NVIDIA Pixel Clock Patcher

[Axejess]

(08-16-2016 11:37 AM)Blackdragonbird Wrote:  Hi guys,

Still not working with the new 372.54 driver. Seems nVidia changed the way the driver installs. I now only do 72Hz in my X-Star, down from 96Hz.

Same here :
Failed to locate driver file.

Hope there is a way to get this working again.

[ToastyX]

Try this: https://www.monitortests.com/nvlddmkm-patcher-1.4.zip

I had to change the way the driver is located and patched. Now it reads the registry to find where the driver is installed and makes a copy in a writable location. Then it tells Windows to load the patched copy instead of trying to overwrite the original. Hopefully there won't be any problems doing it this way.

[Axejess]

(08-17-2016 04:20 AM)ToastyX Wrote:  Try this: https://www.monitortests.com/nvlddmkm-patcher-1.4.zip

I had to change the way the driver is located and patched. Now it reads the registry to find where the driver is installed and makes a copy in a writable location. Then it tells Windows to load the patched copy instead of trying to overwrite the original. Hopefully there won't be any problems doing it this way.

Thank you so much for your hard work. It works again

[Blackdragonbird]

(08-17-2016 04:20 AM)ToastyX Wrote:  Try this: https://www.monitortests.com/nvlddmkm-patcher-1.4.zip

I had to change the way the driver is located and patched. Now it reads the registry to find where the driver is installed and makes a copy in a writable location. Then it tells Windows to load the patched copy instead of trying to overwrite the original. Hopefully there won't be any problems doing it this way.

It's working. TYVM for your fast patch.

And the better part, with this driver I can do DSR with my custom refresh rate of 96hz.

[ttnuagmada]

(08-17-2016 04:20 AM)ToastyX Wrote:  Try this: https://www.monitortests.com/nvlddmkm-patcher-1.4.zip

I had to change the way the driver is located and patched. Now it reads the registry to find where the driver is installed and makes a copy in a writable location. Then it tells Windows to load the patched copy instead of trying to overwrite the original. Hopefully there won't be any problems doing it this way.

You are the man!

[jaytea33]

I'm not able to get my BenQ RL2455 to overclock any higher than 71hz, which I can do with CRU alone without the pixel patcher.

I run the nvlddmkm-patcher.exe (as admin), it patches DL-DVI limit, SL-DVI/HDMI limit, and SL-DVI limit without issue. I restart, attempt to make a resolution higher than 71hz with CRU (I've seen a youtube video where someone ran it at a max of 76hz) and it simply won't take any resolution higher than 71hz when I try to apply it.

I'm running Windows 7 x64 with a Nvidia EVGA 1070 FTW edition, driver is 372.54, I'm using the latest pixel patcher (1.4), and my BenQ is plugged in via DVI. Any help is greatly appreciated and I will happily provide any additional details if needed.

[ToastyX]

(08-25-2016 01:45 AM)jaytea33 Wrote:  I'm not able to get my BenQ RL2455 to overclock any higher than 71hz, which I can do with CRU alone without the pixel patcher.

I run the nvlddmkm-patcher.exe (as admin), it patches DL-DVI limit, SL-DVI/HDMI limit, and SL-DVI limit without issue. I restart, attempt to make a resolution higher than 71hz with CRU (I've seen a youtube video where someone ran it at a max of 76hz) and it simply won't take any resolution higher than 71hz when I try to apply it.

I'm running Windows 7 x64 with a Nvidia EVGA 1070 FTW edition, driver is 372.54, I'm using the latest pixel patcher (1.4), and my BenQ is plugged in via DVI. Any help is greatly appreciated and I will happily provide any additional details if needed.

The monitor itself could have a 165 MHz pixel clock limit with DVI, so the patcher wouldn't help with that. Try the "LCD reduced" timing option to keep the pixel clock under 165 MHz. If that doesn't help, the monitor might only be able to do 76 Hz with HDMI.

[jaytea33]

Thanks so much for the suggestions, I'll give that a shot.

EDIT: Ok the Reduced Timing did it. Is there any downside to doing this in regard to response time or anything?

Also, verrry strange results for some reason. I managed to get it to 75hz on reduced timing, with a pixel clock of 164.61. The highest I can get with standard timings is 164.96. If I try to up it to 76hz on reduced timings, that brings it to 164.81, below the 165hz threshold. Doesn't say "Out of Range" but doesn't apply the resolution, just reverts back to previous. If I try to go to 77hz on reduced timings it goes to 164.96, matching the max allowed with standard timings, and I get the same result as with 76hz. Really weird, I'm not sure what the limitation is other than the pixel clock. HDMI is shot all to hell for some reason and I have to underscan it to display properly, only DVI will display right but oh well. If there's no downside to reduced timings when it comes to gaming I'll just stick with the 75hz.

[Berke53]

Hi all!

I'm having a huge issue. I can't seem to get my UHD TV to run at 4k60 @ 4:4:4 chroma over HDMI. I tried using the latst 1.4 pixel clock patcher but my TV doesn't output a signal when i try.
I get away with 4k30hz, 4k60hz 4:2:0 or 2880x1620 60hz 4:4:4 but nothing over that...
I'm running 2 GTX 1080's in SLI (372.54) on a 55inch SONY BRAVIA TV wich is capable of 4k60 4:4:4 (KD55X8509C) over a certified 18gbps HDMI 2.0 cable.
I set the TV HDMI signal format to 'enhanced' to ensure compatibility with 4k60 4:4:4.

I'm completly out of idea's. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

[ToastyX]

(08-25-2016 03:02 AM)jaytea33 Wrote:  EDIT: Ok the Reduced Timing did it. Is there any downside to doing this in regard to response time or anything?

It does not affect response times. The only disadvantage is NVIDIA GPUs won't clock down when idle if the vertical total is too low.

(08-25-2016 03:02 AM)jaytea33 Wrote:  Also, verrry strange results for some reason. I managed to get it to 75hz on reduced timing, with a pixel clock of 164.61. The highest I can get with standard timings is 164.96. If I try to up it to 76hz on reduced timings, that brings it to 164.81, below the 165hz threshold. Doesn't say "Out of Range" but doesn't apply the resolution, just reverts back to previous. If I try to go to 77hz on reduced timings it goes to 164.96, matching the max allowed with standard timings, and I get the same result as with 76hz. Really weird, I'm not sure what the limitation is other than the pixel clock.

That seems like a driver bug. Maybe the hardware can't handle lower horizontal totals, but then the driver shouldn't list the refresh rate.