[JaGWiRE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asmo Refresh rates don't mean anything on LCD, because, the screen dosn't refresh the same was a CRT does. DVI is vastly better, especially on high res displays. More bandwidth.

Yes, no matter what people may argue or say, 60 hz is the optimal refresh rate for LCDS. This has been discussed on numeruous boards numerous times, and the conclusion is always one guy saying refresh rate matters on an LCD and then another guy having proof that it's best to leave it at 60 hz.

 

[breadnbutter]

O.K., I am now pretty sure that the tearing on an LCD is the result of page flipping during the transmition of the frame to the monitor.

But why is 60 Hz better than 75 Hz? Google did not lead me to any conclusive results. My LCD at 1600x1200 seems to be fixed at 60 Hz anyway.

 

[c0mfortably_numb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by breadnbutter O.K., I am now pretty sure that the tearing on an LCD is the result of page flipping during the transmition of the frame to the monitor. But why is 60 Hz better than 75 Hz? Google did not lead me to any conclusive results. My LCD at 1600x1200 seems to be fixed at 60 Hz anyway.

Eh it's not fixed per se, I wouldn't touch it...But there is an option in monitor settings that says "Hide modes that this monitor cannot display" if you uncheck it it should allow you to change it....

I personally think my monitor is fine as it is I have a Viewsonic VA1912W 19" widescreen and has a resolution of 1440X900 60hz as well...hooked to a Geforce6200 Pci Express (not the pos TC series, has it's own 256mb of ram)

I would recomend you to use DVI, especially if you are going to watch movies on you computer (of course your useing Power dvd right?

) Also on that subject make sure to enable hardware acceleration and deinterlacing. Also as with my monitor there is a standard ANALOG connection, hook that up that up as well for things that can not be displayed digitally (IEost <when you turn your pc on>)

My movies have never looked better in IMHO before this upgrade

 

[sgrossklass]

In the meantime there are a few LCDs that support 75 Hz over DVI (with synchronized internal refresh). Most use 60 Hz though. In some cases the internal refresh is not sync'd to what's coming in at all (meaning occasional jerky movements), in which case one is well-advised to tweak the graphics card's refresh rate e.g. via Powerstrip to match the monitor's rate.

BTW: Turning off VSync should produce tearing regardless of monitor type used.

Now I'm curious what the video playback issues are. Unless one gets dropouts or clear display artifacts, DVI or VGA does not play much of a role beyond that. The type of panel used is more important when it comes to display quality.

 

[JaGWiRE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by breadnbutter O.K., I am now pretty sure that the tearing on an LCD is the result of page flipping during the transmition of the frame to the monitor. But why is 60 Hz better than 75 Hz? Google did not lead me to any conclusive results. My LCD at 1600x1200 seems to be fixed at 60 Hz anyway.

Why? I have no idea, a bunch of threads on different computer forums have debated this. People have said that with 75 hz they have a lot of problems with their LCDS, or it's just not as good as 60 hz, regardless of if their monitor supports it or not.

 

[Asmo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by breadnbutter O.K., I am now pretty sure that the tearing on an LCD is the result of page flipping during the transmition of the frame to the monitor. But why is 60 Hz better than 75 Hz? Google did not lead me to any conclusive results. My LCD at 1600x1200 seems to be fixed at 60 Hz anyway.

Its not better, or worse.

The reason why high res 1600x1200, 1920x1200 etc are only 60hz is because of the bandwidth limitations of DVI. 1920x1200 @ 60hz is the max a single DVI cable can deliver. (thats why 30"+ LCD monitors require dual DVI connections to support the bandwidth)

If you have a smaller LCD you can choose probably 70 or 75hz, there is no benefit in doing so however.

The only reason you would want to choose higher than 60 hz, is if you had a smaller 17 or 19" monitor (1280x1024 res) and wanted a bit more frame rate out of your monitor while gaming, if you set the refresh rate to 70/75, with vsync enabled of course, you can get 70 or 75 fps instead of 60 fps, again, no real world difference here.

 

[goldenslug]

Quote:

Originally Posted by breadnbutter Correct me if I'm wrong, but TFTs still update the Pixels line by line with the given refresh rate. This often leads to tearing in fast moving games. I often have to turn on vsync in games to get rid of this. I am not sure if the refresh rate is fixed by the TFT. DVI-D also supports higher refresh rates than 60 Hz. This depends on the resolution, since ultimately this is bandwidth limited.

The tearing is caused by the LCD's pixel response time (The time required to turn from one colour to another). If you were to get a LCD monitor wtih 8ms or less then you shouldn't see that tearing issue.

Btw DVI-I is the way to go because LCDs are digital and if you send an analog signal you are doing a D->A conversion and then a A-> conversion which is unnecessary and is dependent on the DACs and ADC of your LCD monitor and video card. With LCDs a digital signals are better because they don't have to undergo this conversion and its less suspectible to noise.

The different between DVI-I and DVI-D is nothing except that DVI-I has pins for an analog connection (VGA).

Only with CRTs should you use a VGA signal.

 

[JaGWiRE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldenslug The tearing is caused by the LCD's pixel response time (The time required to turn from one colour to another). If you were to get a LCD monitor wtih 8ms or less then you shouldn't see that tearing issue. Btw DVI-I is the way to go because LCDs are digital and if you send an analog signal you are doing a D->A conversion and then a A-> conversion which is unnecessary and is dependent on the DACs and ADC of your LCD monitor and video card. With LCDs a digital signals are better because they don't have to undergo this conversion and its less suspectible to noise. The different between DVI-I and DVI-D is nothing except that DVI-I has pins for an analog connection (VGA). Only with CRTs should you use a VGA signal.

Pretty much what I read. And heh, it sounds like we're talking about sound dacs now. Then again, DACS are found anywhere we connect components I supose.

 

[breadnbutter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldenslug The tearing is caused by the LCD's pixel response time

I think what you mean is ghosting. Tearing is something else. In this picture http://powerusers.info/images/misc/vsyncdisabled.jpg both effects can be seen. The horizontal "cuts" are from tearing, the fainting double image of the wall is ghosting.

Maybe it would have been possible to get rid of fixed refresh rates in the transition to LCD / DVI-D altogether? In fullscreen 3d mode the graphics card should send the frames to the LCD whenever they are ready, then the LCD refreshes. The framerate could be capped at the bandwidth / LCD maximum.
But the display companies are already too stupid to offer 17/19" panels in more than one resolution...

 

[JaGWiRE]

Actually, I found the largest flaw in the latest lcd monitors is probably blacklight bleed, it seems all the non professional monitors have it to some degree, and although itt doesn't piss me off, it sure does piss off a lot of other monitor owners (especially dell widescreen ones.)

 

[sgrossklass]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaGWiRE Actually, I found the largest flaw in the latest lcd monitors is probably blacklight bleed, it seems all the non professional monitors have it to some degree, and although itt doesn't piss me off, it sure does piss off a lot of other monitor owners (especially dell widescreen ones.)

Here's a suggested fix for the 2005FPW (similarly applies to the 2405FPW) that you may want to pass on:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles...klight_fix.htm
Admittedly it's not quite for the faint of heart and those who fear voiding the warranty, but then, what is?

 

[JaGWiRE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgrossklass Here's a suggested fix for the 2005FPW (similarly applies to the 2405FPW) that you may want to pass on: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles...klight_fix.htm Admittedly it's not quite for the faint of heart and those who fear voiding the warranty, but then, what is?

It's no big deal to me, if your going to risk destroying your monitor, it would make more sense IMHO to just go and buy a different monitor.

 

[c0mfortably_numb]

That is so stupid, why would anyone take there LCD apart like that? The funniest thing is "Use electrical Tape" Anyone that has used that junk can attest to the fact it looses it's adhesion, especially how that guy just slapped it on there, I guess the case should hold it, but I wouldn't recomend anyone attempt that....

I think my Ibm T23 Laptob has a bit of backlight bleed, but not enought to "piss me off" and I don't notice it at all on my NEC monitor, yet another reason I'm glade to steer clear of Dell.

 

[Asmo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgrossklass Here's a suggested fix for the 2005FPW (similarly applies to the 2405FPW) that you may want to pass on: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles...klight_fix.htm Admittedly it's not quite for the faint of heart and those who fear voiding the warranty, but then, what is?

My 2405FPW has no backlight bleeds, and I've setup probably about a dozen 2005FPWs over the past 6 months, and yah, about half of em have some weird backlight bleeding issues, but none that the users ever notice (then again, they arn't power users).

On warranty issues, Dell is kinda funny, a co-worker of mine took a apart a 19" dell monitor completely, trying to re-soder a circuit board in it for whatever reason becasue it was dropped and broken, and in the end, Dell replaced it. All their monitors get 3 year warranty, and they are pretty easy going on it if you explain it to them. If you did that mod, I would open it back up, and undo whatever you did best as possbile before shipping it back to them. But, they might just be easier on business customers.

 

[star882]

While DVI is technically better, it's hard to tell the difference.