Monitor Hz
#1
Posted 17 July 2002 - 06:08 PM
I'd like to know if i tweaking over the monitor HZ using powerstrip or similar program can damage the image quality.
(e.g.: 800x600 @ 85Hz (factory max specification) ---> 800x600 @ ~90Hz)
Is possible tweaking the monitor settings to improve the image when running high resolutions? can these tweaks damage the monitor?
Thanks!
#2
Posted 17 July 2002 - 06:17 PM
If framerate in games bothers you, then turn off "vsync" in both OpenGL and DX, so u're not limited to 85fps when the monitor runs at 85Hz.
#3
Posted 17 July 2002 - 07:40 PM
There is a reason why its only rated at 85, so if you push it further your just gonna hurt it
#4
Posted 17 July 2002 - 08:28 PM
Besides, the only way you could see an improvement by increasing the refresh rate is if you were able to notice the flickering at the old frequency. In this respect, 75Hz is perfect for most people, and you would have to be superhuman to see a problem with 85Hz...
#6
Posted 17 July 2002 - 08:52 PM
Thank you!
#8
Posted 18 July 2002 - 03:04 AM
2) Powerstrip cannot run your monitor above specs. If it says it is then it is LYING. Also : See point 1.
#10
Posted 23 July 2002 - 01:13 AM
Overclocking a CPU makes it run faster, but also reduces its lifetime.
is this true? how long can alive a normal cpu (without overclock)
#12
Posted 23 July 2002 - 09:27 AM
Theoretically, under normal conditions, longer than you.
And why to care about overclockeds CPU time life? :p
#13
Posted 23 July 2002 - 06:01 PM
A few years back it was more feasible to overclock than to buy new coponents, but today it just more safe (And in some cases more cost effective) just to upgrade, however.
#14
Posted 23 July 2002 - 09:23 PM
Got it from 150 to 166mmx.
#15
Posted 23 July 2002 - 11:23 PM
#16
Posted 24 July 2002 - 01:53 AM
Sorry if that was a little too long winded.
L8tr
illusionist
#18
Posted 27 July 2002 - 11:51 PM
I have seen melted MOBO's Graphic Cards. Result of the weakest component failing is not always it stopping to work. They do cause fires etc you know.
BTW ANY and ALL benchmarks are sythetic. If you really want to compare stuff, get your assembler book out and write it yourself even 2+2 will do. number of cycles is your benchmark. But since each CPU has a different design then comparison is irrelevant since you can not compare apple with a water melon.
Last thing on OC, the moment you go above the spec, you start to create errors on each process, Microprocessors or Digital electronic is unreliable on its own anyway, it does not need your messing about. This is what the ECC is there for, but above spec you start to create more errors cause you are losing process synch (actually ALU, BUS, L1, L2 cache structures are the cause.) so your CPU spends more time correcting those errors etc.
And even if it was true that OC can increase the performance how much do you think it will be?
Let me give you a clue. Difference between a P4 1.8 512KB and P4 2.4 512KB is less then %3... (also 2.4 is just a normal P4 same as the 1.8 they came out of the same line the silicon structure and clock connected to taht is the only difference.)

Help










