VX2265 120Hz monitor, 4 screen split??

[ajbrown85]

I just picked up the new Viewsonic FuhZion VX2265WM 120hz monitor...mainly for gaming.

I was at frys and it was on display, I set the windows Hz to 120 and it split into 4 Screens that were all fuzzy/distorted. Nobody at frys could figure out why if you tried to use its native resolution (1680x1050) and use the 120hz - which is what it advertises - it would splt into 4 screens.

I tried it on 2 top of the line PC's at frys, one had a high end ATI radeon and the other an Nvidia 9800 GTX. Same problem.

I ended up buying the monitor anyway because it actually does function BELOW 1680x1050 at 120hz... but only in-game. For example I can run QuakeLive at 1440x900 at 120hz and its fine. If i put it at 1680x1050@120hz it just splits to 4 screens.

Same thing with windows...except windows wont even accept any resolution at 120hz - basically anytime I try and use 120hz it puts the monitor into 4 duplicate screens...anyone ever heard of this, or anything like this?

I have the latest drivers for the monitor and video card. I've tried viewsonics tech support but its so new that no one knows anything. I haven't tried a refresh rate locking program like Rivatuner because it's not that my system isnt ALLOWING me to go to 120hz, it definetly gives me the option to... it just splits to 4 screens everytime!

help!

nVidia 7700 GT(old i know but runs fine and supports dual DVI)
AMD dual core 3.2
Windows XP

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Maybe exchange it for the Samsung.

 

[dflynchimp]

Are you using Nvidia's stereoscopic goggles? If not, there is next to no reason for you to be lusting after 120Hz monitors. The best thing to do for you if you're adamant about this 120Hz fiasco is to contact Viewsonic's tech support about the issue.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: ajbrown85

I ended up buying the monitor anyway because it actually does function BELOW 1680x1050 at 120hz... but only in-game. For example I can run QuakeLive at 1440x900 at 120hz and its fine. If i put it at 1680x1050@120hz it just splits to 4 screens.

Why did you buy it? The monitor is probably faulty. Why didn?t you ask for another before you left the store?

And are you sure that video card is dual-link? Try 1680x1050 @ 75 Hz; if it works but won?t go higher than 75 Hz at that resolution, it's only single-link.

Originally posted by: dflynchimp

Are you using Nvidia's stereoscopic goggles? If not, there is next to no reason for you to be lusting after 120Hz monitors.

What a load of nonsense; I can't believe this myth is still being perpetuated despite evidence demonstrating otherwise:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl.../samsung-sm2233rz.html

To quote the reviewer:

Frankly speaking, I had not expected the difference between the refresh rate of 60Hz and 120Hz to be so conspicuous. It is indeed clear to a naked eye and is always in favor of the higher value. Smoother motion and the lack of RTC artifacts leave a highly positive impression, making you unwilling to return to 60Hz.

 

[alexveeco]

Hello,
I aslo buy a VX2265wm and i have problems running it on my computer. I have a 8800GTX from ASUS and Windows XP SP3. When I plug it, i can't display anything, on any resolution and any refresh rate.
Also, I can display the "menu" by pushing volume or brightness buttons. Is it normal ?
And is it possible to use this monitor with XP ? Thanks to reply

 

[ajbrown85]

well... thanks for the responses

I actually figured it out. I was using a single link DVI cable. I left it plugged into my PC and didnt bother using the one that came in the box because I had seen the same problem at Frys Electronics and figured they would have been using updated cables. Soon as I swapped to the cable from the box (dual link) - it worked perfectly. 120hz@1680x1050. So frys has these 120hz monitors on display but none of them work because they are using old cables - go figure.

To the naysayers that you can't see a difference and If i'm not using it for 3d goggles its a waste, hah. Looking at 120hz is not even a comparison. It's ridicilously clear, like looking through fresh glass, sharp, smooth. Quakelive runs like a beast and I couldn't be more happier with the performance I'm getting as far as how smooth and clear everything looks. Cant compare it to 60hz at all, seriously.

 

[Pugnate]

Congrats!

 

[XenoFreak]

Funny I just had the exact same problem I have two 9800 GTXs in SLI, but I was using the same cable from my last monitor. As soon as I switched the video to 120 Hz the screen would split, but as soon as I switched the cables it worked great. Thanks ajbrown85 for the help, great job. By the way I love the monitor, and the 120HZ really is easy on the eyes, I highly recommend the monitor just a bit on the $$$ steep side.

 

[kmmatney]

Wow, this thread is bringing out the newcomers! Welcome to Anantech!

These 120Hz monitors definately sound great, especially for CRT holdouts.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: kmmatney

These 120Hz monitors definately sound great, especially for CRT holdouts.

My thoughts exactly - now we just need higher resolutions. 2560x1600 @ 120 Hz would be awesome, assuming it wasn?t killed by the input lag the bigger panels tend to have.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

I'm glad I've waited to upgrade my monitor. As soon as I can afford one I'm going to get a 120hz monitor. I would get a CRT, but I really do not want to have a big, hot, piece of ass sitting on my desk - you know what I mean!

When I saw a demo of Samsung TVs at 120hz a year ago I was pretty much sold. When running at 60hz the LCDs picture displayed the typical motion blurring effect, but the 120hz was smooth as butter.

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: kmmatney
Wow, this thread is bringing out the newcomers! Welcome to Anantech!

These 120Hz monitors definately sound great, especially for CRT holdouts.

now people will hold out for 120hz monitors that have better panels than crappy TN kind

 

[dflynchimp]

TN panels aren't exactly crappy unless you're a professional in need of good color accuracy.

I guess I'm not qualified to pass judgement on 120Hz monitors, as I've never used one before, but until they can get 120Hz onto panels larger than 22" and with acceptably accurate colors I'm not ready to move to one yet. The truth is if it weren't for the weight and size issues, I'd still be using CRT. Instant lag free response and good color reproduction. Ahhh the old days...

 

[kmmatney]

Originally posted by: dflynchimp
TN panels aren't exactly crappy unless you're a professional in need of good color accuracy.

I guess I'm not qualified to pass judgement on 120Hz monitors, as I've never used one before, but until they can get 120Hz onto panels larger than 22" and with acceptably accurate colors I'm not ready to move to one yet. The truth is if it weren't for the weight and size issues, I'd still be using CRT. Instant lag free response and good color reproduction. Ahhh the old days...

The good old days also has bad screen geometry (pin-cushion) and curved screens, and the horror of people setting the monitors to 60Hz refresh, and HIGH prices for CRTs. And not all CRTs had great color, only the expensive $1000 displays. They only came down in price when LCDs took over. My last CRT (Sony Trinitron 19", 18" viewable) was a bit fuzzy when first powered up, and took about 20 minutes before the picture looked great. I paid $800 for it - the good old days indeed!

 

[dflynchimp]

Originally posted by: kmmatney

Originally posted by: dflynchimp
TN panels aren't exactly crappy unless you're a professional in need of good color accuracy.

I guess I'm not qualified to pass judgement on 120Hz monitors, as I've never used one before, but until they can get 120Hz onto panels larger than 22" and with acceptably accurate colors I'm not ready to move to one yet. The truth is if it weren't for the weight and size issues, I'd still be using CRT. Instant lag free response and good color reproduction. Ahhh the old days...

The good old days also has bad screen geometry (pin-cushion) and curved screens, and the horror of people setting the monitors to 60Hz refresh, and HIGH prices for CRTs. And not all CRTs had great color, only the expensive $1000 displays. They only came down in price when LCDs took over. My last CRT (Sony Trinitron 19", 18" viewable) was a bit fuzzy when first powered up, and took about 20 minutes before the picture looked great. I paid $800 for it - the good old days indeed!

note, I said "old says" not "good old days"

CRT certainly has its flaws, but for people whining about input lag and refresh rates, CRT has neither of those problems.