• bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    4 months ago

    It makes sense you’d be able to get a much higher refresh rate on a tube if you reduce the resolution, since you would be reducing the beam’s travel.

    • deranger@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Changing the resolution on a CRT normally doesn’t make the picture smaller. There is no native resolution, phosphors are not pixels. My Viewsonic would display 640x480 or 1600x1200 on the whole 21” regardless. You can also watch the video, it’s not using a smaller area.

      I believe the limitation is bandwidth, not the electron beam.

      • user134450@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        There is a limit on the spacing of the colour bands though. If you want colours then you have to hit the spots where the correct phosphors are and this limits the usable resolution.

        • Morphit @feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          What do you mean? The shadow mask ensures the gun for each colour can only hit the phosphors of that colour. How would a lower resolution change that?

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah I didn’t think it would make the “pixels” smaller, but the beam would need to pulse less often and therefore could travel more. Maybe I’m misunderstanding what they did.

        • deranger@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          4 months ago

          Electron beams scan insanely fast, that isn’t the limiting factor. Getting that much bandwidth across a VGA cable is tough. If you wanted super high refresh rates on old CRTs you’d have to drop the resolution. Same concept.

          • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            Ah. I see, so reducing the resolution was more about sending frames to the monitor faster, not about optimizing the tube hardware’s behaviour

            • Dave.@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Yeah basically you can only signal “on-off” so many times a second in a vga cable before the ons and offs get blurry and unusable. So you can trade lower resolution for a higher frame rate as long as you keep the total number of on-offs below the limits.

  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    “Ancient”. I had one up until 2008.

    Edit: I guess when you think about it, someone born then would be entering high school now. Fuck I’m old. It’s weird because all the 2000s just blend together for me, there is nothing defining the decades anymore, like 80s = cocaine and big hair, and 90s = neon and “radicool” stuff.

    • papertowels@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      iPhones were released in 2007, so in 2008 smartphones hadn’t really taken off yet. We old.

  • Grass@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I need newly made modern CRTs. The salvage ones I have tested all have degraded image, and none go that fast even with micro resolution