# unsupported monitor refresh rates **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 10, 2003, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263 "2003-03-10T07:01:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/1 "2003-03-10T07:01:58Z")
What are the associated risks with running your monitor at a higher then spec refresh rate? I own a viewsonic g71f+ and run an odd screen size(1152x864). It runs supported refresh rates at max 75 hz, but I can tell it do 170hz and it seems to work fine. Ideally i’d want it to run about 100hz or so. So, what are the risks? ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/2 "2003-03-10T07:17:16Z")
Most modern monitors will simply go dark or give you a messed up display if the signal is out of sync range. Older monitors can be permanently damaged in some cases if an out of range signal is applied to them. ---
**Author:** ![pervertatoid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f07891/32.png) [@pervertatoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervertatoid)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/3 "2003-03-10T07:21:48Z")
The problem with the “supported” refresh rate is that usually the driver is written to support less than what the monitor can actually support. Especially when using “Default Monitor” or “Plug and Play” monitor, which are just generic monitor drivers…kinda like screen resolutions, too… I know my monitor and video card will both support 1600x1200, but if I try to use it, it gives me that crappy “Virtual Desktop”. Therefore, I’m stuck at 1280x1024. Just 'cause of the way the driver’s written. Doesn’t mean the monitor (or video card in my case) doesn’t ACTUALLY support it… ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/4 "2003-03-10T07:37:22Z")
Do I risk damage if the picture looks perfectly fine even at an "unsupported’ hz? whats virtual desktop? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/5 "2003-03-10T07:45:34Z")
It seems unlikely to me that a monitor at that res could even hope to run at 170 hz… perhaps your video card or monitor automatically downgrades the signal to it’s highest speed when it gets a rate that’s too high? ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/6 "2003-03-10T11:58:15Z")
Right on Senorbeef. I just checked using my monitor’s refresh detection. 65H, 75V. no matter what hz I set it at. Thanks. I guess I won’t be worrying about setting this refresh higher. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/7 "2003-03-10T12:31:49Z")
Well, you shouldn’t damage it with a newer monitor, but I wouldn’t recommend running it higher than it supports. You can probably find a list of supported refresh rates at various resolutions on viewsonic’s web site. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/8 "2003-03-10T13:52:01Z")
> [@](#): > > whats virtual desktop? The desktop is bigger then your monitor’s viewing area. To see whats off the screen you move the mouse off the screen and the desktop scrolls over so you can see it. You may be able to try it yourself by start\>control pannel\>display then look around maybe in advanced. Does anyone actually use virtual desktop? ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/9 "2003-03-10T14:00:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kanicbird \* > \*\*The desktop is bigger then your monitor’s viewing area. To see whats off the screen you move the mouse off the screen and the desktop scrolls over so you can see it. > > You may be able to try it yourself by start\>control pannel\>display then look around maybe in advanced. > > Does anyone actually use virtual desktop? \*\* Interesting, what OS is that on? I run XP pro I can’t seem to find that option, not that it really matters all that much for me(I run dual monitors). Still, it’d be interesting to try out. I can’t find it or find anything in Window’s Help on it. Anyone got a clue? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/10 "2003-03-10T14:08:02Z")
I have seen it on win 98 se and XP pro, perhaps even a mac but don’t remember for sure. but I think it a function of the video driver and not the OS. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2003, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/11 "2003-03-10T19:06:06Z")
If you Timbuktu into a computer that has a higher resolution on its primary monitor than you do, you’ll get the virtual desktop. At my former job I’d be upstairs at some internal client’s station and would Timbuktu into my own. Lots of secretary types were on old iMacs set to 800 x 600, and a few older 7200s were set to 640 x 480 even, and when my own 1152 x 870 screen would come up, I’d have to “swim” around in the “virtual desktop” window to get to the different menus and icons. Just night before last, my PowerBook under MacOS 9 somehow lost track of the display settings for the external monitor – it got the refresh rate wrong on the old 15" Sony Trinitron I had it hooked up to (therefore blank black monitor) PLUS it wrongly decided the Trinitron was my main screen! I’d unplug the CardBus card and it would revert to single-screen display on the PowerBook’s TFT screen, with all menus and dialog windows opening there, but then I could not set the correct parameters for the monitor that was no longer hooked to the computer. Reinsert card, computer says “aha, additional display” and would invoke the corrupted settings and the menu bar and dialog windows would be redirected to the blank Sony. I could launch the Monitors Control Panel but was unsuccessful fishing around in the dark with my cursor for the config window. (Changing the resolution on the TFT didn’t help, as it oh-so-cleverly repositions the other config window to keep it centered on the other display). So I had to write an AppleScript to coerce the main screen to a different setting. set s to item 1 of (screen list) set si to screen id of s set screens to {screen id:si, screen size:{832, 624}, color depth:32} (From there I could boost it back to 1024 x 768 with the correct refresh rate and arrange it where it belongs). ---
**Author:** ![pervertatoid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f07891/32.png) [@pervertatoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervertatoid)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2003, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unsupported-monitor-refresh-rates/160263/12 "2003-03-11T04:00:42Z")
Damn…my first hijack. 😉 But yeah, it’s written into the driver, not necessarily the OS. I’ve seen it on everything from Win95 to WinXP Pro (which is what I’ve got installed now) - it’s in the Radeon’s Catalyst driver. Somewhere, I need to find a driver that says my monitor supports more than 1280x1024. My eyesight’s not as good as it used to be, 'cause I’ve been using a larger resolution for about 3 years now. ☹