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

Enhanced Interrogator said:
That's gotta be with DSR/DLDSR.

What's the output resolution?
Click to expand...
Not sure how to actually check the output resolution 🤔 but this is a custom res within NVCP that I'm sure is being downscaled by the gpu. I just enjoy the resulting image and the complete absence of any aliasing. 😀
 
Last edited:
I noticed NVCC allows you to create a custom resolution with more pixels than the actual output. I think for gaming this is pretty equivalent to using the resolution % slider in game settings. I'd be curious to do some comparison testing.

1689695917946.png
 
Enhanced Interrogator said:
That's gotta be with DSR/DLDSR.

What's the output resolution?
Click to expand...
Yes that's really strange, you'd need a 160kHz CRT to output that resolution/refresh. And if it's not DSR, he's probably either using some messy custom timings to output that or Windows is scaling somehow.
Either way, that's far from optimal, it would be better to use CRU to edit whatever resolution he wishes to use along DSR.
He also could check the OSD info to see what kind of horizontal frequency is being output by the monitor.
 
tongshadow said:
Yes that's really strange, you'd need a 160kHz CRT to output that resolution/refresh. And if it's not DSR, he's probably either using some messy custom timings to output that or Windows is scaling somehow.
Either way, that's far from optimal, it would be better to use CRU to edit whatever resolution he wishes to use along DSR.
He also could check the OSD info to see what kind of horizontal frequency is being output by the monitor.
Click to expand...
Tell you what....pull out your 140khz crt and show me what "benefits" you refer to? Unoptimized? A simple custom res within NVCP being down sampled by the GPU seems pretty "optimized" to me. Result? A clean image free of any aliasing, smooth refresh rate and zero motion blur to boot! Tell me...what else do I use a crt for that I can gain from your "optimized" approach?
 
Last edited:
cesarioFL71 said:
Not sure how to actually check the output resolution 🤔
Click to expand...
Windows display settings>adavanced, then check “active display mode”

There a possibility this could be wrong as well, Nvidia might obfuscate it, you want to double check by bringing up your monitor’s OSD and check horizontal kHz
cesarioFL71 said:
Tell you what....pull out your 140khz crt and show me what "benefits" your refer to? Unoptimized? A simple custom res within NVCP being down sampled by the GPU seems pretty "optimized" to me. Result? A clean image free of any aliasing, smooth refresh rate and zero motion blur to boot! Tell me...what else do I use a crt for that I can gain from your "optimized" approach?
Click to expand...

DLDSR will give better results:

 
Enhanced Interrogator said:
Windows display settings>adavanced, then check “active display mode”

There a possibility this could be wrong as well, Nvidia might obfuscate it, you want to double check by bringing up your monitor’s OSD and check horizontal kHz


DLDSR will give better results:

Click to expand...

I do appreciate the information but to a guy like me this is just splitting hairs. I game just to game and enjoy "the game". I know approaches like DF and it's image quality analysis has it's place and it's proponents but for me it's much ado about nothing. A little extra antialiasing is just the cherry on top for me. :)
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-07-18 170852.jpg
    Screenshot 2023-07-18 170852.jpg
    109.5 KB · Views: 1
cesarioFL71 said:
I do appreciate the information but to a guy like me this is just splitting hairs. I game just to game and enjoy "the game". I know approaches like DF and it's image quality analysis has it's place and it's proponents but for me it's much ado about nothing. A little extra antialiasing is just the cherry on top for me. :)
Click to expand...
You're not getting any "anti-aliasing", you're just getting a blurrier picture because that's just poor software upscaling. DSR/DLDSR will give you MUCH better results like Interrogator said.
 
Unless you're comparing an LCD next to a CRT in person, arguing details is utterly pointless. I suppose the devil is in the details and it's just not worth staying in hell.
 
cesarioFL71 said:
Agreed. I just can't get into the entire, "Looking at trees in Crysis, and telephone poles in Spiderman: Miles Morales" amplified 2.5x for imperfections and such. To me pc gaming is about "big fun" period! The whole focus on DSR, DLDSR and all the other image tools are just niceties to have but they don't make or break the experience for me. I made a point about image quality on a crt and what it offers. Yes, I love the way games look on a crt by nature of the way analog technology presents the image i/e; blacks, contrast, softness of the image, but that's the extent for me as far as the importance of image quality. The other factors like mouse response, motion quality, combined with a beautiful analog image are what makes CRT the prime tech for gaming for my personal use case. Everything else in the PC gaming image quality space is just extra and quite frankly really shines on digital display tech. Therefore, I don't really care or pay attention to it.
Click to expand...
Same here
 
I think some modern graphics tech works better on CRT, by accident. Like TAA. It can look grainy and noisy on LCDs, but CRTs add some smoothness to make it feel more film-like
 
I believe it would be total tube replacement if the blue gun has failed. I'm not familiar with the particulars of the FW900 though.
 
 
Let me start this post post with a huge thanks to Enhanced Interogator and Tongsshadow for suggesting I try out DLDSR. All I can say is I'm impressed...very impressed! I never thought my crt could look any better, but it does......by a HUGE margin! What a feat Nvidia has accomplished with this technology. With DLDSR factor of 2.25 and DSR smoothness set to "0" with in game resolution of 2880x2160@85hz I've never seen such gaming goodness. This tech makes in game visuals look like CGI! :) Of course my lousy camera phone can't do the images any justice but I'm so looking forward to testing out more games. Thanks again!!!!
20230719_205617.jpg
20230719_210541.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20230719_210057.jpg
    20230719_210057.jpg
    427 KB · Views: 1
  • 20230719_205509 (1).jpg
    20230719_205509 (1).jpg
    364 KB · Views: 1
  • 20230719_205557.jpg
    20230719_205557.jpg
    302.9 KB · Views: 1
That does look quite good!

This is why it's good that Digital Foundry is nitpicky. They dive deep and experiment and learn about these types of features, then spread the word.
 
cesarioFL71 said:
...mouse response...
Click to expand...
Sometimes I feel like this is my main reason. I'm one of the old farts that has been gaming with first person shooters since the early 90s. When I first tested an LCD for gaming in the mid 2000s, people thought I was crazy when I mentioned I felt lag between the time you push the mouse and the time movement occurs on the screen, but it is 100% there. I haven't tested a high performance LCD in gaming since the early 2010, and I still felt lag back then with input response. I don't even bother reading specs anymore because input lag seems to be something subjective. I'm very curious how a high performance gaming OLED performs these days in terms of input lag.
 
Flybye said:
Sometimes I feel like this is my main reason. I'm one of the old farts that has been gaming with first person shooters since the early 90s. When I first tested an LCD for gaming in the mid 2000s, people thought I was crazy when I mentioned I felt lag between the time you push the mouse and the time movement occurs on the screen, but it is 100% there. I haven't tested a high performance LCD in gaming since the early 2010, and I still felt lag back then with input response. I don't even bother reading specs anymore because input lag seems to be something subjective. I'm very curious how a high performance gaming OLED performs these days in terms of input lag.
Click to expand...
Same here. Also add that terrible motion blur 🤮🤮🤮
 
Flybye said:
Sometimes I feel like this is my main reason. I'm one of the old farts that has been gaming with first person shooters since the early 90s. When I first tested an LCD for gaming in the mid 2000s, people thought I was crazy when I mentioned I felt lag between the time you push the mouse and the time movement occurs on the screen, but it is 100% there. I haven't tested a high performance LCD in gaming since the early 2010, and I still felt lag back then with input response. I don't even bother reading specs anymore because input lag seems to be something subjective. I'm very curious how a high performance gaming OLED performs these days in terms of input lag.
Click to expand...


i tested a friends LG OLED C1 with fighting game, 60hz, 60fps (vsync off) oled latency boost mode enabled setting if i remeber correclty the name of that setting, recorded pressed inputs of the game at 60 fps camera recording, then played back with frame to frame player and observer the same frame delays i have observed on my pc and crt monitor, so seem to be no diference input lag compared to a crt or if there is some diference, must be very minimal, however i was not able that enable that latency boost setting when enabling BFI both at same time on that TV, which with BFI enabled increased input lag on that test by 1 frame.

personaly the main reason i am still stuck and prefer CRT to anything modern for gaming overall (retro and modern gaming) is motion quality, things like HDR are not such big deal for me, motion quality rather vastly increases more realistic life like feeling of a game for my tastes, its like the brain asossiates crt motion quality like with real life where you dont see things getting blured, articafted, doble imaged or such in real life as happens with crt and makes you feel more like "introduced" into the the game as you move.

sure the C1 does a great job with it BFI mode for motion quality when using oled motion pro high at 120hz, although its about 3-4 ms MPRT instead of CRT 1ms, i have realized than when watching at some distance the TV motion looks like CRT motion, but the requiremet of 120 constant fps for that is rather a disappointment, and 60 hz motion quality is critical for me which the C1 can only achieve something like 8 ms MPRT not as good as at 120hz.

i am aware there are modern monitors capable of crt like 1ms motion quality such the viewsonic XG2431 IPS at 60hz, but the flawfest tradeoff it carries with it compared to a crt monitor is unaceptable to me (lke baldy reduced brightness down to half the crt peak brighness, more notable agresive flcker than crt, IPS light glow, light bleed ,etc.



cesarioFL71 said:
C2 OLED sitting next to a NIB 21in Sun GDM 5410, a Cornerstone P1500 and more recently a mint condition under 12k hours HP P1230 22in crt. I can tell you in my personal experience with OLED that it's as close as it gets to a crt replacement but it's still not there yet.
Click to expand...


curious to know it the C2 have that option called " latency boost" or "boost latency" setting sometihng like that? one of the reason my friend prefered the C1 over the C2 was presisely he was told latency is lower on C1 than on the C2 gaming related, and by watching some test like this comparing C1 vs C2 in latency regard, C1 seem indeed to have lower input lag
 
3dfan said:
i tested a friends LG OLED C1 with fighting game, 60hz, 60fps (vsync off) oled latency boost mode enabled setting if i remeber correclty the name of that setting, recorded pressed inputs of the game at 60 fps camera recording, then played back with frame to frame player and observer the same frame delays i have observed on my pc and crt monitor, so seem to be no diference input lag compared to a crt or if there is some diference, must be very minimal, however i was not able that enable that latency boost setting when enabling BFI both at same time on that TV, which with BFI enabled increased input lag on that test by 1 frame.

personaly the main reason i am still stuck and prefer CRT to anything modern for gaming overall (retro and modern gaming) is motion quality, things like HDR are not such big deal for me, motion quality rather vastly increases more realistic life like feeling of a game for my tastes, its like the brain asossiates crt motion quality like with real life where you dont see things getting blured, articafted, doble imaged or such in real life as happens with crt and makes you feel more like "introduced" into the the game as you move.

sure the C1 does a great job with it BFI mode for motion quality when using oled motion pro high at 120hz, although its about 3-4 ms MPRT instead of CRT 1ms, i have realized than when watching at some distance the TV motion looks like CRT motion, but the requiremet of 120 constant fps for that is rather a disappointment, and 60 hz motion quality is critical for me which the C1 can only achieve something like 8 ms MPRT not as good as at 120hz.

i am aware there are modern monitors capable of crt like 1ms motion quality such the viewsonic XG2431 IPS at 60hz, but the flawfest tradeoff it carries with it compared to a crt monitor is unaceptable to me (lke baldy reduced brightness down to half the crt peak brighness, more notable agresive flcker than crt, IPS light glow, light bleed ,etc.






curious to know it the C2 have that option called " latency boost" or "boost latency" setting sometihng like that? one of the reason my friend prefered the C1 over the C2 was presisely he was told latency is lower on C1 than on the C2 gaming related, and by watching some test like this comparing C1 vs C2 in latency regard, C1 seem indeed to have lower input lag
Click to expand...
I have a 42C2 as well and do not recall a "latency boost" option but it does have "Game Mode" which is supposed to decrease input lag. I am the same, I have the Dell P1110 and the closest I have came to the response of that monitor is the OLED.
 
Petrasescu_Lucian said:
Same here. Also add that terrible motion blur 🤮🤮🤮
Click to expand...
OMG..it's the FIRST thing I turn off in games!
cesarioFL71 said:
I've had a 42in C2 OLED sitting next to a NIB 21in Sun GDM 5410, a Cornerstone P1500 and more recently a mint condition under 12k hours HP P1230 22in crt. I can tell you in my personal experience with OLED that it's as close as it gets to a crt replacement but it's still not there yet. Input lag is still just a hair too much for my taste. It helps you to notice it when you've got both techs sitting right next to each other and you can immediately switch back and forth. The only thing OLED wins over crt is form factor and screen size. Funny thing is my brain adjust to the smaller screen size within 15 -20 minutes of switching so even there OLED really offers no benefit to me. The blacks on my crts are just as good as OLED. You can argue that OLED wins out in that area due to the halo effect exhibited by crt when the edges of blacks and whites meet on screen. To me, the halo effect is minimal and inconsequential. That said, I don't need to tell you which monitors get most of my gaming time. 😀
Click to expand...
Sad, isn't it? I feel that an entire generation of hit scan games were obliterated because of LCDs. Good to know I'm not the only one sensitive to the input lag. Maybe others have input lag between their hands and their eyes which is why they don't notice it. :ROFLMAO:
 
DooLocsta said:
I have a 42C2 as well and do not recall a "latency boost" option but it does have "Game Mode" which is supposed to decrease input lag. I am the same, I have the Dell P1110 and the closest I have came to the response of that monitor is the OLED.
Click to expand...
What he said.....
 
i remeber the C1 also have the "game mode" i think its called "game optimizer" and inside of this mode setting is the setting "latency boost", which seems to improve latency even further than in just its game mode, the lack of "latency boost" in the game mode of C2 could explain why C1 latency seem better.

also C2 seem only to have BFi availabe at on refresh rate instead of C1 two

ridiculous!, they downgrade latency and bfi quality on the later models, the later the model the worse it gets when latter models should rather be an improvment than the previous models.
and now with latest oled monitors with 0 BFI options the situation seem even worse
if something have deeply disaponted me over the years in technology is gaming display industry.
 
Strat_84 said:
:ROFLMAO:

I'm always stunned to see how people try to make an obvious flaw look like a virtue ... :yuck:
Click to expand...
Agreed. There was a time around here when it was sorta fashionable to remove your AG. That is until we realized how bone headed it was unless your AG was in really bad shape.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top