Custom Resolution Utility (CRU)

[loccothan]

THX for new revision !

[Lycanphoenix]

I'm using both the latest version of CRU and the latest Nvidia Driver, and I am trying to get my Acer S240HL to run at 75 Hz or better using Single Link DVI-D on my Nvidia GTX 650 TI. Unfortunately, due to a lack of free time, I have been unable to thoroughly test any of the settings out yet, and was wondering if anybody else has experience with overclocking this particular monitor. If so, what settings would you recommend?

(Yes, I also used the Pixel Clock patcher). Furthermore, I also have Lucid Virtue MVP and Intel HD 3000 graphics, so I don't know how that might affect results.

A Dual-Link DVI-D cable is actually on its way to my house as I type this, so switching to that when I get the chance might increase my chances of success.

Also, what's the fastest somebody has used this tool when Interlacing? And could all of Toasty's tools perhaps be rolled up into a single bundle?

Thanks.

[ToastyX]

(09-03-2017 10:12 PM)Lycanphoenix Wrote:  I'm using both the latest version of CRU and the latest Nvidia Driver, and I am trying to get it to run at 75 Hz or better using Single Link DVI-D on my Nvidia GTX 650 TI. Unfortunately, due to a lack of free time, I have been unable to thoroughly test any of the settings out yet, and was wondering if anybody else has experience with overclocking this particular monitor. If so, what settings would you recommend?

You didn't mention what monitor. If this is a 1920x1080 monitor, the LCD timing options provide three different commonly-supported timing parameters at 75 Hz. "LCD standard" and "LCD native" will require the pixel clock patch. "LCD reduced" will work at 75 Hz without the patch, but the video card might not clock down when idle. When trying higher refresh rates on a 60 Hz monitor, there's no guarantee any particular timing parameters will work. Just use whatever works.

(09-03-2017 10:12 PM)Lycanphoenix Wrote:  (Yes, I also used the Pixel Clock patcher). Furthermore, I also have Lucid Virtue MVP and Intel HD 3000 graphics, so I don't know how that might affect results.

I'm not sure exactly how that works, but if the monitor is connected to the NVIDIA card, then it should work with NVIDIA's driver. Intel doesn't have a driver that supports EDID overrides with 3000-series GPUs. If Virtu MVP causes a problem with this setup, you should be able to disable it and use the NVIDIA card normally.

(09-03-2017 10:12 PM)Lycanphoenix Wrote:  A Dual-Link DVI-D cable is actually on its way to my house as I type this, so switching to that when I get the chance might increase my chances of success.

If this is a 1920x1080 monitor that normally runs at 60 Hz, a dual-link DVI cable won't make a difference because the monitor only supports single-link DVI. You will need the pixel clock patch to go beyond 165 MHz pixel clock.

(09-03-2017 10:12 PM)Lycanphoenix Wrote:  Also, what's the fastest somebody has used this tool when Interlacing?

LCD monitors generally don't handle interlaced resolutions very well. 1920x1080 monitors will usually accept 1080i, although some will display it with bad quality. The refresh rate on 1920x1080 monitors is usually limited by the firmware and not the bandwidth, so using interlaced probably won't make a difference.

(09-03-2017 10:12 PM)Lycanphoenix Wrote:  And could all of Toasty's tools perhaps be rolled up into a single bundle?

It doesn't make sense to bundle them because all the programs serve different purposes. The pixel clock patches are also updated independently as needed with newer drivers.

[Lycanphoenix]

Sorry about that, I thought I had already mentioned what model it was. My monitor is An Acer S240HL. I am using the pixel clock patch.

My Dual-Link DVI cable finally arrived, but so far it hasn't increased my ability to push the refresh rate over the original Single-Link cable. I guess this means the monitor just doesn't support Dual-Link.

So far, the furthest I've gotten is 68 Hz, using Nvidia's built-in custom resolution setup.

[cerryl]

Is there any way to make the settings stick after a restart? Every time I have to restart my computer, I have to go back and reset-all, then restart, then run cru and delete the extension blocks all over again. Works fine up until the next time I have to restart.

Monitors (3) are Sceptre E246BV-F. They look wonderful once I delete the extension blocks. With them they have the 'I'm using a TV as a monitor look'

[ToastyX]

(09-08-2017 09:03 PM)cerryl Wrote:  Is there any way to make the settings stick after a restart? Every time I have to restart my computer, I have to go back and reset-all, then restart, then run cru and delete the extension blocks all over again. Works fine up until the next time I have to restart.

Monitors (3) are Sceptre E246BV-F. They look wonderful once I delete the extension blocks. With them they have the 'I'm using a TV as a monitor look'

The settings do stick. You shouldn't have to run reset-all.exe. That deletes all the settings. If you have to run restart.exe after rebooting to get the settings to load, then that's a graphics driver bug. What GPU do you have?

[BLUuuE]

Hey ToastyX,
it seems that AMD has removed the 56 blanking limit and I can run a blanking lower than that. I was messing about with the timings, trying to decrease them as much as I could and testing it on a 70Hz refresh rate rather than my 72Hz. This is the lowest I could go without my monitor going a bit fuzzy. https://puu.sh/xwN1K/7751135576.png

However, when I tried these timings on 72Hz, my monitor became fuzzy, which means that to achieve higher refresh rate you need looser timings (similar to RAM)? But looser timings means higher pixel clocks which is usually the limiting factor when overclocking monitors.

Also, what do the range limits do?

[ToastyX]

(09-11-2017 02:25 AM)BLUuuE Wrote:  Hey ToastyX,
it seems that AMD has removed the 56 blanking limit and I can run a blanking lower than that. I was messing about with the timings, trying to decrease them as much as I could and testing it on a 70Hz refresh rate rather than my 72Hz. This is the lowest I could go without my monitor going a bit fuzzy. https://puu.sh/xwN1K/7751135576.png

However, when I tried these timings on 72Hz, my monitor became fuzzy, which means that to achieve higher refresh rate you need looser timings (similar to RAM)? But looser timings means higher pixel clocks which is usually the limiting factor when overclocking monitors.

Also, what do the range limits do?

The 56 blanking limit is still there for me. Are you using the pixel clock patcher? I found a way around the limit and added it to the patch last year.

There's no reason to reduce the blanking that low when "LCD reduced" will go up to 76 Hz while keeping the pixel clock from exceeding 165 MHz without going below the 56 horizontal blanking limit. Monitors often can't handle values that are too low. Other than pixel clock limits in the graphics driver, which the pixel clock patch can get around, the limiting factor is usually the monitor's firmware. Most monitors are "locked" in the sense that the firmware will only accept a certain range of refresh rates and timing parameters. The hardware itself can probably handle at least 200 MHz pixel clock, and the panel itself could probably handle 100 Hz if the firmware allowed it.

The range limits are informational. I only added it because AMD decided to use the range limits to control the FreeSync range with DisplayPort monitors. Other than that, CRU doesn't include the range limits by default because it's not needed.

[BLUuuE]

(09-11-2017 05:23 AM)ToastyX Wrote:  The 56 blanking limit is still there for me. Are you using the pixel clock patcher? I found a way around the limit and added it to the patch last year.

There's no reason to reduce the blanking that low when "LCD reduced" will go up to 76 Hz while keeping the pixel clock from exceeding 165 MHz without going below the 56 horizontal blanking limit. Monitors often can't handle values that are too low. Other than pixel clock limits in the graphics driver, which the pixel clock patch can get around, the limiting factor is usually the monitor's firmware. Most monitors are "locked" in the sense that the firmware will only accept a certain range of refresh rates and timing parameters. The hardware itself can probably handle at least 200 MHz pixel clock, and the panel itself could probably handle 100 Hz if the firmware allowed it.

The range limits are informational. I only added it because AMD decided to use the range limits to control the FreeSync range with DisplayPort monitors. Other than that, CRU doesn't include the range limits by default because it's not needed.

I am using the pixel clock patcher so that's why I'm able to bypass the 56 blanking limit.

Is there any risk in running tighter timings?
These are my settings at the moment:

[cerryl]

(09-08-2017 10:16 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  

(09-08-2017 09:03 PM)cerryl Wrote:  Is there any way to make the settings stick after a restart? Every time I have to restart my computer, I have to go back and reset-all, then restart, then run cru and delete the extension blocks all over again. Works fine up until the next time I have to restart.

Monitors (3) are Sceptre E246BV-F. They look wonderful once I delete the extension blocks. With them they have the 'I'm using a TV as a monitor look'

The settings do stick. You shouldn't have to run reset-all.exe. That deletes all the settings. If you have to run restart.exe after rebooting to get the settings to load, then that's a graphics driver bug. What GPU do you have?

I have a 6GB Nvidia 1060 SC. I ended up having to export to INF, reset-all, restart with driver signature checking disabled, use the exported INF as drivers for the monitors, after I restarted again, it all worked just fine. Works still after multiple restarts to check it.