TFT Refresh Rate?
- Thread starter Cyber-Mav
- Start date
Of course they have a refresh rate, otherwise you'd be looking at a blank screen...Cyber-Mav said:
It depends on the TFT, some have controller boards that support 75Hz and others don't. There will be no difference in image quality. The only variable that will be changed is frame rate. Running at 75Hz means you get 15 more frames per second displayed. Obviously this is a good thing if you have a panel noted for its gaming performance. If not, then the extra 15 frames probably won't be visible - perhaps on some colour changes but not others.
Cyber-Mav said:ahh that clears things up. guess i will run my tft at 75 hz all the time then.
all manufacturers recommend running TFT's at 60Hz which is the screens "optimum" refresh rate. You may find that the image is slightly sharper at 60Hz (I have seen this on quite a few models) and unless you're worried about frame rates in games (normally an issue when playing with vsync on) then it's generally better to run the screen at 60Hz due to the actual operating frequency of the panel which is typically ~60Hz vertically. One thing to note when people say 75Hz is better for gaming is that some screens which use overdrive technology can show an adverse affect of running the screen above 60z. The overdrive control is affected which in turn affects the actual pixel responsiveness. Read the bit about refresh rates here for more info
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 12 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,806
- Location
- Aberlour, NE Scotland
This confused me when i got my Belinea 101927. The manual says to set it between 60-75hz. No mention of optimal. I tried it on 60 for a day and then 75 for a day and that's what it is running at now. Does'nt appear to effect performance in games or anything. GTR runs smoothly with no blurring or ghosting as do Quake 4, Doom 3 and Far Cry. I had to turn on vsync for Titan Quest though as there was some screen tearing but that is ok now. If anything i now have to much pc power for my monitor.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,167
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
one thing thats always baffled me, is refresh rates on a TFT. Granted the actually refresh doesnt mean a lot, i already know this, but what i dont understand is what that figure actually does do.
for instance, 60hz = 60 cycles a second, or 1/60th which is 0.0166. 16ms, in otherwords.
how does that affect refresh rates? the difference between a crt and an lcd as i understand it is that when you tell a pixel on an lcd to light to a certain colour and luminance it will and it will stay lit until you change it again. with a crt it has to be done every cycle otherwise they fade to black again. Now, does the 60hz refresh rate mean you can only tell a tft to update every 16ms? and if that's the case, doesnt that make any tft with a faster responce somewhat redundant?
for instance, 60hz = 60 cycles a second, or 1/60th which is 0.0166. 16ms, in otherwords.
how does that affect refresh rates? the difference between a crt and an lcd as i understand it is that when you tell a pixel on an lcd to light to a certain colour and luminance it will and it will stay lit until you change it again. with a crt it has to be done every cycle otherwise they fade to black again. Now, does the 60hz refresh rate mean you can only tell a tft to update every 16ms? and if that's the case, doesnt that make any tft with a faster responce somewhat redundant?
there is some link between refresh rate and response time, but don't get them confused. If you are outputting 60 frames per second from a graphics card to the screen then the pixels need to be able to respond fast enough to show all those changes. The pixel response time must be 16ms or less (1 / 60) to allow the screen to show all the frames properly. Some modern screens consistently have response times lower than 16ms across all grey transitions and so this is achievable. If you're running an output of 75 fps then the response time needs to be 13ms or less to show all these changes as the liquid crystals are fast enough to change orientation on the requests.
However, the veritcal frequency of the panels used are designed to run at 60Hz and as i said before, using the screen outside of its recommend 60Hz refresh rate can lead to some issues with overdrive control. This means that response time of the pixels is adversely effected and this is obvsiously not desirable in most cases
However, the veritcal frequency of the panels used are designed to run at 60Hz and as i said before, using the screen outside of its recommend 60Hz refresh rate can lead to some issues with overdrive control. This means that response time of the pixels is adversely effected and this is obvsiously not desirable in most cases
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 25
- Location
- Gloucester
The following extract is taken from The Gamers Graphics & Display Settings Guide at Tweakguides.com:
...there are a few factors involved in why your LCD monitor may not provide a refresh rate as high as you might expect given its response time.
The underlying reason however is that current graphics software and hardware is designed around compatibility with CRT monitors, and as such,
LCD monitors are limited in some respects by having to emulate the same process...
...there are a few factors involved in why your LCD monitor may not provide a refresh rate as high as you might expect given its response time.
The underlying reason however is that current graphics software and hardware is designed around compatibility with CRT monitors, and as such,
LCD monitors are limited in some respects by having to emulate the same process...
Answer me this if you can cos I am still confused by all this. If in a fps like COD2 you say do a fast flick from left to right, will the screen respond better at 60Hz or 75Hz, and crucially will it look any different to doing he same thing on a crt running at 100Hz. I'm not talking about blur, I'm more talking about number of actual frames displayed as you do a quick twitch. On the face of it the faster the refresh rate the more frames will be displayed and the less jeryky the pan will look. This is currently stopping me wanting to use my tft for gaming.
if you try to output 100fps to a TFT there is a good chance you will see tearing of the image as the screen and graphics card are not in sync. However, using vsync helps eliminate this and syncs the frame rate to the refresh rate. This is where running at 75Hz can offer a frame rate advantage over 60Hz. So you won't get a TFT to display a true 100 fps at the moment, but i think the real question (which let's not dwell on as i know how these threads go! ) is whether you can really tell a difference between 60-75 fps and 100fps? Is your PC powerful enough to run a constant smooth 100 fps, or would running at 60-75 fps be smooth and consistent and just as usable?
) is whether you can really tell a difference between 60-75 fps and 100fps? Is your PC powerful enough to run a constant smooth 100 fps, or would running at 60-75 fps be smooth and consistent and just as usable?Yeah, I'm talking about really fast pans tho. Assuming the g-card can supply frames fast enough, panning from a to b in x seconds at 100hz on my crt can fit more frames in compared to my tft running at 75hz and so looks smoother, and allot smoother than 60hz. I can see the difference clearly maybe cos I am used to fast twitching in fps games, this is with and without vsync on. Like I say this is a crying shame cos the quality of the tft is otherwise superb. VX922 btw.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,167
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
this is what im getting at. its all very wqell having lightning fast panles but if you cant feed tem quick enough, to me they become somewhat redundant.
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 484
i can clear things up about gaming on both kinds of monitors. I have been a serious quakr player since 1999 and have a lot of gaming experience. I also have the experience of an array of crts and own a couple, and also own a xerox 8ms tft.
The way current technology is, i wouldn't even consider using a tft for gaming, especially not fps games where you have the graphics card outputting high frames per second, like Quake3 for example at 125fps steady. The crt when set to 120hz refresh rate really displays the smoothness that you'd expect to see from such a high frame output, and is completely responsive the way it should be.
The tft on the other hand is TERRIBLE for this. It is as if so much information is missing, and the frames just belnd into each other. Your eyes become acustomed to the tft display pretty soon, and you kind of accept it, and begin to forget how much better the crt was. Then the realisation sets in if you then plug the crt back in and suddenly the game comes alive again in all it's smooth responsive beauty.
If you are hardcore into gaming, do not purchase a tft with the hope that it could better, let alone match your decent/high-end crt. Tft's are way off at the moment. I look forward to the day when a thinner, lighter option than a crt becomes available for gaming, which matches or supersedes it. I'll be one of the first on the bandwagon then.
The way current technology is, i wouldn't even consider using a tft for gaming, especially not fps games where you have the graphics card outputting high frames per second, like Quake3 for example at 125fps steady. The crt when set to 120hz refresh rate really displays the smoothness that you'd expect to see from such a high frame output, and is completely responsive the way it should be.
The tft on the other hand is TERRIBLE for this. It is as if so much information is missing, and the frames just belnd into each other. Your eyes become acustomed to the tft display pretty soon, and you kind of accept it, and begin to forget how much better the crt was. Then the realisation sets in if you then plug the crt back in and suddenly the game comes alive again in all it's smooth responsive beauty.
If you are hardcore into gaming, do not purchase a tft with the hope that it could better, let alone match your decent/high-end crt. Tft's are way off at the moment. I look forward to the day when a thinner, lighter option than a crt becomes available for gaming, which matches or supersedes it. I'll be one of the first on the bandwagon then.
Thanks for that confirmation devil, I was thinking I must being doing something wrong seeing as everyone is currently raving about tfts for gaming and seeing what my vx922 is like I was like huh? I was just thinking about replacing my 22" iiyama crt with a widescreen tft but I don't think I will bother now until they bring out high refresh rarte tft technology. On the other hand, can someone tell me how to properly switch primary monitors in ultramon? Whenever I try to do it to temporaliry make the tft the primary it picks up the refresh rate of the crt, which at 100Hz it can't display, its like it switches the displays but also switches the refresh rates. If |I could suss this I'd be happy cos I could then use the tft for most games and switch to crt for fps.
