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.
It’s been a while, but changing resolution on a CRT normally doesn’t make the picture smaller.
bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 month 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 1 month 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
dgriffith@aussie.zone 1 month 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 higher resolution for lower frame rate (or the reverse, like here) as long as you keep the total number of on-offs below the limits.
user134450@feddit.org 1 month 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 1 month 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 changed that?