24" Sony FW900 Widescreen CRT

VI3L

Member
Oct 14, 2005
138
0
0
So I finally decided which monitor I am going to buy and it's a refurbished Sony FW900 :).

link

It's a bit pricey for a refurb, but it comes Grade A- with a 1 year warranty and free shipping. I think it's worth it! Besides this monitor is hard to find in stock elsewhere and I don't want to order through Ebay or personal sellers.

Do any of you own this fine monitor or have any experience with it? If so let me know your opinions on this beast.

Thanks in advance, Vi3L


PS I can't stand LCD's of any type so don't try to convince me to buy one :p
 

tristanic

Member
Feb 14, 2006
77
0
0
I've had one for a while now and love it!!! I did have to reinforce my desk a little and it's not so hot for LAN parties weighing in just shy of 100 lb's. But if you have the video card/s to run it at a high resolution, it just can't be beat.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Holy smokes....what time machine did you use to go back and find that one?
 

VI3L

Member
Oct 14, 2005
138
0
0
Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Holy smokes....what time machine did you use to go back and find that one?

Hey don't hate on the FW900 It's so sexy!

BTW I made the time machine in my basement :)

 

dakels

Platinum Member
Nov 20, 2002
2,809
2
0
Ooooh my aching back.... :p

I still keep my 19" NEC. .22 dot pitch, superb color quality. I don't use it much anymore but I can't throw it away. I love CRTs but the convenience of LCD is too great to resist now.
 

CP5670

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2004
5,657
760
126
I like CRTs but I wouldn't have paid that much for any refurb model. Hope yours doesn't turn out to have any problems.
 

VI3L

Member
Oct 14, 2005
138
0
0
I'm keeping my 19" Viewsonic crt for lans, so I don't care how big this one is :)
 

Ronstang

Lifer
Jul 8, 2000
12,493
18
81
I have a similar monitor from SUN I just took out to the garage the other day when I replaced it with a 24" widescreen LCD. I won't miss that 92 lb heatbox, that is for sure.
 

midway

Senior member
Oct 22, 2004
301
0
0
I still have my GDM-FW9010 (the Sun version of the FW900), I love it, I keep it out in our game room (large room that can handle the heat)
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
I have an HP A7217A myself (yet another rebadged FW900) and I'm not replacing it with an LCD until it's pronounced dead. Absolutely gorgeous display with none of the drawbacks of an LCD.
 

VI3L

Member
Oct 14, 2005
138
0
0
Originally posted by: midway
I still have my GDM-FW9010 (the Sun version of the FW900), I love it, I keep it out in our game room (large room that can handle the heat)

Does it really put out that much heat? Would it be alot more than my 19 inch viewsonic crt?
 

Ronstang

Lifer
Jul 8, 2000
12,493
18
81
Originally posted by: VI3L
Originally posted by: midway
I still have my GDM-FW9010 (the Sun version of the FW900), I love it, I keep it out in our game room (large room that can handle the heat)

Does it really put out that much heat? Would it be alot more than my 19 inch viewsonic crt?

Mine is a heatbox. This small study I am in is much cooler with that thing out in the garage awaiting disposal. I never realized just how hot it made this room until I took it out of here a couple of weeks ago....and I even have a second computer running now when I did not before. They are also power hungry buggers. My model was something like 200 watts. That heat has to go somewhere.
 

MichaelD

Lifer
Jan 16, 2001
31,528
3
76
Beautiful monitor. Good luck with it. I can't imagine how much shipping would cost for that boulder....good thing you got free shipping. I would be very nervous about having a 100-pound CRT shipped; they are too easy to damage. I hope it gets to you in one piece.

Personally, I couldn't imagine going back to losing 2/3rds of my desktop space plus all that heat, ever again. Years ago, LCDs did not have the picture quality of CRTs. Not anymore though. Now it's equal. But to each his own. Good luck. :)
 

VI3L

Member
Oct 14, 2005
138
0
0
LCDs (liquid crappy displays) do have a nicer picture now, but they still perform badly in games vs a CRT. I could go on all day about why, but I will list the top reasons why I still use CRT. And yes I have tested many "High performance" LCDs made by the top brands, they are all the same.

1. Native resolution - being stuck on one resolution just to get decent image quality is lame.

If you can't run that top of the line graphics game or any game that taxes your system at 1900 by 1200 or whatever your native resolution is, you have to turn your resolution down to 1680 by 1050 or maybe even 1280 by 1024. We all know what the picture will look like at any resolution other than the native. (blurry and distorted)

With the CRT you can go to any resolution and have a crystal clear picture. 800 by 600 can look great with Anti aliasing and Anistropic filtering turned up.

2. Refresh rates - We all know that the LCD is limited in this department, most will run at 60 HZ and maybe 75 if your LCD can do it. CRTs can do over 100 HZ at very high resolutions.

3. Vsync - Gross gross gross. Vsync matches your fps with your monitors refresh rate to prevent image tearing.

Vsync also slows down your systems graphic performance dramatically. Why spend lots of money on a high performance PC and then limit your system to 60 FPS? 100+ FPS feels so much smoother. If you start off with 100 FPS and Vsync disabled and get into a large firefight, your FPS will drop severely but you will still stay ABOVE the 60 FPS mark, not below 60 FPS like with Vsync enabled.

Response times in games are real time without Vsync enabled, just try playing your fps game with Vsync off, it might feel weird at first but you will probably see how much quicker the response time feels. The tearing you will see is what matching your refresh rate to FPS removes. (Which you can't do with an LCD)

Running fps games at 100 FPS and 100 HZ or 120 FPS and 120 HZ produces the smoothness of Vsync being enabled without the performance loss. When was the last time you played an fps game at 1920 by 1200 at 100 HZ, it's a true gamers paradise!

4. LCDs pixels are bigger producing a less sharp picture.

With CRTs the pixels are smaller and create a sharper image, plus smaller pixels in game = smoother movement and aim.

5. LCDs also have input lag where the CRT has none at all.

6. LCDs also have the MS response time, where the CRT has none.

7. LCDs contrast ratios are horrible compared to CRT.

8. LCDs colors are getting better but are not TRUE colors and still can't compete with CRT.

Sure CRTs are huge, consume more power and produce more heat, but so does your massive high performance video card. People don't buy a nice system and then get a tiny slower video card to "save" space and lower tempatures in their tower at the cost of losing extreme performance. So why should you do the same with your display? Obviously the video card isn't nearly as much of a problem as a big monitor on your desk is, it's just an example

LCDs are great for surfing the internet or doing work on your desktop as they save power, produce less heat and mainly take up LESS space. But don't we gamers buy badass systems so our games look "badass"?

And by "badass" I don't mean slow to respond and blurry.

All in all the LCD is great for everything but gaming, and the CRT smokes LCD in every way possible when it comes to graphics and games. If you think your LCD is fast and looks great, then maybe you should stick to XBOX games and leave PC games for the people who know what they are doing!

It seems that only a small fraction of gamers today realize all of the above about LCDs, so i'm prepared for the LCD fanboys flames, flame on!
 

Jax Omen

Golden Member
Mar 14, 2008
1,654
2
81
My 25.5" LCD has none of the problems you complain about except the refresh rate and native resolution. It also cost me about as much as your CRT, though, so I got what I paid for :p

I do miss my old 19" CRT. 1600x1200 was gorgeous on it.
 

VI3L

Member
Oct 14, 2005
138
0
0
Originally posted by: Jax Omen
My 25.5" LCD has none of the problems you complain about except the refresh rate and native resolution. It also cost me about as much as your CRT, though, so I got what I paid for :p

I do miss my old 19" CRT. 1600x1200 was gorgeous on it.

IF it's and LCD then yes it does, sorry. Don't believe me? put a crt next to your LCD and you will see it. :)
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Okay VI3L, let's try to keep this civil. Everybody has their own opinion and there are some who prefer LCD to CRT. Personally I agree with you that CRT is superior to LCD in many ways, but try not to turn this thread into a flamewar. :beer:
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,002
126
Anyone know how deep that thing is? I made the move to LCD and have to say I like the crisp picture. But, it's not that I didn't like CRT's, it's just that my old 21" CRT pretty much took up all of my desk space from front to back... I hated that. Now with my LCD I have usable desk space again. Anyway, I wonder how deep a 24" must be. :eek:
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: VI3L
Originally posted by: Jax Omen
My 25.5" LCD has none of the problems you complain about except the refresh rate and native resolution. It also cost me about as much as your CRT, though, so I got what I paid for :p

I do miss my old 19" CRT. 1600x1200 was gorgeous on it.

IF it's and LCD then yes it does, sorry. Don't believe me? put a crt next to your LCD and you will see it. :)


I just went from a CRT to a 22 inch Samsung LCD....I will never go back. I game alot, and notice no "ghosting" with a 2ms response time. Even on FPS games where it matters most, I dont see anything unusual.

If you have to put something side-by-side to see the difference, meaning you cant tell the difference in isolation, then what does it matter?
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Anyone know how deep that thing is? I made the move to LCD and have to say I like the crisp picture. But, it's not that I didn't like CRT's, it's just that my old 21" CRT pretty much took up all of my desk space from front to back... I hated that. Now with my LCD I have usable desk space again. Anyway, I wonder how deep a 24" must be. :eek:

Here's a link to the HP A7217A version's owners manual:

http://h10032.www1.hp.com/ctg/Manual/lpv09562.pdf

According to this, it's 22 1/2"w x 19 3/4"h x 20 5/8"d.
 

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
12,001
2,226
126
Originally posted by: VI3L
2. Refresh rates - We all know that the LCD is limited in this department, most will run at 60 HZ and maybe 75 if your LCD can do it. CRTs can do over 100 HZ at very high resolutions.

5. LCDs also have input lag where the CRT has none at all.

For me the biggest drawback of the CRTs I've had (Samsung and LG 17") is when it could only do something like 75/85Hz at 1024x768 and would drop to 60Hz at 1280x1024. That really killed my eyes as the flickering was very noticeable to me and I'd get headaches fairly quickly. 60Hz on an LCD is much nicer on the eyes since it operates in a different way.

Also, I did a test to measure input lag. (Disclaimer: the test was described on some site and I did it the way they said to so I'm not sure how scientific it was...both LCD and CRT hooked up to the computer with both displaying the same thing...then a large digital stopwatch accurate to 0.001 seconds was displayed on the screen...the stopwatch was started and pictures were taken using a digital camera to show which display was slower) In my testing the Samsung 17" CRT was slower than my BenQ Fp241vw. Does that prove anything? I'm not really sure to be honest.
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
FWIW I owned 7 FW900's at one point. Used they're somewhat a crapshoot... Huge variances in color quality. Invest in a colorimeter if you want remotely accurate color. Some of my FW900's were reasonably close when using the factory presets, but most were WAY off. After a full pre-calibration and profiling they all looked pretty good, though some were still definitely better than others.

Nice monitors if you get a good one, but they're a lot of work to setup properly and maintain. My current 24" LCD is much nicer to live with, that's for sure.

Viper GTS
 

Creig

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,170
13
81
Originally posted by: thilan29
For me the biggest drawback of the CRTs I've had (Samsung and LG 17") is when it could only do something like 75/85Hz at 1024x768 and would drop to 60Hz at 1280x1024. That really killed my eyes as the flickering was very noticeable to me and I'd get headaches fairly quickly. 60Hz on an LCD is much nicer on the eyes since it operates in a different way.

No need to worry about that with the FW900/A7217A. You can go all the way up to 2304x1440 at 80Hz. All resolutions below that go up to 85Hz.