Frosal wrote:
Yeah, it's not a capacitor issue, I have found at least 3 other people on Reddit having this same problem.
...
I forgot to mention, the 360 worked for a time @720p (when I first got the monitor) and then it would just start flashing redder and redder until it flashed white sporadically and went into standby. Very, very strange. I think I still have the video around here somewhere. When I changed the resolution to 1080p it went into standby immediately.
The redder and redder - white - standby issue almost always happens when I feed it anything that's 720p. Very occasionally it will stay, but the image has odd artifacts and is virtually unusable. 1080i basically does the same thing for me as well (it is sometimes a little more stable, but still virtually unusable.)
Since 720p isn't working at all on the PS3 for me, I still think that caps are contributing at least somewhat for my issues. I also tried a bunch of resolutions on the monitor today, and I am getting some preset modes that are near the edge of the max scan range / refresh rates not wanting to sync. 1920x1200@76hz wasn't working at all, and 1600x1200@75hz gave an out of range error.
Frosal wrote:Any downsides to this (after all, this is a 16:10 monitor)? To be honest, the 720p resolution is not all that very appealing on the W900 IMO. 1680x1050, 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 look miles better. But I don't think the 360 is rendering at 1680x1050?
From what I've read, the Xbox 360 is doing hardware scaling so it should be rendering at the full 1680x1050. Scaling was one of the advantages that it had over the PS3, which apparently had a poorer hardware scaler (720p games always show at 720p, not at 1080p, etc.)
In terms of resolution differences, even though 1680x1050 is about 85% of the resolution of 1920x1080, it is showing that resolution on an area that is 11% bigger. On top of that, the general consensus from back in the day was that the max resolution of a CRT monitor was not what you would actually want to run the display on, with the manufacturer recommended resolution usually the next resolution down. (At some point you hit a wall, where a black and white linepair will just barely show up as more than a gray blur.) While this monitor doesn't list a recommended resolution, it should have a sharper (more contrast / higher MTF) image at 1680 than it does at 1920, with likely less of a pure resolution drop than what you would get on a fixed pixel display. On top of that, I doubt most 360 games actually were giving a full 1920x1080 amount of resolution. All in all, it's probably a wash.
Frosal wrote:Yeah, that resolution works with 67.2xxx kHz.
I tested several different resolutions today, just to see if any additional info could be obtained. I have the piLagTesterPRO, which, in additional to testing lag, also has the option to run at just about whatever resolution you want. There are built-in resolutions that caused the same issues, but the custom resolutions did sync. Here's what I got:
1920x1080 60p - synced at 67.2 kHz / 60 Hz - (piLag showed 59.96 Hz)
1920x1080 59.94p - synced at 67.1 kHz / 60 Hz - (piLag showed 59.87 Hz)
1920x1080 60i - synced at 33.8 kHZ / 60 Hz - (piLag showed 59.99 Hz)
1920x1080 59.94i - synced at 33.7 kHz / 60 Hz - (piLag showed 59.81 Hz)
1280x720 60p / 59.94p - synced at 44.8 kHz / 60 Hz - (piLag showed 59.85 Hz) [for this one, I believe I got the same results regardless of inputting 60p or 59.94p]
Everything was tested through the HDFury. This doesn't give me any additional clues, but it might be helpful?