Best frequency to choose for CRT monitor

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Dear All,
I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
Thanks.
The Undertaker
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hi, it may depend upon your video card but the higher the better, also use
32bit if you don't get any performance loss...
Chris C
"The Undertaker" <chrispak9@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ufrQUQq4EHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Dear All,
> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
> Thanks.
> The Undertaker
>
>
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"The Undertaker" <chrispak9@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:ufrQUQq4EHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Dear All,
> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
> Thanks.
> The Undertaker
>
If available in both the CRT and the graphic card, 85 Hz is preferable to
avoid flickering.
Ebbe
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I prefer 70, but it's strictly a user preference constrained by hardware
capabilities.

The Undertaker wrote:

> Dear All,
> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
> Thanks.
> The Undertaker
>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Lower refresh rates are supposed to be better for the monitor. I usually
set mine at the lowest setting that i do not see the screen refresh.

"The Undertaker" <chrispak9@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ufrQUQq4EHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Dear All,
> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
> Thanks.
> The Undertaker
>
>
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

The Undertaker wrote:
> Dear All,
> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
> Thanks.
> The Undertaker
>
>

The one that's most comfortable for *you* to look at.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Kenneth
hope your eyes hold out long enough for you to enjoy your next monitor.
Most monitors have certain refresh rates..........the higher the better for your
eyes.
Yes you can take it down a notch but running at the lowest usually 60 will in
the long run damage your eyesite.
By the time you were to wear your monitor out running at say 85 you would be in
the market for a new one way before that.
My old Viewsonic set to its maximum refresh rate is still running strong after 8
years.....but I switched to an LCD 3 years ago
peter
"Kenneth Brehaut" <meathead1963@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uESUsnw4EHA.2600@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Lower refresh rates are supposed to be better for the monitor. I usually set
> mine at the lowest setting that i do not see the screen refresh.
>
> "The Undertaker" <chrispak9@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ufrQUQq4EHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>> Dear All,
>> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
>> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
>> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
>> Thanks.
>> The Undertaker
>>
>>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hi,
I own a 21" monitor and vid.card combination that's 140 capable at 1024*768.
It's set there. No questions.
I paid good $$ for it. I use it.
If I wanted 60, I'd shelled out $100. vs 1800 for that Sony Pro model (3 years
ago).
It's got the circuits to support the refresh!

Don't EVER under spec. If you own a AMD-64bits 3200, do you cut off some pins to
turn it into a 586 @ 550.
Treat yourself to what you got!

"Bruce Chambers" <bruce_a_chambers@h0tmail.com> wrote in message
news:ecbbhCy4EHA.924@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> The Undertaker wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
>> quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
>> screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.
>> Thanks.
>> The Undertaker
>>
>>
>
> The one that's most comfortable for *you* to look at.
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both
> at once. - RAH
 
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

The Undertaker wrote:

>I have a 17"CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1024*768 pixels (Color
>quality 16 bit). What is the best suitable frequency to choose for the
>screen refresh rate? frequencies available are 60, 70, 72, 75 and 85.

It depends on how susceptible your eyes are to flicker. It is not a
good idea to set it higher than you really need as this may stretch the
bandwidth of the analog circuits and reduce sharpness. I'd start on 72
and see how it goes


--
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K. Alexn@mvps.D8E8L.org (remove the D8 bit)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom