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

Flybye said:
Why is it so difficult in finding a converter that supports a high a pixel clock? Is it something with the physical chip design? Is it internal programming? I mentioned this problem the community is having finding high pixel clock converters to an electrical engineering student friend. If I can get details to what goes into a converter chip, he might be able to look into it for his graduation project.
Click to expand...

You could show him this to get started:
 
SH1 said:
I tried to get a Vention with the older chip a few months ago, but my order was cancelled. I do have one with the newer and I guess weaker chip, but I don't have anything with USB-C to try it with yet.

My needs are probably low though. I normally use 1600 by 1024 at 100 Hz. (To align with the display's aspect ratio. And with the idea that it fits within the 1920 across or so aperture grill with a margin for error as the screen is painted, which should increase sharpness. Not that 1920 by 1200 looks bad though. Though I guess I'd make that 1920 by 1228 given this displays slightly odd dimensions.)
Click to expand...

You shouldn't have problems with those resolutions, even with the new models.

Flybye said:
I can do some extended tests for a few hours with the StarTech if you would like at 2235 x 1397 @ 83Hz / 375Mhz pixel clock. It is a great alternative for the price, and is a great backup to my Delock should it ever die.
Click to expand...

If it is not a problem, try to use for some time the Startech at the resolutions you like, just to be sure there aren't strange problems that come up with long sessions.

Strat_84 said:
Chipsets capable of a 400Mhz pixel clock and beyond have been widely available for tens of years, I doubt there is any technical difficulty with this.

The problem is probably rather that the companies that had that kind of expertise ditched their products because there's no wide need anymore for it, and everything we can find now comes from second-class chip makers. And since it's barely believable for the average Joe nowadays that a monitor with a VGA input may display anything beyond 1920x1080@60hz, that's what they'll design their products for.
Click to expand...

If i remember well, near the end of the nineties, graphics chip makers have started integrating the DAC into the GPU.
Chip makers have stopped to producing and evolving their product with faster DAC, maybe that's why the fastest standalone DAC i have found is a 330 MHz 10 bit.
Then the chip makers started making these all-in-one chipset for digital to digital or analog conversion, but with different targets like flat displays with VGA input (full HD 60 Hz)

Flybye ask why is it so difficult?
Well, i have asked the same question to certain manufacturers and these are some answers:
-Analogix = There is no business
-ITE = If up to 400MHz, it could be no monitor's VGA port can receive it
-Lontium = We will try to make sure that VGA output support upto 400MHz (they practically did nothing)

However, compared to a few years ago, the situation has definitely improved.
Now we have various USB-C adapters that can probably do 360 MHz, chipset like Synaptics can go over 400, the IT6564 can go over 360 and maybe some sample near 400, Lontium DAC probably can do 400 or more if that guy on youtube really tested one of them.
 
Last edited:
Derupter, I ran the StarTech on 2235 x 1397 @ 83Hz for about 9 hours with a mix of windows and in game. No snow or artifacts of any type.
 
Strat_84 said:
So the bezel is damaged, the AR film missing, and the guy still has the guts to ask 2000$ for it. You made my day with this. :woot:
Click to expand...
If I was in his shoes, I would too. :D
These monitors are so very rare nowadays. Search for "crt monitor" or "sony gdm" on https://www.searchcraigslist.org/ or http://www.statewidelist.com/ (the latter sometimes gives results where the former won't)
It's hard to find anything that has a horizontal refresh rate above 90kHz, let alone something as fancy as the FW900.
I didn't realize just how lucky I was when I saved a Hitachi SuperScan Elite 751 from being trashed by my relatives some days ago until I did more research. While not even that high end of a monitor (it has the smallest horizontal refresh rate of its siblings, the 752 and 753 and cost a reasonable $500 in 2000), it is still quite a bit better than most of what's available.
 
Last edited:
Wow are prices on these just getting crazier and crazier. I am glad that I got both the sony one and HP rebadge for reasonable amounts of money.
 
XoR_ said:
If you are sensitive to vertical refresh rate then why do you need adapter with higher pixel clock?
Anything beyond 1600/1920x1200 is completely pointless on CRT monitors and at 1200 lines you will hit horizontal refresh limit before you do pixel clock given current adapters eg. Delock 62967
Click to expand...
I’m sensitive to a degree, but you know it is very subjective. Kinda like how some people can taste the differance between regular milk vs skim and some people can’t. 80 is my limit. 79 I can start notice the slight jitter. Anything above 80 is great.
 
Well, IMO it's just someone greedy looking for a cow to milk. I just hope no one will be silly enough to buy THAT at such price.
 
agreed, i even find an insult and lack of respect from that seller asking that price for an used, cracked physicaly, (even if its just cosmetic) no coating, not even including a good dac adapter to use on current systems monitor. no one should buy that thing, not at that price, i personaly would not even pay 500 for something like that, also fw900 without coatings are condemned to dark enviroments to perseive blacks, and adding a appropiated film to it is a hard task. (not to mention getting the original film is impossible).

its so sad crt abusive price are so high still after a while they became so expensive due to the videos from digital foundry and other sites advertising their advantages against modern displays. (i disagree those price are due to crt monitor "rareness", before digital foundry and those sites, crt prices were much lower and high end crt monitors were still "rare", hard to get).
 
That CRT has been out in the wild for the better part of 20 years? (December 2000 manufacture date. First month of manufacture? Curious, has anyone seen one from November 2000 or before? I think December that year is around the time the FW900 was announced.)

Not personally worried about the lack of a film. It wasn't a highlight of that product. Though the solution for me, the Kantek filter, does require debezzeling and maybe won't work for other folks. (And there is some artifacting.)

In any case, for those of us for whom $2000 is a lot of money, certainly me, wouldn't recommend spending anything close to that on any used computer CRT.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3dfan
like this
Flybye said:
I’ll admit.....

I threw the HP GDM away in the early 2010s as it stopped producing an image, and I never trougleshooted it. I had a perfectly running Sony E400 I donated in the late 2000s. I mean who figured we would be in the middle of a CRT craze! I figured by 2020 we would have perfectly good CRT replacements.
Click to expand...

The 48CX finally takes the crown from the FW900 IMHO as it offers excellent BFI...... if we could get a 32" version we would really be set.
 
Flybye said:
I’ll admit.....

I threw the HP GDM away in the early 2010s as it stopped producing an image, and I never trougleshooted it. I had a perfectly running Sony E400 I donated in the late 2000s. I mean who figured we would be in the middle of a CRT craze! I figured by 2020 we would have perfectly good CRT replacements.
Click to expand...

Even if you don't get an OLED there are plenty of monitors with good strobing that get close enough. My Samsung CFG-73 and CHG70 get close enough. They have their quirks but I can tell you that as a person who still has a CRT monitor on hand, it's close enough. I'm actually considering the Viewsonic XG270.
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Even if you don't get an OLED there are plenty of monitors with good strobing that get close enough. My Samsung CFG-73 and CHG70 get close enough. They have their quirks but I can tell you that as a person who still has a CRT monitor on hand, it's close enough. I'm actually considering the Viewsonic XG270.
Click to expand...

I've tried most of the ULMB strobing LCDs and my favorite was the PG27VQ with its incredible 400nits while strobbed combined with good colors for a TN...however, as good as that monitor was the 48CX BFI is flawlessly clean because there is zero ghosting or crosstalk. I have a fw900 in my closet and think the 48cx BFI actually surpasses it.
 
Well, best I can tell, my FW900, actually FW9011, is still here and 100 percent functional. It's had a relatively easy life.

Still, it was built almost 17 years ago. And I guess could die at any moment.

The 48 CX gives some hope.
 
Personally I'd wouldn't have too much hope with Oled before a model has been tested and proven to resist to burn-in with an extended computer use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3dfan
like this
SH1 said:
That CRT has been out in the wild for the better part of 20 years? (December 2000 manufacture date. First month of manufacture? Curious, has anyone seen one from November 2000 or before? I think December that year is around the time the FW900 was announced.)
Click to expand...
I just checked, I have one manufactured in August 2000.
 
Enhanced Interrogator said:
But it only does BFI at 60hz, 100hz, or 120hz. Nothing between 60 and 100hz, which is where I run my CRT most of the time.
Click to expand...

also it has lower brightness, even lower than crts (60 nits -cd/m2 when crts are arround 115) and higher input lag at least at 60hz in bfi mode according to this 48cx owner




jbltecnicspro said:
I'm actually considering the Viewsonic XG270.
Click to expand...

that monitor took my attention when i saw it being announced in the blur busters site, in their New “Blur Busters Approved” Monitor Certification Program", specially being compared by them to fw900 and even considered "superior" to crt. but after doing a deeper research about its cons and pros, i was dissapointed and concluded those comparisons were just biased xg270 marketing strategies using fw900 popularity rather than real technical facts because:

-xg270 at its crt quality bfi mode (purexp+ "ultra" mode) as a low brightness levels of 68cd/m², thats considerable even lower than crt, that are around 115 cd/m2, (so dim that even site owner uses it when his room is has dark as a cave) it has other brighter modes but also those modes decrease motion clarity quality forcing the user to tradeoff between motion quality vs brigtness, so if user want crt quality motion clarity, will have to stick to the dimmest "ultra" mode (by the way, a measure that was took and made public by a normal forum member, never by site owner, nor by the "rtings" site on their xg270 review which seems to have close relationships with blur busters, even when they have the equipment to do so, and also there is no mention about those measure levels in the monitor's manual which makes me wonder: if that monitor is that great and even "superior to crt", why they did not made that importan info public?)

-typical nasty ips glow, light bleed , poor blacks. (i just imagine such a poor experience, when using its crt clarity quality pure xp ultra mode in a cave room, on an already dim screen, along with those nasty flaws which surely would be attenuated due to room and image darkness, making the situation even worse)

-it needs a 119hz custom vertical refresh to reduce crosstalk, hence requieres a constant 119 fps to achieve that (and you know, crts are crosstalk free at any refresh, resolutions)

-does not support 60hz bfi, minimum 75hz (this is a critical aspect i would espect from a monitor with bfi in my opinion, specially when being marketing compared to crts)


after all this i hardly see this monitor even a match to the crt, just my opinion.
 
3dfan said:
also it has lower brightness, even lower than crts (60 nits -cd/m2 when crts are arround 115) and higher input lag at least at 60hz in bfi mode according to this 48cx owner
Click to expand...

All good points. But if I may and I don’t mean to sound rude, these points only matter to those with functioning CRT’s.

So yeah, keep using your CRT and enjoy it. Wish I still had mine. I had to get rid of mine due to our living situation change. In hindsight I could have kept them. Oh well. Life’s a bitch.

Your 115 nits are slightly exaggerated. Yes, FW-900 maxes out at that when calibrated but only at 100% contrast and at 9300k. Take it down to 6500k and it’s max (assuming calibrated) should be 105 nits. Still better than the XG and CX but it closes the gap somewhat.

Also, consider that the CX is a 48 inch screen and can do pure black. I could easily see setting this up in a cave ala my projector and using it that way. 60 nits is plenty then. But yeah, you make good points.

It’s funny that just a few years ago LCD guys used to hate on CRT for being so dim but as soon as you enable motion clarity enhancements, CRT is actually superior. Hehe
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: XoR_
like this
It's not even sure it would work. There's a drastic difference regarding electronics between the G500/FW900 generation and the G520 generation.

I suppose those refresh rates are also set according to the capabilities of the tube and its inductances. That's probably not a good idea to try such trick on a monitor you care about.
 
jbltecnicspro, my intention with what i wrote about the xg270, after seeing your interest on it, (that was mine as well) is to warn you about its cons that are not being told or are being underestimated by manufacturers or affiliated sites because unfortunately it has become very hard to find trustable unbiased honest review sources about modern monitor capabilites on their motion clarity handling without hiding their tradeoffs, flaws, etc, in order to secure their profits.

even blur busters, a site i used to trust about motion clarity evolution in modern monitors from a science perspective, sadly became another one of the bunch which owner seems to change his north, making users to believe a monitor like xg270 (which he makes profit from its sales) produce a motion experience "superior to fw900" (which as i already said with source links, its crt motion quality mode has considerable dimmer image than crts, with light bleed, light glow flaws, requiring considerable higher refresh and constant fps than crts to reduce crosstalk and produce crt motion clarity, not even compatible with 60hz bfi....... flaws the "inferior" fw900 or any other crt monitors don't have......wow! i just cannot imagine such amazing "superior experience" those mixed flaws would bring!! :( ), and unfortunately many interested users cannot have access to a crt monitor or in good condition to validate by themselves those claims (i have seen users in those forums asking innocent question like if crts have crosstalk, no offense to them, but that tells there are users than have not seen a crt in a long time, so its easier to cheat those users with those claims)

sadly normal site forum members are more trustable and thanks to them, one can know a critical aspect such the mentioned low brigntess measured levels in bfi crt quality mode of the xg270, which is a critical aspect in my opinion, becase requiering a cave room to enjoy crt clarity quality to see whats on screen is just part of the problem, also a dim screen makes colors and image look so lifeless, vividlees, that obfuscates the benefints of the motion clarity improvement. (it reminds me when i was on a store that sold gaming monitors, i asked the seller to enable the monitor blur reduction mode bfi i was interested in, but it was so dim that even the seller said: "definitely much better with that mode disabled"

i learned the leason: not to blindly trust those sites in which owner advertises products and earns comission from product manufacturers by its sales, even if it is a famous tech related acknowledged owner. (i dont say its a bad thing that they earn profit from manufacturers, but what angers me is that the try to fool users and hide important flaw info about monitor to maximize their sales chance.)
definitely normal user testimonials are more trustable, for example i find you claims about the Samsung CFG-73 and CHG70 pros and cons being close to crt motion handling without so many flaws, tradeoffs, etc more believable, i reasearched and indeed those seem to have high brigntness levels on their bfi crt quality mode (sad the lack of lower refreshes like 60hz bfi which for me is important, unfortunately a situacion with all modern monitors).

i didnt know you dont have any crts anymore, since you post in this thread regulary, i thought you had, no wonder why you remember them as dim compared to modern monitors without counting bfi mode. i personaly dont consider i was exaggerating my self, to me eyes crts have good enought brightness (luminance).
i have compared my crt monitors peak luminace to a more modern monitor not bfi compatible and when i indeed note the modern one being brighter, is not something dramatic to consider the crts "dim" against the modern, i dont even need a cave room to see the image, even on a moderated natural light enviroment room i can enjoy and apreciate its visual quality and feel the vividness of crts image. (by the way i agree with you, you get best luminance levels on crt by either hardware calibrating the monitor with higher color temp values or by using osd advanced - expert rgb settings, i dont see it as a problem and that is what i do with my crt monitors to get their best luminace levels)

now i don't mean to suggest you to buy or not to buy the xg270, again, i just want to help as i would expect to be aware of a monitor cons since those are not being clearly mentioned or even mentioned at all to the final user by the manufaturer or sites affiliates, which is an info i would espect while buying a product, i see it as respect and transparency the consumer deserves. so you can make your own conclusion. up to you and your likes or needs about the xg270 (by the way it sounds to me going from your CFG-73 or CHG70 to the xg270, would rather be likely a downgrade, just my opinion).
 
Last edited:
3dfan , I appreciate your explanation. I need to correct a couple of things:

1. I do have CRT monitors still. Some PVM's and a run-of-the-mill Viewsonic PC monitor (using right now to type on actually :) ). I should have mentioned that. I don't have my GDM's anymore, which was more of what I was getting at. It sucks. Oh well

2. I still believe your 115 number is exaggerated by virtue of calibrating my FW-900 using WinDAS several times (and my other GDM monitors) and knowing what the actual numbers were. You're only getting 115 if you're using 9300K (and are calibrated) OR your monitor needs to be calibrated. You shouldn't be pumping it that high. My CRT's always ran at around 85-90 nits.

That being said I appreciate your input and I agree with your assessment that we shouldn't blindly follow reviews. For what it's worth, when Mark talks about superior motion experience I think he's *only* talking motion clarity. On this Viewsonic CRT, I see ghosting on the UFO test. My Samsung LCD's have a little more ghosting which is actually cross-talk (but only on the left of the UFO's, which looks very close to the CRT's ghosting). So when I read that the Viewsonic LCD has pretty much no crosstalk up to 120hz, I believe it. I think that there's a firmware update in the works to boost the brightness in PureXP mode. All I can tell you is - I hope that they allow backlight brightness adjustment. So far no one has been able to answer that question about it.

I would love to have another GDM in my arsesnal but it probably won't happen. Unkle Vito's prices have gone up, and I don't have the time to go recycle-shopping these days. If any of you guys have any GDM monitors (21-inch or bigger - I would LOVE to have a F500R for example) that you would be willing to part with, I would love to talk.

EDIT: I'm around because I do work on these monitors to a degree. Right now I'm in the process of recapping a PVM's power supply. I just got done realigning the yoke of another PVM (no fancy WinDAS dynamic convergence adjustments for this guy! All in the yoke and yoke tabs! :D ). I still have my Quantum Data pattern generator and have since picked up a Sencore VP-301 for the PVM's. I also have recently acquired a Hakko desoldering gun (a VERY nice and VERY expensive tool) and hope to get an oscilloscope soon and upgrade my DTP-94 for an i1 display pro. So yes, I'm still very involved and am always here to help. I have spent lots of hours using WinDAS and calibrating the monitors. I even did my FW900 over from scratch (except the landing adjustment) with the purpose of starting that WinDAS guide that's floating around - the one with geometry and dynamic convergence - not spacediver 's white point balance guide.

Unfortunately, I still have an old GTX-750ti. So I can't contribute much to the conversation about the external DAC's used on modern graphics cards. But yeah - I'm very much into this hobby still. Just in a different way now.
 
Last edited:
Hey, should I jump on getting a Dell UltraScan P990?
I currently am using a Hitachi SuperScan Elite 751- it's my first and only crt.
P990 Specs: https://www.cnet.com/products/dell-ultrascan-p990-crt-monitor-19/
751 Specs: https://www.cnet.com/products/hitachi-superscan-elite-751-crt-monitor-19/
Would any of you consider the P990 an upgrade in some way? The scan rate is comparable, and its dot pitch is worse. So, I guess what is appealing on paper is the flat screen vs. the 751's curve.
I'm just curious if there's something obscure you guys might know, like if CNET was inconsistent in listing the correct dot pitch.
 
Enhanced Interrogator said:
Who is asking 90 bucks? Just some boomer that's had it in a closet for 20 years? You should be able to talk him down to $20 or $10.
Click to expand...
https://akroncanton.craigslist.org/sys/d/wadsworth-dell-trinitron-p990-crt/7166184241.html
I'm skeptical of him saying the P990 is great for photo editing, considering it only has a dot pitch of .25mm. At 18 inches diagonal, that dot pitch isn't in sync with the P990's 1600x1200p max resolution. I checked with https://www.pxcalc.com/ - you need at least .22mm dot pitch for 1600x1200 to be sharp at 18 inches. Considering my Hitachi 751 has .22mm dot pitch and an 18 inch viewable screen area, this P990 listing looks less and less appealing from any standpoint. I only would consider it for the flat screen and/or as a backup crt. Really, besides the Hitachi, I haven't come across anything easily available to me as good as the P990 for less than $200. Maybe even $300.

There's a Samsung SyncMaster 900NF for $60. I'd call it a pretty substantial upgrade with its having 17kHz better horizontal refresh and a flat screen. But, it's a state away and only available for local pickup.
 
Also, I'm curious about what the difference between the Hitachi SuperScan Elite 751, 752, and 753 is at a hardware level.
Their specs are listed here: https://archive.is/HhdDr
What interests me is how the 752 and 753 seem to be just the 751 with a higher horizontal scan rate. Are any of you aware of what kind of components are specifically responsible for the scan rate of a crt? While I'd assume it's extremely unlikely the answer will offer something I could salvage an upgrade out of, I am generally interested in what allows the component(s) to offer a superior scan rate.
 
Was curious about the P990. The pitch of 0.25...thought it might actually be an average of a variable pitch across the screen. However, not seeing that here.

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/36473/Dell-Ultrascan-P990.html?page=28#manual

You'd be running it at a lower resolution than 1600 by 1200, but that's neither here nor there I think as you know that going in. And the 15 years in storage is nice, but if that screen is from the 1990's it could still have been used for years before that. Only spend what you're willing to lose.

However, is it really flat?

Not seeing FD Trinitron in the description and the images have looked a little dodgy. And chatter on the Web suggests it's the later P991 that was the flat one. For example, discussion here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.sys.pc-clone.dell/Zpy2EmkLY84.
 
jbltecnicspro, we definitelly will keep disagreeing in some things. by the way i always have used my crts for years at 100% contrast via osd with no issues, i thing those were made for that, otherwise manufaturers would not allow the user to reach those levels that easy. as a matter of fact have seen luminance wear from modern leds, we have a AOC LE24H037 led TV bought new in 2014, which is rated to had a peak luminance of 300 cd/m2, but now i note it being currently not as bright as my crts (fw900 and compaq 7550).
crts were really made to last!

i have seen the crt ghost you had as well but is insignificant in my opinon, in real life usage to my eyes is only barely noticeable in a black background when moving a bright object in front of it and it vanishes fast. (i wish today monitor flaws were just as insignificant and limited as that)
crosstalk is actualy different, is when the image is double while in motion, even when constant framerate matches refresh rate.

the firmware you were referring for the xg270 was already released time ago, and indeed ads more brightness level modes to the monitor pure xp bfi mode (Light, Normal, Extreme, Ultra,) but as mentioned, those brighter modes also decrease motion clarity quality forcing the user to tradeoff between more brighness vs motion quality.


good luck with your pvm's , havent seen one in my life, but after reading a bit more about those, seems are very good for retro games and consoles specialy from a resolution picture quality perspective.


its always glad to read when you come here sharing your tech experiences and comparision with modern monitors you have tested and compare to crt, feel welcomed to continue doing so if you want. by far i trust you more than blur buster´s owner.
 
3dfan said:
jbltecnicspro, we definitelly will keep disagreeing in some things. by the way i always have used my crts for years at 100% contrast via osd with no issues, i thing those were made for that, otherwise manufaturers would not allow the user to reach those levels that easy. as a matter of fact have seen luminance wear from modern leds, we have a AOC LE24H037 led TV bought new in 2014, which is rated to had a peak luminance of 300 cd/m2, but now i note it being currently not as bright as my crts (fw900 and compaq 7550).
crts were really made to last!

i have seen the crt ghost you had as well but is insignificant in my opinon, in real life usage to my eyes is only barely noticeable in a black background when moving a bright object in front of it and it vanishes fast. (i wish today monitor flaws were just as insignificant and limited as that)
crosstalk is actualy different, is when the image is double while in motion, even when constant framerate matches refresh rate.

the firmware you were referring for the xg270 was already released time ago, and indeed ads more brightness level modes to the monitor pure xp bfi mode (Light, Normal, Extreme, Ultra,) but as mentioned, those brighter modes also decrease motion clarity quality forcing the user to tradeoff between more brighness vs motion quality.


good luck with your pvm's , havent seen one in my life, but after reading a bit more about those, seems are very good for retro games and consoles specialy from a resolution picture quality perspective.


its always glad to read when you come here sharing your tech experiences and comparision with modern monitors you have tested and compare to crt, feel welcomed to continue doing so if you want. by far i trust you more than blur buster´s owner.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words. I wasn't trying to argue. By all means if you have a nice GDM monitor definitely use it. :) I haven't decided if I'm going to get there and start hunting another GDM down yet. My son is old enough to have an appreciation for this kind of thing so it's been pretty fun working on these monitors and showing him this and that. Right now I'm paging through the service manual of a 9-inch PVM and getting all of the capacitor values. Strangely enough Sony doesn't have physical dimensions of capacitors (I guess it makes sense) so I'm taking measurements to make sure I get the right size. :D

One day we'll get to a point where we have good motion clarity on a non-CRT display for PC's that doesn't require loss in luminance output.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3dfan
like this
jbltecnicspro said:
3dfan , I appreciate your explanation. I need to correct a couple of things:

1. I do have CRT monitors still. Some PVM's and a run-of-the-mill Viewsonic PC monitor (using right now to type on actually :) ). I should have mentioned that. I don't have my GDM's anymore, which was more of what I was getting at. It sucks. Oh well

2. I still believe your 115 number is exaggerated by virtue of calibrating my FW-900 using WinDAS several times (and my other GDM monitors) and knowing what the actual numbers were. You're only getting 115 if you're using 9300K (and are calibrated) OR your monitor needs to be calibrated. You shouldn't be pumping it that high. My CRT's always ran at around 85-90 nits.

That being said I appreciate your input and I agree with your assessment that we shouldn't blindly follow reviews. For what it's worth, when Mark talks about superior motion experience I think he's *only* talking motion clarity. On this Viewsonic CRT, I see ghosting on the UFO test. My Samsung LCD's have a little more ghosting which is actually cross-talk (but only on the left of the UFO's, which looks very close to the CRT's ghosting). So when I read that the Viewsonic LCD has pretty much no crosstalk up to 120hz, I believe it. I think that there's a firmware update in the works to boost the brightness in PureXP mode. All I can tell you is - I hope that they allow backlight brightness adjustment. So far no one has been able to answer that question about it.

I would love to have another GDM in my arsesnal but it probably won't happen. Unkle Vito's prices have gone up, and I don't have the time to go recycle-shopping these days. If any of you guys have any GDM monitors (21-inch or bigger - I would LOVE to have a F500R for example) that you would be willing to part with, I would love to talk.

EDIT: I'm around because I do work on these monitors to a degree. Right now I'm in the process of recapping a PVM's power supply. I just got done realigning the yoke of another PVM (no fancy WinDAS dynamic convergence adjustments for this guy! All in the yoke and yoke tabs! :D ). I still have my Quantum Data pattern generator and have since picked up a Sencore VP-301 for the PVM's. I also have recently acquired a Hakko desoldering gun (a VERY nice and VERY expensive tool) and hope to get an oscilloscope soon and upgrade my DTP-94 for an i1 display pro. So yes, I'm still very involved and am always here to help. I have spent lots of hours using WinDAS and calibrating the monitors. I even did my FW900 over from scratch (except the landing adjustment) with the purpose of starting that WinDAS guide that's floating around - the one with geometry and dynamic convergence - not spacediver 's white point balance guide.

Unfortunately, I still have an old GTX-750ti. So I can't contribute much to the conversation about the external DAC's used on modern graphics cards. But yeah - I'm very much into this hobby still. Just in a different way now.
Click to expand...


We have one in stock.... PM for details...

Sincerely,

Unkle Vito!
 
I want to know which of Sony BVM D24 and Sony GDM-FW900 display is better?
Has anyone compared the differences between them?

LRG_DSC04662.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top