Aqua-Soft ForumsWhats the deal with this?
On my iBook it goes anywhere from 60 to 175 hz,
Whats the difference,
Is higher the better?...
Can you go too high?
Will it hurt your eyes going too high?
Whats the best for your eyes?
thx :rock:
Refresh Rates
I'm not too sure about lcds, because i dont own one, but higher is usually better with crt's because a low refresh rate like 60 hz can strain your eyes and give you a massive head ache, especially at high rez. LCD's refresh differently than crts i believe though. But i think higher refresh rates can put more strain on your computer. Basically what im always told is use the lowest refresh rate thats comfortable for you but doesnt hurt your eyes. But like i said, im not too sure about lcds.
So basically, if your computer can handle it then its ok, so higher refresh rate wont hurt your eyes?
I thought more refresh rate == better for your eyes
Try having an 85 hz for a few months, then switch back to 60 Hz. Honestly, you CAN tell the difference!!
Everytime I came to a new computer (friend's computer), I can tell if he/she is using a 60 hz resolution because my spoiled-eyes starts complaining 
yeah, thats true lyon, at least on crts. But i know lcds refresh differently. they do it pixel by pixel or something. I dont know much about it. But higher refresh rates are generally more pleasing to the eyes because you wont notice the flashing the screen displays.
I thought lcd's only displayed 75hz :/ thats prob why I get a headache from the blasted thing...
85+hz for me 
well i set it at 115 witch is the highest it goes
There's really no comparison - a CRT has to refresh the screen once a cycle, whereas an LCD only refreshes those pixels that have changed.
Let's assume, for a moment, that we're using two monitors - one LCD and one CRT, and driving them both at 115Hz. The LCD has a response time of 20ms per pixel. The CRT has it's frequency (including 20% flyback) set by the graphics card at 115Hz. Assume both monitors are running at 1280*1024, and we're switching each pixel from pure white (#FFFFFF) to pure black (#000000) every cycle (every 8 ms, at 115Hz), giving us the absolute worst-case scenario for the display.
For our LCD, the calculation is simple - every time it's refreshed, the whole screen will take 20ms to refresh (plus a small fraction for the electronics to fire the switch).
For the CRT, as noted above, the whole screen, if we're running at 115Hz, has to be refreshed every 8ms. Take 20% off of this for flyback (when the electron gun is returning to the starting position), and that gives us a full-screen rendering time of 6.4ms.
To whit, the CRT at 115Hz will always be faster than the LCD.
At 60Hz, however, the LCD refreshes at the same speed as for 115Hz. The CRT, however, refreshes at a full-screen rate of 16ms (including the 20% flyback).
What you must bear in mind, however, is that, with a CRT, electrons are being "fired" directly at the user, wherease an LCD is merely powering transistors. That, and the fact that a CRT's top left corner will be rendered (fractionally) before the bottom right, which typically presents itself as visual flicker, especially so when you're in a room lit by strip-lights, which "pulse" at the frequency of your local power supply.
In other words, there's no point in running any LCD at anything over 60Hz at the moment - even the fastest panels can only just handle 60Hz.
Originally posted by Timan@Dec 17 2003, 11:09 AMI thought lcd's only displayed 75hz :/ thats prob why I get a headache from the blasted thing...
85+mhz for me
85+MHz? I assume you meant 85Hz screen rate, Timmie... Either that, or you're talking about line- or pixel- rates... I think the former's a little more likely, because line-rates are typically KHz (or each line would be drawn, and then the electron gun would wait for "ages" to flyback), and 85MHz for pixel rate means you're probably running at about 320*240 :6
What iBook what os'ver'?
Well how i got this was by clicking on change desktop background and THEN going to Display up the top, and it opens up the normal windows then the other windows pops up,
12" G4 iBook Panther
No LCD over 60? Mine does 75Hz and I got it over a year ago. 15", 1024x768.
And yes, I can tell the difference between 60 and 75. Especially when reading text.
Originally posted by contrasutra@Dec 17 2003, 06:31 PMNo LCD over 60? Mine does 75Hz and I got it over a year ago. 15", 1024x768.
And yes, I can tell the difference between 60 and 75. Especially when reading text.
I never said that they can't handle the input. I said that they won't refresh at more than that. The difference you see is probably because 75Hz matches some multiple of the pixel refresh rate of your LCD.
Just to jump in real quick.
Be careful of the refresh rate you set on any CRT.
All CRT's are not the same when it comes to the speed in which the screen can be refreshed.
Example:
I have an NEC MultiSync E1100 21" monitor.
I also Have a Dell UltraScan P1110 21" monitor.
Both have a maximum refresh of 85Hz @ 1280x1024
My graphics card is fully capable of doing 100Hz and better at that resolution.
While I can change the refresh rate to greater than 85Hz, after a very short period of time the electron guns will begin to fail and the picture quality will degrade.
I ran my other NEC 21" monitor (same as above) at 1280x1024 @ 100Hz and it only lasted about 2 months before it crapped out completely.
Warranty was voided because I unchecked the box that says display only modes that my monitor supports and ran it at an unsupported refresh rate.
The techs at NEC are fully capable of telling when someone has overclocked, if you want to call it that, the refresh rate to an unsupported level.
That's how I ended up with the Dell 21" monitor... cheaper replacement.
Yeah, i knew crts refresh differently than lcds, thanks for clearing up what i couldnt explain.
Wow do Overclocking to a Monitor is sweeeeet
Originally posted by jumpers@Dec 17 2003, 03:39 PMWow do Overclocking to a Monitor is sweeeeet
What?
I think he/she means, sort of like putting up the refresh rate more than a monitor can handle