PDA

View Full Version : Is there a Microsoft patch for the refresh rate issues yet?


Zarich
08-16-02, 06:01 PM
Ive been away a while.. I have a ti500.. I know at one time we were waiting for service pack 1 to fix the refresh rate issues that we all experience. I know there are small programs to help and hacking that can be done to the registry..

is there any news?

-=DVS=-
08-16-02, 07:58 PM
River Tuner fix that very nicely :)

netviper13
08-16-02, 08:28 PM
Well SP3 for Windows 2000 didn't fix the issue for it, so I wouldn't count on SP1 for XP fixing the issue.

SavagePaladin
08-16-02, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by netviper13
Well SP3 for Windows 2000 didn't fix the issue for it, so I wouldn't count on SP1 for XP fixing the issue.
Are we positive about that? if I recall correctly, to fix it, you need to SET it first in that resolution. or am I on crack?

Never actually tried it post SP3

netviper13
08-16-02, 11:59 PM
I just know that Corp. Dan posted a day or two ago that it doesn't work, so I was going on that.

StealthHawk
08-17-02, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by DVS
River Tuner fix that very nicely :)

i think it's a bit ridiculous to have to fix it with 3rd party software every time you install new drivers...

netviper13
08-17-02, 01:17 AM
I totally agree. There is no reason for forcing the refresh rate to default to 60hz.

Matthyahuw
08-17-02, 02:02 AM
Originally posted by netviper13
I totally agree. There is no reason for forcing the refresh rate to default to 60hz. Actually there IS a good reason...it just sucks for us...hehe

saturnotaku
08-17-02, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Matthyahuw
it just sucks for us...hehe

Hehe, this is true, but seriously using Refresh Force takes all of about 10 seconds to fix the problem and you don't even need to reboot your system for the changes to take effect. :eek: Just change your display mode once and the problem is solved. It's no more than what you'd do to set your refresh rate in Windows display properties anyway except there only one more (small) step involved.

Apoc
08-18-02, 08:42 AM
Originally posted by DVS
River Tuner fix that very nicely :)


I can't stand that rivatuner limits the Hz. in 1024 I can only get 85 Hz, when my monitor support 140. It's very annoying

The Baron
08-18-02, 10:48 AM
Too high of a refresh rate can seriously wreck the life expectancy of your monitor :p

Just a word of warning... it's why I don't go above 100Hz (usually 85) EVER--you think I can actually tell a difference between 85 and 100? ;)

Apoc
08-18-02, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by =SSC=The Baron
Too high of a refresh rate can seriously wreck the life expectancy of your monitor :p

Just a word of warning... it's why I don't go above 100Hz (usually 85) EVER--you think I can actually tell a difference between 85 and 100? ;)

I know it wreck the life expectancy of my monitor, but i CAN actually tell the diference between 85 and 100 (my usual refresh rate). The question is: why can i choose it if i want?

AngelGraves13
08-18-02, 11:49 PM
I was using Windows 2000 service pack 3 and it didn't fix ****. Only RivaTuner worked for me, nothing else.

RAST
08-21-02, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by Apoc


I know it wreck the life expectancy of my monitor, but i CAN actually tell the diference between 85 and 100 (my usual refresh rate). The question is: why can i choose it if i want?

(assuming you ment why can't i choose it if I want...)

You can. By default you can't but you can change the default. Like most things the lowest safe setting is the default. For joe blow average user it's fine. For us it's not -- so change it.

PsychoSy
08-22-02, 01:21 AM
Here's the problem I have with WinXP's Refresh Issue. I recently whipped a new AMD system for a buddy (Soyo Dragon Ultra + Athlon 2100+ and 256MB of 333Mhz DDR) and tossed in a fresh install of XP.

We know that a fresh install of XP defaults to 800x600 at 60hz. Once I loaded the Nvidia 30.30 Drivers, I cranked the resolution up to 1024x768@32 bit because anything less that than on a KDS 19" XFlat is a$$tastic! :p

From there, I changed the refresh rate to 85 hz and WinXP excepted it without a problem. So, if you just going to tinker around with the desktop, WinXP has no refresh rate issue at all as I've changed refresh rates all the time. The problem is WinXP only scales back to 60hz when an API is called, be it DirectX or OpenGL, which makes absolutely no sense.

Think about it: If you know damn well your monitor can handle a DESKTOP refresh rate of 80-100hz, and you set it to that and have no problems, WinXP should automatically apply that refresh rate globally, even when a 3D API is called because if the freaking desktop can handle it, so can the API!!



In no way can a 3D API, be it Direct3D or OpenGL, blow a monitor. I've never seen it happen and I've never heard of something complaining, "Yeah, Quake 3 blew my monitor. Don't know why! I had it set to the same resolution, bit depth, and refresh rate I use for my desktop, which is what the GeForce FAQ told me to do in the first place!!! " Seriously, when's the last time you saw a monitor for sale that had a disclaimer that said, "Not Compatible with Direct3D, OpenGL, or any other 3D API" across the box?!? Do you think a monitor like that would actually sell?!?

Safety feature, my foot! :p It's senseless, and an uncessessary PAIN IN THE A$$!! A hardware call is a hardware call. 3D Gaming APIs don't use extra mumbo-jumbo that is contraband or foreign for the desktop to use. They don't need "11 herbs & spices" just to display a freaking image!! WTF?!? :p :)

Renzo
08-22-02, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by =SSC=The Baron
Too high of a refresh rate can seriously wreck the life expectancy of your monitor :p

Just a word of warning... it's why I don't go above 100Hz (usually 85) EVER--you think I can actually tell a difference between 85 and 100? ;)
Monitors have been protected against too high frequencies for years and they will shut down the electron beam if too high refreshrate is given (most of the 15" and 17" middle priced monitors back in '97 could do this).

The larger the monitor, the more visible is the diffirence between refreshrates. On 19" monitor many people notice the flickering @ 75Hz and complain about it. Most of them want to use 85Hz as a minimum and as high as possible for the maximum.

On my 19" monitor, refreshrates are autoset by monitor inf and drivers as follows:

640*480 170Hz (can do 180Hz)
800*600 144Hz
1024*768 100Hz (or 110Hz, depends on the drivers)
1280*1024 85Hz (or 89Hz, same as above)
1600*1200 75Hz

On the desktop I use 1280*1024@85Hz. It is okay, but I'd rather use 100Hz for convenience.

The Baron
08-22-02, 08:41 PM
I'm not saying accidentally using 120Hz when you can only run 85, I'm saying that running at 120Hz instead of 85 or 100 WILL reduce the life expectancy of your monitor.

StealthHawk
08-22-02, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by =SSC=The Baron
I'm not saying accidentally using 120Hz when you can only run 85, I'm saying that running at 120Hz instead of 85 or 100 WILL reduce the life expectancy of your monitor.

by how much? are we talking about the same thing that overclocking your CPU does?

netviper13
08-22-02, 08:55 PM
No, because technically if you keep your CPU cool it isn't damaged by running at higher speeds.

Running at too high of a refresh rate can seriously distort the image and WILL cause damage to the hardware, even if it is just minor.

Steppy
08-23-02, 04:52 PM
Actually, by the time a fix DOES come if ever, the problem SHOULD be relegated to older games. Most of the newer ones I play list the various refresh rates in addition to the various resolutions(NWN for example), so it becomes a moot point.

Steppy
08-23-02, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by netviper13
No, because technically if you keep your CPU cool it isn't damaged by running at higher speeds.



That's not correct...it reduces the amount of damage, but it does NOT prevent it. It that was true a VERY chilled CPU would last forever, but it doesn't.

Humus
08-24-02, 10:33 AM
Higher refreshrates DOES NOT reduce the lifetime of a monitor in any measurable amount.

netape
08-24-02, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by saturnotaku


Hehe, this is true, but seriously using Refresh Force takes all of about 10 seconds to fix the problem and you don't even need to reboot your system for the changes to take effect. :eek: Just change your display mode once and the problem is solved. It's no more than what you'd do to set your refresh rate in Windows display properties anyway except there only one more (small) step involved.

Another vote for Refresh Force :D That proggie is simply fantastic :D