gaming is better at 1280 x 1024 on a crt , you cannot prove me

>>390029107
There are 1600 x 1200 crts.

>old things are better

Go away

I bet you still drink alcohol instead of plugging it up your ass you fucking grandpa.

File: 2341.jpg (86KB, 602x561px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 602x561px

>>390029219
kek he avoid the fact that crt provides a better gaming experience

>>390029219
>higher refresh rates
>no screen tearing
They are in this case, actually

>>390029424
>better gaming experience
How? We already have monitors that output 4K resolutions at refresh rates as high as 120Hz for a superior picture.

Is it the smaller aspect ratio? Is it that distorted, analog CRT effect on the image? Is it just because you're a nostalgic manchild that can't move on from the past?

only CRTs worth even thinking of using now are high end ones made near the end of their life cycle because of good resolutions and refresh rates

most CRTs are just too shitty except a handful of them

>>390029219
Wouldn't it make more sense to be looking at a square-ish screen over a rectangular one?Wide is unnatural.

>>390029107
Where can I buy one?

File: ar8.jpg (21KB, 222x194px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 222x194px

>>390029790
kek, you probably think modern music is better too

>>390029919
>wide is unnatural
You realize you have two eyes with horizontal spacing, right?

>>390029219
Well in this case they actually are. The only reason meme panel monitors took off is because of power usage for businesses.

File: 1504918636537.jpg (293KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1280x960px

>>390030009
the side of the road my man

>5:4
Fuck no.

A crt is leagues better than your average run of the mill 1080p tn panel. The only downsides are the weight and size.

>>390030119
16:9 is movie meme.

>>390029219
I heard that crt still have better colors.

Ask a guy who still uses 4:3 resolutions in fps games anything.

>>390030092
You didn't answer my question but I think a lot of music is shit.

>>390029107
>not 1024 x 768
>not 640 x 480
get on my level

>>390029163
there's also 2048x1356

>>390029864

Pretty much this, I mean they are actually great pieces of tech and OLED has been a long ass fucking time coming. Anything over 19" inches is pretty reasonable for the most part. The jump from a "standard" 17" or less to 19" is the big one.

I mean a illyama vision master pro 514 could do close to 160hz at 1280x1024 if memory serves me. Though I generally use my Dell screens at 1080P closer to 90 whenever I have the chance.

Apart from that a lot of the issues were either from cheap screens or nowadays aging screens. And it's taken a whole decade for LCDs to even catch up on several of the qualities these CRTs had.

I mean blur reduction still isn't even standard, something these screens inherently did. Want equal brightness across the entire screen? Which affects color? HA! buy a photo grade monitor. Want near zero latency+response time? Read reviews even gaming screens shit out there more often than not.

LCDs nowadays can beat most aspects on a individual basis, but if you want it all at the same time these screens can still hold their own. If they were still being made they would be very dominant for gaming.

File: 1504567111545.png (2MB, 1020x894px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1020x894px

>>390029107
Only for retrogames. Trust me. I love CRT too

File: john_carmack.jpg (26KB, 854x510px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 854x510px

>>390029107
Say that to my 4k 1ms OLED G-Sync monitor you bitch.

File: 21427549_978424978963010_4482855840951090834_o.jpg (120KB, 1480x950px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1480x950px

>>390030651

>>390030765
and HDR

>>390030327
>tfw most games don't even make good use of the additional viewing space 16:9 provides
Just another way movies ruined video games.

File: john_Carmack_working.jpg (41KB, 468x332px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 468x332px

>>390030765

Pretty sure he loved him some CRTS as well. That and OLED isn't even ripe yet. Hope you like your discolored monitor in three years, Y'know the one you paid 10,000 good boy points for.

Don't get me wrong I've been waiting for OLED tech since 2004, and boy howdy it's the damn successor to CRT tech for sure. I just think I'm going to still be waiting for it in 2020

>>390029219
When it comes to gaming this is objectively true. Everything new just seems to slowly ruin gaming.

>>390029107

Ask me how I know that you're an underage newfag who has never seen a CRT monitor in real life.

>>390031002
How do you know?

I play with the monitor turned off.

>>390029107
5:4 on a 4:3 display, are you retarded?

>>390030765
i dont know who that is and quite frankly i dont care

>>390031260
>The 1280×1024 resolution is not the standard 4:3 aspect ratio, but 5:4 (1.25:1 instead of 1.333:1). A standard 4:3 monitor using this resolution will have rectangular rather than square pixels, meaning that unless the software compensates for this the picture will be distorted, causing circles to appear elliptical.
You can use it on 4:3 screen freely.

>>390031260
You can freely adjust the geometry, I mean put some black bars on there and play 16:9 or 16:10 they DGAF.

>>390031215
>he owns a monitor
lmao richfags itt

File: 10460569.jpg (21KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x500px

Here you go, a 400$ CRT monitor.

>>390031625
i already have that plus a crt

>>390031291
Bait

>>390030119
yes, two eyes, not a couple dozen. you realize that theatric widescreen formats are designed for auditorium or couch seating in rows and not one person right? human FOV is about 210 x 150 degrees, or 7:5 which is a ratio of 1.4
>4:3 is a ratio of 1.33
>16:10 is a ratio of 1.6
>16:9 is a ratio of 1.78
of the three common standards, 4:3 was the closest (somewhat narrower), followed by 16:10 (significantly wider). 16:9 is full retard and gullible cinematic normies like you fell for the wider is better meme

the main reason why widescreen was adopted for desktop use was because grownups working on their PC in the office could comfortably put up two windows side-by-side (e.g. outlook and ms word). it wasn't intended for single-app uses like manchildren playing full screen video games. the original reason gaymers liked widescreen was because they could gain ingame fov advantage on their opponent, since most games emphasize horizontal movement more than vertical. widescreen was chosen by baddies who had to buy a handicap to win

>gosh I sure love playing the same games but on a grainy shitty screen instead of a clear one because it makes me feel older! us oldfag gamers right?
there's a reason nobody uses crt anymore

>>390031736
>the original reason gaymers liked widescreen was because they could gain ingame fov advantage on their opponent, since most games emphasize horizontal movement more than vertical
You're more focused to crosshair and minimap is closer to center of the screen with 4:3, a lot of counter-strike pro play with 4:3.

>>390029107
I have one behind me right now that I had to use while my LCD monitor was being fixed and you're literally wrong.
Prove me you're not using it just because it's all you have and trying to justify it.

>>390031746
Yeah they stopped making them due to the expense of manufacture, weight, shipping, etc. Mostly economic reasons. Then they just aged and not many people bother to calibrate or take care of the, They actually need occasional maintenance you know.

Pretty sure anyone that hasn't seen a crisp CRT only had cheap screens. Or never had one at all.They can be quite sharp. Also grainy was more an issue of inferior video formats or low resolution. YPbPr and RGB were where it was at back in the day.

>>390031903
A lot of CS "pros" do stretched 4:3 not even bothering with aspect ratio BECAUSE the screen is stretched. Not because of the actual aspect ratio. For "accuracy" because the FOV is smaller in that game and other bull.

Not really a good example man.

File: asdasdmr.jpg (901KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

901KB, 1920x1080px

>>390032248
No, I'm talking about true 4:3 with black bars.

>>390031968

I bet it was a little 17" inch screen with all sorts of issues wasn't it? Not OP and the 1280x1024 bit is pretty arguable. But I have a Dell P992 sitting right next to a Samsung CFG70 and I would switch back to it in a heartbeat if the next big GPU had VGA support. Cant get over 60hz with these piece of shit adapters.

>CRT this that bullshit
Fucking memes, it doesn't matter.
>4:3 ratio
Holy shit this is so much better it's fucking insane. I've started just letterboxing things on my regular ass 1920x1080 LCD and pulling the screen a bit closer to me because holy shit it just feels so much better actually having vertical peripheral vision. It's useless, sure, but it FEELS massively fucking liberating, and far more engaging.

File: IMG_6670.png (365KB, 590x393px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 590x393px

>>390032352

>>390032352

Oh so your talking about the pros that aren't tagalongs. Y'know the originals. Well your right in that case, but let it be known that enough do stretched 4:3 that it's a thing. I mean even the scrubs do it just to copy their favorites. I doubt they even know the reasons why.

Different guy then the other one FWIW.

>>390029737
>>390030159
>>390030997
What manner of samefaggotry is this

>>390032636
It's objective truth. 4:3 is undeniably the best for video games, widescreen is a meme and modern monitors are still inferior to any CRT.

File: order.jpg (194KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1920x1080px

>>390030327
16:9 is not wide enough

>>390032805
For cinematic experience.

>>390032352
>nothing changes at the top, and bottom
Why would you need to get a wide screen to see more on the sides?You could just get a bigger screen.

>>390032839
Hello, my neym is deveid ceyge and my geemes haev EMOOOTIOOONS!

Even kojima did that bullshit too, Games aren't movies guys. Sure cinema bits carry over just fine, but still.

press X to JASON!

>>390032715
On pre HD games sure, that I agree. But current games look like shit with it. I once played RDR on a CRT and the text is nigh unreadable and everything is blurry

>>390033056
Then that is the fault of shitty modern games for not supporting the superior hardware and aspect ratios.

File: Zu2AGmX.jpg (671KB, 2125x2663px) Image search: [Google]

671KB, 2125x2663px

>>390032961
I think you misunderstood just a tad. That would simply be the FOV slider. Anyway this image shows it at different resolutions instead of a composite.

If you got a bigger screen you would see the same image more or less. Just with different density depending on resolution. In 4:3 for every four pixels horizontal there will be three vertical at any resolution. For 16:9 for every sixteen pixels horizontal there will be nine vertically.

Anyway there will be a lot more horizontal at 16:9 at any 16:9 resolution, and if you wanted to see more at the sides you would change the FOV slider so in degrees you would have more peripheral. A bigger screen would have more pixels on the sides and the FOV would change a bit to accommodate them, so it would be widescreen again.

>>390033157
why support outdated hardware that's worse the than the new standard

>>390033308
>hor+
lol

>>390033157
Gramps, they're not gonna cater to you and old shit anymore. Why would they even support something that most of their target market doesn't even have anymore? Wouldn't it be better to advance technologically?

>>390033319
>that's worse the than the new standard
This is false. It's better than the new standard.

>>390029790
>more pixels is better
>hurr if I hold this book up to my face while reading I'll enjoy the story more!

Modern gamers sicken me.

>>390033359
Shit I messed up explaining something, Now I just need to figure out my dumbness.

>>390033479
>comparing books to tv's
crtfags are truly some of the worst people >>390033386
but it is it looks better it's not huge and clunky not that heavy thin looks nice

/vr/ stay in there please. You're just as autistic as those people who use scanlines on emulators, but hey at least they still use the brand new stuff

File: 1407119379594.png (129KB, 724x611px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 724x611px

>>390029107
>ITT a bunch of anons get baited by other anons pretending to be nostalgiafags

I had several decent chuckles, desu

>>390033607
They are trolls or just autistic manchildren.

I am 35 and I still enjoy games and new tech coming.

>>390031658
Really. I'm 24 and I've never seen that guy before I'm guessing he's a youtube I could google but I don't give enough of a fuck

File: 12104648.jpg (77KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 640x480px

>>390033056
>>390033157
>>390033319
>>390033376

C'mon guys, While CRT's are inherently blurry to an extent that doesn't mean they can't be reasonably sharp. The majority of blurriness people remember is from the inferior video formats most people used. I mean composite video is shit, but theres others. And as for not supporting CRT tech? I have a screen not ten feet away that supports HDMI at 720P And I'm using a VGA screen through displayport right fucking now. I watch movies on it. And I even bothered to connect my 360 to my capture card just to pop in RDR. These things are pretty damn hard to photograph but I can clearly see the aliasing on lines AND curves. I took some photos but my webcam A shit, but I can count the bullets on his damn bandoleer.

>>390033376
And you, right there. You have any idea the drawbacks of either tech? You know how much a step back early LCD was? If you applied that same logic in terms of image quality we would still be using these damn CRT screens today. Back then it was flat out the better technology and it still holds it's own today in overall terms, if not singular. Where a decade later LCD screens can take it on in a few aspects at a time. And it still reigns supreme in several aspects such as motion clarity and response time. Specifically gaming oriented traits.

Shit why do I bother.

>>390035569
>I am 35 and still know shit about tech

>>390029163
>>390029163
I have a 1920x1440 CRT you Gaylords

>>390029107
CRT's are better for everything
Modern displays have yet to reach top crt's

No motion blur/low persistence
No input lag
Deep black levels
No fixed resolution/flexible as fuck

Goddammit CRT's will never be matched because the kikes don't want to make a good display anymore

>>390035878
It's not hard to consume and benefit from new tech, regardless of knowing all about it, fucking idiot.

>>390035728
He's the guy who coded DOOM the first and such things as quake 3 arena and commander keen. Even worked on Doom 4.

Guy is magic at making games run great on things. And without him gaming in general, and especially FPS games wouldn't be the way they are.

>>390036154
It's not about consuming, he said crtfags are trolls.

>>390029790
Enjoy your input lag, enjoy shit framerates at 4k, enjoy your hideous motion blur caused by sample-and-hold(unless you have lightboost), enjoy your shitty black levels and colors(unless you have OLED) you cunt

File: 1505013047223.png (129KB, 314x278px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 314x278px

>>390032636
Are you calling samefag on every board? I've seen it thrice in as many seconds. Is it samefagtag? Is it a game of 'samefag-samefag?

>>390030119
LOL no
With 4:3 you don't have to move your eyes around with fucking widescreen you actually have to which makes widescreen inferior junk

>>390030651
>Only for retrogames.
No, for practically everything you dumbass
A CRT projector is better for movies too

File: 143213213421412321312.jpg (56KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x500px

>>390030765
>1ms

>>390029107

>5:4 on a 4:3 monitor

But that's wrong you donut. Also 1280x1024 was usually at annoyingly low refresh rates on regular 17" CRTs, like 72hz, whereas 1024x768 run at a more palateable 85hz.

I have a FW900 that does 1920x1200 96hz, 2304x1440 80hz as well.

If you don't want to fuck with a CRT, buy a C24FG70, turn off the black equalizer, and set overdrive to fastest for low persistance / strobing. Affordable, VA panel, factory calibration, strobing, what's not to like?

File: Naruto-playing.gif-c200.gif (452KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 200x200px

4:3 is the perfect game aspect ratio.
You have every information on the screen displayed very compact and cose which is a good thing.
Look at how long it takes your eye to scan the 16:9 pic instead of the 4:3 pic >>390033308

CRTs are simply better and I genuinely believe that people who prefer widescreen are lazily trolling.
A shame we will never get them back

>>390030651
Nice setup

>>390036235
framerate is tied to how good the computer is

>>390036795

True, but he means you'll not have 120fps at 4K in any games without a beefy fucking rig.

I really hope monitors or graphic card control panels start offering nearest-neighbour scaling for when these 4k 120hz monitors come out, 1080p on a 4K monitor could easily be native res but it just isn't

>>390030919
Same case with TV shows
God I miss 4:3 TV, who the fuck thought it was a good idea to have widescreens be popular for homes anyways? They just end up taking so much space.

>>390036647
I'll trade you my C27FG70 for that FW900, My P992 needs an upgrade.

>>390031002
You're the one who has never seen a good CRT Monitor and you probably grew up with a shitty low budget consumer CRT

>>390031625
>no support for multiple resolutions natively
>CRT
No

>>390031473
many old PC games that only supported 4:3 also supported 1280x1024 just because it was displayed as 4:3
it was only really anal games that limited you to 1280x960

>>390036663
Never said it wasn't was just trying, poorly, to explain that a bigger screen of the same aspect ratio doesn't make you have a larger field of view.

I told the guy he was right when he elaborated that he meant true 4:3 and not the stretched BS. Which still, those guys do that for some inane reason.

>>390031736
Hahahahhaha Millennials BTFO
>LOL Bro widescreen fills your eyes better
>*keeps eyetracking the screen constantly*
lmfao

>>390031903
Counter Strike was made with 4:3 in mind

>>390029919
flip a crt on its side and realize how rectangular it is

>>390031746
t. dumb ameriburger who grew up with a shitty low budget consumer crt tv who doesn't know what he's talking about

>there are people in this thread right now who bought into the LCD koolaid
It's actually pretty fucking sad. All because normies wanted bigger screens for their oversized living rooms.

At least PVMs were cheap as shit for a few years because of it. Feels good playing shit with the best possible image quality.

things crts are good for
-melee

end of list

>>390032493
Yes it does matter actually
You've clearly never used a good PC CRT Monitor
No input lag, great colors, great black levels, no fixed resolution and amazing motion clarity make for a way better experience

I agree that 4:3 >>>>>>>> 16:9 though 4:3 pillarboxing looks ugly as fuck compared to a proper 4:3 screen lmfao

>>390032715
4:3 is one of the best aspect ratios out there in general
16:9 is a poor men's 21:9 when it comes to movies(you know this is the truth) and is pretty shitty in general

>>390033056
>But current games look like shit with it.
No they don't. You probably played RDR on a shitty consumer SD CRT

There are HD CRT's out there you know? Like top tier Computer CRT Monitors could support upto 2048x1356
Nobody is fucking talking about shitty consumer SD CRT's. Gimme a break dude.

show me five videos of a game with very good graphics by today's standard that looks better on a crt

>>390035835
No dude it's actually not the cable formats as much as people here judging CRT based on the shitty TV's they used to have back in the day

PC CRT's were always miles above your typical shitty consumer SD CRT's

>>390037838
Didn't PC CRT's made you blind or something?

CRT users in 2017 are the equivalent of the hipsters who ride those big front wheeled bicycles to starbucks.

>>390037987
I wouldn't use one everyday because a triple monitor LCD setup is more convenient, and you want to preserve the life of your CRTs as much as possible, but anyone who doesn't use a CRT for old games is a grade A retard.

File: 1387818306034.png (23KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 400x400px

My dream display

>oled tier black levels
>crt tier colors
>no input lag
>no fixed resolution
>can display interlaced content natively so I don't have to put up with a shitty deinterlaced picture when I watch tv(which is till 1080i) or old stuff
>no motion blur with no flicker at any refresh rate(eliminate it somehow I don't care if you have to bend the laws of physics REEEEEEEE)
>high resolutions
>high refresh rate
>variable sync
>can physical transform to any aspect ratio and can change into bigger/smaller sizes

>mfw this never come true

>>390037507
>No input lag
No one notices any input lag, and in the case where it would matter (comp mp games) you're so shit you dont play them anyway

crt's put out more radiation it's heavy most look bad Higher power usage almost triple that of a lcd
Glare is reduced by the use of special filters and treated glass unlike the lcd which has little to none
Slightly less sharp images Suffers from burn-in problem If displaying a same image for a prolonged period it could be embedded in the display permanently A minimum of 75hz is required for a flicker free image. All CRTs already support this except at ultra high resolutions 2048++ all crts are way hotter than a lcd less color
>>390037987
right about that only people who buy CRTs or poor people hipsters or people who want to play old consoles the same way they played when they were younger

>>390033308
>all that disgusting dead space in 16:9 and 21:9
Widescreen was a fucking mistake

>>390038134
>what is emulation
>ports

>>390038159
Not him but it's good for platforming games

>>390038226
>>>what is emulation
>>ports
It's not hard to hook up your emulator to a real display. Ports of old games were all awful.

>>390036663
There are widescreen CRT's out there you know
4:3 is still better but don't act like widescreen is exclusive to modern tv's

>>390038354
Widescreen was incredibly rare on PC CRTs, and only popular on the later consumer TV CRTs which were all awful thanks to crappy digital conversions.

>>390037156
>those guys do that for some inane reason.
It's not for some inane reason
In OG Counter Strike the hitboxes were programmed for 4:3
If you play on 4:3 stretched the targets are wider and it's much easier to hit them

>>390036795
You'll have to shell thousands of dollars for a monster PC to be able to run the newest games at 4K/60fps and even then that isn't a guarantee

>>390036952
>nearest-neighbour scaling
Fucking disgusting
I especially fucking hate those faggots who insist that retro games look good with this kind of shitty scaling. No they fucking don't, they just look like overly pixelated pieces of shit which never looked like that in CRT's. I'd rather scaling that is a bit blurry than that fucking shit.

>>390033607
Kill yourself you fucking nigger
Stop talking about technology you have no clue about
Even the top-tier LCD's right now are nowhere near top-tier CRT's

>>390036663
>4:3 is the perfect game aspect ratio.
>You have every information on the screen displayed very compact and cose which is a good thing.

>implying every game engine scales the same no matter what your aspect ratio is
The more your aspect ratio is, the more you will see. Why cripple yourself seeing less?
>Look at how long it takes your eye to scan the 16:9 pic instead of the 4:3 pic
No, my eye doesn't take any long to scan any image you grandpa

While you are playing at 4:3 seeing shit i will snipe you out seeing your ass at the corner of my 21:9 screen.

>>390036154
Enjoy giving $$$ to kikes even though you know shit about the "upgrades" you're getting

>>390029737
>what are 144hz monitors
>what is adaptive sync

File: 1502612217773.png (21KB, 263x200px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 263x200px

>>390038702
>The more your aspect ratio is, the more you will see

>>390038151

Could be achieved with like a 120hz 40" 4K OLED monitor. People with such big monitors usually set smaller resolutions in aspect ratios of their choosing, to run games easier and since the whole screen area is too big to see close up anyway.

A 120hz laser projector and white wall would also do the trick, at night at least.

Fun fact: the guy behind Blur Busters is looking for a FW900 to do Freesync tests with. Apparently that's a thing you can do for some reason


>>390038602
I'm saying bilinear filtering currently makes 1080p blurry on a 4K monitor even though the 4:1 pixel ratio could make it perfect

>>390038301
okami was way better on ps3 same with shadow
>>390038512
wrong 700-800 if you buy parts during a sale same with buying used or you can just shell out 1000-1400 which is not much if you make 25 a hour and live alone or with family

File: FB1WzeZ.jpg (463KB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 4160x2340px

>>390037838
I mean I would love to agree but I was gifted with a good consumer level set when I was younger. It was small and everything looked damn good on it. It was a KV-1311CR. I mean I cant say all the this and that in every post but even composite looked good on it.

Apart from that I've taken a liking to calibrating the screens as well, And a few non-trinny screens even at standard 480i like pic related can really shine with a little TLC, I mean the top one was literally a RF only screen. A little solder and some wire on the jungle IC and boom SCART RGB. And boom fantastic.

It's really is both, but once you upgrade the formats And calibrate them, they shine. I just focused on what I believed was the larger of the two.

All that said most people don't even fucking know what to do with a LCD that doesn't even need anything done with it. And they just do something retarded. I doubt that has changed since as well.

>>390029107
That's 5:4 though

>>390038159
Yes they do you shitter, yes they do
Go back to playing your shitty menu simulators weeb

>>390038658
wrong there isnt even 10 games that look better on a crt than a lcd this gen
and wow so mad and wrong you have to resort to name calling you didnt even make a joke

>>390037932
No, not really. 60hz is unbearable in them due to medium/low persistence phosphors though so you have to set them at 85hz

>>390038814
You do realize that most people had shitty CRT's though? There were good consumer sets too but most people didn't have them

PC CRT's were still generally miles above though

>>390038443
I actually know they are visually wider and such, it just seems inane to me because the motion of the mouse and such, and correct me if I'm wrong, don't actually change. Just the visual. So why would you choose to pan your eyes around, when it's a legitimate technique to stare center, and have all the information in the the non-stretched 4:3 ratio?

>>390038797
>Could be achieved with like a 120hz 40" 4K OLED monitor.
No it can't
OLED is a fixed pixel display so forget about it supporting multiple resolution natively

>Laser Projector
Is there any out there that isn't a DLP?
Majority out there are just DLP with Laser as light source

I mean I know some Laser Beam Scanning Projectors which work like a CRT in which the laser draws the picture pixel by pixel same way an electron gun does but they're releaged to Microvision's shitty Pico Projectors and they aren't good quality

I know about Blurbusters and I know about Freesync on a CRT

That still doesn't address some of my points such ass
>no motion blur with no flicker any refresh rate
or
>physically changing aspect ratio
the latter one has been demonstrated by Samsung at CES 2016 but it was experimental and it might never make it in the consumer space

File: 66K4bmX.jpg (2MB, 2340x4160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x4160px

>>390038602
This is an actual point of discussion on actual CRT systems as a note. A lot of people like the sharp look of RGB flat out. Like in the SNES 1chip mini, It can be argued that it is in fact missing a certain kind of blur filter and shouldn't actually be that sharp. Kind of like the Composite vs RGB that it was "intended to be a certain way. (S-video is a great compromise if you prefer the slightly blurrier aesthetic) Like how the n64 has a half pixel shift every other line. Sort of like the SNES, You can use a gameshark to disable it in some games as well as some RGB mods having a feature that removes it to be extra sharp.

Food for thought. Theres die hards on both sides.

>>390038354
>There are widescreen CRT's out there you know
Is there literally anything besides the Sony GDM-FW900?

>>390038797
Near Neigbor Integer Scaling is still fucking shitty
God fucking dammit how did we go from technology which didn't need to scale to this fixed bullshit that needs upscaling which always ruins the picture

>>390038602
>they just look like overly pixelated pieces of shit
Protip: They were always overly pixelated pieces of shit. Just because shitty CRTs distorted them doesn't mean that's not what's actually there.

>>390038798
>700-800
You're not going to get 4k/60fps on the newest games without some sort of insane sli setup which requires 4 1080ti or some bullshit

>gotta degrade my vidya experience to match my 314184900 years ago experience because it was better and I'm not blinded by nostalgia!
The only reason to have a step back in evolution and playing on a CTR is for retro gaming.

>>390039529
The BVM D24e1WU which is 16:9 comes to mind
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffiR4E1id-8

There were some consumer CRT's too some of them used digital bullshit but there's some of them out there which were all analog too

>>390029107
>1280 x 1024

Gross. That's a 5:4 aspect ratio.

1280x960 is much nicer to look at considering the aspect ratio matches the screen ratio.

>>390029163
Nowadays that resolution usually produces blur on CRTs unless you found a relatively unused or never used CRT.

>>390039608
i said if there is sale buy it used or go to some second hand computer warehouse or just shell out 1000-1400$ for a nice computer that will last about 6-8 years

>>390037313
Heeeeeelllllooooo, REDDIT!

>>390039081
Yeah, Not saying your wrong at all man. Just that I was saying what was closer to my experience. I mean I take home several CRTs a month and I've thrown more out than I've kept. And no contest PC CRTs are miles above.

>>390038904
I could name Ten from last gen. From experience generally games with a lot of contrast and color such as borderlands looks pretty fantastic on them.

Only game I know from current gen which I have played on both would be no mans sky and that is the exact opposite of a ringer.

>>390039686
CRTs are an objectively better technology that was discarded simply because of weight and size concerns. It'd be like if everyone replaced their refrigerators with a bag attached to an air conditioner.

>>390039608
Are you retarded? One 1080Ti can hit 4k/60 in most games maxed out, two would be enough for every game. Hell, if you lower settings a 1070 or Fury X can hit 4k. 4k isn't nearly as hard to hit as people think.

>>390039428
>Forget about multilple display resolution natively
Nigger, 4k is literally just 1080p x 4. You can have one pixel scale to 4 and have it fit perfectly

File: s3-mgz-appearanceimg1.png (13KB, 320x224px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 320x224px

>>390039603
>They were always overly pixelated pieces of shit.
No they weren't and you have no idea what you're even talking about
Look at pic related. Does it look like overly pixelated bullshit? No it fucking doesn't
The blockiness is caused by fucking upscaling
Twich the pixels will always be twice the pixels

Now look at how retro games look on a Broadcast Quality CRT Monitor
No fucking blockiness there. Kill yourself you fucking emulationretard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffiR4E1id-8

>>390039853
and are the games graphically impressive or just some random indie game
and indie games are a good thing to list because of games like terraria and binding of isaac but remember for every Isaac there is two warz

>>390039126
Since it's a 4:3 stretched you don't need to scan as much and it's a trade-off I guess.

>>390031746
My CRT was a higher resolution than your monitor for 15 years

>>390039881
>CRTs are an objectively better technology
>that was discarded simply because of weight and size concerns
It's not that better then.

>>390038904
>wrong
yeah that's you

>>390029107
Depends, I still hook up my old consoles to pic related but my PC is hooked up to a 1440p monitor.

>>390039984
No it will look just like crappy overly pixelated dogshit
Upscaling will always look shit compared to native

File: SOny trinitron.jpg (67KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1280x720px

>>390040218
pic related

>>390036198
So basically you're saying he's Jewish

>>390040137
Current, professional level 10k+ displays are JUST ABOUT on the level of end of life CRTs from over a decade ago. They're still inferior in many aspects, but we're almost at the fucking starting line from a professional standpoint.

From a consumer level, LCDs are still 20 years off matching CRTs. That's about how long it'll take for most of the population to get a display better than what was available. Fucking plasma has died off from the burn-in meme, despite it still utterly destroying current LCDs. Normies do not understand screen technology. All they understand is what the adverts tell them to buy, and the advantages of LCD were PURELY from a shipping and cost standpoint. Consumers got utterly shafted by the switch, but plebs are always going to pleb it up.

>>390039519
RGB 240p has nothing to do with Near Neighbour Scaling. Near Neighbour Scaling looks nothing like RGB 240p if that's what you're implying

240p RGB looks proper sharp. Upscaled with NNS looks like an overly pixelated mess

>>390040156
show me ten new games 5 3d 5 2d that look better on a crt

>>390039973
Not in the newest games it will not
There's a reason 4K isn't standard yet

>>390039081
Ah ok.

>>390037932
60hz strobing hurts your eyes, it's why your mom told you not to sit too close to the TV. PC monitors were typically set to 70, 75 or 85Hz to compensate. What's funny is 75Hz was the standard on early LCD monitors as well. 60Hz has never been the standard on PC and it's horseshit that pretty much all vanilla 1080p monitors are 60Hz. 75Hz makes mouse and windows movement a lot smoother

>degauss

>>390040487
Every single game looks better on a good CRT

File: 1310575598397.jpg (155KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1680x1050px

We are hitting peak /v/ nostalgia

>>390040567
I see, thanks

>>390040228
It physically IS native though. The physical shape of 4 square pixels is the exact same shape as 1 individual square pixel. 4k allows for native, physical upscaling from 1080p PHYSICALLY

>>390040068
Eh things like vanillaware games and things like mad-world, the saboteur KOA:Reckoning, overlord on the one end having simple/r but exaggerated styles are the majority. There are some that could be considered graphically impressive (for the time) that also fit such as lost odyssey or the Witcher 2, where they make good use of contrast also look pretty fantastic on A CRT.

Anyway I just realized the newish DOOM game looks better on my CRT versus my CFG70 so theres that. And I would wager alien isolation does but I haven't actually played it on my CFG70 yet. So feel free to not count it.

>>390040567
I wish it was somehow possible to get rid of flicker while getting rid of motion blur at any refresh rate
I guess frame rate amplification as described by the Blur Busters Guy might be the best thing we can hope for.

Sample-and-Hold is disgusting and people have forgotten how smooth games used to look in motion in CRT's.
I think it's partially why people remember PS2 games looking much better back in the day than they do now

>>390040808
No you fucking idiot it isn't
It's upscaling
4 will always be bigger than 1 you idiot. Hence why it's overpixelated. Period.

>>390040446
Shit I think I responded to the wrong guy, One of them was talking about how people liked the extra pixellated look of modern screens. My bad.

>>390040656
wrong some games do but most look better on lcd
no one likes scanlines and blurry tv's
>>390040847
see this is how people should act when arguing this makes me feel bad for having bad grammar
and being rude you kinda proved me wrong you didnt name ten but you did name some soild games which make up for it

>>390040912
4 pixels on a 50" 4k tv is the same shape and size of 1 pixel on a 50" 1080p tv

Same would go for a 24" monitor

>>390041109
LCD's have shit black levels and contrasts. They also have shit motion if you don't have a lightboost monitor

>no one likes scanlines and blurry tv's
Again we're talking about top-tier PC CRT's here not shitty consumer SD CRT's
Now shoo, shoo move along you idiot

I work in tv studio and there are some high end crt for some ccu and the color are fucking amazing on them.

Only high end are worth something.

>>390038759
>what is 20 years too late
It's ok, but I wish my 1060 had analog output, I could've saved 200€ on a 144hz monitor and I could keep my glorious CRT for emulation.

>>390041208
Except that's not how it works
4 pixels will still be 4 pixels, not 1 pixel. Hence upscaling either looking blurry or like a jagged overpixelated mess

>>390041246
if we are only talking about top tier Lcd and Crt then lcd is better than Crt

>>390041273
>we will never have displays as good as this on the consumer space again

>>390032976
You clearly havent seen a movie with a 3:1 ratio.

>>390040295
Thats a good one. Trinitron were good tubes.

>>390036235
If you play any modern shooter, you'll find out how important higher resolution is. CRT is fine if you play Quake 3, but you won't be able to see shit at 1024x768 on a 20" CRT when playing things like BF4, Overwatch and even the new Quake and UT, because of the amount of clutter present. Ironically the best games to play on CRT monitor right now are Destiny and the PC version of Halo 5 because of the simplistic design and easily recognizable shapes.

>>390041434
Except it fucking isn't you idiot

CRT's have
better black levels
no input lag
vastly better motion clarity at higher brightness than lightboost/ulmb
no fixed resolution + very flexible with refresh rates at different resolutions(as long as it is withing the khz band it supports it can display it)
vastly better color(technically unlimited color due to its analog nature only limited by signal-to-noise ratio)

>>390030835
Why the hell would anyone try to play a 16:9 game on a 4:3 ratio? That shit looks ugly.

>>390041635
Are you fucking kidding me with this shit?
Most people out there still play on 1080p and there's tons of PC CRT's that can support this resolution and even higher(1600x1200 monitors are very common after all)

Hey does anyone here knows if the tube the CRT's use can be removed and possibly used in another CRT?

>>390041350
Objectively wrong. It's called pixel perfect scaling.

>>390041687
That game supports many aspect ratios natively so not really. The game isn't squished if that's what you're thinking.

>>390041635
>CRTs have low resolutions
Helllo reddit

>>390041635
Even then, higher refresh rates is generally regarded as more important than resolution, which CRTs excelled at (75Hz was usually the norm on those) and wasn't surpassed until those 144Hz LCD displays started popping up in the recent couple of years.

>>390041793
I don't care what it's called it looks like shit and it doesn't look like native period

>>390041926
You can still get like 160hz or higher if you lower the res in some monitors

>>390041668
no one wants a Bulky heavy high power usage glare filled less sharp tv with more radiation than a lcd and hotter plus there are alot of top tier lcd tv's with Refresh rates way higher than Crts top tier tv's

File: b290a3e4-ed56-4b34-bf3a-973e84228681.png (85KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1080x1920px

>>390041929
It physically is the exact same thing as native. The same size and shape, these pixels will be able to display the exact same physical image

>>390041993
At what? Something stupidly low like 640x350 or something?

>>390041109
Well there are more but Specifically games with lots of color, or lots of contrast. I just named the ones I thought were the best and also looked fantastic on my screen. Anyway heres a list in no particular order from my subjective experience.

1. Valkyria chronicles
2. Tropico 3-5 (count as one, pretty much the same game anyway.)
3. The deadspace series.
4. Elite dangerous
5. Bioshock 1 & 2
6. Alien versus predator. (2010)
7. Dragons dogma : dark arisen
8. Metro 2033 & Lost light
9. MGS V The phantom pain. (I count this as last gen as it's really not super impressive graphically)
10. Far cry 3.
11. Wasteland 2
12. Vanquish

Bonus: Indies, The Shadowrun RPGs, Bastion, Child of light, Darkest dungeon, Armello, Deadlight, Killing floor, (one, haven't played two.) Depth.

All of these either have a large amount of light V dark contrast or color that "pops". Now I'm not going to tell you that all games look better on a CRT. I could probably even name a couple. But CRT does do these two things very well, and it's a great experience. If you ever find the chance I hope you will try them out.

Protip: CRU can be used to play in widescreen, I personally do this with black bars, And Super resolution as antialiasing is phenomenal on these screens.

>>390041745
Listen you fucking moron, you can't get more than 95hz on 1600x1200 via VGA or RGBVH because fucking bandwidth limitation, not to mention that the closer you're to the cap, the more signal degradation will you notice and most controllers simply won't let you even do that because the signal quality is too garbage.

You trade of resolution for refresh rate. Anything bellow 100hz on a CRT produces noticeable flickering. If you don't run at whatever the lowest comfortable resolution for you to get the highest possible refresh rate via CRU, you're a cuck and enjoy straining your eyes.

1080p is perfectly fine, 4:3 and 5:4 is borderline useless these days because of how FOV is calculated in games these days.

>>390042109
i agree that Vanquish Tropico dead space and metrp 2033 dragons dogma hell no the rest i dont know

>>390041926
Almost every TN panel could do 75hz at the beginning of LCD. Most panels and their output controllers still let you go as far as 80hz when creating custom resolution, provided you've got the bandwidth. The issue was that CRTs could push almost 200 at 1024x768. LCDs with custom controllers could do it aswell, but it looked like a waterpainting due to the pixel response time.

>>390040514
what do you consider "newest games"? perhaps name some

>>390038602
please kill yourself eyelet

>>390040446
"overly pixelated" means literally nothing

>>390041929
are you legitimately brain damaged?

>>390040514
I actually have one and with a slight overclock you can hit a solid 60fps with the most minor of compromises
>Move shadows from ultra to high on Witcher 3
>Use dynamic resolution on gears of War and dishonored
>No tesselation on Metro LL
>Fully maxed out, no compromises on DICE games, Titanfall 2, Doom

>>390042760
if you have to use dynamic resolution for 60fps then you aren't playing at 4k60fps. is the concept of dynamic resolution lost on you?

>>390042073
800x600

>>390042831
the guy said about 800 if you get parts used or on sale or from computer warehouses he also said without all that 1000-1400 and you dont even need a 1000$ computer to play games a 500$ one can run gta v on normal settings you wont be able to play it on high settings with out lag but hey

>>390042052
No it isn't
That's not how it works on displays

>>390042831
No I know what it is. The thing is though I'm not worried about it on my 24" monitor because 90% of 4k for a few seconds is completely unnoticeable and objectively preferable to a couple dropped frames
>>390043039
It literally, physically, objectively is. Fix your brain.

>>390029107
1680x1050 is the best resolution

>>390042318
Fair enough on dragons dogma, It's one of the ones that wasn't as distinctive in the difference. And you can consider me biased on the subject. I can't make much of a bigger list since I think I should've played them on both kinds of screens to even mention. If I interpreted correctly.

Anyway if I were to choose one game out of these to play that you haven't would probably be AVP2010 It's just a dumb stupid romp around and it's great.

>>390043103
>Not 2560x1700

>>390042256
Monitors use DVI too you dumb nigger
FW900 can do 2048x1536 at 85hz

>Anything bellow 100hz on a CRT produces noticeable flickering.
Bullshit. Unless you have some really super good eyes you won't notice shit at anything 85+

Stop spreading misinformation you goddamn retard

>>390042654
It means overly pixelated you dumb shitter
4 times the pixels will always be 4 times the pixels

>>390043248
well maybe you have bad eyes i only once needed glasses and that was because someone shined a powerful flashlight in my eyes when i was 10

>>390042760
Yeah an in a year or two you won't be able to do that anymore
This is not like with 1080p where it became a standard

>>390043402
I don't really think so. We need to wait for the next gen of consoles before devs start making games which are significantly more complex than the ones we have now, and even then my 1080ti will be ok playing at 3k60fps and with a decent AA I'll hardly be able to tell the difference

>>390043075
No, you fix yours
Unlike you I don't like a jaggy picture

>>390029379
>ass-bonging alcohol in 2017
Bitch I've transitioned and thanks to my SRS I can now pussy-bong my cocktails

>>390043334
you just made up this phrase and expect it to have meaning to other people

>>390043337
I never needed glasses so I guess my eyes are better than yours
Point is unless your eyes are super sensitive you won't notice shit. Most people out there don't detect flicker at 85hz or higher

>>390043505
You are such a dumb faggot
A 1080p image on two monitors of the same size, one 4k and one 1080p, is physically the same image

You're literally making up an issue in your head. I can't believe that this image here didn't help fix your brain
>>390042052

>>390043248
>Bullshit
Bullshit, get your eyes checked. If you can notice the difference between 75hz and 150hz, you should be able to notice that the fucking monitor is flashing x-times per second. It's why higher refresh rate on CRT makes the image seem a bit brighter. It isn't, the periods of dark are just shorter.

>>390043540
Again I don't like jaggy pictures

>>390043337
I think it would have more to do with the brain than the actual eyes in this case. I mean I've trained myself to tolerate 60 because reasons, and I usually don't see any flickering past 85hz unless the screen is way too bright anyway or my brain is buggering out.

When my brain buggers out I can see it update the frames at 60hz, Cant actually see the raster, but kinda the after image as the phosphors decay. Happens with LCDS too. Happens about once a month.

Anyway from this perspective and strictly speaking, it's easier on your brain to processes the higher framerate as it has less bullshit to fill in. So if you can see that shit at 100hz while a average person only needs 75hz or so that would mean your brain isn't working as well as the person who doesn't notice flicker at 75hz.

Anyway what I'm saying is you might be brain damaged, as it's that same thing happening when I almost have a seizure just less severe and implied all the time.

>>390043578
>A 1080p image on two monitors of the same size, one 4k and one 1080p, is physically the same image
That's how it works mathematically but that's now how it translates into real life you idiot.

>>390043785
It does work like that in real life though. Just have your GPU do the scaling, not the display dumb dumb

>>390043248
It doesn't have DVI, it has DVI-I or DVI-A. That's essentially VGA in different form factor. If it does accept actual digital intput, conversion from digital to analog has to happen, which you can shove up your arse and go fuck yourself with, enjoy 50-200ms latency.

>>390043606
Of course I can notice the difference
What I'm calling bullshit on is the "below 100hz there's always flicker" comment. 85hz is the cutoff point for most people not 100

>>390043505
On monitors of equal size, a.4k and 1080p will display two 1080p images exactly the same if you use 1:1 pixel scaling. (Not bilinear filtering, which is what most upscalers use) This is a simple fact. The reason PVMs look "sharp" is because they're so small, the DPI is very high. The main reason LCDs look so pixelated is because they have relatively low DPI due to increasing size. LCD monitors have much greater screen sizes nowadays due to the fact that they're smaller and lighter than CRTs. Youre complaining about DPI, it has nothing to do with.CRT vs. LCD.

>>390038759
>what is 16ms delay
nice lcd, kiddo

>>390043843
It doesn't matter what does the scaling it will always look worse than native by virtue of it being different and having more pixels than the original(reminder that fixed pixels are square and that causes all sorts of issues when upscaled too)

>>390041851
I booted up Mania to check on the settings, and only now find 4:3 resolutions. Sadly, still a 16:9 game, but it will letterbox.

Took me a while to reply because I ended up playing the game to the Flying Battery zone. Game's too good.

>>390029107
Enjoy your eye strain and flicker. Getting a good crt today is neigh impossible.

>>390043719
my uncle did drop me on the head as a baby i also fell of the monkey bars trying to hang on upside down and when i was 15 my head filled up with blood and pus but i feel okay i have slight anger issues and get sick alot but im fine

>>390043854
You're a fucking idiot
DVI-I is not VGA
It also doesn't change the fact that there's monitors out there that can do 2048x1536@85hz so put a sock in it LCDshitter

>>390036663
>omg it takes your eyes longer to scan a larger surface area

You fucking clueless ape

>>390043924
Bilinear filtering is actually better despite it being blurry. At least it doesn't look like a jaggy mess like Integer scaling...yuck

>>390043993
You can change resolutions via the ini file or something(Taxman said this)

>>390043946
But it's displaying the image in the same size and shape. You even said mathematically it's the same and it works that was in real life too

>>390044008
Enjoy your
shitty black levels
input lag
motion blur
fixed resolution
you fucking lcdfag

>>390043719
I can't see flickering at 85hz. On 60 it's noticeable though.

>>390044191
Lol, I rather get a LCD right now because getting a good CRT monitor today is almost impossible.

I wish plasma screens didnt die.

Playing Yakuza Kiwami and the game is fucking gorgeous.

>>390044191
enjoy the radiation
scanlines
Heavy
High power usage
less sharp
glare filled
burn-in riddled
hot as fuck shit tv

>>390044167
No I said that mathematically it makes sense but in real life IT DOES NOT work like that

Images technically are only displayed via little square pixels, they're not technically made of pixels before being display.
It's really complicated to explain but when you multiply the amount of pixels by copying said pixels you run into artifacts which makes the picture look oversharpened and more pixelated than it originally was

This might be less noticeable in some content than others but it definitely is noticeable and looks hideous on retro games which had more rudimentary graphics. It makes them look like blocky pieces of shit which they weren't originally at their native resolution

>>390044191
>/v/ is so contrarian that it actually defends outdated technology

Wew.

>>390044459
>enjoy the radiation
Nice meme, you get more radiation from the sun in one second than you'll get radiation from a crt in one week. And this was only an issue with old as fuck CRT's which got fixed a long ass time ago

>Scanlines
Sexy as fuck. But there's virtually no scanlines at high resolutions

>High power usage
Meme

>less sharp
square pixels suck

>burn-in riddled
Not a problem with most CRT's

>>390044026
Dude I"m fucking crazy about CRTS and the analog portion of DVI format is the same signal VGA carries. You know those passive adapters you use to plug a VGA cable into the back of a analog compatible DVI port? Yeah those are PASSIVE adapters, nowhere in that chain does digital to analog conversion take place and the monitor straight accepts it through the VGA connector.

If it's in fact digital DVI going to the monitor then at some point it has to be converted back into an analog format. CRT displays are naturally analog and theres no real way to get around that. Well unless SED or FED came to fruition but that didn't happen. So the signal has to be processed and that will add input latency to the screen. This guy made a valid point on the DVI vs VGA thing.

Either way when you got your beautiful monitor working full speed at it's maximum bandwidth that shit is fucking tight. And any screen past 2002 with a well shielded cable wont fucking have signal degradation worth worrying about unless your doing photo-work. So, pretty much any CRT worth owning nowadays.

Maybe should of gone with that last part instead calling him a nigger and actually read up a little about this.

>>390044529
>/v/ is filled with so many millennialfaggots that don't know what they're talking about
WEW

>>390044705
Yet it can fucking do 2048x1536@85hz while you claimed it tops out at 1600x1200@95hz which os utterly false

>>390044706
only hipsters suck the cock of old outdated tech
i bet you still use a sony walkman

>>390044646
>High power usage is a meme
>Scanlines are sexy
Scanlines are distracting and it doesn't make it look better.

>>390044026
DVI-I carries both analog and digital, and the analog portion is the same as VGA. Please read a book, while I enjoy my monitor pushing double the amount of pixels per second for a tenth of the retail price of your precious FW900 and half of what it's worth right now second hand.

>>390044705
>Yeah those are PASSIVE adapters, nowhere in that chain does digital to analog conversion take place and the monitor straight accepts it through the VGA connector.
t. retard.

Don't worry, I can understand your confusion, but you're still stupid. A computer puts out a digital signal. Some older graphics cards have an onboard DAC for VGA/DVI, but you're still ultimately converting a digital signal to analog.

Don't believe me? Use a fucking active adaptor from HDMI to VGA, there is absolutely zero latency introduced. Computers haven't put out an analog signal for decades.

>>390044841
CRT is not outdated
It's still the ultimate display technology which is fucking sad

File: Vegeta_laugh.jpg (23KB, 353x269px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 353x269px

>>390044869
>Claimed VGA can only do 1600x1200@95hz
>Offer evidence that it can do 2048x1536@85hz
>"r-read a book anon"

>>390045020
Wrong the Sony KD-55A1
and LG OLED55C7V is better than shit crts

>>390045020
>>It's still the ultimate display technology which is fucking sad
Only when it comes to really good CRTs which are both expensive and hard to find.

>>390045324
Except those were really good displays from a decade ago. Technology improves, by this point we would have had insane displays.

>>390032715
baby duck syndrome

>>390044817
Different guy brah, can't you tell by the dumb ass way I format my posts? ANYWAY that depends on the screen capabilities. At what refresh rate something tops out at a certain resolution. Given this is A 4:3 aspect ratio lets go with the best screen for that. The Illyama vision master pro 514, which has a bandwidth of 390Mhz and a horozontal max of 142Khz.

1600x1200@95hz uses 273.6mhz of bandwidth and a horizontal rate of 114Khz. Clearly this screen can do better. At 1600x1200@118hz the screen uses 340Mhz bandwidth a good 50 from it's rated maximum, which you can throw that in his face too. And is limited by it's horozonal scan rate which at this resolution is at 141.6Khz without estimated retrace.

Anyway when the vertical resolution stays the same the horozontal scan doesn't change much so you could do 1920x1200@118 or what have you up until you hit the bandwidth cap. Which 1920x1200@118 would be 408Mhz, so too much anyway and if you did get it would would be limited by both the standard RAMDAC and the monitor. So all the fuckups on the cord quality. 1920@1200@110 seems about right though.


For comparison my current screen, the Dell P992 has a horizontal scan of 107Khz and a 170Hz limit which is way more typical And tops, and did, out at 1600x1200@90hz and even goes over spec just a bit. It does work with minimal signal noise one a quality cable.

Math it up my man.

>>390045324
Point still stands
They could make much better displays with all the qualities us hardcore geeks want but they just don't want to

>>390045135
I'm not him, and he was clearly arguing refresh rate, not resolution. Resolution you posted runs at lower refresh rate. Just curious, I'm reading through the spec sheets of FW900 and the resolution you posted isn't there. Infact best it can do is 1920x1280@75hz. Maybe it's custom resolution, but even than that doesn't seem to fit the VGA limitations. Care to provide source for your claims?

>>390045717
Well you do realize monitors like Iiyama Pro 512 can do 140khz scanrate and 390mhz bandwidth right?

And you're forgetting how much you can do with CRU/EDID modifications

what tier is a dell p991 21' which is just a refurbished sony trinitron.

what tier is a Sony Wega

>>390044969
I'm using a Displayport to VGA right now, and while you could measure the added latency it isn't actually noticeable. I wasn't saying it was severe just that it's there.

I mean it's like a few microseconds. But mostly depends entirely on the adapter being used. But yeah, the standardized RAMDAC is pretty fantastic all told. And they did put out analog signals mind you. I mean the last I know that did was the 3xxX series from amd which was released in 2015. Through DVI-I..

Unless your confusing Working with an analog signal versus outputting one, which yeah. That shit hasn't happened in decades. But it still outputs it as analog, the conversion just took place on the GPU instead of with an active adapter outside of it. Right before it was output. And compared to the internal RAMDAC these adapters are garbage. Talking 170MHZ bandwidth versus 400MHZ.

Not even enough to run that Illyama at fucking any good refresh rate and actually do have the issues the other guy mentioned. I mean that brings down 1600X1200@95 all the way down to 60hz.

So if your saying computers didn't output any analog signal for decades why the fuck are you arguing about 95hz vs whatever? It would be flat 60 at pretty much any.

Those things are garbage. And I have to fucking live with one.

>>390046054
Well It's pretty basic overall, theres plenty of shit to fuck with. Thats how I got my P992 working at 90HZ actually. Just going by the listed specs.

Really monitor overclocking used to be a lot more badass.

File: fuck this shit.png (74KB, 2302x758px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 2302x758px

>>390029107
What happened?

I really don't know something feels wrong with my LCD. It's new but it doesn't look fluid compared to my CRT I had before, jeez.

>>390046101
Uh pretty much the "basic acceptable" tier of displays. I said a lot earlier how the jump from 17" to 19" was huge. And keep in mind that it's not actually a 21" it's got a smaller visible area and that was a marketing thing back in the day. If it was an actual 21" inch it would got from "basic acceptable" to "good" possibly "great" if it was a higher end 21"

Anyway WEGA is for the most part in the "good" category, if you want to pick one up try for one around 2002-2003 as generally they have none or less post processing on the image.

>>390046586
Mobile/tablet-oriented shitty interface perhaps?

>>390046723
>>390036137
Only good thing is probably higher resolution.

>>390046789
Ok thanks!

>>390045853
>Infact best it can do is 1920x1280@75hz.
Wrong
FW900 maximum is around 2304x1440@80hz
https://www.cnet.com/products/sony-gdm-fw900/specs/

>>390045604
Not quite, LCD's are improving at an incredible speed. Remember that CRT TV's were worked on from around the 1920's, and cathode ray tubes in general even earlier.

>>390046586
What shitty webpages are you viewing that don't adjust for 16:9 resolution. What pages are you viewing that are still locked in a 4:3 ratio.

File: vga.jpg (68KB, 817x260px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 817x260px

>>390046572
Man even Wikipedia supports my claims that VGA can do 2048x1536@85hz pic related

>>390047149
there is a "past" before the 4:3

You are clearly to young to know the pre smart phone internet

>>390046980
Yeah that was a really dynamic time in monitor tech. Though there were some interesting technologies that would have been a nice merge. SED and FED for instance are quite similar to OLED all told. You have an organic phosphor with a emitter behind it that lights it and boom. No huge magnets, no massive backspace, No messing with geometry, massive power savings, ETC. In other words the benefits of a LCD.

The interesting bit is LCD displays eventually drifted back into that with organic phosphors and all that. And have the added benefit of most of this already existing for the most part because of CRTs. People just started to dust it off again.

I think if CRTs were the ones that won, we would probably end up in a very similar place technology wise. I think either way they would've converged. Just took a different path to it.

Convergent technologies and all that. In this strange roundabout way, OLED is the true successor to the CRT. Not only in heritage but in capabilities.

>>390047249
Do tell what site still does things in blackberry format.
>You are clearly to young to know the pre smart phone internet
Bitch I grew up with a Nokia brick and payphones. Remember those 35 cents to make a 2 minute long distance.

>>390047220
Hey I said that from the start, just that he had a point with the DVI thing at the same time.

>>390046980
One problem is people tend to compare high end professional CRT monitors that cost thousands of dollars new to cheap $150 LCD monitors. I mean just next year you will be able to get a 4k/120Hz monitors with Gsync/Freesync, HDR and reduced motion blur.

>>390047448
/v/´s favorite sites kotaku and polygon

>>390046172
Depends on the model
If it's HD it's good for HD shit but not good for SD shit. If it's the rare analog-only one it's pretty good all around though they're less sharp than PC CRT's or BVM's partly due to their size.

>>390046980
LCD is redundant at this point
I hope OLED takes over and I hope some non-fixed pixel technology comes along someday

>>390039984
>Nigger, 4k is literally just 1080p x 4
This is the state of /v/.
4K is 2x1080p

>>390048131
Easily the dumbest post of the day. 3840x2160 is quadruple the pixel count as 1920x1080. Remeber, you double both vertical and horizontal resolution.

File: 4k-2.png (355KB, 700x401px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 700x401px

>>390048131
Not sure if bait or stupid.

>>390047403
>ED and FED for instance are quite similar to OLED all told
Not really, FED was not fixed pixel so it could support multiple resolutions
FED had problems according to the BlurBusters guy but with some R&D it had a lot of potential. Shame.

OLED is the successor to Plasma not CRT
It's a fixed pixel display
Thus far has problems with Blue OLED's so it uses WRGB(though that might be fixed later)
Burn-in just as bad as plasma
It's Sample-and-Hold(although Plasma was PWM or something like that)
Broadcast Sony OLED monitor apparently can display Interlaced content natively but consumers versions don't support this
Input lag(though this is because of connectors used)
Color isn't analog(so it's limited)

>>390048328
extremely sure you're stupid

>>390048131

double vertical + double horizontal = two 1080p frames can fit inside 4k horizontally and two more can then sit below them

>>390048131
It's the number of pixels and not the horizontal and vertical resolution.

1080p
1920x1080 = 2,073,600
UHD or 4K
3840x2160 = 8,294,400

8,294,400 / 2,073,600 = 4

This is what they are saying Not that.
1,920 x 2= 3,840 and 1,080 x 2 = 2160

Thats not 4k.

>>390044135
That you are right, but the actual game will be letterboxed to fit a 16:9 ratio in a 4:3 screen.

>>390048504
Fair enough, Still think all these techs are converging though. Thinking about it thats a good point overall. Was going to make a note as plasma as a inbetween but don't actually know a particularly large amount about it, so I didn't.

>>390046586
Multitasking
You can view 2 pages at once on a 16/9 display.
Adblock
The side menu was used for ads and useless shit.

>>390048906
Doesn't it have 4:3 output? Like if you set it to 320x240 it should output at 4:3 right?
The CD Port displayed at 4:3 when you selected 640x480 for example

>>390046586
16:9 is so fucking bad. I see no reason to ever use that meme bullshit when 4:3 is just better.

>>390049251
Not this one. I have it set to 640x480 on the ini file, but it outputs it letterboxed. Try it out.

>>390049090
I honestly think the display industry moves at a snail's pace...maybe in purpose so they can sell incremental upgrades to enthusiasts for tons of money

There's no reason why we can't have displays that are in every way superior to CRT's in 2017 but they just don't fucking do it

I've got a 720p CRT with HDMI. It's only 13" though. Sony. Don't remember model number.

Its amazing for games.

>>390049447
13" is too small honestly.

File: 1483657347740.png (92KB, 247x168px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 247x168px

>>390040295
Noice, Popful Mail is a great game.

>>390049509
Yes I know. But I got it from my uncle. He bought it as a bedroom Tv and only used it for DVD videos hooked up with composite plugs.

It's in my office now. I casually play games on it. Its not my main display for anything.

File: sonicmaniawidescreen.jpg (62KB, 635x406px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 635x406px

>>390049335
It seems you're right(pic related)

Hmm, have you tried 320x240? or 320x224?(I mean you might as well if you're outputting to a CRT for those sweet scanlines)
Might wanna contact Taxman on twitter or something, it's pretty stupid that it doesn't work in 4:3 or there might be some other setting on the ini file I dunno

>>390029219
Cougars are pretty good

What is the best PC crt I can get?
I only have shitty no name ones

>>390049372
I mean I've been waiting *specifically* for OLED to mature since 2004 or so. I mean they made a prototype in 2009 and thats almost a decade ago.

>>390049851
for 4:3 the illyama vision master pro 514, rebranded trinitron with some serious guts. For 16:10 it's the GDM-FW900 which has around 7 clones all of great quality.

For 16:9 you can try to find that screen john carmack is using that I posted a few hours back. Can never remember it's name.

Anyway expect to go looking and spending time instead of money unless you want to bother unkle vito with his calibrated units that are both local pickup only and over a grand.

>>390049851
Oh and a lot of no-name ones that are a bit larger are just rebranded sony trinitrons so you might want to check what you already have for a trinny. It's probably the one that looks better than the rest.

Theres also shadowmask versus aperture grill, but I didn't make the distinction. Both are great.

>>390029107
>CRT
i am so fucking glad we got off this ancient bullshit technology. i grew up using this shit for years back on my old win98 computer and i fucking hate it so goddamn much. i have never interacted with a CRT screen that didn't give me severe headaches after an hour or two of use. and don't give me that "your refresh rate was too low" bullshit, i always made sure it was set as high as it could go for the monitor i was using and it didn't make them go away. the first time i used an lcd screen was like goddamn magic, i could sit in front of it all day and not have issues.
idk why anyone would want to use this shitty technology other than to bulk up every time they want to move the goddamn thing. sometimes newer is actually better. fuck crts.

>>390050447
Great bait. Early lcds were notorious for giving headaches.

>>390050676
>great bait
eat shit, the first lcd i had was when my mom brought home a winxp dell computer back in 2004. it had a shitty lcd monitor that was tiny and i immediately noticed i could play games on it all day and not get a headache like i did on our old garbage crt piece of shit.

>>390049335
>>390049790
Protip: Use 424x318 if you want a good 4:3 low resolution for your CRT for this game

If you use 320x240 as it is the game outputs really blurry

>>390050447
Well, you weren't alone in that respect. A lot of people would get headaches and eyestrain from the strobing. That said It's still a good technology and not everyone has that issue. Theres plenty of reasons someone would still use a CRT display, and I'm not talking just nostalgia. You can read the thread if you want.

In this case the switch to LCD has solved a genuine issue and your physiologically prevented from using them. Hopefully newer screen technologies will bring their benefits to you in a functional way.

>>390050869
makes sense. i just have terrible memories of it due to that.

File: 1492377816030.jpg (106KB, 724x717px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 724x717px

>>390032805
>this "CINEMATIC MASTERPIECE" people wouldn't shut the fuck up about for 6 months prior to launch was fucking dead and buried week after release

>>390050234
I checked they are insignia

>>390049335
Apparently you can use 4:3 via debug/developer mode or something like that. That's what I read on the Steam Forums anyways

>>390046970
I think that he's talking about what the interface itself can handle, not just the monitor.

>>390050447
Fuck off you fucking millennial
This "ancient tech" is still better than your shitty LCD

>>390051479
VGA can do 2048x1536@85hz no problem so it can probably do 2304x1440@80hz too

>>390051530
pretty sure i'm older than you

>>390050951
I can understand, Other anon had a point. I can stand 60hz CRT but get the same issues with PWM backlights on LCDs. Same idea just at a much faster frequency.

I mean I've used LCD screens along CRT most of my life and until recently primarily CRT. Had to use LCDs at low brightness in a darkened room. I have used three total as my primary display and old 16:10 ACER for the resolution an LG and Currently a CFG70 to hold me over until OLED as newer GPUs need adapters that don't go over 60hz on my CRT. I can leave it strobing all day and not care but whenever theres a PWM backlight I get the same thing.

Funny, two different technologies and pretty much the same reason not to use them.

>>390051902
>strobing all day
Can you explain this issue?

>>390051530
>millennial
That a Generation Z you dumb ass. Millennial are 80's and 90's

ITT: scrubs think having better gear makes them a better player

most of you don't play on the skill level that requires a CRT /v/ is casual as shit

Why are PC monitor aspect ratios screwed up? A 5:4 1280x1050 monitor is meant to be run at 4:3 1024×768 at 85Hz and 4:3 1600×1200 is meant to be run at 1280x1050. What the hell, why would you be expected to play stretched or with black bars?

>>390052439
Sure, Essentially whenever a frame is drawn to a CRT it "flashes" across the screen kind of like a strobe light and it does it incredibly fast. Then it waits until the next update from the computer and does it again.

Some people have issues looking at a flashing light for a long time. Generally it has to be updating much faster than the basic rate people need to see motion. And even if you can't actually see it your brain does. For some reason or another the rate that something has to strobe to not give headaches or eye strain can vary from person to person.

Generally speaking a rate between 70-90hz or times per second is where the majority of people fit in regarding viewing CRT screens for an extended period. I have personally acclimated to this from a young age, or at least I believe so and don't suffer from under normal circumstances. I will admit that past a certain point I do but thats usually over eight hours of constant screen usage and not healthy anyway. I usually get up every hour or so and take a break which is recommended for all screen types anyway. And it generally doesn't happen.

So if you want to prevent headaches and eye strain be sure to take an occasional break, use the highest refresh rate you can and stay hydrated. And possibly lower the brightness of the screen or adjust it's color temperature to a lower value. More red less blue, which can also give people headaches without strobing or flashing.

Theres also other forms of strobing or flashing lights that can cause this depending but thats the gist of it.

>>390053612
So you basically mean sitting behind a screen for entire day.

File: 1285112286458.jpg (59KB, 378x372px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 378x372px

>>390054370
Yep, Been lurking in here since. >>390030621

I ain't got shit to do today. I mean I haven't even been on this site since two years ago... Don't forget your here forever.

And if your worried about deep vein thrombosis or W/E I got a pedal machine with a four digit step counter and I'm pretty sure it's rolled over like four times.

File: 1425760239099s.jpg (3KB, 125x110px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x110px

>>390055295

I mean thats like 40,000 keks

>implying you can be competitive in games like RO2 at that res

File: 200px-1371333204502.jpg (6KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x200px

>>390029107
Is CRT the new flat earth meme?

>>390055295
I just thought that "strobing" is similar issue like PWM to certain lcd displays.

>>390056945
It is, both are rapidly flashing lights. That may or may not cause eye strain and headaches etc.

The frequencies are different enough that you could experience either, neither, or both. CRT strobing just has more you can do about it.

1280x1024 120 FOV is the best for arena shooters in my experience.

>>390038797
>the guy behind Blur Busters is looking for a FW900 to do Freesync tests
This sounds nice, time to go hunting.

>>390048131
>anons disagree with this
i thought underage were back in school

>>390049251
the CD port would technically output whatever resolution you chose, but it was always filtered no matter what options you chose, even if you picked 240p

File: 1341190820479.jpg (8KB, 251x194px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 251x194px

>>390029107
until last month i was using on of those, much better to watch youtube and 720p movies as you are so close to the desk and shit.

using a 21:9 2560x1080 LG now, even at 1080p youtube butcher the quality and shit is so big that i lost immersion over movies.

MISS YOU OLD CRT

>>390030996
golem get ye gone

File: Screenshot-54.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>390029107
GPU passthrough master race

>>390029919
>squares are not rectangular
You are fucking retarded.