Poorfag here, I’m thinking about overclocking my ASUS VP239 1080p 60Hz to 70Hz or maybe even 75Hz. I’m just wondering if it’s retarded to do that since I risk damaging components and if there would be any real boost given to it. Any one ever mess with that kinda stuff on here?

60hz to 75hz is not noticeable at all and this will bust your warranty and massively reduce your monitor's lifespan

just buy a new monitor they're not that expensive

you can't do that

I got the thing back in 2017 so warranty is a non-issue here. And I assume with it being that old, upping the Hz past it's limit may fry it since it's already 5 years old. 

 

It's the buzzword for it, it's actually just making a custom screen resolution through Nvidia and specifying a refresh rate higher than stock.

it won't fry immediately but if you push it to its very limit (1hz below black screen) it's almost guaranteed to end up with fucked up colors, ghosting, color banding and all kinds of other things in less than a year

it's just not worth it for less than a 20% improvement

>it's just not worth it for less than a 20% improvement

30

>>93007218 (OP)

I have never had a monitor that I could actually overclock more than a few hz at absolute most. I'm talking 60 -> 63 hz or 165 -> 170. It's just not worth it. High refresh monitors have become so cheap that it's a complete waste of effort even if you could get some ridiculous 30hz+ overclock out of it, which you won't.

>>93007218 (OP)

dont listen to all the retards telling you that you'll fry your monitor. there's zero cases of LCD's getting fried from overclocking. You can use CRU to push the refresh rate, but if the monitor won't take it it'll just say "Resolution out of range"

From what I've seen on other sites, people seem to say 74Hz is the max, what margin of tolerance do you think I should put in place if I do it? Come to think of it said people claimed that at 72Hz even the screen got darker, that's alarming since I really like a bright ass screen and this one has very comfy whites right now. 

 

If it's 60 to 63 then I don't even really feel like attempting it.



So only prolonged use at the razor edge of that would likely be a risk huh? What about color quality etc?

no one's saying it will fry shit, much less at the exact moment you switch to a new frequency, it will just undeniably lessen your monitor's lifespan

even if it managed 75hz which is already pushing it you would only be able to tell the difference when your monitor shits the bed a year or so from now and ends up with fucked up colors and white noise solid colors

That nigger piss screen would suck even 120hz

>>93007218 (OP)

im busssssin

op, monitor overclocking is done by increasing the pixel clock

simply increasing the hz is not an overclock, that's you being a retard

>>93007218 (OP)

OP, why did you edit an image of an ejaculating black man onto the monitor?

>OP, why

you know why

>>93007218 (OP)

> doesn't want to waste money 

> overclocks monitor instead of buying a new one

>>93007218 (OP)



You don't need more than 60Hz.
