P 1130 with old computer - refresh rate question

[mset]

Briefly - Bought Dell P1130 and plugged it in to old computer (Plug and Play adapter is SiS 630/730).

Eye strain became apparent immediately. Downloaded Refresh Force and ran it - it shows the 'maximum' for 1280 X 1024 to be 85. I clicked 'apply' and restarted and now when I click the button on the front of the monitor, the refresh rate has been bumped to 85 hz. I can no longer physically see the screen flickering, and the eye strain seems to be better but I still sense some strain.

My question - in Refresh Force I have the ability to bump the refresh rate as high as I want. Are the calculation below correct for max refresh rate?

Thanks

 

[mset]

VSF = HSF / number of horizontal lines x 0.95, where

VSF = vertical scanning frequency (refresh rate) and HSF = horizontal scanning frequency.

So, a monitor with a horizontal scanning frequency of 96kHz at a resolution of 1280x1024 would have a maximum refresh rate of:

VSF = 96,000 / 1024 x 0.95 = 89Hz.

If the same monitor were set to a resolution of 1600x1200, its maximum refresh rate would be:

VSF = 96,000 / 1200 x 0.95 = 76Hz.

Now, for Dell P 1130, the specs are....

Resolution
Horizontal scan range 30 kHz to 130 kHz (automatic)
Vertical scan range 48 Hz to 170 Hz (automatic)
Optimal preset resolution 1280 x 1024 at 85 Hz
Highest preset resolution 1600 x 1200 at 85 Hz
Highest addressable resolution* 2048 x 1536 at 80 Hz

My Horizontal scan rate (assuming I take the larger or maximum value from above)

= 131,000kHz

Therefore

131,000/1024 X .95 = max refresh rate

This gives 131,000/972.8 = 134. So my max refresh rate is... 134Hz?? But the Dell specs show 'optimal' preset resolution at 85 Hz. So, can anyone weigh in and say how high I can/should push it?

 

[mset]

 

[SonicIce]

HSF = 130,000

(130,000 / 1024) *.95 = 120Hz

Theres no point in running above 85Hz. The screen will just get blurrier. I think the strain you're sensing is all in your head .

With a monitor that nice, I would set it to 1600x1200@85Hz, maybe turn up the font sizes.

 

[mset]

Aha. not 130,000/(1024*0.95)...

Ok, I will try out 1600x1200@85 Hz tonight. Thanks a lot for the response.

Maybe the strain I was sensing was a residual effect of having bought an X2 3800+ when my budget originally called for a 3200+ Venice

 

[xtknight]

I get back of head/neck aches on anything below 120 Hz on a CRT. Looking at something flickering after I've seen static images really kills my eyes too. You should run it as high as you can (before blurriness occurs) so you don't limit your FPS, and you minimize any strain/aches. Not surprisingly, I'm also the kind of person that sees rainbows on DLPs (though it doesn't make me sick).

 

[mset]

Originally posted by: SonicIce
Theres no point in running above 85Hz. The screen will just get blurrier. With a monitor that nice, I would set it to 1600x1200@85Hz, maybe turn up the font sizes.

Originally posted by: xtknight
I get back of head/neck aches on anything below 120 Hz on a CRT. You should run it as high as you can (before blurriness occurs) so you don't limit your FPS, and you minimize any strain/aches.

Ok guys, this is why I post here. Can anyone weigh in with a tiebreaking opinion? I notice that no one has posted to say that I can wreck my hardware by trying to up the refresh rate.

 

[xtknight]

Neither of us is lying..... people have different sensitivites and you'll just have to "probe" for your own. Maybe I should have taken more breaks. I found myself with lots of red eye using CRTs for long gaming sessions though.

 

[CP5670]

Just try different settings until you get something that looks good to you. The best combination varies a lot with the particular monitor and what your preferences are. I use 1600x1200 at 110hz to as there is no noticeable blurriness over 85hz on mine and I can't see any flickering beyond 100hz.

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: CP5670
Just try different settings until you get something that looks good to you. The best combination varies a lot with the particular monitor and what your preferences are. I use 1600x1200 at 110hz to as there is no noticeable blurriness over 85hz on mine and I can't see any flickering beyond 100hz.

Give me your monitor.

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: mset

Originally posted by: SonicIce
Theres no point in running above 85Hz. The screen will just get blurrier. With a monitor that nice, I would set it to 1600x1200@85Hz, maybe turn up the font sizes.

Originally posted by: xtknight
I get back of head/neck aches on anything below 120 Hz on a CRT. You should run it as high as you can (before blurriness occurs) so you don't limit your FPS, and you minimize any strain/aches.

Ok guys, this is why I post here. Can anyone weigh in with a tiebreaking opinion? I notice that no one has posted to say that I can wreck my hardware by trying to up the refresh rate.

You aren't going to wreck anything as long as you keep it within specifications. I only say dont go higher than you need because image quality can possibly suffer with a very high refresh rate. find your sweet spot, it could be 75, 85, 100, whatev

 

[mset]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Neither of us is lying..... people have different sensitivites and you'll just have to "probe" for your own. Maybe I should have taken more breaks. I found myself with lots of red eye using CRTs for long gaming sessions though.

Hi xtknight

Man, I must have worded that badly - I absolutely did not mean to imply that either of you were lying, not even close. I am doing my first ever build and have been hanging around here for a couple of months, accumulating parts and advice. It has happened in the past that I have had two different opinions re: some hardware or compatibility issue (actually, it happens quite a bit!), even from pros like the two of you. Basically I was just bumping and hoping for more respondents. In particular I was wondering if anyone would post and say 'Don't do this or that, you may wreck either your monitor or your GPU'.

Anyhow, I guess I have enough info now. I will try a modest hike in refresh rate to 100Hz. The difference between 60 Hz and 85 Hz is huge - I could hardly look at the monitor at 65 Hz, and it really did cause a weird feeling just behind my eyes.

Thanks and sorry for any misunderstanding.

 

[mset]

Originally posted by: SonicIce

Originally posted by: mset

Originally posted by: SonicIce
Theres no point in running above 85Hz. The screen will just get blurrier. With a monitor that nice, I would set it to 1600x1200@85Hz, maybe turn up the font sizes.

Originally posted by: xtknight
I get back of head/neck aches on anything below 120 Hz on a CRT. You should run it as high as you can (before blurriness occurs) so you don't limit your FPS, and you minimize any strain/aches.

Ok guys, this is why I post here. Can anyone weigh in with a tiebreaking opinion? I notice that no one has posted to say that I can wreck my hardware by trying to up the refresh rate.

You aren't going to wreck anything as long as you keep it within specifications. I only say dont go higher than you need because image quality can possibly suffer with a very high refresh rate. find your sweet spot, it could be 75, 85, 100, whatev

Ok, Ice. As you saw, the Dell site shows 'optimal' prest resolution and refresh rate, but this doesn't say maximum. Seems that no one thinks I will wreck this monitor by bumping it to 100Hz, and since it feels fine at 85Hz, I will just try 100 and then leave it at that. I just sit in front of this thing a lot so I want the best setup for eyestrain.

Thanks for responding, guys, and btw...here are my parts bought so far with the help of and mostly directly from AT members

Dell P 1130

X2 3800+

WD Raptor 74 GB

WD Raptor Dual Option 120 GB External HD

Now looking for the optimal mobo for a non overclocker, non gamer who just wants stability at stock and an easy first build.

 

[mset]

Originally posted by: CP5670
Just try different settings until you get something that looks good to you. The best combination varies a lot with the particular monitor and what your preferences are. I use 1600x1200 at 110hz to as there is no noticeable blurriness over 85hz on mine and I can't see any flickering beyond 100hz.

Just an update in case any n00bs like me are following along or find this thread by search.

I used Refresh Force to try and bump to 100 Hz. I restarted but when I pressed the button on the front of the monitor, it was still set at 85 Hz; however, the monitor was now set at 1024x786. So the monitor/GPU setup didn't like this setting. Also, all the icons became bigger and things did not look so clear as at 1200x1024 @ 85 Hz. Maybe that's why this setting is described as optimal by Dell. The clarity is amazing at this setting, so this is it for me until I get a GPU with which I can force the resolution.

 

[xtknight]

mset: lol, that's ok...miscommunication (I thought you meant "who was right"). I didn't mean to imply you were thinking we were lying.

Increasing resolution and refresh rate bumps the bandwidth required. On CRTs, blur results from too high of a bandwidth.

If you set the refresh rate too high, it can damage your monitor. But any competent monitor (99%) will have a simple out-of-range message. In fact, you've probably seen it before. If so, you don't have to worry about damaging it. Well, of course, "wearing it out" is always possible after awhile. On a really old NEC MultiSync CRT I had, I liked playing with refresh rates so I set it too high and the screen just got all garbled. All I had to was go in to safe mode so it reverted back to 60 Hz and it was fine since. (This had happened at least three times.) Just don't play with PowerStrip too much because I think that can bypass the out-of-range message. As long as you select something in the normal Windows enumeration of display modes and refresh rates, you'll be safe.