Question Monitor won't display 1440p@144hz over HDMI 2.0 on laptop

[MaskedEvilGenius]

I recently bought an LG 27GP83B-B.AUS 1440P monitor. The monitor manual says 1440p@144hz over HDMI and my MSI Sword 11800h/3050ti laptop spec sheet says 4K@60hz so I'm assuming that is HDMI 2.0. The most I can get is 1440p@120hz (no 144hz option). Even at 1080p I can only achieve 120hz. I recently returned a Samsung LS27AG50 that allowed 1440p@144hz so I'm not sure what is going on. My monitor is still within return window so if anyone has any info on this please help.

What I've done so far:

downloaded LG monitor driver

downloaded Onscreen Control via LG website thinking I could update firmware (no option)

updated intel integrated graphics driver

updated nvidia graphics card driver

used 3 different HDMI cables (including one that displayed 144hz with Samsung monitor)

tried a new HDMI 2.1 cable (48Gbps bandwidth) and it still didn't show 1440p@144hz only 120hz max

tried both HDMI ports in monitor

turned HDMI compatibility mode off in OSD

turned freesync off in OSD

tried to set custom resolution in Intel Graphics Command Center but wouldn't let me since resolution was the same??, however it did show it supported 2560 x 1440p at 144hz HDMI

I'm using 8 bit color (true color 32bit) and HDR is off

Also, I have no displayport.

Thanks

 

[Lutfij]

Welcome to the forums, newcomer!

my MSI Sword 11800h/3050ti laptop spec sheet says 4K@60hz so I'm assuming that is HDMI 2.0.

MSI Sword 15 – Sharpen Your Game

With the latest 11th Gen. Intel® Core™ i7 processors and powered by NVIDIA® GeForce RTX™ 30 series graphics, the Sword 15 is optimized to unleash true performance during gameplay. The new Sword 15 is built with the same exquisite craftsmanship used to for

www.msi.com

You don't need to assume, it's stated in specs that it's HDMI 2.1 .

updated intel integrated graphics driver
+
updated nvidia graphics card driver
I'd advise that you use DDU to remove all GPU drivers, then manually reinstall with the latest GPU drivers from Intel and Nvidia in an elevated command, i.e, Right click installer>Run as Administrator. Install the Nvidia driver prior to the Intel if you're wondering about which order to do it.

One other thing you could try is to check and make sure your laptop's motherboard BIOS is on the latest version, prior to the GPU driver reinstall.

 

[kerberos_20]

You don't need to assume, it's stated in specs that it's HDMI 2.1

the thing about hdmi 2.1 is that extra bandwith is optional..so atleast they say that it can run 4k @ 60Hz, which is 14.93Gbit
1440p @ 144Hz needs 15.93Gbit
so we can assume that MSI cheaped out a little here

through custom resolution it should be possible as we can assume that pixel clock is here limited to 600MHz

 

[kerberos_20]

@MaskedEvilGenius
can you run this tool? then doubleclick on detailed resolution for 1440p at 144hz and post picture of your resolution config

https://www.monitortests.com/download/cru/cru-1.5.2.zip

here example from mine when ive clicked on 4k resolution

forum again acting up with pictures...

https://imgur.com/vfV3P2L

View: https://i.imgur.com/vfV3P2L.png

 

[MaskedEvilGenius]

@MaskedEvilGenius
can you run this tool? then doubleclick on detailed resolution for 1440p at 144hz and post picture of your resolution config

https://www.monitortests.com/download/cru/cru-1.5.2.zip

here example from mine when ive clicked on 4k resolution

forum again acting up with pictures...

https://imgur.com/vfV3P2L

View: https://i.imgur.com/vfV3P2L.png

CRU Detailed Resolution that was already on there by default
What my Windows display settings are showing
I didn't change anything, just showing you what is currently on there. Any idea what is going on?

 

[Glenwing]

CRU Detailed Resolution that was already on there by default
What my Windows display settings are showing
I didn't change anything, just showing you what is currently on there. Any idea what is going on?

The monitor has a 1440p 144 Hz profile as expected. The timings are within 600 Mpx/s so I'm not sure why it would not be available as an option.

Please try the following: Open back up the 144 Hz profile in CRU and set the Timing dropdown menu to CVT Reduced Blank Version 2. That should result in a pixel clock of 586 MHz at the bottom. Then hit Ok -> Ok to exit out of CRU, and hit the Restart64.exe. Then see if the 144 Hz option appears in Windows.

 

[MaskedEvilGenius]

The monitor has a 1440p 144 Hz profile as expected. The timings are within 600 Mpx/s so I'm not sure why it would not be available as an option.

Please try the following: Open back up the 144 Hz profile in CRU and set the Timing dropdown menu to CVT Reduced Blank Version 2. That should result in a pixel clock of 586 MHz at the bottom. Then hit Ok -> Ok to exit out of CRU, and hit the Restart64.exe. Then see if the 144 Hz option appears in Windows.

Is it this one? It wouldn't let me hit OK

 

[kerberos_20]

CRU Detailed Resolution that was already on there by default
What my Windows display settings are showing
I didn't change anything, just showing you what is currently on there. Any idea what is going on?

that profile is fine for hdmi 2.0 specs
inserted it and got it available, so profile is fine
that means your gpu driver is not loading it

https://imgur.com/uCHK4Gs

View: https://i.imgur.com/uCHK4Gs.png


which driver is used for your external monitor? intel or nvidia?

 

[MaskedEvilGenius]

that profile is fine for hdmi 2.0 specs
inserted it and got it available, so profile is fine
that means your gpu driver is not loading it

https://imgur.com/uCHK4Gs

View: https://i.imgur.com/uCHK4Gs.png


which driver is used for your external monitor? intel or nvidia?

It says connected to Intel UHD Graphics in the picture I posted on Windows display settings.

I believe it's running with Optimus as that's how my laptop is (automatically switches to 3050ti when playing a game or opening an app that requires discrete gpu). Otherwise, it uses the integrated graphics for normal operations.

 

[Glenwing]

Is it this one? It wouldn't let me hit OK

Yes. Change the refresh rate to 144 as well.

 

[MaskedEvilGenius]

Yes. Change the refresh rate to 144 as well.

It's not letting me click Ok.

https://imgur.com/UXPS2JL

View: https://i.imgur.com/UXPS2JL.png

The CVT-RB Standard is allowing me to, but that is 604.37 pixel clock.

https://imgur.com/9sdxkRu

View: https://i.imgur.com/9sdxkRu.png

Should I try that one?

 

[MaskedEvilGenius]

So I restarted my laptop and open CRU again and this time I created a new resolution to get 144hz and the pixel clock showed 580mhz. Then I ran the restart64 and 144hz showed up on the Windows display settings

https://imgur.com/EOYekT6

View: https://i.imgur.com/EOYekT6.png

https://imgur.com/HPcdO2q

View: https://i.imgur.com/HPcdO2q.png

https://imgur.com/BkmbOyP

View: https://i.imgur.com/BkmbOyP.png

The questions I have now is why did I have to do it this way to achieve 144hz@1440p? Was this a problem with the monitor, drivers, laptop, or Windows itself?

Also, I'm not too familiar with the total pixels/lines/pixel clock terminology in CRU. Is there any downside now that pixel clock is 580mhz and it appears the total vertical lines are a little less 1523>1481. Does this result in lower picture quality? Or is the quality exactly the same?

 

[Glenwing]

It's not letting me click Ok.

The CVT-RB Standard is allowing me to, but that is 604.37 pixel clock.

Should I try that one?

Interesting, not sure what the restriction is about.

600 MHz is the maximum allowed by HDMI for TMDS transmission (which is what Intel graphocs support), so the CVT-RB version 1 would not work.

So I restarted my laptop and open CRU again and this time I created a new resolution to get 144hz and the pixel clock showed 580mhz. Then I ran the restart64 and 144hz showed up on the Windows display settings

The questions I have now is why did I have to do it this way to achieve 144hz@1440p? Was this a problem with the monitor, drivers, laptop, or Windows itself?

Also, I'm not too familiar with the total pixels/lines/pixel clock terminology in CRU. Is there any downside now that pixel clock is 580mhz and it appears the total vertical lines are a little less 1523>1481. Does this result in lower picture quality? Or is the quality exactly the same?

The HDMI specification states 600 MHz as the maximum that may be supported. However, devices may have lower limitations. For example in version 1.4 the maximum allowed was 340 MHz, but Intel HD graphics were limited to 300 MHz only, so for example 144 Hz at 1080p was not available.

So it may be limited to less than 600 MHz. I suspect it only supports up to 594 MHz, which is a common timing used for 4K 60 Hz with CTA-861 timing, and sometimes devices will be limited to this speed. It would be interesting to see if increasing the vertical back porch until the pixel clock is just below 594 MHz, whether it would still appear, and then increasing it one more to exceed 594 MHz, if it would disappear as an option. This would be very interesting to know, actually.

There is no change in the visible picture from these parameters, although when the vertical blanking interval is too short it may prevent the graphics card VRAM from reducing clock speed at idle, since there isn't enough time between frames to change memory speed so it would run at full speed all the time. This would increase power consumption.

 

[MaskedEvilGenius]

Interesting, not sure what the restriction is about.

600 MHz is the maximum allowed by HDMI for TMDS transmission (which is what Intel graphocs support), so the CVT-RB version 1 would not work.

The HDMI specification states 600 MHz as the maximum that may be supported. However, devices may have lower limitations. For example in version 1.4 the maximum allowed was 340 MHz, but Intel HD graphics were limited to 300 MHz only, so for example 144 Hz at 1080p was not available.

So it may be limited to less than 600 MHz. I suspect it only supports up to 594 MHz, which is a common timing used for 4K 60 Hz with CTA-861 timing, and sometimes devices will be limited to this speed. It would be interesting to see if increasing the vertical back porch until the pixel clock is just below 594 MHz, whether it would still appear, and then increasing it one more to exceed 594 MHz, if it would disappear as an option. This would be very interesting to know, actually.

There is no change in the visible picture from these parameters, although when the vertical blanking interval is too short it may prevent the graphics card VRAM from reducing clock speed at idle, since there isn't enough time between frames to change memory speed so it would run at full speed all the time. This would increase power consumption.

Yes you are correct. Just below 593mhz I was still able to get 144hz in Windows display. Once I reached over 594mhz (vertical back porch@69), I was not able to receive 144z in Windows display. That explains why the default pixel clock of 596mhz on the monitor did not work.

So, should I keep the vertical back porch up and have it just at 593mhz (this will raise the vertical blanking interval a bit) or leave it back at 580mhz?

 

[Glenwing]

Yes you are correct. Just below 593mhz I was still able to get 144hz in Windows display. Once I reached over 594mhz (vertical back porch@69), I was not able to receive 144z in Windows display. That explains why the default pixel clock of 596mhz on the monitor did not work.

So, should I keep the vertical back porch up and have it just at 593mhz (this will raise the vertical blanking interval a bit) or leave it back at 580mhz?

Thank you, that's valuable for me to know

Probably the 593 MHz would be preferable in my opinion.