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

Those of you with good graphics cards: how do the recent Nvidia cards from the last 2-3 generations do when it comes to supersampling/downsampling? I'm looking to run games in 1440p or 4k and downsampling to 1920x1200, but I've never been able to get Nvidia's downsampling from the control panel to work properly.
 
But I’ve never got DSR to work.

It's a bit of a headache for CRT monitors. If you want to downscale to 1200p, you have to delete all higher resolutions with CRU, like 2304x1440.

And even then, some games won't detect the DSR resolutions. Recently, I found Mega Man 11 doesn't detect the DSR resolutions for some reason.
 
Those of you with good graphics cards: how do the recent Nvidia cards from the last 2-3 generations do when it comes to supersampling/downsampling? I'm looking to run games in 1440p or 4k and downsampling to 1920x1200, but I've never been able to get Nvidia's downsampling from the control panel to work properly.

on a GTX 980 TI with the FW900, i have tested adding a DSR 4x resolution downsampling to 1920 x 1200. with a result of 4096 x 3072.

what i do is to make windows believe 1920 x 1200 is the monitor native resolution (tested on windows 10 pro 64bit 1709), for that, i create the resolution with CRU (tested with custom resolution utility version 1.4.1) from the detailed resolutions, using automatic CRT standard, and moving the resolution to the top with the up arrow, so it seems the top resolution on that list will be what windows believes is tha native one, then restart the PC, and now you check that nvidia control panel lists 1920 x 1200 as native, then create DSR 4x and thats it.

1.jpg

now if what you want is 4K known as 3840 x 2160, i created 2560 x 1440 with same procedure mentioned, in DSR set to 2.25x, (FW900 supports 1440p up to 2560 x 1440 75hz 16:9 and 2560 x 1600 16:10 68hz without the need of DSR, at least with the gtx 980 TI)

2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, if your video card has a DVI-I output it should work. But it's hard to tell without knowing the exact model you have, there might be custom manufacturer cards not featuring it but still using connectors with the DVI-I keyed connections instead of the DVI-D ones.

Fool-proof question: Did you think about selecting input 2 on the monitor switch when plugging that cable ?
 
Ok it works now. Thanks a lot!
Edit: After some testing, I see that 1024 is the highest resolution that can support 144hz. Normally the fw900 can go higher than that.
Is it limited because of the gpu? Or the cable?
 
Last edited:
Ok it works now. Thanks a lot!
Edit: After some testing, I see that 1024 is the highest resolution that can support 144hz. Normally the fw900 can go higher than that.
Is it limited because of the gpu? Or the cable?

Cable shouldn't be an issue. It's probably the GPU's 400mhz RAMDAC limit. You could try overclocking it but I don't know how. If you find out let me know.
 
Thx for the tip. Im gonna try.
Would a 750ti perform better though? It has a vga output. Or maybe another gpu with a better analog management?
 
1024x768 144 Hz with CRU,an horizontal frequency of 120.674 kHz which is near the limit of the FW900.

FW900 limits are:
Horizontal: 30 to 121 kHz
Vertical: 48 to 160 Hz
 
Last edited:
How does it look? :)

basically the diference i notice testing games is less aliasing, specially at 4K , it can be even posible to achieve 5K on the FW900 for games via DSR. at that res, there is practically no aliasing visible, however in my opinion resolutions arround 4K or higher are not really worth on displays ranging 22 - 24 inches, image quality diference is not that big from using 1920 x 1080 or 1920x 1200 as the performance hit is.


1.jpg

2.jpg


Ok it works now. Thanks a lot!
Edit: After some testing, I see that 1024 is the highest resolution that can support 144hz. Normally the fw900 can go higher than that.
Is it limited because of the gpu? Or the cable?

i have tested resolutions such 1280x 720 (16:9), 1200x 750 (16:10), 1229 x 768, 1024 x 768 at 144HZ, on the FW900 and it supports those. tested via nvidia control panel custom resolution using GFT standard, GTX 980 TI vga port, never tested via BNC cables, so dont know how that input may affect results
 
Last edited:
Ok it works now. Thanks a lot!
Edit: After some testing, I see that 1024 is the highest resolution that can support 144hz. Normally the fw900 can go higher than that.
Is it limited because of the gpu? Or the cable?
1024x768 is strange resolution to display on FW900...
I used to play Skyrim at 1280x800@140Hz and imho it looked pretty nice with MSAA 2x + FXAA. A little bit blurry but the good kind of blur, one that masks all the game graphical imperfections and looks natural and soft.

Actually I prefer lower resolutions on CRT + tons of AA over higher resolutions. Lower resolutions with high refresh rates are also much better for eyes.

For Ray-Tracing I will probably go and get my FW900 because it seems like the best way (only 'viable'?) to proceed with this tech, especially since we talk about "highest image quality" :)
 
Not sure why people are so concerned about hitting 144hz on a CRT. It's just an arbitrary number. 130hz is just as good. Hell, after 100hz you really start to get diminishing returns. Might as well run 100hz and use a slightly higher resolution.
 
Not sure why people are so concerned about hitting 144hz on a CRT. It's just an arbitrary number. 130hz is just as good. Hell, after 100hz you really start to get diminishing returns. Might as well run 100hz and use a slightly higher resolution.
Some probably think it's analogous to LCD's 144 Hz.
 
I know. I would still aim for highest refresh possibe that wouldn't reduce sharpness, just wouldn't care about arbitrary numbers like 120/144.
 
Depends on the game for me. If 60fps fine for a game, I'll go 60hz and turn up the resolution until I start dropping frames. If it's a more competitive or fast-paced game I'll aim higher. Basically the same considerations for when developers of console games make the decision to go 30fps or 60fps.
 
Last edited:
I think aiming for 120 Hz is a better idea since it's exactly double the AC rate (at least here in USA so maybe 100 Hz for Europe) in which electrical interference is minimized. I know it is sharper at 60 Hz, but it makes my eyes tired.
 
I think aiming for 120 Hz is a better idea since it's exactly double the AC rate (at least here in USA so maybe 100 Hz for Europe) in which electrical interference is minimized. I know it is sharper at 60 Hz, but it makes my eyes tired.

These monitors weren't made in 1945 so I don't think any interference from not running at the AC frequency is going to be perceptible. Unless you're playing counterstrike or Quake, I think 120hz is overkill, especially since you have to run a lower resolution to hit it.
 
These monitors weren't made in 1945 so I don't think any interference from not running at the AC frequency is going to be perceptible. Unless you're playing counterstrike or Quake, I think 120hz is overkill, especially since you have to run a lower resolution to hit it.

You would think that, except my current monitors did get electrical interference before in which running at 60 Hz was a solution. I ended up getting a power transformer to have cleaner electric. Here is a simple test, if your eyes can handle it, try 60 Hz and see if the text is sharper or not.
 
You would think that, except my current monitors did get electrical interference before in which running at 60 Hz was a solution. I ended up getting a power transformer to have cleaner electric. Here is a simple test, if your eyes can handle it, try 60 Hz and see if the text is sharper or not.
Well, since that's something I'm working on currently I can tell you the FW900 uses a switch-mode power supply in the 100-120 kHz range, 60Hz interferences normally cannot make their way outside of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeho
like this
Well, since that's something I'm working on currently I can tell you the FW900 uses a switch-mode power supply in the 100-120 kHz range, 60Hz interferences normally cannot make their way outside of it.

Ah okay, it's true I'm not using a FW900 so I can't test, but my monitors were made near the end of the CRT era, so I doubt it's due to old tech.
 
You would think that, except my current monitors did get electrical interference before in which running at 60 Hz was a solution. I ended up getting a power transformer to have cleaner electric. Here is a simple test, if your eyes can handle it, try 60 Hz and see if the text is sharper or not.
It's probably sharper because it's lower refresh.
 
Hey everyone, I have some sad news, I have a HP A7217 with what looks like a flyback/power problem:

http://imgur.com/a/8NWUibZ

Ever since this happened I have stopped trying to turn it on. Anyone from Massachusetts that knows of anywhere I can try to repair this? I'd rather not part it if it can be fixed.

Thankfully I have another FW900 in perfect shape.
 
wow you guys rule. i sold my sony crt ions ago. i dont know the model number off hand but it weighed 62lbs! that i will never forget. ive missed it ever since i sold it.
 
Hey everyone, I have some sad news, I have a HP A7217 with what looks like a flyback/power problem:

http://imgur.com/a/8NWUibZ

Ever since this happened I have stopped trying to turn it on. Anyone from Massachusetts that knows of anywhere I can try to repair this? I'd rather not part it if it can be fixed.
Well, it wouldn't be wise to part it without knowing where the problem is exactly, you might transfer a faulty board to another screen and fry something.

Your picture is surprising as it seems to be a red led when it should normally be orange or green. But maybe red is orange on HP ones. Is the led steadily lit red or was it blinking ? What was the blinking pattern ? That may help finding what's wrong.

Having a look on the top of the screen through the plastic case may as well give clues as your record let think there is an electric arc inside, but you don't know where.

Or another thing that could be done without powering on the screen, remove the plastic case, unscrew the top shielding plate and look for burnt components or areas on the boards/tube.
 
I asked about Sunix DPU3000-D3 and they replayed "Just confirmed with my engineers that our splitter only able to reach max @ 60Hz with the 1920x1200 resolution supported by the graphics cards. It will not able to pass through over 60Hz refresh rate to prevent overflow. Your best bet will probably still be using PCI or PCIe graphics that comes with VGA ports."

How are you pushing more than 60Hz with Sunix DPU3000-D3?
 
I asked about Sunix DPU3000-D3 and they replayed "Just confirmed with my engineers that our splitter only able to reach max @ 60Hz with the 1920x1200 resolution supported by the graphics cards. It will not able to pass through over 60Hz refresh rate to prevent overflow. Your best bet will probably still be using PCI or PCIe graphics that comes with VGA ports."

How are you pushing more than 60Hz with Sunix DPU3000-D3?

The engineer they talked to is mistaken. Also sounds like english isn't his first language so something may have been lost in translation. And the actual chip inside is made by Synaptics, so they may not be experts on its capabilities.

I run all kinds of refresh rates on my Sunix. You may need to create some in CRU though. And it needs to be within your monitor's maximum horizontal frequency.
 
Thanks for clarifying. Guy on reddid said he found info about Sunix here so I asked Sunix as well and joined hf https://tinyurl.com/y8gr2qby

Have CRU but was to scared to create my own "manual" can you post screen of presets? I am on fw900 of course.

You may need to create some in CRU though. And it needs to be within your monitor's maximum horizontal frequency.

Its basically means that it wont run out of the box without CRU presets at standard resolutions or I just won't be able to pick resolution with higher refresh rate without presets?
 
Thanks for clarifying. Guy on reddid said he found info about Sunix here so I asked Sunix as well and joined hf https://tinyurl.com/y8gr2qby

Have CRU but was to scared to create my own "manual" can you post screen of presets? I am on fw900 of course.



Its basically means that it wont run out of the box without CRU presets at standard resolutions or I just won't be able to pick resolution with higher refresh rate without presets?

The SUNIX will read the EDID fine, so any preset set in the FW900 would show up right away. Just doing anything outside of the EDID is when you need CRU or using the GPU software to add custom resolutions.
 
Ok i just put 3 positions in "detailed resolutions" added 85Hz, 96Hz and 98Hz at 1920x1200 didn't change anything else.

Noticed that at 98Hz I have a little deformation at top left corner with extra brightness. Is that normal?

Also anyone pushed full 100Hz at 1920x1200 with fw900 with cru?

When i go and click restart64.exe I have lost all resolutions except those 3 from cru for fw900 is that normal?

Also by just putting 3 parameters for cru 1920,1200 and 85Hz am I having same setting like from preset list? Is this 85Hz the same as windows 85Hz preset?

Is putting only 3 parameters when creating "detailed resolutions" should i tweak something else to avoid distortion in left top corner with 98Hz? Or maybe I should put some more precise value 98,???.

And last thing I see some people here keep their fw900 with 96Hz not 98Hz? Any particular reason to lower the value advertised by sony?

Please help i am in dark
 
Last edited:
Ok i just put 3 positions in "detailed resolutions" added 85Hz, 96Hz and 98Hz at 1920x1200 didn't change anything else.

Noticed that at 98Hz I have a little deformation at top left corner with extra brightness. Is that normal?

Also anyone pushed full 100Hz at 1920x1200 with fw900 with cru?

When i go and click restart64.exe I have lost all resolutions except those 3 from cru for fw900 is that normal?

Also by just putting 3 parameters for cru 1920,1200 and 85Hz am I having same setting like from preset list? Is this 85Hz the same as windows 85Hz preset?

Is putting only 3 parameters when creating "detailed resolutions" should i tweak something else to avoid distortion in left top corner with 98Hz? Or maybe I should put some more precise value 98,???.

And last thing I see some people here keep their fw900 with 96Hz not 98Hz? Any particular reason to lower the value advertised by sony?

Please help i am in dark

If you have problems with CRU try with the custom resolution panel of graphic card, both AMD and Nvidia have theirs (use only GTF or CVT timings,do not use CVT reduced)
About CRU:
First make sure to set the right monitor in the list,it should be GDM-FW900 (active),sometimes there are multiple values of the same monitor (old registry keys),set only the one with "active"
Use only CRT timings,with CRU 1.4 and up you can use Old Standard (GTF)
With default EDID you can't set 1920x1200 over 85 Hz,using CRU or graphic panel you can set it to 96 Hz
You can't set 1920x1200 98 Hz because is above monitor's specs

FW900 limits are:
Horizontal: 30 to 121 kHz (i never tested real limit,i think around 122 kHz)
Vertical: 48 to 160 Hz

With 1920x1200 98 Hz you have more than 124 kHz on horizontal frequency,maybe you can get it by reducing manually the vertical blanking.

When you set a resolution in Windows without a custom EDID, with CRT monitors the video driver by default uses GTF or DMT timings for standard resolutions or what is present on detailed resolution of default EDID (custom timings)
 
Last edited:
When i go and click restart64.exe I have lost all resolutions except those 3 from cru for fw900 is that normal?

First make sure to set the right monitor in the list,it should be GDM-FW900 (active),sometimes there are multiple values of the same monitor (old registry keys),set only the one with "active"

sometimes and i dont know why, windows detects my FW900 as a generic non PNP monitor, i restart windows and it detects it as GDM-FW900 again, but sometimes even restarting it keep detecting it as generic, when that happened the firs time, i lost all resolutions in CRU which were setup for FW900,

a workaround for this was to export all GDM-FW900 custom resolutions from CRU using the "export" button to a file, and when windows detected the monitor as generic, i imported the file, so now it does not matter if windows detects the monitor as FW900 or generic, since i now just use the same custom res created for the FW900 for the "generic" monitor and problem solved.
 
Last edited:
Thank You for taking your time Derupter.

NVIDIA Control Panel works well at 96Hz. I am using GTX680-DC2O-2GD5

I setup GTF for now but what is a difference between GTF and DMT? Are both the same or one is better for FW900? I noticed that booth have same pixel clock

98Hz worked with CRU but had a little deformation at top left and increased brightness in this corner without reducing anything. But u are right NVIDIA Control Panel won't let me setup 98Hz due to 330 pixel clock i think

NVIDIA Control Panel made hes own parameters

HUlFiGT.png
 
Last edited:
Thank You for taking your time Derupter.

NVIDIA Control Panel works well at 96Hz. I am using GTX680-DC2O-2GD5

I setup GTF for now but what is a difference between GTF and DMT? Are both the same or one is better for FW900? I noticed that booth have same pixel clock

98Hz worked with CRU but had a little deformation at top left and increased brightness in this corner without reducing anything. But u are right NVIDIA Control Panel won't let me setup 98Hz due to 330 pixel clock i think

NVIDIA Control Panel made hes own parameters

View attachment 118320

DMT isn't a timing formula, but it is a VESA document containing a list of resolutions and refresh rate with different timings.
Timings can be GTF or CVT or CVT-Reduced or custom (very old resolutions)
If you set a resolution in Windows who is on that list, it uses those timings.
So with some resolution DMT is like CVT, with others like GTF, with others different from both CVT and GTF (example with 1024x768 85 Hz DMT-GTF-CVT are all different)
CVT and GTF are real timing formula, GTF is older than CVT.
Between the two standard horizontal formula is almost identical, vertical formula is a little different.
Another difference is that with CVT the pixel clock should be a multiple of 0.25 MHz, CRU doesn't follow this rule.
In fact CVT with CRU is a little different from CVT of AMD and Nvidia custom resolution panel, this is because CRU aims to have a near perfect refresh rate you set, instead to round the pixel clock with multiple of 0.25 MHz.
The choice of timing formula is important if in the past you have regulated geometry, landing, moire, ecc. of your resolutions without a custom EDID.
When for some reasons you have to set those resolutions custom, knowing the timing formula that was used by default allows you not to have to adjust again the monitor settings.
Another story if you create a new custom resolution never used and regulated before, in this case DMT is useless, choose GTF or CVT, never use CVT-Reduced with CRT monitor.

In the pic you have posted look the horizontal frequency, see that 121.73 KHz?
The fact that 98 Hz doesn't work has nothing to do with pixel clock.
FW900 can't do more than 122 KHz, with CRU you can set 1920x1200 even at 100 Hz or more and the resolution should appear in Windows resolutions panel, but when you apply it the monitor goes blank (protection) until you switch to a working resolution.
About DMT and GTF, 1920x1200 96 isn't in the DMT VESA list, so when you switch from GTF to DMT nothing change, try with 1024x768 85 Hz and you will see that DMT-GTF-CVT are all different.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top