Can overclock Monitor with a strong GPU?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

pd_cpa

Honorable
Jul 29, 2012
7
0
10,510
I have a 3 LA2405X monitors. I am using 7970 GPU. When I run at resolution: 5760x1200, I could get about 60 FPS with Low Setting and no AA/Sync in Crysis 3. At 1920x1200 resolution (using one LA2405X) with the same above settings, I saw that FPS was 140. I am using MSI Afterburn to monitor the FPS.

Per manufacturer's manual of my monitor, max FPS is 60, but it could run 140 FPS.
Is this true that my monitor could run faster that 60 FPS?

Thanks!!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
joecole1572

joecole1572

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2008
112
0
18,710
When you say "monitor FPS" are you talking about the refresh rate. Most LCD monitors have a refresh rate of 60 Hz, that means the screen updates with a new image 60 times in one second. You cannot change this, so you will not really see 140 FPS on that monitor. Basically, the GPU makes more frames per second than your monitor can show.

Some LCD monitors (usually 3D ones) have a refresh rate of 120 Hz. They are usually more costly than the 60 Hz versions, but some people swear by them. It is a once you go 120 Hz, you will never want to go back down to 60 Hz.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860
your monitor is not capable of displaying more than 60 FPS, and your eye's are barely capable of seeing more than 24fps.

The FPS #'s you are seeing is what your video card is pushing, not what is being displayed. If you want to have higher visible FPS (whether they can be detected or not is another issue) you would need to purchase a 120 or 240hz screen.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jaguarskx

jaguarskx

Titan
Apr 19, 2006
27,979
3
84,965


Afterburner is telling you how many FPS the graphics card is rendering. It does not measure how many FPS the monitor is receiving. A 60Hz video port like DVI is only able to sample 60 times per second. If Afterburner is telling you that your graphics card is outputting 120FPS, then the monitor will receive every other frame.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860


Why do gamers who don't know how to type into google refute this information which is backed up by science and accepted by the entire scientific community as fact? Your eye can only detect 12 FPS, You have two of them hence 24FPS. The issue is whether your eye happens to be capturing at the same frequency that is being displayed. Higher FPS allow people whose eyes capture at slightly different frequencies to have the same experience.

"The human eye and its brain interface, the human visual system, can process 10 to 12 separate images per second"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860


You refuted my post about 24 FPS capability. "your eye's are barely capable of seeing more than 24fps." By stating my post was baseless and wrong, but provided nothing to back up your claims.

I posted a link to the proof behind my statement. Performing this test will only prove that my eye's and monitor do not display and capture data at the exact same rate. What you are talking about is perception, what I am talking about is capability. Hence why I used the word "capable" not the word "perceive."

p.s. try reading up on the subject before you post more nonsense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860


I will reply to the second part of your post since you edited it.

Do you think a street magician actually makes a deck of cards disappear? You can go walk outside and see it with your own eye's so it must be true. If you believe in magic than I can understand how you think you can see more than 24FPS, the difference as I stated above and provided a link to the proof of, is capability versus perception.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860



When we are discussing frame rates, how is an article titled "frame rates" out of context?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate
THE FIRST LINE of the article

"The human eye and its brain interface, the human visual system, can process 10 to 12 separate images per second, perceiving them individually"'

You are really sounding like a frightened child yelling at me to stop because your reality is about to be shattered. Sorry my claims are backed up, your claims are based on nothing.

I posted about apples (capability), you then tried to compare them to oranges (perception).

Learn to read, and stop trolling me.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860
As I already stated adjusting monitor to 24hz would only prove that my eye's are not capturing at the exact same frequency my monitor is displaying. Which is not something I (or anyone with a half ass education) would refute.

I have a test for you. Set your monitor to 72 Hz then aim your cellphone at it and record a video. Now play back the video. OMG the screen tears when watching on your phone, but your eye's didn't see it on the screen. Thats because your phone captures at 30FPS your screen draws at 72fps.

You're still trolling, but i'm done here, you have proved my point for me. Feel free to post to yourself for the rest of the day.

Thanks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860
I'm on lunch so I will try to educate you one last time on reality versus perception. I am not trying to redefine the word "seeing" I used the words "capable of seeing." You seem to be the one who does not know the definition.

Let me show you something from earlier in this thread where you proved my point. I have changed a few words, but they still work.

"Your eye refreshes itself at 24 Hz (24 times per second), which is totally independent of what framerate the monitor is feeding it."

You proved yourself wrong right there. You already knew about the differences of what is being drawn in reality, vs what is being perceived by the end user, you just forgot to put the eye's into the equation.

The problem is we can not control the "refresh" rate of our eye's as well as a computer / monitor can, nor is everyone's eye's exactly the same. So we must compensate by having the displaying data source be many times faster than what we can actually capture. Otherwise we end up with half/blank images which is what causes tearing/ghosting.

Watch this video of a 10000 FPS camera recording an LCD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRidfW_l4vs

If your eye's capture data faster than what is being displayed, then eventually what your eye's perceive will be out of sync with what you are looking at, just like the video above.

Now if you eye's were capable of seeing faster than 24 FPS, then every movie you have ever gone to would look something like this video (just not as drastic.) So once again, I assure you that the human eye cannot detect more than 24 FPS.

I hope this makes sense, but if not thats ok. I understand that some people "must be right because they said so." Fortunately for the rest of the world these people usually get their asses kicked enough enough in real life that they don't exhibit this behaviour in public, unfortunately for the internet no one is there to slap some sense into you.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Kari

Kari

Splendid
Jun 16, 2004
3,844
1
23,160

that is all nice and dandy, but I think you are missing the point, it doesnt really matter what rate the eye/brain uses to refresh itself if one can easily notice that having higher fps feels smoother and that what it's all about, smoothness of the gameplay...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dalethepcman

dalethepcman

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2010
1,636
0
19,860
Kari, I never missed the point, Bigmack was the one that instantly attacked my statement, claiming everyone always says this, but no one can back it up. He trolled me, not vice versa. Challenge accepted. Internet Troll

Nothing in my initial statement was refuting anything bigmack said nor attacking them.

your monitor is not capable of displaying more than 60 FPS - true, OP has a 60hz monitor all frames beyond 60 are basically thrown out.

your eye's are barely capable of seeing more than 24fps - debate all you want science has proven this, this is where I was trying to show the difference between what is being captured vs what is being displayed, perception. "The hand is quicker than the eye"

The FPS #'s you are seeing is what your video card is pushing, not what is being displayed. - true, the video card is trying to draw 140 fps on a 60hz screen, 80 FPS are thrown away.

If you want to have higher visible FPS (whether they can be detected or not is another issue) you would need to purchase a 120 or 240 hz screen. - true, OP would need to purchase a higher refresh screen for more visible FPS, whether or not he could detect them is a different issue.

At no time did I say "You never need anything higher than 24FPS" and that seems to be what bigmack thinks I said.

Anyways my lunch is over so I'm done feeding the troll.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Kari

Kari

Splendid
Jun 16, 2004
3,844
1
23,160


well that surely is what was implied given the context in which it was said.
well trolled.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom