Can higher refresh rate settings really damage hardware?

[xMax]

I change the screen refresh rate from 60hz to 180hz on my crt monitor after unchecking the "hide modes that this monitor cannot display" option, and my monitor seems to be perfectly fine. But the problem is the following message thats written right underneath the checkbox

"Clearing this check box allows you to select display modes that this monitor cannot display correctly. This may lead to an unusable display and/or damaged hardware."

But i dont really see my monitor being damaged at all. Of course, maybe im wrong! Maybe there is subtle damage taking place and i cant really percieve it.

Anyhow, im planning on doing the same thing for my very high end DVI connected LCD. But there is no way in hell that im going to use a higher refresh rate setting if there damage could occur.

Any advice besides asking me why i would want a higher refresh rate to begin wtih. Because i dont think i do, but im very curious to know.

 

[Bobthelost]

*drops head into hands*

Ok, if you haven't noticed any difference then WTF IS THE POINT IN RUNNING YOUR COMPUTER IN A MANNER THAT MAY WELL DAMAGE IT?

Oh look, there's a button labeld "DO NOT PRESS THIS BUTTON", let's just see what it does shall we?

I am lacking in patience at the moment however you sir, are an idiot and this will not ever change.

 

[V00D00]

Yes, it will damage your monitor. It might just kill it straight up, or it might not. Monitors are only made to go so high.

Hitting my brand new processor with a hammer doesn't look like it's breaking it..... but do you think it is??

You will probably kill your monitor very soon if you punish it with those ridiculously high refresh rates.

Why do you even need them that high? Just to say you have it? "haha, 60hz... fvcking pvssy, I got 180hz biatch!!"

 

[wchou]

the op say he is curious so what he need to do is drop the monitor to the ground to see if it will damage his monitor. I woulnd't dare do 100hz much less 150 or higher. ;eek:

 

[xMax]

Its all confusing you see. The control panel shows a maximum of 60hz being allowed. While the ATI CCC shows that i can go up to 120 without clicking the "force" refresh rate. So you see, how does this make sense.

Would any of you take 60hz over 120hz.

And having tested the 180hz on my old CRT monitor aswell as my sisters cheapest of cheap ginny pig LCD, i was able to see what happens. With the CRT it simply used the 180hz. With my sisters LCD it simply displays a message stating that it cant support such a resolution.

You people are rude.

 

[Bobthelost]

Yes, we are rude.

It did not use 180hz.

It will not work.

 

[GalvanizedYankee]

You are a fool to overdrive your monitor.

If you want to run 100 get a Mitsubshi 2060u NF from Asatek.com for $375+ship.
They cost $1100 in 1999 and they are made to run that hard. There are others that
will also.

Before you kill your present display start shopping for one


...Galvanized

 

[foodfightr]

I wouldn't go that high. Period. Stick with what your monitor was made to do!

 

[xMax]

But CCC doesnt mention that i would damage the monitor by selecting 120hz. It doesnt even consider it to be a forced refresh rate, since the forced refresh rates start above 120. So according to the CCC, my monitor is perfectly well and capable of supporting a refresh rate of 120 at a resolution of 1600x1200.

So what i did is installed the CCC on my older computer running my CRT, a monitor i use as a ginny pig. On this monitor, the CCC shows a maximum of 60hz, and if i chose a higher refrehs rate through the force refresh rate option, it simply takes that refresh rate, like 120, but reduces the resolution. Meaning that it doesnt even allow it.

Basically the communication between the monitor and the graphics card, which uses the EDID feature, doesnt allow for the user to take a setting that is not supported. Unless you turn off automatic EDID and set your own manual settings. But that is something that i will not do since it would clearly lead to trouble. Not to mention that i wouldnt need more than 120hz anyways.

but 60 hz is just a little bit low.

Would you take 120 over 60 if 120 was perfectly OK for your monitor?

And if the control panel says you cant go ovef 60 while the catalys control center (CCC) says you can up to 120, then wouldn't you post a question on a forum and simultaneously conduct experiments on monitors that you use as ginny pigs anyways.

Im not a fool. Myabe your all fools for rushing to call a person a fool before understanding the individuals circumstances.

 

[xMax]

I wouldn't go that high. Period. Stick with what your monitor was made to do!

But thats the point, i think my monitor is made to do 120.

But the windows control panel says maximum of 60 while the CCC says i can go up to 120.

But i figured it out just now. You see, the windows control panel version doesnt know what my monitor is capable of. It just says maximum of 60 for any monitor. But the CCC uses the EDID and knows exactly what my monitor is capable of, which is a maximum of 120hz.

This has to make sense.

 

[episodic]

I overdo mine by 5. The max for my system at 1184 is 75hz - I up it to 80 - slightly Overclocking the monitor. It is an old monitor, but 75 is too low for my eyes. 80 works ok.

 

[xMax]

If you want to run 100 get a Mitsubshi 2060u NF from Asatek.com for $375+ship.

Well, you see, my monitor is better than that one. In fact, its the best monitor on the market when it comes to color accuracy. And it allows me to run at 120hz. So the question is "why wouldn't I?"

Well, for one, my monitor is not made for gaming, and has no purpose for high refresh rates.

secondly, the eye probably cant notice a difference between 90 and 120.

So technically, i dont need to run at 120, but 60 was too low and my inquisition that lead to my understanding of how i can use 120 was very much wise.

I could use lower than 120, but why would they make the monitor support 120 if it has absolutely no use when the response time is only 30ms.

But anyhow, this thread should end now.

 

[Bobthelost]

It should have been strangled upon posting, but that would be playing god.

*returns to Black & White 2*

 

[Jeff7]

As I understand it, recent monitors (like, made in the past 10 years) will not allow themselves to be run at refresh rates higher than they were made to tolerate.

Easy way to find out your monitor's maximum allowable specs: Look it up online, using the brand and model number. You should find a specsheet right from the manufacturer, which will detail just what your monitor is capable of.

I don't always trust that EDID or whatever it is - sometimes the drivers don't like to listen to it. My monitor is capable of 144Hz according to its specsheets. Some driver versions on various videocards would also only allow 60Hz, and they were supposedly reading the specs from the monitor. Sometimes I had to edit the registry or .INF files to force the drivers to allow for more than 60Hz - though that was only when RefForce failed to get the job done.

 

[Stas]

If you have drivers installed then it should display the correct options for refresh rate without unchecking that box. If not, then, AFAIK, if you do go above supported refresh rate then the monitor will simply work at the maximum RefRate it can while showing whatever you chose in the refresh rate drop list. In other words: if your monitor supports 1280x960 @ 100Hz MAX then setting it to 180 will make it still work @ 100 but Windows will not be aware of that (now, if you have drivers installed then it will show an error) and will show 180 in the options. I think there is a chip or something that protects the monitor from that kind of stuff.
All of the above is from my own experience with 3-5 CRT monitors (a couple of cheap Gateway and Compaq, 15 to 19 inches, and a 22 inch pro model).

 

[GoodRevrnd]

CRTs usually have OPTIMAL resolutions with OPTIMAL refreshrates. I tend to stick with those. They also have supported resolutions with MAXIMUM refresh rates at each resolution. While your monitor may support 120hz at 1024x768, i'm sure it doesn't at 1920x1440. The manufacturers list these specs for a reason. I suppose you put 92 octane gasoline in your riding mower as well?

You don't need to worry about refreshrates with LCDs. Just leave that one alone.

 

[ShadowBlade]

I tried to change an old spare CRT to like 90Hz once and it just started flickering, like on cable when the channel doesnt come in. So i unplugged it and ended up having to leave it unplugged for a while for it to work again.

 

[xMax]

I would have listened to the specs from the manufacturers, but i couldnt find the information on the maximum refresh rates. I scoped the manual, the brochure, the detailed specs on their web site, and did some searches with google. Nothing came up. Only the 162mhz for dvi frequency. But that is mega hz, which cant be the same thing.

This is a very high end and new monitor, which means that it must have a chip or something that prevents the user from selecting an unnacceptible refresh rate. how could it possibly not. Its just such a logical and simple idea.

The refresh rate is also restricted to the graphic cards support, with mine being only 120. I have no idea what my monitor actually allows. The only thing i know is that the CCC is telling me that my monitor can do 120, and having set it to 120 and seen that it works, then i can only assume that its ok. My only concern would be that damage is actually occuring at an imperceptible level, but i cant imagine that such an error would take place between the latest CCC and this new monitor and with the simple fact that such protective mechanisms must be implaced into modern monitors.

 

[Ichigo]

SO USE 120HZ!

Not that freaking difficult. What is going to use more than that anyways?

 

[xMax]

if you put it that way.

thread over.

 

[0roo0roo]

180hz? best crts i've seen generally do 120hz ish..and the ones u buy these days do far less...maybe 85hz if ur lucky at the highest res, more likely 75 if ur setting it to 180hz its probably not doing it cuz if it did..u wouldn't see a picture since most monitors just don't show a thing if u go overboard, they don't die. lcd works differently, the pixels don't respond fast enough to make 60hz a problem. and they don't flicker, 1hz wouldn't flicker on a freakin lcd.

 

[Sonikku]

When I check the "Only display refresh rates my monitor supports" box my Sony FW900 lists 120htz as being usable at 1280x800. But even though this is a support resolution, will it burn my monitor out faster then if I used 100htz?