ti 4200 low refresh rates

[john]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

I just bought a MSI Ti4200 Nvidia video card from Ebay. I can only get
85hz as the highest refress rates.
The MSI site specs on the video card says it can get maximum of 120hz. I
have a new monitor and the lastest drivers from Nvidia.

What could be wrong?


Windows XP
512MB RAM
AMD64 2800

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Maybe 85 is tops for your monitor, and "hide modes this monitor cannot
display" is checked.

If you could select one your monitor would break about, it wouldn't be good.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
uce@ftc.gov
Thanks, robots.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

The highest refresh rate depends upon what your screen resolution is set to,
and what the maximum refresh rate that both your monitor and your video card
can handle at that given resolution.

For instance, at a resolution of 1280x1024, my 21" monitor can provide a
maximum refresh rate of 100 Hz. My 17" monitor can provide a maximum of
85Hz refresh at it's present setting of 1024x768.


"John" <jagger7774@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d0ql0t$3m4$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
> I just bought a MSI Ti4200 Nvidia video card from Ebay. I can only get
> 85hz as the highest refress rates.
> The MSI site specs on the video card says it can get maximum of 120hz.
I
> have a new monitor and the lastest drivers from Nvidia.
>
> What could be wrong?
>
>
> Windows XP
> 512MB RAM
> AMD64 2800
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Even assuming WinXP has correctly determined the specs for your monitor,
you will still see the maximum refresh rate drop as you shift from low
res (600x480) to the higher screen densities. You have not stated what
resolution you are trying to use. Probably your monitor can't handle
120Hz at the requested resolution.

If you know that your monitor is capable of 120Hz at the desired
resolution, then you will need to make changes in the registry so that
WinXP has correct data. That may require changing the installed monitor
driver or a manual alteration of the registry.

John wrote:
> I just bought a MSI Ti4200 Nvidia video card from Ebay. I can only get
> 85hz as the highest refress rates.
> The MSI site specs on the video card says it can get maximum of 120hz. I
> have a new monitor and the lastest drivers from Nvidia.
>
> What could be wrong?
>
>
> Windows XP
> 512MB RAM
> AMD64 2800
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

I have also read about Win XP limiting refresh rates.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Anyone care to explain why this should matter? For best performance one
should use the minimum refresh rate that eliminates flicker. I doubt
that anyone can actually see an improvement in screen quality by
increasing refresh above about 75Hz.

Gil wrote:

> I have also read about Win XP limiting refresh rates.
>

 

[kenneth]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Robert Gault wrote:
> Anyone care to explain why this should matter? For best performance one
> should use the minimum refresh rate that eliminates flicker. I doubt
> that anyone can actually see an improvement in screen quality by
> increasing refresh above about 75Hz.
>
> Gil wrote:
>
>> I have also read about Win XP limiting refresh rates.
>>

The higher the refresh rates, the less eye strain you get.

 

[Stevem]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Kenneth" <jagger7774@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d124c0$ev6$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
> Robert Gault wrote:
>> Anyone care to explain why this should matter? For best performance one
>> should use the minimum refresh rate that eliminates flicker. I doubt that
>> anyone can actually see an improvement in screen quality by increasing
>> refresh above about 75Hz.
>>
>> Gil wrote:
>>
>>> I have also read about Win XP limiting refresh rates.
>>>
>
> The higher the refresh rates, the less eye strain you get.

You should have received a monitor.inf file with your monitor. Make sure
that is installed (by whatever method your monitor supplier provides) and
you should find XP will show your choices. There is no need at all to go
beyond 85Hz. Yes, the higher the refresh rate, the less eye-strain, but only
up to about 72Hz - hence the legal minimum of 72Hz (obviously, applies only
to businesses). The only thing you will achieve by going beyond 85 Hz is
(possibly) to overstrain your monitor, so why try it? You certainly will see
no improvement.

Steve.

 

[kenneth]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

stevem wrote:
> "Kenneth" <jagger7774@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d124c0$ev6$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
>
>>Robert Gault wrote:
>>
>>>Anyone care to explain why this should matter? For best performance one
>>>should use the minimum refresh rate that eliminates flicker. I doubt that
>>>anyone can actually see an improvement in screen quality by increasing
>>>refresh above about 75Hz.
>>>
>>>Gil wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I have also read about Win XP limiting refresh rates.
>>>>
>>
>>The higher the refresh rates, the less eye strain you get.
>
>
> You should have received a monitor.inf file with your monitor. Make sure
> that is installed (by whatever method your monitor supplier provides) and
> you should find XP will show your choices. There is no need at all to go
> beyond 85Hz. Yes, the higher the refresh rate, the less eye-strain, but only
> up to about 72Hz - hence the legal minimum of 72Hz (obviously, applies only
> to businesses). The only thing you will achieve by going beyond 85 Hz is
> (possibly) to overstrain your monitor, so why try it? You certainly will see
> no improvement.
>
> Steve.
>
>
You're right Steve, no need to go beyond 85hz. But there is still
something wrong if the video card and the monitor can go up to 120hz but
somehow it only goes up to 85hz. Right?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Does the monitor chart show it going up to 120 at, say 800 x 600, but only
to 85 at, say, 1024? That would be normal.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
uce@ftc.gov
Thanks, robots.

 

[Stevem]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Kenneth" <jagger7774@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d14lbo$ak5$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
> stevem wrote:
>> "Kenneth" <jagger7774@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:d124c0$ev6$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu...
>>
>>>Robert Gault wrote:
>>>
>>>>Anyone care to explain why this should matter? For best performance one
>>>>should use the minimum refresh rate that eliminates flicker. I doubt
>>>>that anyone can actually see an improvement in screen quality by
>>>>increasing refresh above about 75Hz.
>>>>
>>>>Gil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have also read about Win XP limiting refresh rates.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>The higher the refresh rates, the less eye strain you get.
>>
>>
>> You should have received a monitor.inf file with your monitor. Make sure
>> that is installed (by whatever method your monitor supplier provides) and
>> you should find XP will show your choices. There is no need at all to go
>> beyond 85Hz. Yes, the higher the refresh rate, the less eye-strain, but
>> only up to about 72Hz - hence the legal minimum of 72Hz (obviously,
>> applies only to businesses). The only thing you will achieve by going
>> beyond 85 Hz is (possibly) to overstrain your monitor, so why try it? You
>> certainly will see no improvement.
>>
>> Steve.
>>
>>
> You're right Steve, no need to go beyond 85hz. But there is still
> something wrong if the video card and the monitor can go up to 120hz but
> somehow it only goes up to 85hz. Right?


Yes, but that usually means that you have not installed the monitor
correctly,
and you are seeing only the values Windows allows - hence my comment about
the monitor.inf file. Windows deliberately restricts the values allowed if
it does not
recognise the monitor, to prevent possible damage occurring.

Steve.