59Hz

Skumin said:

And did you download the graphics card drivers?I chose 185.85 for nVidia and for Vista 64bit and everything works well.Try to reinstall your monitor drivers.You should then see the name of your monitor at the"Screen resolution/advanced".So there is not written Plug'n'Play but the proper name of the monitor.

That's not the latest drivers, the latest are 191.07

[edit] Ops it's 195.62

falkenjeff said:

I'm sick today so I don't have time to read that entire post, but I meant code is dynamic as in once you release a (good) piece of software, you maintain it and change it to fix any bugs that appear. It doesn't stay broken.

I'm gonna get back to laying around doing nothing for the day. If anyone cares, I am still using DirectRefresh to fix this issue.

I only keep coming back here because I'm too lazy to unsubscribe to this topic, and my inbox keeps getting spammed lol.

Ahh sorry, I did the same thing in an earlier part of the thread. already gave you props I think for fixing my mistake? I don't remember lolz but yeah sorry I jump on people easy but it's not because I like to it's because I like the right info out. =P Oh and if I get jumped and am wrong I'll admit it... SHHHH don't say that though.

I recently updated my nVidia295 drivers to 195.62 and the 59hz issue returned, but only in my spare Windows 7 boot...the main one stayed at 60hz, very weird.
I had to do the fix that jimmyt1988 posted here: 59Hz to get it to work.
This is most definitely a Windows 7 quirk and whilst it may seem trivial to some it's important in certain games and HD.
By contrast my Vista OS has never had this problem and neither did the XP I had before that.

JackNaylorPE said:

I had 59 originally too on prmary monitor...went away when i added 2nd smaller monitor, now both say 60Hz. Agree with others that this looks like a display of umber thing not a real indication of improper frequency.

If a second monitor fixed the problem, it might also be a problem with the nvidia cards. =S As 2 monitors draw different than one monitor, maybe ground out has problems, who knows. Or maybe the profiles are different, but I don't see why some people use the same drivers, the same setup, just different monitors and get different results then say it's all software. That's just not how troubleshooting goes. Usually it's not all that complicated and is a lot more obvious than people want to think. Like 1G hard drives stuttering.... People don't understand that when we started building computers and file systems we didn't anticipate 1G space to be used as a whole for an OS. But either way, I'm saying if the code works for x scenario than I will work for any other scenario. Software is all math, and the math doesn't lie. So if you have only one changing variable and you get different results when that changes.... What does that show you? It's like programming html... EVERY browser interperts stuff slightly different, making universal web pages is a ****ing bitch. You have to code and test in 3 different browsers... Is the code wrong? No, because by different standards it's correct. That's just it though, universal 59.95 hz isn't a definite, hardware is known to fluctuate. So what if MS decided to change how things are being reported, they wanted to do a whole new re-write when they started vista. That means we might see more stuff like this in the future. With everything becomming more and more accurate I'm not suprised we see 59Hz being reported, hell I never knew they had options for offset hz back in the day until one day my linux reported 73hz and I was all WTF WTF WTF. I learned what was up and dealt with it.