1080p (full HD)LED60Hz16:9a problem solved for eternity. but let me guess, you need "more"?
yeah
>>109841507Yeah I tested the 240 hz and I can never go back
If I ever upgrade I will go with 2160p since I only play old games and some small dev titles anyway
>>1098415104k, nice
>>109841507I don't need a monitor because I can imagine what the video output would look like in real time.
>>109841507A little bit more, yes.
>>109841507Yes, more height, I hate widescreens.
Imagine not having a 6K display
>>109841507It's crazy how today you can find an ok 24" FHD monitor for like 70 bucks.Five years ago this wasn't possible. When you looked for the cheapest monitors, they were all creaky older unsold models with a brightness of 250cd/m2.Not sure what happened but a lot of serious brands are now making models for this lowest entry level tier and they have decent specs. Like you can get one with 175Hz refresh rate, 300cd/m2 brightness, 1ms response time, 100% sRGB, FHD, 24", IPS, 1000:1 contrast for just 66 bucks.
>>109841964Nah I'm pretty happy with a 4k tv and a 2k monitor.
>>109841507As far as I'm concerned, anyone that cares about graphic or image quality is an NPC consoomer.
>>109841507> LEDLCD with another meme of the day backlight
>>109841507>1080pthat just tells everyone you dont do any actual work
>>109841507Yes. The bezel is too thick.
>>109841507I got a 1440p 32" 180hz panel, and while the size/res is great because it's exactly what I wanted from the upgrade, 60 vs 120+fps has been rather negligible in most games once I stop actively paying attention to it. Not that it isn't nice to have sometimes but not necessary for sure.
>>1098415071536p (QXGA)CRT160hz4:3let me guess, you're using something worse?
>>109841507I very specifically need >1200p or 1600p>IPS or VA>120hz>16:10>24" or larger Right now the only options are small portable displays or desktop monitors at 100hz
>>109842564>SONY TORINOTORON GDM-F520That CRT is 1300 TVL, or 990p vertical. even less than 1080p. This is the sharpest CRT grille ever made, and has worse sharpness than a 1080p LCD.
>>109842564>1536p>(usually used at 1024x768 back in the day because high resolutions were too blurry)
>>109842917I'm actually impressed someone on nu-/g/ was able to cite approximately correct values for this monitor. I actually own this monitor.But you know yourself measuring AGs by just TVL is quite reductive. This monitor can definitely view 1536p no problem, as long as you don't expect it to resolve *horizontal* moire patterns.>>109843012This monitor has more than fast enough amplifiers to resolve 400MHz resolutions with slew rate to spare.
>>109843020
>>109843033Posting LLM hallucinated slop is not an argument and should be a bannable offense
>>109841507>but let me guess, you need "more"?I have more. Problem?
>>109843038Posting crtrschizo hallucinated slop is not an argument and should be a bannable offense
>>109843042I actually own this monitor though. It does not meaningfully become any softer when viewing 400MHz resolutions.
>>109843020>I'm actually impressed someone on nu-/g/ was able to cite approximately correct values for this monitor. I actually own this monitor.t.
>>1098415074k is fine because you can just stretch 1080p to it for fps gainz when necessary
>>109843020I got its service manual pulled up.>fast enough amplifiers to resolve 400MHz no doubt the video amplifiers have overkill bandwidth, however grill pitch is the limiting factor way earlier, due to aliasing.>grille pitch 0.22mm>403.8mm viewable horiz>0.72 kell factor>403.8/0.22 * 0.72 ~ 1300 TVL>>109843012trvth.
>>109843127just use DLSS, looks better than normal upscaling
>>109842917what... if you are such expert in CRTs, which computer display CRT has highest resolution and solid refresh rate, how are they all 640p or whatever but push 4K? why is thi sony GMD F520 sharpest ever made, and have worse sharpness than p1080p despite being 1536p
>>109842917I have an even worse model from that Sony lineup and 1440p is just perfectly sharp.
>>109843146There's way sharper CRTs than the F520. But they aren't AG.
>>109843162CRTs without any mask/grille at all like monochrome medial CRTs or Mitsubishi shadow masks.
>>109843140Yes I've run those kell factor calculations myself and actually tested on the monitor that indeed 1280x960 is about the maximum resolution where you can resolve any and all moire pattern.Which for a CRT is a crazy achievement, most tubes can't resolve moire patterns correctly at any resolution (yet they were still useful displays ...).>trvthThis was only an issue on consumer grade 17" garbage.Even my 1997 CPD-300SF's archaic curved .30mm grille can resolve 1200p and look good doing so. >>109843117I chuckled >>109843162No there are not, ignoring monochrome monitors. SMs come nowhere near AGs, no matter how much you fudge your dot pitch values.
>>109843180>AG>SM>dot pitchwhat the fuck are you talking about
>>109843198You do not belong here
>>109843146I am no expert. My IQ is 77, anon.>how are they all 640p or whatever but push 4K?CRT accept any resolution within their horiz and vert sync range. 4K+ is possible with a top end CRT. those kinda resolutions are not resolvable by the grille, they are finer than the electron beam diameter itself, whose power follows kind of a 3D Gaussian type distribution.>>109843155It might look sharp. relatively unsharp v.s. a 1080p 24" monitor. Only the top end CRTs can even come close. Check a 1 px black/white vertical strip test image. We agree 'sharpness' is an alias for pixel density?>1080p 24" LCD>92.3 DPI>SONY TORINOTORON F520 @ 1300 TVL>83.8>>109843180>crazy achievementyes, still very impressive.
>>109843302>>My IQ is 77, anon.>CRTtard outsmarted by a literally retard
>>109843336Outsmarted where?
>>109841507I used to clown on people like OP but I'm so burned out on technology and now old I guess that I kind of agree at this point
>>109843394You should try a 4K 27" display, they are pretty cheap these days and look great
>>109843666OLED* display
>>109843693Those are shit. QD OLED get micro scratches if you wipe them with literally anything, and WOLED has terrible banding and other crap artifacts.
>>109843722>and WOLED has terrible banding and other crap artifacts.A huge overexaggerated meme parroted by people who never used OLED hands on. More dependent on model, panel and software than a fact.
