Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!usc!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd!hplsla!kens
From: kens@hplsla.HP.COM (Ken Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Non-interlaced v. Interlaced SVGA monitors
Message-ID: <13000006@hplsla.HP.COM>
Date: 16 Jan 91 21:49:06 GMT
References: <1991Jan11.175216.44245@vaxb.acs.unt.edu>
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Lines: 14

/ acook@athena.mit.edu (Andrew R Cook) writes:

> Interlacing scans every other line per screen refresh.  This leads to
> perceptible flicker on monitors with short lifetime phosphors.  This can
> cause your eye to try to follow the flicker, which causes eye-strain
> (eye is trying o keep up with the flicker; which is at about 30 Hz for
> interlaced 1024x768, ie 1/2 the vertical refresh frequency).  Interlacing
> can also lead to dimmer screens, since the pixels are refreshed 1/2 as often.

   The ATI VGA1024 card's solution to interlacing the 1024x768 mode is to
move the refresh rate to 87 Hz.  This solves both the flicker and brightness
problems (to my eyes) very nicely on a NEC 3D.

Ken