EEVblog
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- The IBM T221 was the world's first 4k monitor. Released in 2001, it was 12 years ahead of the first consumer 4k monitors,
It innovated dual domain IPS LCD display technology.
Teardown time!
Forum: www.eevblog.co...
Bitcoin Donations: 38y7DE8HEHNj8fGDtUr4PkCn9nWxiorvvy
Litecoin: ML7oQokTwB38bgzzjLDbRV97HKAHuwRfHA
Ethereum: 0x11AceA38DCA9DbFfB4F35f3F746af65F9dED28ce
EEVblog Main Web Site: www.eevblog.com
The 2nd EEVblog Channel: / eevblog2
Support the EEVblog through Patreon!
/ eevblog
AliExpress Affiliate: s.click.aliexpr...
Buy anything through that link and Dave gets a commission at no cost to you.
Stuff I recommend:
kit.com/EEVblog/
Donate With Bitcoin & Other Crypto Currencies!
www.eevblog.co...
T-Shirts: teespring.com/s...
Likecoin - Coins for Likes: likecoin.pro/@...
"viewer that donated it" .. uh yeah, two old bits of hardware in a row... and no flux capacitor in sight no more...
Daves done it!
Lovely comment
alch3myau He sold his soul - I mean the capacitor
damn i could use a time machine
Biggest way back moment for me in this video:
Back when IBM made things
Theoretically they still do. Just almost all of it is hidden away in big companies' server rooms.
Mora Fermi Boom. Roasted.
I owned an IntelliStation POWER 285 for a couple of years. Best built computer I've ever seen. Gorgeous, engineered like a tank, nothing made in China as far as I am concerned. Truly brutal and brilliant.
Ibm still makes mainframes
IBM: We made a monitor that holds up to standards for 20 years.
RUclips: tear it down!
I worked in IT support for the engineering dept of a fortune 20 company in 2001... we had hundreds of NEC 21" CRT monitors. Then when these came out we got a boat load of Silicon Graphics workstations with custom made video cards (onyx?) and 60 some of the T221s. The SGIs went away quick but the T221s hung around for years. Amazing for their time. designers were taking hi-res pictures out the windows then setting a monitor in the window and adjusting the cameras to get the display to match the outside world.
Nice!
@@ap-np5qb My bet is that it will go haywire and not show anything but an error code
ramosel
consumer electronics, support you did?
Only Canon did them, i guess DELL used them to sell this, same tech it used!
Silicon Graphics workstations used Canon too, on the more expansive solution, not the cheap Onyx Desktops!
@@ap-np5qb You have to connect them on Dual link, just as SLi in 2010, drivers etc.
Here, no smart people, they all just don't understand, or smart enough to use Google!
@@lucasrem In house, not 3rd party
Man I still don’t have a 4k monitor
Mine is broke after 1 year , and this thing is still working after nearly 2 decades , amazing ...
@@6417893265q784256128 because IBM didn't include planing obsolesence inside, now every tv, monitor etc have that "feature"
@BodziuM what can they do, people who produce that need their jobs also tomorrow, I mean they also could do a 3. world war, destroy everything and reset the system once more this way, so people have jobs again, but planned obsolescene is a little more rational, a little, just a little, very little, because the concequence is that we are on the best way to destroy all knowing life. So what to say? Hail monetary system, hail the most psychopathic kind of it, hail capitalism and death to all life, needs only to be until the old psychos are dead, aslong they get their will, what comes then they don't care about, their seven billion proud slaves also don't, even if they are no psychopaths, but the moving some tons of scrap and plastic and atleast four empty seats for more than a couple of meters, a new phone, tv, kitchen etc. every couple of months is more important than their own children and grandchildren.
@@Wilson84KS never assume malice where incompetence is a reasonable explanation.
Dude, they are still very much the exception rather than the rule. Join the club, as they say.
OMG you and the community always find the way to blow me away. Thnx to whoever donated it and of course to Dave. Man, so glad that such content exists : ) I don't see that anyone would ever make such videos. History should not be forgotten.
Thanks, glad you liked it.
Thanks for posting this in 4K. It nice to be able to read all the part numbers with such clarity. For someone whose first computer was a ZX81 it's amazing how far we've come.
Old guys love this show?
That video card says 2009 right on the sticker and it’s obviously not from 2001 or earlier because it’s PCIe. It wasn’t “old-hat” when this monitor was released... it was from the future!
Dang, you're wright.
@@EEVblog . Yeah i was also wondering. So the question is, what cards did they use? Back in the day I guess some sort of AGP configuration. Bunch of first generation Quadro cards?
@@merlingallagher4484 it originally shipped (was paired) with Matrox GPUs
it was from 2001 just modded 10 years ago
@@merlingallagher4484 Earlier ones were bundled with a special multi-monitor version of the Matrox G200, later ones came with a converter box which allowed you to use a more pedestrian gfx card, like a Geforce 6 based quadro.
Damn, cant imagine driving it.
I got lucky as a teen in early 2000's by getting 1600x1200 100hz crt monitor. used it till 2010 when it died for good
Had a graphite grey SGI CRT with similar specs back in the day. Think it was 21" or 24", pain in the ass to move lol
@@Chriva- nice, brings back memory of the first LCD screen with 1600×1200 pixels I got at work around 2004 (a Fujitsu-Siemens, I think). It was my favorite resolution for quite some time because of the lines of code visible at once, often side by side. Later I got me a refurbished Eizo with 1920×1200 pixels which I’m still using right now. (Not nearly as heavy as your CRT though, thankfully. ;-)
Yea, I managed to nab a 1600x1200 CRT for £30 and it was in use until 2009.That sort of resolution and refresh rate was bonkers to me back then :D
Wonder what the failure was. Should have lasted tiny bit longer. Maybe it could have been fixed. There is a marked for CRT screens!! I would like to buy one. Why? Old gear, need the 0 latency.
Sweet Jeeezzz. I just (like 2 years ago) destroyed my old jumbo 22" 1600x1200@60Hz CRT I was using in 1999 to mid 2000's. Just because I don't have storage space for such enormously big and heavy piece of junk. It was still good. I dig up mosfets and similar stuff sometimes from its remnants.
We actually had the IBM and the Viewsonic version in our test lab. The first version was driven by a 4-port Matrox G100, and it actually saw it as 4 different monitors, so it was a little weird when you maximized a window, and it only took up 1/4 of the screen. There were not many video cards that could drive this monitor in it's native resolution. I think it had a refresh rate of like 20Hz.
11:12 on the silk screen they even included where they wanted to place the hot snot, brilliant :-)
In my T221 the cable drawing on the silkscreen is going right under the cable. Dave's T221 is of an older revision I guess.
I had a crt until like 2006-7, then I got a 1680x1050 LCD. I had no idea insane tech like this was even around back then. The construction of this thing is just insane.
What’s crazy is this always fits the pattern that the very first in tech are ultra high quality and would give a lot of today’s displays a run for their money. The early Sony HD CRTs in the late 80s still look absolutely gorgeous today as well.
Back in 2003, I had the Viewsonic twin to this, called the VP2290B, it was nothing at all like today's 4K monitors. For a start back when they were released they came with the best multi monitor card of the day the Matrox G400 x 2 (the video card shown here was for much later versions) which was a purely 2D card and it draw the screen by combining 4 panels together (MS Windows thought that 4x monitors connected) which actually worked fine HOWEVER it was a hopeless monitor for anything other editing still photos etc. The refresh rate was so terrible that you could have no movement.
Worth mentioning that those cards were basically two Matrox chips and a PCI bridge on one card. They had some later ones with four total GPU chips and two DMS-59 plugs!
I remember IBM displayed it at trade shows - and there was a magnifying glass usually tethered to the display case to show the high resolution
Like the clever thumbnail title name " 2001 a 4k odyssey " hahaha great!
Oh did they change it?
@@Omlet221 probably, it's pretty common for people to change their videos thumbnail & title. Ltt seems to do it as their default, I think it's a sort of recasting of the audience net to maximize traffic to the video. Or maybe some ip bot picked it up & got fussy about it.
At the time when this was released I still used an 800x600 CRT display. You sure needed high-end workstation class hardware, and a ton of video memory to drive that.
Regarding the need for four DVI cables, that makes perfect sense to me. A single-link DVI cable (which those connectors are) tops out at 165MHz. After subtracting the 8/10b overhead, that means a data rate of about 4Gbit/s.
This is enough to deliver 1920x1200 at 60Hz. but if you want to go to 4K (4x the pixels), you need four links. Had they used dual-link DVI cables (an additional 6 pins between the two groups of 9 seen on a single-link cable), then they could've gotten away with only two cables instead of 4. But it is quite possible that video cards with dual-link connectors on the output side weren't available at the time.
It's also interesting to note that this display was using only 42 Hz refresh (I think that's what you said) with four cables. With four links, DVI can produce 4K at 60Hz, but maybe that was too much for the technology of the day, either in the display or in the video card. And there was probably quite a bit of overhead from needing to sync two video cards together in order to produce four synchronized links.
Great video and thanks for the info. I had no idea such a display even existed until now. Back in 2001, I was still using 17" and 19" CRT monitors, usually driven at 1280x1024 (or a tweaked 1360x1024 in order to get square pixels) over a VGA cable. Occasionally deciding to overdrive the display to 1600x1200 (and putting up with poor image quality because VGA can't really run that fast).
great comment, good info
far above avg youtube cancer
A later version goes with 2x dual link.
I’ve seen one of these, well at least a IBM screen used at an Air Force Base for air traffic control, I was told it cost close to $30k for the high resolution
Wow. Just watched this vid on one for my two T221. I got them in 2009/2010 for approx. 1000€ each.
I actually got my two IBM T221 upgraded to 2x DualLink-DVI each using adapters of cirthix/ZisE.
With active DL-DVI to DsplayPort adapters one can make them work with modern graphics cards. AMD Eyefinity helps a lot.
One T221 is running at 55Hz (overclocked) the other T221 is running at 48 Hz (stock). Fans have been disabled for silent operation.
I will not replace my T221 displays until 200dpi/120Hz 4k screens will become available.
Thanks for the memories, Dave! If left the electronics industry in 2001. For most of my career I worked on pro video equipment for broadcast and post-production , so boards like these bring back a feeling of familiarity. For those "bodge wires", we used to call them "kludges", I would use green insulated wire-wrap wire and route them carefully so they were electrically correct but so neat that they looked a lot like another trace. There were times when traces didn't work and we had to hack in some shielded cable to get signals from one place to another on large boards. That monitor is a beautiful piece of gear.
I was expecting it to be a CRT until the microscope close up revealed it's an LCD.
4k off of a CRT would be Nobel worthy tbh
@@thedrwatson4363 It would be very possible actually. The screen would have to be very big in diameter though (much bigger than this LCD here) because the dot pitch of the mask cannot be as small as a pixel on this LCD's panel. (But then again, 4K on a small display doesn't make sense anyway.)
The best CRTs have a dot pitch of 0.23 mm. Based on that we could calculate the required size of a 4K CRT.
Actually, let's do that:
4096 * 0.23 = 942.08 mm (so for 16:9 ratio the height is 529.92 mm)
Now let's calculate the diameter using Pythagoras:
942.08² + 529.92² = c² | pull square root
=1080.89 mm = 42.55 inches
Yeah a 42.55 inch CRT is one hell of a monster but not impossible.
@@thedrwatson4363 I was given a large 1080i CRT TV a number of years ago. It had a bad solder joint that caused it to intermittently stop displaying correctly, but it was too bulky to be worth trying to repair, given how much 1080p LCDs have come down in price.
Now halve those numbers because custom ingenuity.
@@Baigle1 Yes there hasn't gone any development into CRT technology for 20 years now and my numbers are based on what was possible in the very early 2000's, but it's most likely not the maximum that would be physically possible. If only there was a revive of CRT technologly, who knows maybe 24" 4K CRTs would be possible (although I still think you don't need 4K at that size).
6:03 Dell's 8K monitor takes 2 displayport inputs, if you have 1 it runs at 30hz and if you have 2 it runs at 60hz
Run 4 for 120hz?
Now that is powerful
Run 8 for 240hz
Yeah, that's because 8K is smacking against the bandwidth limits of DisplayPort 1.4. The next version (probably will be DP 2.0) which is supposed to be released later this year, is expected to support 8K at 60Hz over a single cable, but that's of no use for equipment currently being sold.
Fantastic. I remember opening up an 8514 PGA monitor in the 90s, built to the same style - had formal coax for the colour drive to the CRT base.
And here I am still rocking just a single FHD display
Sure hope you put this beauty back together, working, and no extra hardware left over. I cringed seeing the flex interconnects stressed corners and being moved around so many times. One tear and it's all over.
I was getting 2048x1536 in 2006ish. We did a big drop when we switched to LCD!
It was sad, ghosting and 60hz crap we got with slim monitors
Worse is when wide screen came out. When it first came out, it was basically like buying a screen with a chunk of the top missing. The screen was physically bigger, but you lost a lot in resolution. Took a while for them to catch up.
Would be curious to see a video comparing this to internals of modern day 4K displays.
Crazy that 4k was already there in 2001 hard to get your mind around the things that could be here and we see them in 15 years..
@@GamingAmbienceLive Any corroborating evidence on that? Would be interesting to see a pic or an article about it.
Add atleast ten more years and you will know how old this technology really is.
In 2001 I just switched to 1024x768 on a 17 inch Tube, driven by a Riva TNT 2 :D
4K arrived on my desk just about 3 weeks ago^^
I bought a couple of W27C512 chips from eBay and one had a TNT2 BIOS written on it!
I would gladly use this monitor today, it's a beauty.
Not to mention that it's around the size of your average desktop monitor today.
If you could interface to it lol
@@userPrehistoricman Well, since it has quad DVI input, all you need is two cards with dual DVI outputs, or four with single DVI outputs, running at 1920x1080, and arrange it as an extended desktop.
Does it work like that? I don't remember Dave saying that the display became effectively 4x full HD screens with the 4 DVI inputs. That also begs the question: why only 41 fps when DVI can do 1080p60?
@@userPrehistoricman No idea if it really does work like that, but it seems reasonable if it can work with 1, 2, or 4 inputs. I think the way he describes, it was used was sort of the opposite of SLI/Crossfire, where multiple inputs make one image instead of multiple cards making one output.
I recall being a software contact to a major merchant bank in Sydney in the late '90's. Their IT Director told me about meetings they were having on the quiet with IBM about these new "flat-screen" monitors. The bank was using large CRT monitors like NEC 5D's for their brokers on the trading floor. Moving to flat screens for all would allow the addition of a complete extra row of stock brokers. This would give them a jump on competitors, perhaps at most 2 years. It was purely the physical space they would gain, plus the extra stock trading volume. So price was not an object.
Oh yeah remember that beast well. Needed a special dual video card but the issue was a fairly low frame rate. 22Hz or something? Saw it used as a medical image monitor for CT scans from memory. Never seen inside one however - well done, and yes it worked as if there were two separate monitors in the box.
Andy Grace Yep Matrox had special HDR cards for accurately displaying all the shades of grey in Xray images to doctors looking for tiny variations indicating tumors. To this day, there's a bottleneck of getting enough oncologists who can look at X-rays and determine if someone needs urgent surgery or are perfectly healthy.
Those DVI connectors are single-link, note the missing pins.
I have a 2.5K monitor connected using DVI and it requires dual-link DVI which is equivalent to those 2 separate single-link connectors.
Modern display cards support this without problem.
Of course a modern setup would use Displayport.
I saw a curved monitor at the 2002 CES show in Las Vegas. I would figute those things had not retail price being floor demos on display by the manufacturer. I was there as a web consultant for a company that bodged cameras and monitors into news helicopters can't say the company name but they did most of the news copters.. I figure it was somewhere around a million for a system from bate helicopter to news copter.
The place I work for has those. I have two at my desktop pc. Those are used for the engineering dept for machines that are used for CATIA.
+1 profile pic
I'm still rocking with my 19'' 1280x1024 monitor.
You need to visit my dumpster...
I love 5:4 ratio.
@@basshead. No offence but I wish 5:4 monitors were never made and used 4:3 instead. I understand it was a shortcut for production, as it was easier to manufacture a panel with 1024 vertical lines rather than 960 but it caused a mess in resolutions, where people used 1280x1024 even for 4:3 CRTs, never understanding they are actually ought to use the proper 4:3 version which is 1280x960, because 1280x1024 is correct only for 5:4 LCDs. To this day I read and hear things like "Back in the day on my 1280x1024 Trinitron..." and it makes me facepalm.
I was enjoying QXGA back then in 2000yr (2048 x 1536 @60hz) on a CRT
This is max. res. on VGA
punker4Real
CTR is analog, so any resolution!!! If your card produced it, your CTR shows it, is it sharp, or do i need less Hz or resolution!
analog!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! why is that for you noobs so hard to understand here?????
@@lucasrem Yes, it's analog, but cables and connectors have frequency limits. I found that driving a VGA signal at 1600x1200@60Hz would tend to produce a bad image, with ghosting along the edges of text. Mostly because the high frequency signals would reflect off of the connectors because the cables were simply not designed to carry frequencies that high.
Wow I didn’t even know these existed, truly remarkable.
Years ago I used an IBM 5081 monitor obtained as surplus which probably also had cost a fortune when new.
Those were 1280x1024 Trinitron monitors, actually a Sony chassis with some IBM customization.
At the time these were produced that too was a quite high resolution...
4k existed in 2001 damm i'm young i was still thinking vhs was good at that time and i thought dvd was unnecessary.
My friend had a 19'' Samsung CRT monitor back then. I rocked with a 14'' or 15'' Hansol monitor back then and played Sims 1 on that.
I had no idea either until the viewer offered it to me!
As another poster mentioned, some of these really pricy monitors were used on MRI scanners, for air traffic controllers, etc.
Although it was "around", it was nowhere near consumers. :P
Cinemas display movies in 8k since the 80s
@Diablo Rojo true that, HD is ways older than people can even imagine, instead they seriously think it is possible to create more pixels in old movies that are sold now in HD than there ever was saved on the tapes. They sell us the same pile of shit every couple of years, which they on purpose made worse back then and people seriously think there is any process, while everyone can see clearly from car industry and energy production there is no progress at all. Only progress is the progress to destroy all knowing life buy planned obsolescene/overproduction just for profit, for colored paper and virtual numbers.
That is pretty wild. It would have been fun to be a fly on the wall during the design of this product! The 41Hz refresh rate is amusing.
TheResistorNetwork Basically what was left when running 8 DVI links at max year 2000 speed and trying to fill that screen.
"Spared no expense" If John Hammond hired a team of developers to audit Dennis Nedry's code, then the events of Jurassic Park wouldnt have happened. So yes, expenses were in fact spared.
Ari Finkelman Nedry said that himself before locking the SGI machine.
The LCD/TFT (model no. MD22292 B2 - data sheet available online) is produced by IDTech (International Display Technology), which correctly was previously IBM's Display Business Unit. It was sold to Sony in 2005 in order to produce small displays for handheld devices, but I have no idea if the factory is still in operation. IDTech also had a manufacturing site in the Philippines. As the PC division was sold to Lenovo in 2005, IDTech closed since Lenovo (of course) wouldn't be interested in taking over display research. IBM also used IDTech panels in their 15" Thinkpads from the A31 (I think) up until the T60p. They branded this as "Flexview". You could even get a 15" with QXGA and IPS in 2003 ( model no. IAQX10) with a refresh rate of 50 Hz - I have retrofitted this into my old T60p :-). They also had various other interesting products, but I think the laptop market really produced the profits. This is almost 10 years before all the retina mumbo-jumbo happened.
Thanks for the teardown - really interesting to see!
A thing of beauty...
... a joy forever.
@3:35 "weighs 13kg..." for a monitor from 2001 it is more like "weights only 13kg", the comparable screens from that time were the P1220 and GDM-FW900, weighing in at 30kg and 42kg respectively! and they could manage "only" 2048x1536 and 2304x1440
both of course used Trinitron technology, none of this shadow mask rubbish
@666tomato666 The trinitron had a shadow mask, but it wasn't made of dots. It was called an aperture grill. The Trinitron PC monitors I used had an annoying pair of wires across the screen to dampen vibrations in the grill.
Wow, 42kg!
@@whitcwa shadow mask is shadow mask, aperture grille is aperture gille. Yes, both are used in CRTs, but confusing them is like calling an "electric engine" a "petrol engine"
@@666Tomato666 and monochrome used one big smug. if you get the picture sharp it looks like diamonds
@@whitcwa mostly to keep the tension on the mask so it would not warp.
I used to work on big CRT from the same time. I think it was 23 inches and 1920 x 1380 at 60Hz or so and it was absolutely amazing experience. I never know that tech like this was already existing. Thinking that LCD are just toys that time :)
I worked in the LCD flatscreen department at Keycorp in 1994, 800x600 was state of the art, 640x480 most common, and the guarantee was no more than 5 dead pixel!
IBM: i'm limited by the technology of my time
Apple: I'm limiting the technology of my time.
Intel: I'm the limiting technology of my time
Also Apple: I'm time-limiting my technology
lmfao best comments
I - I’m limited
B - by the technology of
M - my time
I think the IDTECH venture only lasted a few years. This was the only desktop 4K LCD monitor for nearly ten years going.
I was feeling the king of the world with my new 15" 1024x768 60hz samsung lcd (still works) in 2001
Funny. I just pulled out my old Syncmaster 17" for a weather station monitor. Solid as they come.
with refresh rate of like 150ms lmao
Mu Aries
Nerdy noobs never need good colors, or resolutions!
Just HD ready 8 bit good, only needing more frames!
@@lucasrem i think you are confusing HD (1280 x 720 pixels) with SD (1024 x 768 pixels) and no I dont use it daily.
@@harshnemesis When lcd first came out response time wasnt even quantified... we were greatful that we could ditch the big ass monitors for a slim one
One more thing.
I purchased one long ago from France and the obtuse person who shipped it just laid the monitor in a cardboard box without ANY protection whatsoever. The plastic is old, so it's brittle and the screen was completely ruined. It works so I kept it for spares (even though it smells like a bar).
I donated the power supply to a Canadian gentleman who has a fully functional unit and took apart the screen a bit beyond what you've done. There's nothing much behind that 9M pixels made in Japan board, so I even regretted removing it, but I can send you a picture if you are interested.
Thanks Dave, glad it wasn't a destructive tear down - good call. 😊
Man, i do still have this monitor at my workbench as main monitor along with some 13 years younger BENQ's.
Back when IBM was in the computing hardware business. Nowadays, they assemble Cloud Computing and Server platforms from components made by vendors.
I miss IBM consumer products though, they were always built to last.
Ah the good old days. We had a dual display setup with these running under Linux back in the day. It was a bit temperamental but it was pretty amazing when it did.
hard to imagine back then - even 4k on a 27" looks like really high pixel density for a monitor!
Holy crap. This is like the Sledghammer Corvette of monitors. The Callaway Sledgehammer, if you didn't know, set the speed record for production cars in *1988* w/ John Lingenfelter behind the wheel, at a top speed of 254.76 mph. Held the speed record for nearly *20 years* , until the SSC Aero _barely_ broke it in *2007* at 256.18mph.
drinking game: when Dave says 'that's all she wrote', take a shot. See y'all in ER.
How about "Bob's your uncle" or "in like Flynn"?
In 2001 I had a Acer crt 1024x768....
None of that LCD rubbish
Remembering 2001 (a space Odyssey). The ship's computer was called "HAL". Now, if you go to the next letter in the alphabet for each of the letters in HAL what do you get?
sydmichel The author has publicly denied this was intentional. Also it was from a different university town actually known for pioneering computer tech back then.
I hope they used a surge protector on such an "investment" nor in an area without thunderstorms :-$
The first 144 Hz Gaming monitors required Dual Link DVI even for 1080p. Like this monitor the reason is the DVI bus cannot transfer enough data across a single link for full refresh rate. On this 4K one it is taking it to the extreme. I doubt back then very little 3D software could or the GPU could handle 4K.
Single and dual link DVI was also used in early days of modern 4K monitors. Some of them was able to display 60Hz using dual DVI and 30 Hz using single link. My Dell 4K does support monitor chaining over DP. On single monitor it supports 60Hz while 30 Hz in chain setup. This is because 4K uses around 18 Gbps of total 20 Gbps DP/Thunderbolt 2 bandwidth.
I've read about this monitor on a Magazine when i was in college, CHIP - Magazine, i''ve never had chance to see it in real. Old memories :). I had 14" Hyundai monitor back then, i think it was 1280x800.
Probably 1280x1024 or 1024x768 at that time
@@brandonupchurch7628 I don't think so, CRT's allways had different vertical pixels and screen format. Or, at least my model :). I still have it i think somewhere in garage.
If it was a consumer monitor from the early 2000s it would have been 4:3 or 5:4 , Typical max resolutions for a 14" monitor would have been probably 1024x768 but I guess a higher end 14incher could have supported 1280x1024 or 1152x864.
1280x1024 is correct only for 5:4 LCDs, but not for any CRT (there were no 5:4 CRTs at all). For 4:3 screens you would use 1280x960 but many people used 1280x1024 anyways at the expense of wrong aspect ratio (5:4 streched to 4:3), usually not even noticing it. Since a CRT doesn't care about the aspect ratio, it will display anything as long as the signal is within it's scan range, that's why it worked nevertheless (but slightly stretched).
There were plenty of CRTs that supported 1280x1024, my cheap 17in Compaq CRT I used in the early 2000s could.
Now they do this on 8k+ monitors, multiple HDMI inputs, panel divided by # of inputs.
And they will have to continue doing so at least until DisplayPort 2.0 gets released and people start making equipment that supports it. Figure at least another year.
Yes, splitting up signals was quite common up until a few years ago. People wanted 4k at more than 60 Hz, so they would need to use two DisplayPort connections until a faster DisplayPort spec. was finally released. I don't recall if they ever did that with HDMI.
Nice teardown video. Predates HDMI even!
VK7HH HDMI is DVI with a different mechanical plug. At least Samsung made DVI monitors with HDCP for DRM playback.
@@johnfrancisdoe1563 I think at least nowadays, DHCP is a requirement for DVI, in fact both my older and this monitor I have now had DHCP enabled through DVI, and old digital TV-ready sets had DVI for the digital decoder input partially because of that.
What makes me wonder is why IBM didn't use dual link on the DVI cables, 2 dual link cables would fill all the frame at 60Hz
VK7HH
this is DVI, same as HDMI, you can exchange cables... connector guy???
Not that smart?
6:08 Some of the new 8K monitors that require 2 DisplayPort cables will run at 30hz if you only have 1 connected.
This was true of early 4k monitors, as well.
An absolute marvel of engineering although somewhat disappointing that it took a decade before 4K displays became affordable enough.
I once designed a five display board, this reminds me of that. Enjoyed the chip trip.... Thanks!
five display????
Why you cry here?
I loved that, it's like you have 3 eyes! Because I feel more smootly and don't make my vision tired.
I wish my world was as 4th dimension-fluid as Dave's - 5:10 (where 2008 is older than 2001) - hot shot in 2000 would have been a 3dfx Voodoo5 or maybe the OG Geforce 256... if they're doing workstation stuff they might have had something like a 3Dlabs wildcat?
it was typically sold with Matrox card at the time
@666Tomato666 Makes ways more sense, Matrox had like the monopol for professional use back then.
@Chris Bourne Just last night I watched the movie "Arrival", Dave is like the main character in that movie 😂
Thank you for sharing this great piece of technology with us. Can't find it on ebay. Someone would say why bother this is outdated you can buy a new monitor for cheap. Well the thing is this was made to last while today when you buy something dies out in a year or two. I still use old crt monitors 20 and 15 year olds and they still work as new while I had been through a dozen of new monitors that break down fast or have a fault rendering it unusable. To the point I don't bother with new monitors anymore for some years now.
At 27:40, the chips on the left aren't row drivers. They are backlight drivers. CCFL.
And here I was, using 800x600 all the way till 2006
Crazy
I still have several Silicon Graphics brand 21" crt monitors. If I remember they use a Sony Trinitron CRT. They were part of a medical imaging system. I used them for many years of gaming and just can bring myself to get rid of them. I still think they look so much better than LCD.
Dell's current 8K monitor is like that. Give it only one DP input and you only get 8K@30Hz. 60Hz requires 2 DP 1.4 connections.
saljuice
Thunderbolt 3/USB4 replaced it, DP 1.4 still used, still max 30, try it, is it real 60??!!! Overclocked??? most run them on apple.
apple is the better os, forcing them om Thunderbolt, 10bit 5k@220 or better now! 12 bit emulating too!
This is impresive, thank you Dave.
I am still watching this in my 1080p IPS monitor ;)
Wow, this was 20 years ago... Makes me wonder what kind of stuff they have today that we don't know about O_O
I imagine there is some crazy tech equivalent to this being put in at those super telescope sites.
Ben V For the black hole photo, they did faster-than-any-network data transfer by carrying boxes full of hard drives around the globe. Because the raw video files were that big. And that's a known project.
It's kind of too bad this state of the art stuff is rarely accessible to consumers. Yeah it's crazy expensive, but it should still be accessible. I should be able to order it off Amazon or other site if I actually want to spend the money. Bet there are super enthusiasts like Linus Tech Tips who would actually put down the coin buy stuff like that to review it. It would be cool to see.
I like how eev is making people realise how technology goes through evolution and improvements.
Imagine using this in 2001 at the office everyday just go home to your old CRT and nothing met that level until over a decade later.
I am curious about what the PIC processors are doing. You pointed out the main PLCC one and one smaller one. I noticed there is a second identical smaller PIC with similar circuitry around it to the other small PIC.
Kevin Cozens configuration and OSD-
I was thinking that it might even be the user interface control?
Always been a fan of laptop docks and multi screen systems.....
Back in the day I had a 3 CRT 17" screens with a desktop system.....
I cannot believe if they even had any 4K videos back then !
Shakaib Safvi A few blockbuster Hollywood movies did CGI at "4K" or above, distributed on celluloid / plastic as if filmed directly. Also, big ass astronomy telescopes were huge resolution with wafer-sized low light CCD sensors.
Quadro by nVidia are the Workbench lineups... designed to be massively reliable, while power efficient. you can run them continuously on full load and they won't be mad at you for doing so. And it makes sense since - as you said - the monitor was mainly used in research facilities.
pretty cool stuff. there were a few very high res displays back around that time that took quad DVI inputs, but IDK if they all gave you the option to use less or even split the panel into 4 quadrants so you had to use 4 cables.
Multi-monitor was about all matrox was doing after nvidia took over the GPU market, but evidently nvidia got their hands in that stuff as well :P
I remember seeing those attached to MRI scanners, and all four cables were hooked up, at least on that setup.
I got a ride in one after hosing my knee playing football (the Yank kind) and they had to see what snapped. It was pretty neat (after the scan) watching the slices resolve on that HD display as the tech twisted their depth knob - didn't need an MD to diagnose torn ACL - the puppy popped right in two, and it was clear as a bell as the tech passed through it a few times.
design so good!
EEVBLOG is my favorit tv repair and review channel! :) LOLOLOLOLOLOL
He never repairs anything, only destroy 😂 but still interesting
Most of the current 4K 144Hz monitors do the same, using 2 DP-cables to carry the signal. If you use only 1 cable, you'd be limited to 120Hz or have to use chroma subsampling.
Ah, thanks, didn't know that. Obviously I'm not a gamer...
Some nice guy donated the monitor for teardown, Dave decided to only do half teardowns and keep it?!? Really nice of him! I'd call it disrespectful to all viewers but even more to the one that donated it.
You'd rather me potentially destroy it? Like teardown the LCD itself? Really?
"Mid range card released in Nov 2008, so old hat even in 2001" What are you smoking, Dave?
About the same time this monitor came out. There was another monitor that was made by Apple called the Apple cinema display. I believe it had a resolution of 1920x1200 and had a price tag of $8000.
joyange1 Wonder if they are still supported by their design suite, or if you have to download an old version.
In year 2000 all I had was a 1024x768 CRT monitor.
In 2002 or 2003 I purchased a Hercules 17" tft at 1280x1024 and for its time that actually was an impressive screen. I actually paid a bit more to have DVI! That wasn't even standard back then. If you'd told me back that there was such a thing as a 4k display I'm not sure if I would have believed it.
Besides, what surprised me the most, is that this monitor has solids from Nippon Chemicon, and Sanyo / OS-CON SEPC, those capacitors are worth a fortune.
I'm torn. The devil on my left shoulder is saying that you needed to tear the damn thing down. The angel on my right shoulder says that you are smart to stop where you did. Good video. Appreciated. Thanks.
I bet the response time on that thing is abysmal!
Does it matter if it's not for gaming? I didn't even know what response time was until I got a 144hz monitor.
It was
80ms gray-to-gray if I'm not mistaken. But if you are driving it at 42 or 48Hz it's not too bad. It adds a nice motion blur to everything. =)))
There is a 4k panel (my main display) -- it runs at full 4k resolution at 120hz with one displayport cable, and can do full HDR at 120Hz with 2 displayport cables (haven't tried it), so it's still a thing using extra cables for more bandwidth.
Commodore 2024 for the amiga did something similiar with the resolution. it buffered several 320x200 screens to make up a 1024x1024 screen- stunning back by then..
I really wanted one of these when they first were announced. Back then they were called high-density displays.
When we started to designe our current project the MSRP of the FPGA we used, that wasn't even released yet, (We had two of the 3 existing dev boards existing) we already was way over 2000$. We got it for 1200$ the first year, 480$ the second year and are now down to under 200$ / piece. We are not even that big of a customer. FPGA prices drop extremly fast.
Regarding your question at 6:00, I'm using the amazing UP3218K which needs two DisplayPort-connections in order to provide 8K@60Hz. With only one it can still do 8K@30Hz. By the way, this monitor really is the perfect monitor for using Altium. :)
Not at 22", too small
@@EEVblog I'm sorry, I meant the UP3218K is perfect for Altium.