Custom Resolution Utility (CRU)

[ToastyX]

(12-06-2014 02:25 AM)Danja Wrote:  Is a Benq XL2430T in the same ballpark? I think its the newer version of the 2420Z but easier to get hold of in the UK at a better price. Thanks!

I think it is. It seems to have the same blur reduction feature.

[falkentyne]

(12-05-2014 07:37 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  

(12-05-2014 04:56 PM)Danja Wrote:  Ah well, I guess I'll just stick with 120hz and sell the spare one and put it towards a higher end panel. Thanks for your help, its good to know what's causing it at least!

Last question, any particular 120/144hz monitor you'd recommend?

I'd say one of the BenQ Z-series monitors: XL2411Z, XL2420Z, XL2720Z

They have a blur reduction feature that works like LightBoost without washing out the colors, and it can be used at 144 Hz. I can't guarantee they won't have any dithering/inversion artifacts though. Strobing can also make inversion artifacts worse, but you can always turn strobing off.

Long rant explanation:

From what I've seen, the Benq monitors do not have -any- dithering or inversion artifacts in benq blur reduction mode, whatsoever, because the panels don't use accelerated scanout, so the panel image quality is not compromised. Even on lagom's inversion tests, there is literally no difference between blur reduction on and off, which, despite the ghosting complaints about BBR, is a testament to BBR keeping great image quality.

Lightboost uses accelerated scanout via a LC panel update timing. I don't know much about this, but it's the LC panel update changes that cause the "scanlines" and artifacts you sometimes get in lightboost mode. Lightboost also uses per-line overdrive, which greatly helps the ghosting (this also applies to the Benq Z series' lightboost mode), and by lowering the contrast to 0 on the 27" monitors, the lightboost quality on the 2720Z gets VERY close to VG248QE quality (along with the horrible contrast and washed out colors but avoiding some of the color degradation; contrast 37 keeps the close to 1000:1 contrast ratio but with significantly more ghosting, though usually only apparent in 2d).

Benq blur reduction does not use any of these, just backlight strobing, so neither the colors nor the contrast get affected, just the brightness levels, and you have to deal with finding a good area for the crosstalk zones (strobe pulse settling errors). You can basically tell, because enabling blur reduction is instantaneous without any sort of resets or resolution changes.

Using a higher Vertical Total (like 1350 or 1500) basically forces an accelerated scanout very similar to lightboost's accelerated scanout, by speeding up the update process of the LC panel (giving the panel more time to complete the strobe phase). Increasing the Vertical total basically makes the vertical synchronization phase longer, while preserving the vertical refresh rate (which allow the panel to complete more of the strobe transitions between strobe phases (E.g.. extends the distance between the first strobe pulse at the top of the screen, and the next one at the bottom of the screen...essentially pushing the bottom one off the screen, so the thick double image effect of the strobe pulse is ofscreen). Doing this, however, raises the pixel dot clock, does stress the monitor more and the panel (For some reason) switches to the 60 hz backlight pulse widths, instead of using the normal 100 or 120hz pulse widths. So you wind up getting very similar inversion lines that you do in lightboost mode (since lightboost is accelerating the scanout the same way, but by the LC panel timings instead of vertical total changes).

If you make lightboost 120% (lightboost 100% has the top edge crosstalk (strobe pulse) completely off the top of the screen; 120% doesn't quite have it off) match benq blur reductions crosstalk (top to bottom) by using the settings with the VT 1500 tweak: Strobe duty (intensity ) 005, strobe phase (area): 000, you will find that although the crosstalk top to bottom seems to match up evenly with lightboost now, the Benq screen will be much darker, with less inversion lines (and the persistence lower, thus showing a smoother image), while lightboost mode will have more intense inversion lines. That's because lightboost's accelerated scanout pushes things harder than the VT tweak ever can.

All that being said, for some 2D games where ghosting is very apparent, lightboost with low contrast and its per line overdrive may look much better than benq blur reduction.

I don't think the 2430T supports lightboost...someone said it doesn't support 3d vision 2...can anyone confirm?

[_alkaline]

Hey, I just got a QX320QHD. It isn't overclocking, and people at overclock.net and the manufacturer have suggested it should.

Anyway, I got my new QX320QHD, I plugged it in, great monitor, very nice colors. I connected it with the dual link DVI that came in the box. The whole reason I got it was so I could overclock it, as per the widely circulated screenshot on Amazon here (bottom photo on the left sidebar): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KVZMUYI/?tag=mtests-20#ad

I actually got the monitor here because lower price, I am 99% sure there's no difference as they are the exact same model: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00O0UTCPA/?tag=mtests-20#ad

I got the monitor, loaded up CRU, added custom resolutions, the first with 85 hz 1440p and the second with 720p 100hz (to see if lowering resolution would allow higher refresh). I also removed the pixel clock that's in the AMD drivers. I rebooted, changed the refresh rate in AMD Catalyst Control... and black screen on 1440p 85hz!

I then tried 720p 100hz, and this is what's really strange. It worked. No visible frame skipping, so I loaded up the Test UFO frame skipping [http://www.testufo.com/#test=frameskipping], but it identifies my frame rate & refresh rate as 60hz! I tried a bunch of different resolutions in CRU, including 1440p 65 hz and 720p 65 hz, but every time it still says 60 frame rate and 60 hz refresh. I can provide screenshots tomorrow if necessary.

I have a prebuilt with a i7 4790 and R9 270, and my OS is Win 7 Home Prem. Those shouldn't be the issue unless I'm completely off.

Thanks so much for the help in advance! I really appreciate it!

Edit: screenshot of amd catalyst control saying 75hz while testufo says 60hz.

[ToastyX]

(12-10-2014 06:40 PM)_alkaline Wrote:  Hey, I just got a QX320QHD. It isn't overclocking, and people at overclock.net and the manufacturer have suggested it should.

Anyway, I got my new QX320QHD, I plugged it in, great monitor, very nice colors. I connected it with the dual link DVI that came in the box. The whole reason I got it was so I could overclock it, as per the widely circulated screenshot on Amazon here (bottom photo on the left sidebar): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KVZMUYI/?tag=mtests-20#ad

I actually got the monitor here because lower price, I am 99% sure there's no difference as they are the exact same model: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00O0UTCPA/?tag=mtests-20#ad

I got the monitor, loaded up CRU, added custom resolutions, the first with 85 hz 1440p and the second with 720p 100hz (to see if lowering resolution would allow higher refresh). I also removed the pixel clock that's in the AMD drivers. I rebooted, changed the refresh rate in AMD Catalyst Control... and black screen on 1440p 85hz!

If 85 Hz is listed and you're able to set it, then it's working properly and your particular monitor can't handle it for some reason.

(12-10-2014 06:40 PM)_alkaline Wrote:  I then tried 720p 100hz, and this is what's really strange. It worked. No visible frame skipping, so I loaded up the Test UFO frame skipping [http://www.testufo.com/#test=frameskipping], but it identifies my frame rate & refresh rate as 60hz! I tried a bunch of different resolutions in CRU, including 1440p 65 hz and 720p 65 hz, but every time it still says 60 frame rate and 60 hz refresh. I can provide screenshots tomorrow if necessary.

I have a prebuilt with a i7 4790 and R9 270, and my OS is Win 7 Home Prem. Those shouldn't be the issue unless I'm completely off.

Thanks so much for the help in advance! I really appreciate it!

Edit: screenshot of amd catalyst control saying 75hz while testufo says 60hz.

Make sure you're using one of the Aero themes. The UFO test requires desktop composition to work properly, but your screen shot shows you're using the Basic theme, which disables desktop composition.

[_alkaline]

(12-10-2014 08:08 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 06:40 PM)_alkaline Wrote:  Hey, I just got a QX320QHD. It isn't overclocking, and people at overclock.net and the manufacturer have suggested it should.

Anyway, I got my new QX320QHD, I plugged it in, great monitor, very nice colors. I connected it with the dual link DVI that came in the box. The whole reason I got it was so I could overclock it, as per the widely circulated screenshot on Amazon here (bottom photo on the left sidebar): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KVZMUYI/?tag=mtests-20#ad

I actually got the monitor here because lower price, I am 99% sure there's no difference as they are the exact same model: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00O0UTCPA/?tag=mtests-20#ad

I got the monitor, loaded up CRU, added custom resolutions, the first with 85 hz 1440p and the second with 720p 100hz (to see if lowering resolution would allow higher refresh). I also removed the pixel clock that's in the AMD drivers. I rebooted, changed the refresh rate in AMD Catalyst Control... and black screen on 1440p 85hz!

If 85 Hz is listed and you're able to set it, then it's working properly and your particular monitor can't handle it for some reason.

(12-10-2014 06:40 PM)_alkaline Wrote:  I then tried 720p 100hz, and this is what's really strange. It worked. No visible frame skipping, so I loaded up the Test UFO frame skipping [http://www.testufo.com/#test=frameskipping], but it identifies my frame rate & refresh rate as 60hz! I tried a bunch of different resolutions in CRU, including 1440p 65 hz and 720p 65 hz, but every time it still says 60 frame rate and 60 hz refresh. I can provide screenshots tomorrow if necessary.

I have a prebuilt with a i7 4790 and R9 270, and my OS is Win 7 Home Prem. Those shouldn't be the issue unless I'm completely off.

Thanks so much for the help in advance! I really appreciate it!

Edit: screenshot of amd catalyst control saying 75hz while testufo says 60hz.

Make sure you're using one of the Aero themes. The UFO test requires desktop composition to work properly, but your screen shot shows you're using the Basic theme, which disables desktop composition.

That would make a lot of sense. I'll test it with Aero this evening when I have a chance. Thanks ToastyX!!

[spyros78]

I registered only to say a BIG-HUGE-WARM thank you to @ToastyX for the solution he provided which got me out of big trouble and allowed me at last to use Win 7 properly and bypass my *.inf editing

I believe this solution will work for many -many users as well...... so, again THANK YOU @ToastyX !!!

[_alkaline]

(12-10-2014 08:08 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  Make sure you're using one of the Aero themes. The UFO test requires desktop composition to work properly, but your screen shot shows you're using the Basic theme, which disables desktop composition.

I just tried the Aero theme, and still no results, as you can see in the screenshot. This makes no sense, and if you have any more ideas I would be very grateful! Thanks!

[_alkaline]

Nvm. Forgot about hardware acceleration. My qx320QHD seems to be capable of 79 hz, if anyone is curious. A bit disappointing as I was hoping for ~90hz, but oh well it's beter than 60hz!

Thanks again to Toastyx!

[network4me]

@ToastyX

hi, a nice tool you have, but i am a bit afraid ... if i am going to mess up my only monitor , all i want is greater resolution from my Sapphire AMD/ATI HD 6670 2 GB DDR3 card out of dell 2209WA if possible, some right suggestion would be greatly appreciated.


My card supports :2560 x 1600 Maximum Digital Resolution
I am looking for:1920 x 1200 60hz from my monitor.

as from the attachment below you will see ive run the tool... the three standard resolution was there and one detailed resoultion..so i am now trying to add expected 1920 x 1200 ...and thats it i am stuck with silly fear ,am i doing the right thing should i now reboot ? and will get the expected res from monitor screen res setup ?


in your starting post of this thread you ve said i qoute "Lower resolutions will be scaled up if GPU scaling is enabled, but higher resolutions won't be scaled down by the GPU. Higher resolutions will only work if the monitor can handle them."

am i getting this right meaning in my scenario since my gpu scaling is not enable my monitor lower resolution wont scale up, so i by enabling gpu scaling i will be able to upscale my monitor resolution through your tools ?
please help me. Thanks.

PS: may be i was looking for 1920x 1080 but opted for 1920 x 1200 since some tools like open broadcaster software recommend downscale the capture video to be less than the base monitor resolution ,but thats a different issue, i should be okay with both the resulutions with 60Hz as far as your tool procedure concerns?

[ToastyX]

(12-11-2014 04:10 PM)network4me Wrote:  @ToastyX

hi, a nice tool you have, but i am a bit afraid ... if i am going to mess up my only monitor , all i want is greater resolution from my Sapphire AMD/ATI HD 6670 2 GB DDR3 card out of dell 2209WA if possible, some right suggestion would be greatly appreciated.


My card supports :2560 x 1600 Maximum Digital Resolution
I am looking for:1920 x 1200 60hz from my montior.

as from the attachment below you will see ive run the tool... the three standard resolution was there and one detailed resoultion..so i am now trying to add expected 1920 x 1200 ...and thats it i am stuck with silly fear ,am i doing the right thing should i now reboot ? and will get the expected res from monitor screen res setup ?

please help me. Thanks.

You can't mess up the monitor. If a resolution isn't supported, either the monitor won't accept it, or it won't display properly, but it won't damage the monitor.

I actually tested a Dell 2209WA before. It will accept a 1920x1200 @ 60 Hz signal and scale it down. It can also handle 1680x1050 @ 75 Hz.

You need to add 1920x1200 @ 60 Hz as a detailed resolution using the "LCD standard" timing option. It probably won't work properly as a standard resolution.