VOGONS


Reply 160 of 295, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Oh, I thought you were using one of these old, ~2008 era 1600x1200 monitors.

I did try a 1920x1200 monitor last year, but I was a bit disappointed by it. As far as I understand, almost all 1920x1200 displays use an IPS panel (a few use PLS, which is a similar tech), and I found it to have pretty bad ghosting (and text smearing as well), as compared to the current TN panel I use. Also IPS are pretty slow unfortunately, they are advertised as 76 Hz maximum; the one I tried would support 70 Hz but with dropped frames. It'd be excellent to have a 1920x1200 TN panel that could do up to 144 Hz, have a VGA input and an option to force the input into 1600x1200 (and subpixel sampling for 720x400).

Reply 161 of 295, by dr_st

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
cde wrote on 2020-08-21, 06:35:

I did try a 1920x1200 monitor last year, but I was a bit disappointed by it. As far as I understand, almost all 1920x1200 displays use an IPS panel (a few use PLS, which is a similar tech), and I found it to have pretty bad ghosting (and text smearing as well), as compared to the current TN panel I use.

This is likely due to 60Hz vs 120/144Hz refresh. I think all 1920x1200 screens are 60Hz (some may overclock a little to 70-80Hz but not more than that).

cde wrote on 2020-08-21, 06:35:

It'd be excellent to have a 1920x1200 TN panel that could do up to 144 Hz, have a VGA input and an option to force the input into 1600x1200 (and subpixel sampling for 720x400).

Not likely you'll find one. The resolution and form factor was phased out before 120Hz+ displays came into the mass market. In any case, I wouldn't go for TN, due to viewing angle instability (although it has most certainly improved). IPS/VA panels with 144Hz do exist, expensive as they are. But not in 1920x1200. You may find them in 1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160 and a few resolutions in between.

https://cloakedthargoid.wordpress.com/ - Random content on hardware, software, games and toys

Reply 162 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
cde wrote on 2020-08-21, 06:35:

Oh, I thought you were using one of these old, ~2008 era 1600x1200 monitors.

I did try a 1920x1200 monitor last year, but I was a bit disappointed by it. As far as I understand, almost all 1920x1200 displays use an IPS panel (a few use PLS, which is a similar tech), and I found it to have pretty bad ghosting (and text smearing as well), as compared to the current TN panel I use. Also IPS are pretty slow unfortunately, they are advertised as 76 Hz maximum; the one I tried would support 70 Hz but with dropped frames. It'd be excellent to have a 1920x1200 TN panel that could do up to 144 Hz, have a VGA input and an option to force the input into 1600x1200 (and subpixel sampling for 720x400).

My 75Hz IPS Acer VW257 does not smear or ghost in a noticeably annoying way at 70Hz , at least not to my eyeballs. No dropped frames are apparent using Pixperan through DVI/HDMI at 70Hz . I have recently noticed though that running at 70Hz vs 60Hz gives static flat surfaces a slightly "textured" look . This is hard to describe and probably to photograph . My guess is that someting is off with FRC at >60Hz . I have been able to reproduce this effect on another monitor with IPS 6-bit+ FRC panels at higher refresh rates . All of those monitors have LG IPS panels .

Reply 163 of 295, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
darry wrote on 2020-08-21, 13:45:

My 75Hz IPS Acer VW257 does not smear or ghost in a noticeably annoying way at 70Hz , at least not to my eyeballs. No dropped frames are apparent using Pixperan through DVI/HDMI at 70Hz . I have recently noticed though that running at 70Hz vs 60Hz gives static flat surfaces a slightly "textured" look . This is hard to describe and probably to photograph . My guess is that someting is off with FRC at >60Hz . I have been able to reproduce this effect on another monitor with IPS 6-bit+ FRC panels at higher refresh rates . All of those monitors have LG IPS panels .

Thanks darry! Could you be so kind and try the following test: force a 70 Hz resolution over HDMI (e.g. 1600x1200) and using preferably Firefox navigate to vsynctester.com. is the VSYNC solid gray or do you have flashes of red/green?

Reply 164 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
cde wrote on 2020-08-21, 16:53:
darry wrote on 2020-08-21, 13:45:

My 75Hz IPS Acer VW257 does not smear or ghost in a noticeably annoying way at 70Hz , at least not to my eyeballs. No dropped frames are apparent using Pixperan through DVI/HDMI at 70Hz . I have recently noticed though that running at 70Hz vs 60Hz gives static flat surfaces a slightly "textured" look . This is hard to describe and probably to photograph . My guess is that someting is off with FRC at >60Hz . I have been able to reproduce this effect on another monitor with IPS 6-bit+ FRC panels at higher refresh rates . All of those monitors have LG IPS panels .

Thanks darry! Could you be so kind and try the following test: force a 70 Hz resolution over HDMI (e.g. 1600x1200) and using preferably Firefox navigate to vsynctester.com. is the VSYNC solid gray or do you have flashes of red/green?

Tried it on Windows 10 computer with RTX 2070 over HDMI on

a) Acer VW257 at 1600x1200@70Hz custom resolution : no flashes of red or green

b) Acer EB321HQ at 1920x1080@70Hz custom resolution : no flashes of red or green

EDIT: Over DVI/HDMI, the VW257 officially does 60Hz and 75Hz only and does not have 1600x1200 as a resolution in EDID .

Over DVI/HDMI, the EB321HQ is 60Hz only, but apparently can do 70Hz without frameskip at least at native resolution with a custom resolution.

EDIT2: Panel in the EB321HQ is by BOE according to service menu .

Reply 166 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
cde wrote on 2020-08-21, 20:54:

Awesome! It's too bad 1600x1200@70 is not supported by your nvidia card iirc. Do you think that perhaps by resucimg blanking it could reduce the pixel clock enough for it to work?

1600x1200@70Hz does work fine with reduced blanking through DVI on both my FX5900 and FX5900XT in both DOS and Windows 98SE when used with an EDID emulator on my Acer VW257 . Aspect ratio is 4:3 . I am just not crazy about Nvidia's scaler blurring, which is why I am still waiting for OSSC Pro and trying to make do with OSSC in the meantime .

The primary reason why I ordered the Philips 252B9 is because it seems to have a proper 4:3 option . If that works with the OSSC line-doubling my Voodoo 3 VGA from 640x400 to 1280x800 at 70Hz and 4:3 aspect ratio, I will be a very happy camper indeed . Another reason is that 1920x1200 70Hz capable, non frame-skipping monitors will likely not be on the market forever, so having a spare is not a bad idea .

Reply 167 of 295, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

The Philips 252B9 looks really good! Looking forward to your review 😀 BTW I thought the VGA output for 320x200 games was 720x400, not 640x400. Is this correct? In either case line doubling would work the same I suppose.

Reply 168 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
cde wrote on 2020-08-21, 21:41:

The Philips 252B9 looks really good! Looking forward to your review 😀 BTW I thought the VGA output for 320x200 games was 720x400, not 640x400. Is this correct? In either case line doubling would work the same I suppose.

Looking forward to receiving and reviewing the 252B9 . I hope it will end up being a good gamble .

As for the VGA output matter

a) VGA mode 13h (320x200@70Hz in 256 colors), the output coming of analogue VGA card was line-doubled to 640x400 by the card itself .

b) VGA text mode is composed of 80 columns and 25 lines of character cells each of which is composed of 9x16 pixels, which gives 720x400 actual output resolution .

The timings for a) and b) (horizontal/vertical front porch, back porch, sync pulse length) look essentially identical to a digitizer (unless you start to analyze the actual pixel data, which no digitize does, AFAIK), inside an LCD monitor's VGA input . In doubt, most LCD monitors assume the actual resolution is always 720x400 and sample accordingly . This gives un-distorted text mode but craps out when the actual signal is 640x400 (uneven pixel sub-sampling on the horizontal axis) .

To avoid this issue, some higher-end/better scalers/digitizers allow manually configuring the number of total, active, front porch, back porch and sync lines on the horizontal axis in order to accurately sample 640x400@70Hz . Two examples of those are the Extron DVI-300 variants and the OSSC . Of the two, only the OSSC preserves 70Hz for output .

Over DVI/HDMI/Displayport, this is never an issue as the number of actual pixels is always known to the scaler (whether it be the one in the video card or the one in the monitor), so no guesses compromises need to be made .

EDIT : On a CRT, there is no issue displaying either a) or b) , as the monitor does not care and directly displays however many active pixels there are on a horizontal scanline .

Reply 169 of 295, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Thanks for the detailed explanation darry, it makes a lot of sense. I probably thought 720x400 was used in mode 13h because that's what some LCD OSD would show, but I realize now it's a lot more logical for the video card to simply double the horizontal lines. I suppose a LCD scaler would need a more advanced algorithm to properly distinguish between 720x400 and 640x400 since the timings are so similar. Since mode 13h is not used on modern computers, it's easier to assume 720x400 text mode. Hopefully OSSC Pro will be able to handle these cases without issue.

Reply 170 of 295, by Oetker

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I tested my 2007fwb 'L' model (so IPS) in PixPerAn @ 640x480 75Hz and it looks smooth to me. Maybe my eyes/brain are just easily satisfied but that works for me...

Reply 171 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 11:03:

I tested my 2007fwb 'L' model (so IPS) in PixPerAn @ 640x480 75Hz and it looks smooth to me. Maybe my eyes/brain are just easily satisfied but that works for me...

Interesting.
Was that over VGA or DVI ?
If it is not too much trouble, could you test at 70Hz as well ?

Reply 173 of 295, by Oetker

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
darry wrote on 2020-08-22, 13:15:
Interesting. Was that over VGA or DVI ? If it is not too much trouble, could you test at 70Hz as well ? […]
Show full quote
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 11:03:

I tested my 2007fwb 'L' model (so IPS) in PixPerAn @ 640x480 75Hz and it looks smooth to me. Maybe my eyes/brain are just easily satisfied but that works for me...

Interesting.
Was that over VGA or DVI ?
If it is not too much trouble, could you test at 70Hz as well ?

I was testing at 640x480, but that didn't offer 70Hz for some reason. 800x600 does and it still looks fine. Ati Rage Pro connected over VGA.

cde wrote on 2020-08-22, 13:25:

I concur. Also a test with vsynctest.com could be worth it 😀

I don't see that working on Windows 98...

Reply 174 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 14:01:
I was testing at 640x480, but that didn't offer 70Hz for some reason. 800x600 does and it still looks fine. Ati Rage Pro connect […]
Show full quote
darry wrote on 2020-08-22, 13:15:
Interesting. Was that over VGA or DVI ? If it is not too much trouble, could you test at 70Hz as well ? […]
Show full quote
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 11:03:

I tested my 2007fwb 'L' model (so IPS) in PixPerAn @ 640x480 75Hz and it looks smooth to me. Maybe my eyes/brain are just easily satisfied but that works for me...

Interesting.
Was that over VGA or DVI ?
If it is not too much trouble, could you test at 70Hz as well ?

I was testing at 640x480, but that didn't offer 70Hz for some reason. 800x600 does and it still looks fine. Ati Rage Pro connected over VGA.

cde wrote on 2020-08-22, 13:25:

I concur. Also a test with vsynctest.com could be worth it 😀

I don't see that working on Windows 98...

Thank you for the info .

Unfortunately, vsynctester.com does not work on older Firefox versions, nor does it seem to work that reliably in modern Firefox under Linux (with Wayland at least) .

Your results over VGA are tempting me to fully test my Dell 2007FPB over both DVI and VGA . VGA being less interesting to me because of 640x400 being sampled as 720x400 . Anyway, the most recent VGA equipped machine I have currently has XP installed and I am not sure how well vsynctest.com will work on the latest version of Firefox available for it .

Last edited by darry on 2020-08-24, 02:50. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 175 of 295, by Oetker

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
darry wrote on 2020-08-22, 14:13:
Thank you for the info . […]
Show full quote
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 14:01:
I was testing at 640x480, but that didn't offer 70Hz for some reason. 800x600 does and it still looks fine. Ati Rage Pro connect […]
Show full quote
darry wrote on 2020-08-22, 13:15:

Interesting.
Was that over VGA or DVI ?
If it is not too much trouble, could you test at 70Hz as well ?

I was testing at 640x480, but that didn't offer 70Hz for some reason. 800x600 does and it still looks fine. Ati Rage Pro connected over VGA.

cde wrote on 2020-08-22, 13:25:

I concur. Also a test with vsynctest.com could be worth it 😀

I don't see that working on Windows 98...

Thank you for the info .

Unfortunately, vsynctest.com does not work on older Firefox versions, nor does it seem to work that reliably in modern Firefox under Linux (with Wayland at least) .

Your results over VGA are tempting me to fully test my Dell 2007FPB over both DVI and VGA . VGA being less interesting to me because of 640x400 being sampled as 720x400 . Anyway, the most recent VGA equipped machine I have currently has XP installed and I am not sure how well vsynctest.com will work on the latest version of Firefox available for it .

I just tested it with PixPerAn over DVI on Win10 (it only wanted to do 75Hz there) and that didn't always look smooth to me, but it didn't look like every nth frame was being dropped either.

In any case the 720x400 problem is visible, in Duke3D the HUD numbers are scaled non-uniformly horizontally, so that's a shame.

Reply 176 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 15:03:
darry wrote on 2020-08-22, 14:13:
Thank you for the info . […]
Show full quote
Oetker wrote on 2020-08-22, 14:01:

I was testing at 640x480, but that didn't offer 70Hz for some reason. 800x600 does and it still looks fine. Ati Rage Pro connected over VGA.

I don't see that working on Windows 98...

Thank you for the info .

Unfortunately, vsynctest.com does not work on older Firefox versions, nor does it seem to work that reliably in modern Firefox under Linux (with Wayland at least) .

Your results over VGA are tempting me to fully test my Dell 2007FPB over both DVI and VGA . VGA being less interesting to me because of 640x400 being sampled as 720x400 . Anyway, the most recent VGA equipped machine I have currently has XP installed and I am not sure how well vsynctest.com will work on the latest version of Firefox available for it .

I just tested it with PixPerAn over DVI on Win10 (it only wanted to do 75Hz there) and that didn't always look smooth to me, but it didn't look like every nth frame was being dropped either.

In any case the 720x400 problem is visible, in Duke3D the HUD numbers are scaled non-uniformly horizontally, so that's a shame.

As far as I understand it, the issue with vsynctest.com and likely any other test like it, pixperan included, is that if the PC sending the frames drops some before they get to the monitor, the test will fail, as frames will be dropped/skipped, but it will not be the monitor's fault .

In the case of vsynctest.com, you get a nice graph on the left side of the screen that should show actual generated framerate before getting tothe monitor. It is only if the graph in question shows no issues, but the color still changes from grey to red or blue in the frame test on the right that you conclude that it is the monitor's fault .

Reply 177 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I dug up my Dell 2007FPB (IPS) and hooked it up over DVI to an RTX2070 under Windows 10 . I can confirm that it does skip frames at 70Hz using https://www.vsynctester.com, whether at 800x600 , 1024x768 or 1600x1200 . I tested using Nvidia custom resolutions (and used reduced blanking for 1600x1200@70Hz) . I did not bother with VGA because of the issue with 640x400 being sampled as 720x400 thing and I would have had to dig up my VGA equipped, vsynctester.com capable (hopefully) XP machine .

Reply 178 of 295, by Horun

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Odd considering Dell specs say it can do 800x600, 1024x768 and 1280x1024 @60Hz or 75Hz, it does say 1600x1200 is max 60Hz. Maybe the driver or DVI interface does not allow 75Hz ? Just a curious obsevation

Hate posting a reply and then have to edit it because it made no sense 😁 First computer was an IBM 3270 workstation with CGA monitor.

Reply 179 of 295, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Horun wrote on 2020-08-24, 04:39:

Odd considering Dell specs say it can do 800x600, 1024x768 and 1280x1024 @60Hz or 75Hz, it does say 1600x1200 is max 60Hz. Maybe the driver or DVI interface does not allow 75Hz ? Just a curious obsevation

I tried 75Hz too at 800x600, which required no custom resolution as it is suported in the Dell's EDID and it also skipped frames . DVI definitely allows >60Hz , and this monitor accepts it but either because of the DVI input/controller or panel limitation is unable to display >60Hz . Dell probably means the monitor can accept >60Hz , but actually displaying it properly is another story .

My other newer monitors have no issues at 70Hz over DVI (accept and display all frames) at up to native resolution (even the EB321HQ which officially tops off at 60Hz).