or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays › The Unofficial Sony GDM-FW900 thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Unofficial Sony GDM-FW900 thread - Page 6

post #151 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrslig100 View Post

Out of curiosity, whats the highest resolution anyones ever got one of these beasts too?
Ive got my w900 to 2560x1600 on VGA @59Hz
What can the fw900 go to?

The highest resolution I've used is 2560x1600@75Hz and it works great - very sharp! However, I generally always keep it at 1920x1200@96Hz since I like to play games at higher framerates and it scales well with film content.

EDIT: Using NVIDIA custom resolutions on GTX 470, GTX 660M, and GTX 670.
Edited by nathanddrews - 1/20/14 at 6:12am
post #152 of 167
Why do people like high frame rates so much.
Loved the old 24fps at the pictures. nothing these digital projectors could ever replicate!
Displays Above 6Hz have always seem like a waste of time to me.
I know a bloke with a monitor that goes up to 200fps and I see no difference.
Whats the fuss? I feel like im missing out!
post #153 of 167
In 3D games, high framerates mean there is a higher game tick to the 3D world that is being simulated. This is an important factor especially to consider if you are playing against other people. In this instance, it means that the person with a faster 3D game world simulation literally has a faster potential response to any attack against him, be it evasion or counterattack. It also makes that particular opponent faster. If you are only getting updates on the world status 24 times per second, you are only able to adjust your position, your aim, etc. in the world at that rate. Someone updating at 60 or faster will clean your clock easily. This is why high framerates are always desirable to a gamer. It simply makes your games faster, smoother, easier to play and win, and a lower framerate, usually more due to slower game hardware, means you're handicapped.

This is entirely a different matter from "120Hz television," or even "240Hz television." Those are HDTVs which do not accept inputs at those rates; rather, they update their screens at this rate. This creates different problems for television, movies and such, because they are historically made to update at 60Hz. Because 120 and 240 are multiples of 60, processors can be placed in the HDTV to take two frames (or four, in the case of "240Hz television") and create an additional frame by interpolating video information from each frame, like creating a new image by mixing and matching interlocking puzzle pieces of two completely different images. This creates an effect of smoother motion but it harms the detail of the high definition image because it is literally only half of two (or four) separate frames, mashed together. This interpolation can be turned off, but by doing this you are left with a broadcast that is no different visually from a "normal" 60Hz television. The other method that is popularly used is one where both 120 and 240 are multiples of 24, the framerate standard for film. By holding 24 frames per second long enough to display the full images at 120Hz or 240Hz, you eliminate an age-old problem of 3:2 pulldown, the "judder" effect that you see when film is transferred to television/dvd. Similar effects have been achieved in the past with plasma screens and refresh rates of 48, 72, 96, etc., so again, the need for these rates in a television is questionable, and still has nothing to do with nathanandrews' preference for playing games at high sync rates.
post #154 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrslig100 View Post

Why do people like high frame rates so much.
Loved the old 24fps at the pictures. nothing these digital projectors could ever replicate!
Displays Above 6Hz have always seem like a waste of time to me.
I know a bloke with a monitor that goes up to 200fps and I see no difference.
Whats the fuss? I feel like im missing out!

For starters, if you can't tell the difference between 24Hz and 60Hz or 60Hz and 120Hz, then you clearly have no reason to buy anything capable of such refresh rates. To the point, computer games can be played (usually) at any frame rate that your hardware will allow (graphics power and display). Objectively, a faster frame rate will allow for faster reaction time and better control, which is a big advantage in competitive play. All action appears smoother which, subjectively, provides a more enjoyable experience.

What is good for some is not good for others. To that end, I prefer 24fps for movies, but it is terrible for games. 60fps isn't bad for games, but after being used to significantly higher rates it feels like a slideshow.
post #155 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrslig100 View Post

I know a bloke with a monitor that goes up to 200fps and I see no difference.

no such display will put out 200 FPS All you would be doing is throwing those frames out the window because anything over its refresh rate isnt being displayed properly and no such thing as 200hz monitor

All we have is up to 144hz
Edited by demo23019 - 1/20/14 at 9:18pm
post #156 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by demo23019 View Post

no such display will put out 200 FPS All you would be doing is throwing those frames out the window because anything over its refresh rate isnt being displayed properly and no such thing as 200hz monitor

All we have is up to 144hz

While can't verify the former statement, I can tell you for a fact that I had a CRT that could do 180hz. Keep in mind that this was at 640x480 or 800x600, but in the days of Q3 and UT, that was sufficient to kick some ass. wink.gif I believe it was either a Viewsonic or Iiyama, which are the only other brands I owned before my Sony. When dealing with any display interface (VGA, DP, DVI, HDMI) there's always a tradeoff that you make between refresh rate and resolution. Higher resolution = lower refresh, higher refresh = lower resolution. However, the FW900 is a very capable display in this regard, in addition to its other spectacular performance traits.

EDIT: A quick Google search confirms my recollection regarding max refresh rates of some monitors:

LG Flatron 915 FT plus 200hz
iiyama Pro vision master 514 200hz
iiyama Pro vision master 454 200hz
iiyama HM204D DT 200hz
Dell P1130 170hz
Dell P991 170hz
Sony GDM-F520 170hz
Sony GDM-C520 170hz
Sony GDM-E530 170hz
Sony CPD-G520 170hz
Viewsonic P90F 170hz
Ibm P275 170hz
Samsung SyncMaster 9xxnf 160hz
Philips Brilliance 202P4 160hz
NEC Multisync FE992 160hz
mitsubishi diamond pro 2070sb 160hz
post #157 of 167
Quote:
no such display will put out 200 FPS
Nope!
post #158 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

While can't verify the former statement, I can tell you for a fact that I had a CRT that could do 180hz. Keep in mind that this was at 640x480 or 800x600, but in the days of Q3 and UT, that was sufficient to kick some ass. wink.gif I believe it was either a Viewsonic or Iiyama, which are the only other brands I owned before my Sony. When dealing with any display interface (VGA, DP, DVI, HDMI) there's always a tradeoff that you make between refresh rate and resolution. Higher resolution = lower refresh, higher refresh = lower resolution. However, the FW900 is a very capable display in this regard, in addition to its other spectacular performance traits.

EDIT: A quick Google search confirms my recollection regarding max refresh rates of some monitors:

LG Flatron 915 FT plus 200hz
iiyama Pro vision master 514 200hz
iiyama Pro vision master 454 200hz
iiyama HM204D DT 200hz
Dell P1130 170hz
Dell P991 170hz
Sony GDM-F520 170hz
Sony GDM-C520 170hz
Sony GDM-E530 170hz
Sony CPD-G520 170hz
Viewsonic P90F 170hz
Ibm P275 170hz
Samsung SyncMaster 9xxnf 160hz
Philips Brilliance 202P4 160hz
NEC Multisync FE992 160hz
mitsubishi diamond pro 2070sb 160hz
I stand corrected smile.gif
post #159 of 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by demo23019 View Post

no such display will put out 200 FPS All you would be doing is throwing those frames out the window because anything over its refresh rate isnt being displayed properly and no such thing as 200hz monitor

All we have is up to 144hz

My FE2111SB manual says that I can get 160Hz.
post #160 of 167
I DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE REFRESH RATE CONTEST THREAD!!!
MAY THE BLOODBATH BEGIN!
post #161 of 167
And tried 160 hz @ 800x600 on a Mitsubishi 2070SB monitor and it works.
post #162 of 167

posted my question in its own topic, please ignore or delete this post


Edited by superchad - 3/26/14 at 5:02pm
post #163 of 167

Hey guys, I've been looking to buy a GDM-FW900 for gaming. I love the 16:10 aspect ratio, and I'd like to get some decent colors and be able to use different resolutions. Today, I have a 1920*1200 LCD monitor.

 

I'm wondering: Is there anything I should know before getting my hands on one? How big are issues like eye strain? I haven't used CRT monitors for a long time. Thanks!

post #164 of 167
Still the best monitor around, imo.
post #165 of 167

Kind of related question. I haven't found an FW900 near me, or even in my country (I live in Sweden). Neither have I found an FW900 that ships to Sweden. I have come across some other monitors though:

 

ViewSonic Graphic G810 21"

Sony Artisan GDM-C520K 21" FD Color Reference Monitor

NEC P1250 Plus CRT 21"

Dell Trinitron 21" (This is the only one available in Sweden.)

 

What are the difference between these and the FW900?


Edited by jocap - 4/8/14 at 1:30am
post #166 of 167
Viewsonic Graphic G810 21": http://www.cnet.com/products/viewsonic-g810/
Sony Artisan GDM-C520K 21": http://www.cnet.com/products/sony-artisan-color-reference-system-gdm-c520k-crt-monitor-21/specs/
NEC P1250 Plus CRT 21" http://www.cnet.com/products/nec-multisync-p1250-plus-crt-monitor-21-series/specs/
Dell Trinitron 21" . . . could be several different models.

The FW900 has a 16.10 ratio glass face. The other monitors you listed, including the Dell, have a 4.3 glass face. You can still use different ratios of resolutions with all of them, you just might have to live with blank space or with stretching the image if you do so, just know that only the FW900 from your list has a widescreen ratio. The Artisan and the FW900 use a Trinitron screen. This means the face of the glass is completely flat, and stabilizer wires hold the trinitron wires in place. When using various resolutions, you might notice the stabilizer wires more or less, they might also become more or less visible when viewing images or video of a certain brightness. Viewsonic makes excellent monitors, many of which are Trinitrons, but the model you listed is not a Trinitron, and from the brief reading I've done, seems to be one of their cheaper (crappier) models made.

Some very good CRT monitors that I know personally, from my own use, are the LaCie Electron 22 Blue IV, which is identical in every way but the outer molding to the Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070SB (LaCie is a strange sort of Navy Blue colour, the Mitsubishi is black). Each of these are Trinitron-alikes and two stabilizer wires fit across the screen horizontally. At the top of my personal list of computer monitors is the Viewsonic p225fb, the p225f is identical except for its white casing instead of the p225fb's black. My Viewsonic is particularly sharp given its age, phosphors are still very bright and colourful as well. Possibly this is due to my having shelved it for a number of years before coming back to it, but this touches on the biggest caution point about acquiring a CRT in the modern age: a lot of CRTs were created somewhat close to equal, but they have not all aged the same. The more use a CRT has seen, the more likely it is to be worn. You can always just order something and see how it goes, but there is really no substitute for viewing this kind of vintage hardware before buying because you have no way of telling what the tube has been subjected to or how it was used before it fell into your hands. If you can at all take a look at the thing working, do so before buying, so you're at least aware of its condition and how it affects the image.
post #167 of 167
I can sign under this. Very good advice and a list of monitors suggested by LiquidSnake.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays › The Unofficial Sony GDM-FW900 thread