How get more Hz on monitor?

[Nena Trinity]

Ok so my monitor kinda refused to go to 64~75hz after replacing the GPU + cable, most posts on the interwebs seems to pin the blame on my new HDMI to DVI cable. 

 

So basically if I go with a DP to VGA adapter would I solve the problem? 

 

Or is DP to DVI better as a fix?

 

A guy on reddit said DP to VGA would be best for more Hz better... 

 

[mariushm]

Monitors may accept a wider range of refresh rate on VGA inputs, but mostly for backwards compatibility.  As in, the video processors may accept 40Hz ... 85 Hz on VGA input, but only updates the LCD screen content 60 times a second. 

 

A HDMI / DP to VGA converter is unlikely to offer you more than 60 Hz refresh rate - the chips inside these adapters aren't known for offering such options, they're usually locking at 60 Hz refresh rate. 

 

Does the monitor actually advertise more than 60 Hz refresh rate? If it doesn't chances are even if you somehow give it more than 60 updates a second, the content on the actual LCD panel will only be refreshed 60 times a second, so you're wasting your time. 

[Nena Trinity]

1 hour ago, mariushm said:

Monitors may accept a wider range of refresh rate on VGA inputs, but mostly for backwards compatibility.  As in, the video processors may accept 40Hz ... 85 Hz on VGA input, but only updates the LCD screen content 60 times a second. 

 

A HDMI / DP to VGA converter is unlikely to offer you more than 60 Hz refresh rate - the chips inside these adapters aren't known for offering such options, they're usually locking at 60 Hz refresh rate. 

 

Does the monitor actually advertise more than 60 Hz refresh rate? If it doesn't chances are even if you somehow give it more than 60 updates a second, the content on the actual LCD panel will only be refreshed 60 times a second, so you're wasting your time. 

The overclocking utility for Nvidia and AMD seemed to work 1920x1200 64hz? Also the 75hz thing is kinda standard for most LCDs at 1280x1024 resolutions are they not? HP L2445w is model of LCD panel... 

[mariushm]

39 minutes ago, Nena Trinity said:

The overclocking utility for Nvidia and AMD seemed to work 1920x1200 64hz? Also the 75hz thing is kinda standard for most LCDs at 1280x1024 resolutions are they not? HP L2445w is model of LCD panel... 

 

You can set refresh rates higher than 60 Hz, and the monitor will accept them, but you won't see any actual higher refresh rate on panel. In fact, if you set too high refresh rate, the image quality may suffer because you're just pointlessly sending too much data through a poor quality vga cable.

 

The display processor (the chip)  which takes in analogue input is designed and MUST accept a wide range of refresh rates, for backwards compatibility. 

Some video card may only output 720x400 75 Hz,  another video card may only output 640x480 85 Hz, there's CNC machines, sewing machines, industrial machines which output barely acceptable VGA signals ... user may not be able to control the refresh rate. Or, the product generating an analogue signal may be badly designed and not produce a properly timed analogue signal, so the monitor would see 59.8 Hz or some other such value. 

 

The monitor's input must be capable of accepting a wide range of refresh rates. But, this doesn't mean the processor in the monitor will also update the actual pixels on the LCD panel that many times a second. Unless explicitly specified, it will only update the panel 60 times a second.  You give it 70 Hz signal, it will simply pick 60 frames out of 70 and throw away those extra 10 frames.  You give it 50 Hz, it will simply update the screen when a new frame is received, once even 1000 ms / 50 frames = 20 ms... OR, it will just double some random frames out of those 50 and update the screen 60 times a second.

 

The processor chip is made like separate departments  :  [   analogue to digital conversion ] ---- > [ digital resizing to LCD panel resolution, if needed ]  ----- [ conversion from digital to format the LCD panel understands ]   --->  repeat 60 times a second.

 

Also, in those old LCD displays, the pixels are quite slow to update. Often, it takes more than 16 ms (1000ms / 60 hz = 16.66 ms) for a pixel to fully change from one color to another.  To move from one shade of gray to another, or from one blue to some other blue it's easier, maybe 6-10 ms on average, but if you change between colors it can often take quite close or over 16 ms. 

So even if the processor would actually send more than 60 updates to the LCD panel, the pixels wouldn't change that fast.

 

I wish there was an easy way for you to actually test ... all I can think of is using your phone to record the screen at 90-120 fps while you play a 75 fps movie of a clock or something that changes every frame. If you can actually see 75 changes on the LCD panel within one second, you actually have a monitor that does more than 60 hz refresh rate.

Maybe you can create a test video with a tool like Virtualdub, I know for sure you can change the framerate of a video easily with it. 

[Nena Trinity]

1 hour ago, mariushm said:

 

You can set refresh rates higher than 60 Hz, and the monitor will accept them, but you won't see any actual higher refresh rate on panel. In fact, if you set too high refresh rate, the image quality may suffer because you're just pointlessly sending too much data through a poor quality vga cable.

 

The display processor (the chip)  which takes in analogue input is designed and MUST accept a wide range of refresh rates, for backwards compatibility. 

Some video card may only output 720x400 75 Hz,  another video card may only output 640x480 85 Hz, there's CNC machines, sewing machines, industrial machines which output barely acceptable VGA signals ... user may not be able to control the refresh rate. Or, the product generating an analogue signal may be badly designed and not produce a properly timed analogue signal, so the monitor would see 59.8 Hz or some other such value. 

 

The monitor's input must be capable of accepting a wide range of refresh rates. But, this doesn't mean the processor in the monitor will also update the actual pixels on the LCD panel that many times a second. Unless explicitly specified, it will only update the panel 60 times a second.  You give it 70 Hz signal, it will simply pick 60 frames out of 70 and throw away those extra 10 frames.  You give it 50 Hz, it will simply update the screen when a new frame is received, once even 1000 ms / 50 frames = 20 ms... OR, it will just double some random frames out of those 50 and update the screen 60 times a second.

 

The processor chip is made like separate departments  :  [   analogue to digital conversion ] ---- > [ digital resizing to LCD panel resolution, if needed ]  ----- [ conversion from digital to format the LCD panel understands ]   --->  repeat 60 times a second.

 

Also, in those old LCD displays, the pixels are quite slow to update. Often, it takes more than 16 ms (1000ms / 60 hz = 16.66 ms) for a pixel to fully change from one color to another.  To move from one shade of gray to another, or from one blue to some other blue it's easier, maybe 6-10 ms on average, but if you change between colors it can often take quite close or over 16 ms. 

So even if the processor would actually send more than 60 updates to the LCD panel, the pixels wouldn't change that fast.

 

I wish there was an easy way for you to actually test ... all I can think of is using your phone to record the screen at 90-120 fps while you play a 75 fps movie of a clock or something that changes every frame. If you can actually see 75 changes on the LCD panel within one second, you actually have a monitor that does more than 60 hz refresh rate.

Maybe you can create a test video with a tool like Virtualdub, I know for sure you can change the framerate of a video easily with it. 

Well I guess I can at best try the DP to VGA adapter and see what happens if windows will allow me to set it to other Hz again, in the past it could do 1280x1024 at 75hz or 1920x1200 64hz so worth a shot it's only 30 bucks for adapter and I have so many VGA cables....

[mariushm]

Keep the 30 bucks, add 20-30 more and buy yourself a proper 22-24"  monitor, instead of killing your eyes with 1280x1024 15-17" monitors. 

 

ex dell p2210 1680x1050 22"  is 65$ on newegg: https://www.newegg.com/dell-p2210-22/p/N82E16824260306?Item=9SIA6AB3GY2677

 

No, the adapter won't work, or it will work and produce 75 Hz or whatever, but the lcd panel will still only output 60 updates per second, so like i said, pointless. You're paying $30 to see a number in Windows which doesn't actually affect the screen quality and performance.