Why can't I go higher than 85Hz in W2K???

[Alf]

I'm using Windows 2000 Professional and 5.03 drivers. There is NO option for changing the refresh rate of display. All I get to choose is 60, 70, 75, 85 and optimal. Shouldn't there be a tool for changing the rate in 1Hz steps like in Windows 98.

The monitor is 19" Nokia 446Xpro and adapter is G400 max. Any help is, surprise, greatly appreciated! Any tweaks or so. Please help.

cheers,

Alf

[Gurm]

Alf,

The tool is coming... SOON. Heh. It'll be in a new release of PowerDesk. Go figure.

Anyway, why would you want the refresh rate higher than 85? I'm gonna get some shit for this, but you do know that anything over that is bad for your eyes, right?

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Greebe]

OK I'll take it easy this time!
Actually by going higher, all that occurs is a melding of what's seen thus producing a more contiguous image. Well at least that's what my optimologist says.

FYI by going lower is dangerous. A flashing effect can cause extreme nausa, vertigo and or siezures in many people. Flourescent lighting can augment this by producing a harmonic which further increases visual stress.

Now back to the original Q... Yes, it's being worked on.

[This message has been edited by Greebe (edited 29 April 2000).]

[Gurm]

I was talking about seriously higher. Anything over 100hz hurts my eyes. I've talked this over with a lot of people, and it SHOULDN'T happen like that, in theory, but it does. Perhaps it's current monitor technology. All I know is that my monitor looks much nicer to me at 85hz than it does at the 160 it supports... or anything in between. Although I've seen monitors that do look nice at 95 or 100hz.

And Opthamologists are notorious for violently disagreeing with each other. Heh. This one I went to said "well we need to make your prescription weaker, so that your eyes get stronger!" and gave me a prescription so weak that I walked into walls and couldn't drive. I went back, and she said to give it time. I gave it two weeks and still couldn't read my computer screen from 2 feet away, so I went back and she GRUDGINGLY gave me a slightly higher prescription.

That still wasn't good enough so I went to a different Opthamologist who said "oh that theory is horse crap. here, you need a stronger prescription than before... and have you considered contacts?"

So... hehe. Just a funny anecdote.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Alf]

I think you simply cannot have too much refresh rate. I get headaches if using anything under 85 and prefer 100Hz+. In Windows 98SE I have 120Hz in 1024x768x16. Plus the display type is also VERY important - dot size and CRT. Quality monitor looks nicer in 85Hz than crappy screen with 140Hz. That's a fact.

But in every case, this depends. Everyone knows what is best suited for their eyes. If 85Hz seems okay, then fine. Hope Matrox will, however, get this matter fixed soon.

[ALBPM]

I ended up having to get reading glasses after using an old POS monitor at work for a year that wouldn't even do 75Hz.
If I don't keep mine at 85Hz or higher I get serious eyestrain, fatigue and headaches.

My wife has a Hitachi ultrascan that I have used at 140Hz without any problem at all. And I feel better using higher than 85Hz refresh rates. I guess it depends on the brand of monitor you do that with.

Paul

[MegaManX4]

Gurm,

I believe you're right. I saw some years ago that in a magazine that this can indeed screw up your eyes. But i think it was because of bad monitor quality... Don't remember correctly

Mega

[Gurm]

I haven't really tried pushing my Viewsonic GT775. Maybe I'll give it a shot.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.