Is the retrotink 5x worth it for just PS2?

I guess I could also use it with my my hacked Wii for Gamecube games, but honestly the $5 HDMI adapter I got for that already looks great on my 4k TV and adds almost no lag (if it's anything at all, it's only like a couple ms).

Everything else I just play on my MiSTer which afaik doesn't benefit from the retrotink as it basically has that tech built in. But maybe it would help with PSX games that have res changes (if I'm using low lag mode, it causes screen to go black a couple seconds on res change, apparently Retrotink fixes that?)

>captcha: 4PS24K (can't make this shit up)

I would say yes, its motion adaptive deinterlacing is really good as is the low input lag and VRR. This compressed video file doesn't exactly do it justice, it looks better in person.
>(if I'm using low lag mode, it causes screen to go black a couple seconds on res change, apparently Retrotink fixes that?)
The 5X works in much the same way, if you enable triple buffering (adds about one frame of lag) then you get instant resolution switching. But with low lag it drops out momentarily.

https://consolemods.org/wiki/AV:RetroTINK-5X_Pro#PlayStation_2
Also dialing in the image quality takes longer than any other console because of the way it handles resolutions. But that's only if you're really into tinkering, the default generic 4:3 scaler on the 5X looks decent enough for most people.

I still like using my Retrotink 5x, but I'm not sure if I would buy the device just for PS2 usage. Depending on your budget I'd recommend starting with something cheaper like the GBS Control, as it still has motion adaptive deinteracing for PS2 games. The cons with that device are that the colors are off, it only goes up to 1080p (without proper widescale support, you need to enable that with your display), and you need to connect GBS Control via wifi to change device settings.
If that doesn't sound appealing, the Retrotink 5X can go up to 1440p, has seemingly more accurate PS2 colors, a lot more customizable settings and you can just customize settings with the included remote with its on screen UI. But its more expensive so take your pick.

it technically does the job you're looking for but its still far too expensive for what it is. $300 is not the right cost for a small box that handles analog video signals more intelligently than an existing chinese converter. You're basically paying for the hours he spent making it

>>11789339 (OP)
>adds no lag
wrong
i would get a 2xpro instead and save money if you dont notice how shitty the wii2hdmi and ps2hdmi shitmon adapters are
also open your faggy eyes

>>11789339 (OP)
No you dumb fuck.

Insane how far people go out of their way to avoid a cathode ray tube

>>11789745
It doesn't, I tested it with 240fps phone camera. modern TVs add minuscule (1-2ms at most) amounts of lag from scaling video. De-interlacing adds more lag (but still only about a frame max)

Get a backwards-compatible PS3

>>11789809
adds too much lag and too bulky.

>>11789810
Like yo mama

>>11789339 (OP)
>>11789809
Personal experience: not worth it.
Just PCSX2

>>11789810
>adds lag
Any comparisons on that vs. a normal PS2?

>>11789882
Probably, it adds a few frames with the HDMI connection. If you use analog cables to a CRT, it doesn't add lag, but that defeats the whole purpose since I'm trying to play on a 4k TV

>>11789868
Use LRPS2 instead, it's the Retroarch fork with more features and better accuracy.

>>11789763
Show me a decent CRT in good condition for sale for a reasonable price near where I live, and I'll buy it

>>11789898
If you want PS2 to look better than a cheaper scaler using the Tink, it's going to add lag.

>>11790048
Tink doesn't add any lag though, that is its main appeal, it adds like <1ms of input lag

>>11790058
Not if you add the PS2 processing features. If you're going to use BOB then just get an OSSC

>>11790109
The lag it adds is tiny though. Fractions of a single frame. It's not like it has to buffer two frames to merge into one like a cheap scaler, it simply blends the incoming line with the previous frame. De-interlacing doesn't have to add a frame of lag, it's just the lazy way every scaler before the Tink did it. The Tink does the blindingly obvious fucking way of updating the blend buffer as the data comes in and that way it only needs to be a couple of LINES behind.

>>11789906
No, you're lazy.

>>11789339 (OP)
>MiSTer which afaik doesn't benefit from the retrotink as it basically has that tech built in
Pretty sure the scaling and effects built into MiSTer don't come close to the ones in the Retrotink, and they vary from core to core.

>>11789906
Go on Facebook Marketplace and you'll see a boomer near you chucking one away for $0.

I'm very happy with mine, OP.

The only better option is way too pricey at 700 for slightly better motion adaptive de-interlacing. 5x gives you a great experience already. A lot of people here shit on 5x and insist on knockoffs but 5x has gotten a crazy amount of firmware updates that improved upon it that I couldn't see myself using anything else.

I've had mine since launch and I've gotten way more playtime than I could have thought of. I paid 275 ish at launch and I would pay 300 personally. At the time I was flipping burgers at McDonalds and lived at home and still bought mine.

>>11791215
thanks

what exactly does a retrotink do? is it just retroarch shaders but for your console?

This is a direct comparison of the Retrotink 5x (left) and the OSSC (right).
I think the quality improvement from the Retrotink is clear.

>>11793170
holy shit, that's huge.

>>11793169
mostly upscaling retro consoles laglessly, lagless deinterlacing that looks as good as porgressive, but it also includes a lot of options for custom shaders, and you can even do some niche stuff like downscaling higher-res games to play on a CRT

>>11793195
bob interfacing is fast and relatively lag-free but it's switching its line-doubling to a different field every frame, so the end result is chunky and flickery.

it's "tolerable" in my opinion, but if you have bigger TVs or you want to record content then it's not pretty.

I’ll have to get it

Why do people spend $500 to connect their PS2 to a screen?

>>11793872
Why not? PS2 is the greatest console of all time and money is no issue when it comes to getting the best experience with the PS2

>>11789339 (OP)
If you only need it for your PS2 just stick with the HDMI adapter. Electron Shepard sells a high quality one if you want to upgrade from the chink one for $35 that handles the resolution swap, it just doesn't upscale so if you have an old TV from before 2010 it probably won't support 240p/480i anyways.

>>11793872
Because the PS2 is the biggest dickhead in the world when it comes to making it look good on a fixed pixel display. Basically every other system you can reliably get some kind of progressive output from and line multiply with ease and it looks fine, but the PS2's whole rendering pipeline and output is basically built around 480i and displaying on a CRT, meaning most attempts to display it on a modern screen are any combination of blurry, laggy, full of deinterlacing artefacts and washed out.
The obvious way to make the PS2 look good is just to connect it to a tube and be done with it, but if you're absolutely determined to have your PS2 on a modern TV the higher end Retrotinks are basically the only way to do it properly.

>>11791067
Hasn't been true for 10 years no matter how much you bullshit. You might find some piece of shit for free at best but nothing in decent condition with more than RF

>>11793170
why do thye both look like shit? looks like plugging my ps2 up to my LCD from 2010

>>11793872
Phobia of CRTs

>>11794516
>if you have an old TV from before 2010 it probably won't support 240p/480i anyways.
wut. the older the panel the more likely it was to support 240p/480i because the switch from those standards just happened. I've only ever had 240p not work on a TV thats newer. Pre-2010 panels were literally made for 480i

>>11794532
>meaning most attempts to display it on a modern screen are any combination of blurry, laggy, full of deinterlacing artefacts and washed out
Works on my machine. Don't buy shitty TV's.

>>11794579
No non-CRT TV on the planet is going to output 480i even nearly as clean as Retrotink

>>11794564
I've seen loads of trinitroons for $20 or less

>>11789339 (OP)
For just the PS2 alone, I'd say probably not. However, since you have a MiSTer, why not use that for your PS2? Look into the OSSC DEXX, which is in between the original OSSC and the OSSC Pro for features, but uses the DE10 nano board of your MiSTer to do the adaptive deinterlacing. https://github.com/marqs85/DExx-vd_isl

>>11794790
lucky you, i haven't seen any usable tvs for less than $80, and they've only ever had composite with mono audio in that price range. faggot.

>>11798092
Boomers throw them away for free all the time
>they only have composite!!
Boohoo. If you don't like composite, you don't like CRTs (or retro games for that matter).

This webm is made from Retrotink 5X footage.

If you have a CRT as your main TV for retro gaming, you can stick with that. For non-CRTs, I really don't know a better option for upscaling for everything without (perceptible) input lag if you value the accuracy of playing on real hardware.
If you are an emuchad, then obviously none of this applies.

The biggest argument I don't see much online is what is best for deinterlacing PS2: motion adaptive or blend.

>>11798093
>Boomers throw them away for free all the time
okay and if they're throwing them away they're not being put up for sale, there are literally none near me. god you are an insufferable third world faggot

>>11798156
>types like an ESL moron
>accuses me of being third world
Maybe the reason you can't find any is because the technology was never even introduced to your country, Ngubu.