Perhaps you are not judging the same "source image"? (you did not post any details so I can only assume) On those old cards you are probably running something like Win98 or XP which has fonts and UI optimized to look nice and sharp on CRTs. Newer versions of Windows with ClearType and UI scaling appear a bit blurry on CRTs because these are designed for LCDs. You should also wait 30-60 minutes for the voltage to stabilize, before that the picture appears lighter, larger, blurrier, skewed and can even have a color tint.

You could try using Irfanview (works in i think most versions of Windows) and load some test patterns fullscreen with 1:1 pixel mapping for your resolution. Make sure to use the same resolution and refresh rate.

I havent noticed any pressing issues with analog output on modern GPUs myself, I was switching some game back and forth (2 PCs, BNC+VGA) using the front-panel slider button and there was no difference. These days I am using a DisplayPort>VGA convertor with its own integrated DAC (500MHz!) for latest GPUs and its just fine. You would really need to dive into relatively special things such as 10-bit colors and ICM/LUT calibration to run into some issues.

Also, the picture appears blurrier (and produces less nits) the higher the refresh rate. Dark text on white background always looks blurry on CRTs (which is why you didnt need anti-aliasing for fonts in older Windows) but I like this imperfection because it adds a slight bloom/softness to games.

I used a GTX 970 on an HP P1230 (can do 2048x1536 at 85Hz or 1600x1200 at 106Hz) for a while and it looked fine in Windows 7 and in Windows 10.

The refresh rate makes the biggest difference in clarity, especially at higher resolutions. Lowering the refresh a bit can greatly improved text clarity.

duga3 wrote:

These days I am using a DisplayPort>VGA convertor with its own integrated DAC (500MHz!) for latest GPUs and its just fine.

Can you tell what converter you're using ? I'm quite interested in such a thing since it seems RGB output is bye bye on new stuff and HDMI converters are not able to do any high resolutions (more than 1920x1080) and/or refresh rates.

Tiido wrote:

duga3 wrote:

These days I am using a DisplayPort>VGA convertor with its own integrated DAC (500MHz!) for latest GPUs and its just fine.

Can you tell what converter you're using ? I'm quite interested in such a thing since it seems RGB output is bye bye on new stuff and HDMI converters are not able to do any high resolutions (more than 1920x1080) and/or refresh rates.

Sure: http://www.sunix.com/product/DPU3000.html You should also buy your own cables, they may not be included. With that you can run resolutions higher than you normally could, thanks to the higher 500MHz pixel clock, such as 3056x1910@60Hz/119kHz. Works fine in any of the highest refresh rates as well (with lower resolutions of course). There is no perceived lag even when I am playing instagib rail mods in Quake III Arena (at 1104x690@160Hz/121kHz).

Thänk you ~
It seems to be quite expensive so I'll have to save up...

Thanks for the quick response! I am a an adept of higher refresh rates, love even the way mouse cursor moves on 120+ hz. So i use only 100+ hz and yes it is blurrier than 60hz, but as i said radeon 9700 and voodoo deals with that just fine.

I didn't know the info about windows 7 fonts on crt, i guess it is a part of the problem since i was using win2000 with my radeons and voodoo and it was indeed much sharper. The hdmi-vga dongle converter i was using is very cheap. Didn't know that there are better solutions like Sunix, so Duga3 thanx, i guess i will try them out.

The DAC MHz specification in the graphics controller's data sheet is what you want to know. There are big differences.

what about this adapters? or is it better to use a native VGA Card with native VGA like 980 Ti ?

Variant 1 (Delock 85262, USB-C DP ALT Mode, ITE IT6516BFN + Cypress) :https://www.delock.de/produkte/865_USB-C--Ste … 2/merkmale.html
Variant 2 (Delock 62967, DP 1.2 -> VGA, Analogix ANX9847): https://www.delock.de/produkte/S_62967/merkmale.html

GokuSS4 wrote on 2020-03-20, 16:42:

what about this adapters? or is it better to use a native VGA Card with native VGA like 980 Ti ?

Variant 1 (Delock 85262, USB-C DP ALT Mode, ITE IT6516BFN + Cypress) :https://www.delock.de/produkte/865_USB-C--Ste … 2/merkmale.html
Variant 2 (Delock 62967, DP 1.2 -> VGA, Analogix ANX9847): https://www.delock.de/produkte/S_62967/merkmale.html

Those converters work fine mostly but they will usually output @ 60Hz wich is straining to look at on a CRT because you will perceive the flicker. Often a converter will also introduce image tearing is the monitor isn't synced anymore. The purpose of those converters is more connecting modern devices to old projectors and TFTs imho.

The VGA out capabilities of a video card depend fully on the integrated DAC. I have no idea how good or bad the one in a GTX 980 Ti is.

Deflektor wrote on 2019-05-11, 12:14:

Hi guys, i have a Crt Sony GDM F520 monitor. So here is the problem - it works great with radeon 9700 - the image quality is jus […]
Show full quote

Hi guys, i have a Crt Sony GDM F520 monitor. So here is the problem - it works great with radeon 9700 - the image quality is just superb, text and images are very sharp. Voodoo 3\5 - also great. Geforce 6600 - a little bit inferior in terms of sharpness but still good. But i want to push it further in more modern games at high framerates.

I've tried using it with MSI 750ti gpu and the result is bad. Really bad - VGA output quality is blurry as hell. Like using a hdmi-vga converter, only it was native vga output. I've used Gtx 460m from laptop - same thing, even worse.

So the question is - what is the most recent gpu with good vga output? Is there any? Anyone tried gt730 with crt? Radeon r7 240?

If they all bad, what is the last gpu generation with good vga output? Something like radeon hd 5770 maybe?

Also, what about the integrated graphics? Maybe Ryzen 2400 with vega on some expensive motherboard with vga output will be better? Please help.

I've seen the same thing. Especially at lower resolutions it's obvious that newer cards aren't producing as crisp an image.
Tested a GeForce GT 240 / GTX 960 and a Radeon X800 / HD6670 and the Radeon was the clear winner, Text was much clearer @ 1024x768 on a 19inch Trinitron.

GeForce 5 FX was the last Geforce to have what I would consider a more industry standard naturally sharp VGA output.
Geforce 6 VGA output in comparison is more saturated. Though visually appealing, it does output a slightly blurrier image, especially text.
Geforce 7 Series cards produces the same saturated image as 6 And I find it tolerable. the GT 240/9600gt/GTX 960 by comparison have awful blurry text. It effects the Bios, Windows/98SE/XP it doesn't matter.