Which 16:9 size is the GDM-FW900 closest to in terms of screen height? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 Old 09-13-2012, 11:07 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
jameslieb1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Not including bezels, just the screen itself. Thanks.
jameslieb1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 Old 09-13-2012, 08:12 PM
Member
 
salty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
As you probably know, the Fw900 has a diagonal viewable area of 22.5" instead of 24 because of the way CRT's are measured.

That being said, I looked and found that a 24" 16:9 lcd has a vertical viewing area of about 11.7" and the Fw900 has 12.1"

I'd guess that's the closest match. 27" is way taller.
salty is offline  
post #3 of 13 Old 09-14-2012, 03:45 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
jameslieb1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by salty View Post

As you probably know, the Fw900 has a diagonal viewable area of 22.5" instead of 24 because of the way CRT's are measured.
That being said, I looked and found that a 24" 16:9 lcd has a vertical viewing area of about 11.7" and the Fw900 has 12.1"
I'd guess that's the closest match. 27" is way taller.

Tyvm for the reply salty. actually thats exactly what i wanted to hear, as i have a 16:9 24 lcd and was worried the fw900 would be too small for me. thankfully that seems not to be the case. smile.gif
jameslieb1 is offline  
post #4 of 13 Old 09-14-2012, 03:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
Super Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Here is a good site for comparing various 16.9 sizes to various 4.3 sizes.
http://www.displaywars.com/

I just replaced my old 4x3 17 inch PC CRT that is 16.1 inches viewable with a 16x9 21.5 viewable LED backlit LCD PC monitor.

That site will give you the width and height and even produce a graphic showing you the size difference.

Check it out at http://www.displaywars.com/

Here is the difference between my old and new monitors biggrin.gif
http://www.displaywars.com/16,1-inch-4x3-vs-21,5-inch-16x9
Super Eye is offline  
post #5 of 13 Old 09-14-2012, 07:02 PM
Member
 
salty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Definitely a handy tool to have there! Bookmarking that site now...
salty is offline  
post #6 of 13 Old 09-15-2012, 03:08 PM
Senior Member
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 304
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Sony FW-900 is not a 16:9 ratio screen. It is in fact 16:10. If you use this screen with your Xbox 360 or any game made with 16:9 ratio, then you must adjust the screen in order to make borders on the top and bottom of the image in order to maintain proper ratio. If you do not do this, the image you see will be stretched when used with games at this ratio.
LiquidSnake is offline  
post #7 of 13 Old 09-15-2012, 06:47 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
jameslieb1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post

Sony FW-900 is not a 16:9 ratio screen. It is in fact 16:10. If you use this screen with your Xbox 360 or any game made with 16:9 ratio, then you must adjust the screen in order to make borders on the top and bottom of the image in order to maintain proper ratio. If you do not do this, the image you see will be stretched when used with games at this ratio.

Actually the Xbox 360 can output images at 1680x1050, which is a 16:10 resolution.
jameslieb1 is offline  
post #8 of 13 Old 09-15-2012, 07:04 PM
Member
 
P719C1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Western Hemisphere
Posts: 175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post

Sony FW-900 is not a 16:9 ratio screen. It is in fact 16:10.

Well, technically, it's not exactly 16:10 either (482.1 x 308.2 mm ~ 64%), but close enough for government work as they say.
P719C1 is offline  
post #9 of 13 Old 09-15-2012, 10:37 PM
Member
 
salty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Now that you mention it, I think that is correct that the 360 will letterbox the image on a 16:10 display to a 16:9 format, resulting in a smaller vertical image than the actual screen height. I had forgotten about that, but that would only be an issue with Xbox-not PC. You could stretch it to fit perhaps, but I wouldn't do that. Just looks wonky.
salty is offline  
post #10 of 13 Old 09-16-2012, 10:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mik James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Well, you'll want to go over vga to mitigate input lag. Here are the supported resolutions: http://hardware.teamxbox.com/reviews/xbox-360/40/Xbox-360-VGA-HD-AV-Cable/p1/
It looks like it has no problem supporting a 16:10 resolution so maybe it will show a full 16:10 image. Something tells me current 360 games only jive with two image formats though 4:3 and 16:9, if the image is to small you'll likely be able to cut the sides of the 16:9 image slightly to fill the 16:10 screen as you likely want to feed it the maximum vga res anyways which is in fact 16:9.

if you do go for a fw900 I hope it does everything you want it to without any of the issues you've had with the xbr 960, keep in mind Hp, Dell and Sun all sell rebranded versions of the Sony fw900 so if you can find them it might save you some coin over the Sony smile.gif

EDIT: I somehow forgot that you want to completely mitigate scaling to solve your problem, meaning the most suitable resolution for you over vga has to have a 720 pixel vertical resolution.
There are a couple of games you just won't be able to do anything for because they run at 640p or 600p but that is the game designers fault, for the majority you may get even less lag than you had on your 480i or p screen because there should be no scaling at all.
Mik James is offline  
post #11 of 13 Old 09-17-2012, 06:11 PM
Member
 
salty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
720p looked great on my FW900 and W900 using my 360, but the inability of the Xbox to output anything higher than 60hz made my eyes ache. Some people don't mind that too much, but I couldn't hack it. Not trying to discourage you from getting one, just a thought.
salty is offline  
post #12 of 13 Old 09-19-2012, 02:05 PM
Senior Member
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 304
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameslieb1 View Post

Actually the Xbox 360 can output images at 1680x1050, which is a 16:10 resolution.

Actually, if you use 1680x1050, which is a 16:10 resolution, with your XBox 360, you will get borders at the top and bottom of the screen when playing your games. The rest of the interface will fill the screen when you are outside of your game, but it is impossible to play your games at that ratio in that resolution because the 360 will always and under every circumstance output borders with them. As I said, you can get around this with the FW-900 by stretching the vertical axe, but if you do this, you are stretching the image. You can also lose the right and left side, but that's a piss poor compromise.

There are no XBox 360 games which are designed with a 16:10 framebuffer. Similarly, although in reverse, if you happen to use any 4:3 resolution with the XBox 360, you will encounter many games which force the video into a letterboxed format--even when running at 640x480 or 480i or 480p.
LiquidSnake is offline  
post #13 of 13 Old 09-19-2012, 06:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Mik James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 37
There's also the fact that you would be scaling 720p up to a higher res via the 360's scaler a topic we have gone over for about 3 threads now wink.gif
The 360 doesn't support 1680x1050 over VGA as far as I and the people who wrote the article I linked know and anything other than VGA would introduce input lag.
If your not planning to run 1280x720 to the fw900 over VGA you might as well keep the xbr 960.
Mik James is offline  
Reply Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off