I have 2 Eizos (1280x1024) and they, as you may have expected, do not feature a proper (integer) scaling mode. On a more positive note you could have a go at a laptop panel if you happen to know the model. I once bought a used Tecra9100 which features "proper" integer multiple scaling with black borders... although it's dimensions are 1024 times 768. It seems that there are models with a 1280 x 1024 screen available...

The few 1280x1024 monitors (new) on the market, all seem to be business models, and are very conservative with no scaling options.

Not sure why the issue with widescreen monitors, Windows 98 can support it just fine, depending on the graphics card. So you will have a proper 1080p or whatever you're going for desktop.

The graphics card can do the 1:1 scaling for you, but this depends a LOT on what era / year you're going for and what card you have.

Assuming you're using something quite old, like a V3, then the main options that I came across are:

- Philips 18.5" with 1366 x 768. Play at 1024 x 768, which IMO is the BEST, retro gaming resolution and have a 1:1 image
- Aim higher, for 1600 x 1200 and get a 1920 x 1200 monitor. Challenge is that you need much faster hardware to cope at that high resolution and many games have tiny user interface at that resolution.
- Benq high end gaming monitors. They do 1:1 pixel mapping at EVERY SINGLE resolution. It does not get better than this. But they are not cheap

So IMO, solutions exist, but you need to get a widescreen LCD. You will get used to the black bars, I can tell you that.

Here is my 18.5" Philips in action.

1024 x 768 @ 75 Hz 1:1 pixel bliss 😀

I do know of one LCD that can properly scale: 1280x1024 / 1024x768 / 800x600 / 640x480 (and **possibly** 320x240, never tried it) is the IBM T221. It's one of the few monitors to offer advanced scaling because being so expensive I guess they decided to put proper scaler chips in.

The monitor is "widescreen", but runs 4:3 resolutions just fine: it ignores the sides when operating in full screen. AFAIK it's the only LCD which is capable of scaling like that. And as an added bonus you can run it in 3840x2400.

As said above, Benq gaming monitors can do what the OP asked. They mention the scaling feature on the product pages. And in the thread linked, someone took photos of his Benq as evidence 😀

I mostly ok with black bars on sides or top/bottom, as long those black bar are "trully black" and not some light-bleeding reflective shit that most cheap/semi-cheap LCDs gives out.

I use two images/picture to test it this annoying "light-bleeding" properties.
The first picture would simply totally black,
and the second picture similar with the first one, but it contain 1x1 white pixel in the middle.
Both pictures size should be match with monitor native resolution so they can cover entire screen without any scaling,
they can easily made using mspaint.

Use your favorite image viewer to view each pictures alternatively.

philscomputerlab wrote:

As said above, Benq gaming monitors can do what the OP asked. They mention the scaling feature on the product pages. And in the thread linked, someone took photos of his Benq as evidence 😀

I have the BenQ FP241VW and, well, the scalling is not impressive. I either use it at native resolution (1920x1200) or 1:1. Or software (nVidia) scalling, but that's on a Core i7 PC. I also bought a NEC LCD1990SXi for my older gear. It does 1280x1024, can do 1:1 and works with Sync on Green (important for old workstations and Macs).

1:1 is what the OP wants.

1:1 1280 x 1024 on a 1080p panel should be big enough?

philscomputerlab wrote:

Not sure why the issue with widescreen monitors

I could probably live with an 18.5" 1366x768 monitor, but those will likely be gone in a few years. Might as well move on to 1080p. I can skip the 24" monitors, as the high pixel density will make 1:1 1024x768 pretty much useless. (It would be like having 14" monitor - yuck.)

That leaves me with the 27" models. To get 1:1 pixel mapping, I would need a $300+ high-end gaming LCD. Considering that I would only be using it for retro gaming, this seems overkill. If I stick with 1:1 pixel mapping, I would typically be using less than 40% of the screen real estate, yet I would still have a 27" monster hogging my desk. Worse yet, I can easily see myself getting tired of black bars and switching to aspect-preserving scaling, in which case I would be back to living with a blurry picture. On top of it all, I'd still have all the familiar LCD problems (washed out colors, bad black levels, input lag, etc.). This does not sound like $300+ worth of fun.

GL1zdA wrote:

I have the BenQ FP241VW and, well, the scalling is not impressive.

That's good to know. I hate how it's impossible to tell how monitors perform at non-native resolutions without trying them out.

GL1zdA wrote:

I also bought a NEC LCD1990SXi for my older gear.

Hooray, they do exist! Or did, rather... looks like that model is no longer available. Also, the specs say 18ms response time? Ouch. Still, the scaling sounds pretty sweet. Does it work with both VGA and DVI, or only DVI?

http://i.imgur.com/CZR9YVr.jpg

I'm also confused as what you actually want. On the one hand you have been "looking for years", but products are already out, and have been for a while, that do what you want. $400 is not much money for a screen that you will have for many years.

philscomputerlab wrote:

I'm also confused as what you actually want.

You're right, I should have stated this up front. Fantasy time. 😎

I want a 19" monitor that can display every resolution between 320x200 and 1280x1024 with perfect clarity. I also want accurate colors, true blacks, zero input lag, 180° viewing angles in both directions, and support for 120 Hz at every resolution.

Since this doesn't appear to exist, my choices are gently used 19" CRTs (which are increasingly becoming unobtainium), 19" 1280x1024 LCDs with no scaling options, and 27" 1080p LCDs with all the problems outlined in my previous post.

I'm just frustrated that it's 2015 and we still don't have anything like a CRT replacement. All we have is used up CRTs, bad LCDs, and less bad LCDs.

It's almost like the rest of the world doesn't care about retro gaming! Oh, wait...

Someone should start producing a retro CRT. One that is multi-sync, Scart RGB, VGA, can do 120 Hz+ and everything else 😀

I tackled the issue by using multiple screens. Not for everyone, but it suits me:

DOS games: Either the Philips 18.5" or my large Samsung 24" Both have 4:3 scaling options

1024 x 768: Philips 18.5" for a really sharp image. Has some light bleeding, but you quickly get over it

1280 x 1024: I have 3 LCDs. A Samsung 19", A brand new Asus 19" and a LG 17"

1600 x 1200: Samsung 24" which has scaling options (1920 x 1200 panel) and does pixel perfect 1600 x 1200

"True Blacks"? Stop right their not gonna happen, until Oled screens become available we're out of luck I have a 24" Dell U2412M which does 4:3 scaling blacks don't compare to CRT.

An update for anyone interested:

I got tired of using my 15" LCD and fired up my old CRT again. It was having problems when I put it away, but seems to be fine now... fingers crossed.

Long story short, I was completely blown away, and remembered why I was making such a big deal on this thread about there being no good CRT alternatives. Gentlemen, the difference between CRTs and LCDs is not minor or trivial - it is night and day. The colors, the black levels, the silky smooth 85+ Hz refresh rate, the slightly blurry picture that almost makes antialiasing unnecessary... it's just heavenly. Granted, the LCD I was using is old and crappy, but the new ones are just newer and slightly less crappy. They're all basically the same.

I should also mention that this is not some high-end Trinitron. It's an el cheapo 17" Chuntex that I rescued from the dumpster when I was in middle school.

I know there are a lot of CRT fanatics here, so I feel like I'm preaching to the choir a bit. I have to say, though, that I'm always amazed how quickly I forget what the CRT experience is like. I would even go so far as to say anyone who hasn't used a CRT in a few years no longer has any idea what they're missing. It's just too easy to get used to the inferior LCD experience.

I appreciate all the suggestions I received in this thread, but I've decided (at least for the moment) that my time and money would be better spent hunting gently-used CRTs. I'm increasingly convinced that even the best LCD would still be a poor substitute. I really, really hope the industry proves me wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up anymore.

So, the Craigslist trawling begins anew... wish me luck!

When you say "used up CRTs", are you sure that the tubes are what's going bad? Perhaps these monitors could benefit from a re-capping? The reason say this is because I have seen repairs of many 50+ year old CRTs that still test strong. Do fine dot pitch CRTs last significantly less?

maximus wrote:

An update for anyone interested: […]
Show full quote

An update for anyone interested:

I got tired of using my 15" LCD and fired up my old CRT again. It was having problems when I put it away, but seems to be fine now... fingers crossed.

Long story short, I was completely blown away, and remembered why I was making such a big deal on this thread about there being no good CRT alternatives. Gentlemen, the difference between CRTs and LCDs is not minor or trivial - it is night and day. The colors, the black levels, the silky smooth 85+ Hz refresh rate, the slightly blurry picture that almost makes antialiasing unnecessary... it's just heavenly. Granted, the LCD I was using is old and crappy, but the new ones are just newer and slightly less crappy. They're all basically the same.

I should also mention that this is not some high-end Trinitron. It's an el cheapo 17" Chuntex that I rescued from the dumpster when I was in middle school.

I know there are a lot of CRT fanatics here, so I feel like I'm preaching to the choir a bit. I have to say, though, that I'm always amazed how quickly I forget what the CRT experience is like. I would even go so far as to say anyone who hasn't used a CRT in a few years no longer has any idea what they're missing. It's just too easy to get used to the inferior LCD experience.

I appreciate all the suggestions I received in this thread, but I've decided (at least for the moment) that my time and money would be better spent hunting gently-used CRTs. I'm increasingly convinced that even the best LCD would still be a poor substitute. I really, really hope the industry proves me wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up anymore.

So, the Craigslist trawling begins anew... wish me luck!

Totally agree.
As stated I'm using Eizos for my reading/browsing which have stellar colors but a good CRT is still superior for "fun stuff".
Even my cheap 15" Belinea screen has a unique quality when I fire up some Dos games on it. I wish some little genius would be able to make new CRTs, although I think there are still manufacturers out there but totally high end. In the end CRTs should get the same respect as tube driven audio devices and live on as a niche product for gourmets.

There is a working CRT at work. Might have to take it home and check it out 😀

maximus, you're totally preaching to the converted. 🤣

mockingbird wrote:

When you say "used up CRTs", are you sure that the tubes are what's going bad? Perhaps these monitors could benefit from a re-capping? The reason say this is because I have seen repairs of many 50+ year old CRTs that still test strong. Do fine dot pitch CRTs last significantly less?

In my experience, when PC CRTs are worn, they're really worn, unlike vintage TVs which might display a totally acceptable picture even down to 50% of original emission. I have some conjectures about this:

• The thinner necks and smaller cathode surfaces needed for a finer beam do last less compared to the big monsters of old, especially when factoring in cost-reducing East Asian manufacturing.
• Cathode wear on PC CRTs tends to be on the high side and uniform among all three guns - I believe this is due to WYSIWYG/GUI type interfaces which mostly display a bright white screen for hours on end, causing such a wear pattern. Television imagery is a lot more 'average', causing most cathode wear on the middle of the emission curve.
• High-res displays by nature are driven much harder and small imperfections are much more objectionable.
• Default brightness/contrast levels used to be rather high on many displays, leading to premature wear if not toned down, coupled with those dark-tinted anti-glare screen filters you've got the ultimate tube-killing recipe.

amadeus777999 wrote:

I wish some little genius would be able to make new CRTs, although I think there are still manufacturers out there but totally high end. In the end CRTs should get the same respect as tube driven audio devices and live on as a niche product for gourmets.

I'd love to see that happen, but deep down I know it won't. 😢
There's no 'hipster love' for analog video like there is for analog audio, and the economics & logistics of manufacturing & shipping all that leaded glass make it unfeasible for small production runs. CRT manufacturing has become a lost art, and with more and more of them going into landfills every day, working examples will become museum artifacts.

maximus wrote:

Long story short, I was completely blown away, and remembered why I was making such a big deal on this thread about there being no good CRT alternatives. Gentlemen, the difference between CRTs and LCDs is not minor or trivial - it is night and day. The colors, the black levels, the silky smooth 85+ Hz refresh rate, the slightly blurry picture that almost makes antialiasing unnecessary... it's just heavenly. Granted, the LCD I was using is old and crappy, but the new ones are just newer and slightly less crappy. They're all basically the same.

I appreciate all the suggestions I received in this thread, but I've decided (at least for the moment) that my time and money would be better spent hunting gently-used CRTs. I'm increasingly convinced that even the best LCD would still be a poor substitute. I really, really hope the industry proves me wrong, but I'm not getting my hopes up anymore.

So, the Craigslist trawling begins anew... wish me luck!

Lol I totally agree. I was reading this tread just waiting for you to come to your senses! 🤣 j/k! I'm glad you did though....Good luck finding another CRT, I am sure something will turn up.

I personally like my 22" and 21" sony trinitrons. Check out this earlier thread just to wet your whistle a bit of some of the CRT's out there (I'm sure you have seen many, but just in case you missed it)...Post pics of your CRT monitors.

The huge on screen real estate, sharp image, deep blacks and being able to scale every resolution I need so well can't be beat (well it can be beat - but by some other CRTs and not by any LCD I have come across so far 🤣).

I think the main reason many people just compromise on using inferior LCD's just because of the weight and space they take up, but for me it's worth it. I mean it's still amazes me that I can find so many high quality CRT's for so cheap or even free. They just work better for retro computing. I have many scaling devices made by Extron that get pretty close to scaling and processing nice lag free images on my 42" LCD Sony TV, but I keep turning back to my CRT's for the best image and scaling options.