Why cant my monitor go above 85 Hertz?
 

I tried tweaking my monitor to 100 HZ as a refresh rate and it went off for a few secs then came back ona nd was still at 85 HZ. I have a GF2MX400 on 1024x768 32bit color with latest drivers form nvidia.com! I would like to go to 100 but is it because my card only allows 85? ed:

what kind of card? maybe your monitor is old to that could be a problem, if its not old than its the card probably

dont try and make it go super duper fast crazy like or youll blow your monitor

The higher the resolution you put your monitor at the lower the refresh rate you will get. Most monitors these days, 19+ inch flatscreen ones that can go up to resolutions of 1600x1200 can only do refresh rates of 60 - 75Hz.
The quality of your monitor and power of your graphics card are the most important things to look at when this problem arises. If you want higher refresh rates, use lower monitor resolutions. And, as Intrested pointed out, dont go spastic with this sort of thing, going to higher can cause damage to your monitor.

The human eye can only see about 25 or so frames per second. Just something to keep in mind.

That's a stupid statement: realize that lower refresh rates actually hurt
your eyes, on top of the refresh lines being noticeable. A higher refresh
rate means less strain on your eyes and a better chance of not seeing
refresh lines...

Von Meyer, check your monitor's specifications: it will tell you the
resolutions and available refresh rates for each. If it doesn't support
it, you're shit out of luck.

mmmmk I dunno who that was directed toward but I'll respond anyways.
The ONLY time you will see refresh lines is if its under 25 or so fps. Anything above that you will see very clear and it wont strain your eyes. Almost anything on TV refreshes only a few fps above what the human eye can see. The 25fps thing is from what I can remember when I read it like 6 months ago so I may be off a bit there, but not much.

[quote:6754e]The ONLY time you will see refresh lines is if its under 25 or so fps. Anything above that you will see very clear and it wont strain your eyes.[/quote:6754e]

That's HORSESHIT.

Sometimes I boot my pc and I instantly notice that my monitor has switched
to 60 hertz: I have to go change it in my display properties because the
refresh lines are way too visible and annoying. I can FEEL the difference as
well. Your eyes really start straining when you use a 60 hertz refresh rate:
the recommended minimum being 75, 85 for comfortable viewing. Most of
my friends will notice this right away. I don't understand why you persist in
challenging this...

Your mistake is assuming that because our eyes are limited to processing
30 frames per second, we don't get a chance to see the refresh lines, let
alone feel them. It's like the pointless argument some people make with
graphic cards having too much power. They claim that 60 frames per second
for games is too much because our eyes only see 30 anyway. Well, I have
news for you, buster: compare two copies of the same game, one running
at 30 fps and the other at 60 and I can guarantee you that you will see a
difference between the two. Why do you think it's smoother ? Oh, I forgot,
your eyes can't notice the difference... eek:

If you need a link to the article that explains the aformentioned (and in
doing so, put the final nail in your coffin), let me know: I will be happy to
enlighten you.

I concur, 85 or optimal is good

That's HORSESHIT.

Sometimes I boot my pc and I instantly notice that my monitor has switched
to 60 hertz: I have to go change it in my display properties because the
refresh lines are way too visible and annoying. I can FEEL the difference as
well. Your eyes really start straining when you use a 60 hertz refresh rate:
the recommended minimum being 75, 85 for comfortable viewing. Most of
my friends will notice this right away. I don't understand why you persist in
challenging this...

Your mistake is assuming that because our eyes are limited to processing
30 frames per second, we don't get a chance to see the refresh lines, let
alone feel them. It's like the pointless argument some people make with
graphic cards having too much power. They claim that 60 frames per second
for games is too much because our eyes only see 30 anyway. Well, I have
news for you, buster: compare two copies of the same game, one running
at 30 fps and the other at 60 and I can guarantee you that you will see a
difference between the two. Why do you think it's smoother ? Oh, I forgot,
your eyes can't notice the difference... eek:

If you need a link to the article that explains the aformentioned (and in
doing so, put the final nail in your coffin), let me know: I will be happy to
enlighten you.[/quote:5a009]

Uh huh, he knows whats goin down !! biggrin: Although it was brutally said wink:

Im at 85 now and it increased my FPS by a little. Not very much about 4-8 fps gain is all i got.

I still disagree... Yes I would love to see that article because I have researched this plenty and have yet to find a credited article that differs from... what I said.
Our eyes are simply not sensitive enough to see that fast of changes, hence it blurs together. Do you see the induvidual frame when you are watching a modern cartoon? If you do then your the one exception.
I havn't had a good arguement since the blood incident many months back ;)
I have high hopes for this one.

If u stand back from a computer that lets say is running on 60 hertz u can see the lines, hell my head starts to hurt if i use a computer thats going that slow.

your eyes may not be able to see every frame, but higher fps means more comfortable viewing - and your eyes can see more fps than you claim.

http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
http://amo.net/NT/05-24-01FPS.html
http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_1.html

I was only going to give you the 30 vs. 60 link but Aristotle did it already.
Still, the link is http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_1.html

Enlighten yourself.

becasue the monitor doesnt like u

wow! i am surprised! i boosted the thing to 85(the safe max for my screen and the lag that i used to get in mohaa is gone! ed: i didnt know boosting refresh rate improved your fps! woa this is great biggrin:

hehe I found some plageurism between two of the articles... someone basiclly changed a few words around :)
Aritcle A. ( http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_2.html )
[quote:7db90]We do not perceive the world through frames. In games, motion blur would cause the game to behave erratically. An example would be playing a game like Quake II, if there was motion blur used, there would be problems calculating the exact position of an object, so it would be really tough to hit something with your weapon.[/quote:7db90]
Article B. ( http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html )
[quote:7db90]The Human Eye perceives information continuously, we do not perceive the world through frames. You could say we perceive the external visual world through streams, and only lose it when our eyes blink. In games, an implemented motion blur would cause the game to behave erratically; the programming wouldn't be as precise. An example would be playing a game like Unreal Tournament, if there was motion blur used, there would be problems calculating the exact position of an object (another player), so it would be really tough to hit something with your weapon. [/quote:7db90]
Oh ya... Back on topic. Ok you win. That argument wasnt as fun as I thought it would be :( Mabe next time eh? Hey who want to come over for a brewsky?

beer and arguing?

Do you own a gun? ed:

Hey... beer ! You got me there...

And arguing ? Shit son, I like you biggrin:

beer and arguing? pfft.

BEER and SEX is where its at.

well... err... if that is what you really want I guess I can have that arranged for you :)

Hey cousin, if your redneck cpu is configured like mine, I suggest you go to the pet store and get a faster hampster for the treadmill. biggrin: