What is the higher resolution that you can get on 4:3 display?

[Toyota AE86]

I just want to know what is the highest resolution of 4:3 monitors, and is it possible to get them nowadays.

[Princess Luna]

The absolutest highest is 2048×1536p

[mariushm]

Officially 2048x1536.

 

In real world, CRT monitors aren't really limited to a maximum resolution, the limitations are due to your video card's RAMDAC (digital to analogue converter, which converts individual pixel color values into 3 voltages that are sent through the cable, red green and blue) and how fast the circuitry inside the monitor was.

You could take a 21" CRT from Sony or Eizo (which were expensive) that could do 2048x1536 and run them at 2560 x 1600 but lower refresh rate

 

There was a CRT monitor from IBM or Eizo - i forget now - which accepted two VGA inputs and worked like split screen technology, half the screen was one vga input and half was the other vga input , so it was possible to get some ridiculous resolution for that time, like  3200x 1200  ( 2 x 1600x1200) , maybe even 4096x3072 but I'm not sure.

I remember it was prohibitively expensive and still had some issues from time to time like one side of the screen showing previous frame or not locking together (vsync issues)

 

[SolarNova]

Top end CRT monitors used to be able to go very high, however the higher they went above their 'rated native' resolution, the less resovled the image would be nearer to the dges of the screen. So while they can technicaly display hgiher resolutions, not all of those resolutions where ideal to use.

 

I would have to say that a realistic maximum would be 1920 x 1440 on a few top of the line models with 1600 x 1200 being more common.

[homeap5]

He asking about 4:3 monitors, not CRT monitors.

 

BTW. There are also 1:1 monitors if someone wants - for example EIZO EV2730Q with resolution 1920x1920.

 

[manikyath]

54 minutes ago, Princess Cadence said:

The absolutest highest is 2048×1536p

a client of the place i work at actually has a display of around this size, may be a few pixels off, but with margin, yes.

[JoostinOnline]

57 minutes ago, mariushm said:

Officially 2048x1536.

 

In real world, CRT monitors aren't really limited to a maximum resolution, the limitations are due to your video card's RAMDAC (digital to analogue converter, which converts individual pixel color values into 3 voltages that are sent through the cable, red green and blue) and how fast the circuitry inside the monitor was.

You could take a 21" CRT from Sony or Eizo (which were expensive) that could do 2048x1536 and run them at 2560 x 1600 but lower refresh rate

 

There was a CRT monitor from IBM or Eizo - i forget now - which accepted two VGA inputs and worked like split screen technology, half the screen was one vga input and half was the other vga input , so it was possible to get some ridiculous resolution for that time, like  3200x 1200  ( 2 x 1600x1200) , maybe even 4096x3072 but I'm not sure.

I remember it was prohibitively expensive and still had some issues from time to time like one side of the screen showing previous frame or not locking together (vsync issues)

 

 

35 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

Top end CRT monitors used to be able to go very high, however the higher they went above their 'rated native' resolution, the less resovled the image would be nearer to the dges of the screen. So while they can technicaly display hgiher resolutions, not all of those resolutions where ideal to use.

 

I would have to say that a realistic maximum would be 1920 x 1440 on a few top of the line models with 1600 x 1200 being more common.

How did you both jump from aspect ratio to CRT? There are plenty of LCD 4:3 monitors out there.

[mariushm]

You have to admit there's very few LCD monitors that are 4:3, while almost ALL CRT monitors were 4:3 or 5:4... wide screen is much harder to achieve on CRT monitors due to how they function (throwing a beam of electrons on on layer of phosphorus to heat it up)

 

So I'd say it's only natural for my mind to go to CRT monitors.

[SolarNova]

39 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

 

How did you both jump from aspect ratio to CRT? There are plenty of LCD 4:3 monitors out there.

Well to be honest it was just a natural jump for me.  Started out with CRT's myself, so when i think 4:3 , i think CRT. I supose i can undertsand a younger person thinking of only LCD, but for me it was what immediatly popped into my head. By the time LCD arrived mainstream, 16:9 was the standard, so using 4:3 on a LCD seems ..odd.

[JoostinOnline]

36 minutes ago, SolarNova said:

Well to be honest it was just a natural jump for me.  Started out with CRT's myself, so when i think 4:3 , i think CRT. I supose i can undertsand a younger person thinking of only LCD, but for me it was what immediatly popped into my head. By the time LCD arrived mainstream, 16:9 was the standard, so using 4:3 on a LCD seems ..odd.

I started with CRT as well. I was very resistant to the widescreen switch. I used to buy all my movies in full screen and my first few LCD TV/monitors were 4:3.