High Res 21"+ CRT monitors

Mar 19, 2003
18,289
2
71
NEC/Mitsubishi FP2141SB, if they still make it...

Does 1600x1200 at up to 109Hz, and 2048x1536 at up to 86Hz.
 

nugglets

Junior Member
Nov 5, 2005
21
0
0
appears to have been discontinued. was thinking about this, looks like a good deal.

Sony GDM-FW900 24" Trinitron Widescreen

also, as for video cards. im going to wait until the 512mb GTX's come out to make a decision BUT... hypothetically.. would the fact that i will be using a high-res monitor make SLI'd 256mb GTXs a better option than a single 512 GTX. i understand that for most uses SLI wont show a difference noticeable enough to justify the price, but im wondering if splitting the workload will mean better efficiency at high res's with AA over a single(all-be-it better) card. i know im just going to have to wait until some benchmarks are released to know for sure, but hypothetically, what are your opinions?
 

Mojoed

Diamond Member
Jul 20, 2004
4,473
1
81
I have the A7217A (exact same thing as the GDM-FW900, just branded HP). Anyway, it's the best computer purchase I've ever made.

I paid $225 for it, got it through ebay. 2048x1280 @85Hz, just a gorgeous picture overall. As far as I'm concerned, for this price it's the best bargain (New retail was $2500) and the best CRT in existance.

If you have the desk space, this monitor simply cannot be beat.
 

nugglets

Junior Member
Nov 5, 2005
21
0
0
daaaamn 225$ ;o thats nice. and i thought the link above for 479 was good. but yea, this is the HP version A7217A as well. so, thats decided.

now, what about my video question? anyone?
 

SonicIce

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
4,774
0
76
Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
NEC/Mitsubishi FP2141SB, if they still make it...

Does 1600x1200 at up to 109Hz, and 2048x1536 at up to 86Hz.

or Diamond Pro 2070SB (same tube as the MultiSync FP2141SB, I think)
 
Mar 19, 2003
18,289
2
71
Originally posted by: SonicIce
Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
NEC/Mitsubishi FP2141SB, if they still make it...

Does 1600x1200 at up to 109Hz, and 2048x1536 at up to 86Hz.

or Diamond Pro 2070SB (same tube as the MultiSync FP2141SB, I think)

Yeah, it was the same tube IIRC. It looks like they've discontinued both though, as far as I can tell (although that's the case for the Sony too) - so your only option at this point may be to buy one used...
 
Mar 19, 2003
18,289
2
71
Originally posted by: nugglets
also, as for video cards. im going to wait until the 512mb GTX's come out to make a decision BUT... hypothetically.. would the fact that i will be using a high-res monitor make SLI'd 256mb GTXs a better option than a single 512 GTX. i understand that for most uses SLI wont show a difference noticeable enough to justify the price, but im wondering if splitting the workload will mean better efficiency at high res's with AA over a single(all-be-it better) card. i know im just going to have to wait until some benchmarks are released to know for sure, but hypothetically, what are your opinions?

If you're willing to spend that much money on video cards, I'm almost certain that the 256MB GTX's in SLI will be a better performing choice than the 512MB GTX (unless you absolutely need 512MB of framebuffer memory, which I don't think anyone really does yet). There's no way that the 512MB GTX will be fast enough to eclipse two five-month-old high end cards in SLI - it'll be faster than the original GTX, but not that much faster. If you're running with high resolutions and AA (which I imagine is why you want this kind of monitor), I'd definitely recommend the older GTX's in SLI if you want to spend that much.
 

BigCoolJesus

Banned
Jun 22, 2005
1,687
0
0
Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
Originally posted by: nugglets
also, as for video cards. im going to wait until the 512mb GTX's come out to make a decision BUT... hypothetically.. would the fact that i will be using a high-res monitor make SLI'd 256mb GTXs a better option than a single 512 GTX. i understand that for most uses SLI wont show a difference noticeable enough to justify the price, but im wondering if splitting the workload will mean better efficiency at high res's with AA over a single(all-be-it better) card. i know im just going to have to wait until some benchmarks are released to know for sure, but hypothetically, what are your opinions?

If you're willing to spend that much money on video cards, I'm almost certain that the 256MB GTX's in SLI will be a better performing choice than the 512MB GTX (unless you absolutely need 512MB of framebuffer memory, which I don't think anyone really does yet). There's no way that the 512MB GTX will be fast enough to eclipse two five-month-old high end cards in SLI - it'll be faster than the original GTX, but not that much faster. If you're running with high resolutions and AA (which I imagine is why you want this kind of monitor), I'd definitely recommend the older GTX's in SLI if you want to spend that much.


agreed.......

ATI already tried the 512MB route, and in gaming benchmarks (against single cards, no SLI) it barley did better (the average was like 7FPS at most, and every other card was already in the 80's and 90's range, so 7 extra FPS isnt worth the cost)


yes, i know newer technology and all that, but still, 512MB wont be as utilized as 2 GFX card's
 

SonicIce

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
4,774
0
76
two 256's in SLI would be 512mb anyway, right? so whats the point of one 512 card? it's not going to perform nearly as good.
 

Matthias99

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2003
8,808
0
0
Originally posted by: SonicIce
two 256's in SLI would be 512mb anyway, right? so whats the point of one 512 card? it's not going to perform nearly as good.

They don't share memory like that. Texture and model data has to be mirrored on each card; the SLI link isn't fast enough to transfer THAT much data back and forth at anywhere near on-card memory speeds.
 

SonicIce

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
4,774
0
76
Originally posted by: Matthias99
Originally posted by: SonicIce
two 256's in SLI would be 512mb anyway, right? so whats the point of one 512 card? it's not going to perform nearly as good.

They don't share memory like that. Texture and model data has to be mirrored on each card; the SLI link isn't fast enough to transfer THAT much data back and forth at anywhere near on-card memory speeds.

it would add the pipes together though?