You may check with Amazon.com when they will be restocking soon."

about similar capable converters, search for "vention" and "delock 87685" in this forum topic for more info,

the delock 87685 seems to be available in amazon.de
https://www.amazon.de/gp/offer-listing/B075MZBXQ8/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all

and dpu3000 from someone in ebay located in asutralia it seems

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Sunix-Tiny-Universal-DisplayPort-Graphics-Splitter/183630795772?_trkparms=aid=111001&algo=REC.SEED&ao=1&asc=20180816085401&meid=cbdc04d03bf146ecb274d8985ca4d1e0&pid=100970&rk=1&rkt=1&mehot=none&sd=183630795772&itm=183630795772&pmt=0&noa=1&pg=2380057&_trksid=p2380057.c100970.m5481&_trkparms=pageci:652a1c06-978e-11ea-887d-feabdb91ea1c|parentrq:1e3756841720a6e697d01f13ffed2528|iid:1#shpCntId
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
61
Anyone know the status of the Sunix DPU3000? I never get any responses from Sunix, and I can't find it anywhere.
Unless there is a good alternative digital to analog converter that can do 2304x1440 @80hz?
I have both the Sunix and the Delock version. I want to sell them.
 

3dfan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
153
you may try to sell your adapters in facebook groups like "The CRT Collective" and " "CRT PC monitor club" too, i frequently see people asking for dpu3000 or equivalent there
 

Flybye

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
254
i also tried contacting them 2 days ago, but no anwer yet,
EDIT: right know sunix replied about dpu3000 availability:
"You may check with Amazon.com when they will be restocking soon."

about similar capable converters, search for "vention" and "delock 87685" in this forum topic for more info,

the delock 87685 seems to be available in amazon.de
https://www.amazon.de/gp/offer-listing/B075MZBXQ8/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all

and dpu3000 from someone in ebay located in asutralia it seems

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Sunix-Tiny-Universal-DisplayPort-Graphics-Splitter/183630795772?_trkparms=aid=111001&algo=REC.SEED&ao=1&asc=20180816085401&meid=cbdc04d03bf146ecb274d8985ca4d1e0&pid=100970&rk=1&rkt=1&mehot=none&sd=183630795772&itm=183630795772&pmt=0&noa=1&pg=2380057&_trksid=p2380057.c100970.m5481&_trkparms=pageci:652a1c06-978e-11ea-887d-feabdb91ea1c|parentrq:1e3756841720a6e697d01f13ffed2528|iid:1#shpCntId
Thanks! I guess I just need to stalk Amazon more often. I haven't even gotten an email from Sunix, yet. Lucky you lol.
I find it interesting that the Delock and Sunix are the exact same dimensions...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3dfan
like this

jei

n00b
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
10
Thanks! I guess I just need to stalk Amazon more often. I haven't even gotten an email from Sunix, yet. Lucky you lol.
I find it interesting that the Delock and Sunix are the exact same dimensions...
My guess would be they just come from the same factory in China?

-

Hi everyone, I've gotten into CRTs recently, currently have a Sony CPD-520GS, and plan on buying an Iiyama Vision Master Pro 514 soon.
Question I have in regards to adapters: Should I be looking for an adapter with pixel clock frequency higher than the video bandwidth of the monitor I will use it on? Does this have any relevance? I've been having a hard time finding info on this.
I have a few Delock 62967s on the way, and while those should be fine on my CPD-520GS, I'm not sure if they will support the VMP514's high resolutions. What should I be looking for in adapters in this case? I understand that the Sunix DPU3000 and Delock clone are considered very good, I'm just curious on the technical side of it.
Also in regards to GPUs, what is the best GPU that supports analog natively (through VGA/Dual Link DVI)? From my research it says Titan X, which I can find for around 300 in the second hand market.

Any info is appreciated, thanks.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
Definitely 62967 won't support highest resolutions. It has anywhere from 320 to 340 MHz max bandwidth and VMP514 have horizontal refresh limit of 142KHz which should allow even 4K to be displayed 🙃 (though there does not exist any adapter with >700MHz bandwith for that)

Will this be an issue though?
1600x1200@110Hz is 311MHz bandwidth and 141KHz horizontal and seems to be good resolution in terms of resolution and refresh rate.
 

jei

n00b
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
10
Definitely 62967 won't support highest resolutions. It has anywhere from 320 to 340 MHz max bandwidth and VMP514 have horizontal refresh limit of 142KHz which should allow even 4K to be displayed 🙃 (though there does not exist any adapter with >700MHz bandwith for that)

Will this be an issue though?
1600x1200@110Hz is 311MHz bandwidth and 141KHz horizontal and seems to be good resolution in terms of resolution and refresh rate.
That sounds good too, I just want good browsing experience while I'm not playing games, during games I will of course be playing at 180/200hz. 62967 should support 800x600 200hz though correct?

How do you calculate bandwidth like that?

Thanks
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
Easiest way I know is to use CRU (https://www.monitortests.com/forum/Thread-Custom-Resolution-Utility-CRU) and just try to create new video mode.
For CRT it will be "Automatic - CRT standard"
You will be limited by either parameter in "Frequency" section.
It is also possible to reduce some blanking lines with manual timings which should reduce horizontal refresh rate.
With lower resolutions you need not worry about horizontal timings or even resolution because they do not affect horizontal refresh.
When higher resolutions both horizontal and vertical blanking can be reduced to save some bandwidth.

You can reduce blanking pixels/lines but if you reduce them too much there might be some geometry issues and/or image might be cropped.

800x600@200Hz should be easily doable on this monitor and it uses half of available Delock bandwidth so also no problems here.
 

spacediver

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 14, 2013
Messages
2,604
Also in regards to GPUs, what is the best GPU that supports analog natively (through VGA/Dual Link DVI)? From my research it says Titan X, which I can find for around 300 in the second hand market.
Yea I think titan x is the best, but I think 980 Ti is a close second (and arguably better value).
 

jei

n00b
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
10
Easiest way I know is to use CRU (https://www.monitortests.com/forum/Thread-Custom-Resolution-Utility-CRU) and just try to create new video mode.
For CRT it will be "Automatic - CRT standard"
You will be limited by either parameter in "Frequency" section.
It is also possible to reduce some blanking lines with manual timings which should reduce horizontal refresh rate.
With lower resolutions you need not worry about horizontal timings or even resolution because they do not affect horizontal refresh.
When higher resolutions both horizontal and vertical blanking can be reduced to save some bandwidth.

You can reduce blanking pixels/lines but if you reduce them too much there might be some geometry issues and/or image might be cropped.

800x600@200Hz should be easily doable on this monitor and it uses half of available Delock bandwidth so also no problems here.
Thank you very much for the info, this helps a ton!
So, I'm kind of in a limbo right now.. I had to get the 62967 proxied for me by a German friend, but the package has been stuck for over 2 weeks, and I'm getting antsy to use my CPD-520GS (have had it for about a month now, but I haven't had the chance to use it).
I'm planning on just buying a cheaper one that won't support nice high resolutions, the best one off amazon that I can get with 1 day shipping supports 1920x1200. When inputting this into the CRT standard it gives a horizontal of 74.7khz and pixel clock of 193.634mhz. If I want to run my CPD-520GS at 720x540@160hz (or 800x600@147hz), it gives a horizontal of 96.58khz and pixel clock of 105.08mhz. Question is, would it support it? pixel clock is lower, but horizontal is higher than the initial assumed spec. (The adapter: https://www.amazon.ca/Rankie-DisplayPort-Adapter-1080P-Converter/dp/B00Z08TZNU)
Yea I think titan x is the best, but I think 980 Ti is a close second (and arguably better value).
Thanks, I'll give it some time and see, the only reason I'm considering it is because I can just sell a 1060 to cover for half of it, and I have another rig that is just sitting there unused with pretty good specs (at least for what I'd be using it for). If adapters have no problems then I won't bother.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,041
Cheap HDMI to VGA adapters should support bandwidth up to around 166MHz. Maybe not quite there and maybe even higher. It depends on the model. I guess it is similar story with DP to VGA converters but maybe those can go higher than that.
800x600@200Hz is about 150MHz so it should work just fine.
It should also support 1280x960@85Hz (150MHz) for desktop. This resolution was actually always good choice for 4:3 CRT's giving nice and sharp picture.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
1,022
From my research it says Titan X, which I can find for around 300 in the second hand market.
Keep in mind, there are two "Titan X's". One is Maxwell, one is Pascal. You want the one on the Maxwell architecture, since it has DVI-I. Pascal is digital only like the 1080. Not do be confused with the Titan Xp, which is yet another card in the pascal architecture.

But really, it's only a few percentage points faster than the 980Ti, if I remember correctly, but the 980Ti is MUCH cheaper on ebay.

But in my opinion, none of that really matters since we know of a few DAC's that mostly get the job done on digital-only cards. So no need to limit yourself to 900 series cards.
 

3dfan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
153
hi jei. i have a gtx 1080ti paired with sunix dpu3000 to fw900 crt and my experience with it have been fantastic so far, however this adapter is tricky to setup some resolutions / refres rate combos correctly to avoid some issues this adapter use to get when using some resolution as they are detected by default, , for more info search this thread words like "sunix" "dpu3000" "delock" also i suggest to search for user Derupter posts in this thread, this user have done a very helpful research about good quality adapters to use with modern graphics cards and high end crt monitors.
 
Top