AMD/ATI Pixel Clock Patcher

[cennis]

Hi toasty,

I have a ASUS PB278Q and it seems to work at 85hz
http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/18/...index.html

I see most members are using dual link DVI. I have a laptop has a 7970m and it has HDMI 1.4a, DP 1.1a.

Does this mod allow me to have enough pixel clock in a HDMI 1.4a port to support 1440p 85mhz? (around 340mhz required)

Will DP work better instead?

I believe for laptop with integrated intel GPUs like mine goes through intel gpu for external monitors.
is there a way to make these resolutions on the intel driver?

Should i tweak the settings so i can acheive a lower 1450 vertical lines? tweaktown link did not do this. It does not seem to reduce total pixel clock by much.

[ToastyX]

Doesn't that monitor skip frames at higher refresh rates? It should be obvious just by moving the mouse cursor. I don't think that monitor can handle anything above 60 Hz. Use this to check: http://www.testufo.com/#test=frameskipping

2560x1440 @ 85 Hz should be done through dual-link DVI or DisplayPort 1.2. It will not work with HDMI or DisplayPort 1.1, and the monitor might not support the same refresh rates over DisplayPort.

Laptops with switchable graphics are a problem because the outputs are handled by the Intel GPU. I don't have a patcher for Intel, and Intel's driver doesn't support EDID overrides, so CRU won't work either.

Intel's driver does have custom resolutions, but the feature is not always available: http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/sb/CS-029478.htm

Reducing the vertical total might help when trying to get higher refresh rates, but the monitor might not support it, and AMD GPUs will not reduce the memory clock when idle if the vertical total is reduced. You have to use "LCD standard" timing in CRU to avoid that.

[ihatelolcats]

awesome work, i have an XFX HD7950 with two outputs:
DL-DVI-I
SL-DVI-D

i applied the patch and it says that it did patch when i run it again.
however i still can not go past 165MHz pixel clock

so, what should i try?

i am using a dell u2312hm IPS panel if that makes a difference

thanks in advance

[MS-DOS]

ihatelolcats Looks like, it's impossible to go above 165Mhz on DELL monitors at least since Uxx11H series.

https://www.monitortests.com/forum/Threa...374#pid374

ToastyX
I just read your conversation with cypherix93 (who didn't even answer your last question) and got a few questions. Is there a way to edit the EDID directly without installing the override driver? I could try the same trick with switching the input mode to DP or HDMI.
What could be the point of including the extension block in CRU?

Here's my EDID with three custom resolutions from CRU, created by the tool you posted on a previous page.

  .0.5.txt (Size: 414 bytes / Downloads: 968)

Can you see any limits that can cause 165Mhz cap there?

And the last question: how have you made it possible, that the patcher no longer requires the test mode?
Tnanks.

[ToastyX]

(08-10-2013 06:19 AM)ihatelolcats Wrote:  i applied the patch and it says that it did patch when i run it again.
however i still can not go past 165MHz pixel clock

What do you mean by this? Does the refresh rate not get added? Does the monitor not display it?

[ToastyX]

(08-10-2013 02:31 PM)MS-DOS Wrote:  I just read your conversation with cypherix93 (who didn't even answer your last question) and got a few questions. Is there a way to edit the EDID directly without installing the override driver? I could try the same trick with switching the input mode to DP or HDMI.

If the refresh rate gets added but the monitor won't display it, then it's a monitor limitation, not a driver limitation. Changing the EDID won't make a difference. The monitor doesn't care about the EDID.

The extension block usually contains HDTV resolutions and audio information. I don't see an extension block in the file you posted. CRU removes timing information from the base EDID, so there aren't any limits there.

The patcher now signs the driver using a certificate that Windows will accept without needing test mode.

[ihatelolcats]

(08-10-2013 05:46 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  

(08-10-2013 06:19 AM)ihatelolcats Wrote:  i applied the patch and it says that it did patch when i run it again.
however i still can not go past 165MHz pixel clock

What do you mean by this? Does the refresh rate not get added? Does the monitor not display it?

sorry i wasn't clear-
it adds fine, but when i select a setting with pixels over 165MHz the monitor OSD goes black and says to go back to 1920x1080 60Hz

[ToastyX]

That's a monitor limitation then. You should be able to get at least 72 Hz using "LCD reduced" timing in CRU.

[MS-DOS]

(08-10-2013 07:13 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  If the refresh rate gets added but the monitor won't display it, then it's a monitor limitation, not a driver limitation. Changing the EDID won't make a difference. The monitor doesn't care about the EDID.

I would agree, but based on what cypherix93 said:

(07-30-2013 07:49 PM)cypherix93 Wrote:  I found a weird workaround though - In the EDID, if I set the byte that defines the display input to A5 (DisplayPort), I can get past that 165MHz limit in CRU (adlutil still won't work). I am running at 1080p@85Hz (which is around 203MHz) with custom settings and no problems whatsoever. BUT, AMD HD3D won't work under this configuration. Yes, it works without the EDID override.

...his monitor did care about that small thing in EDID, that allowed to past the limit. So, my previous question remains. It's not that hard to try anyway, I just don't know how to edit EDID directly.

[ihatelolcats]

(08-10-2013 11:47 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  That's a monitor limitation then. You should be able to get at least 72 Hz using "LCD reduced" timing in CRU.

thank you
i am running at 75hz with that option now