Originally Posted by Zero4549
Right right, but that "temporary burn in" is usually caused by either an improper signal being received, or because there is still a residual charge due to improper shutdown.
Now, the common variable as far as I can tell among people with bad "burn in" is they're all also getting monitor crashes due to overclocking.
It only makes sense that those crashes are happening at the controller level. If they were at the LCD level, you would have individual lines or pixels working while others weren't (or "normal" artifacting/scan lines), rather than entire panels crashing to black screens with sometimes some garbled static colors on some part of it.
If the pixels aren't being returned to their natural state (black) when the monitor gets shut off due to some issue at the controller level, which only occurs when overclocking, it stands to reason that the controller might be overheating due to pumping electrons through it at literally twice it's intended rate (that is, after all, what we are doing when we OC to 120hz).
At any rate, since you've already got yours open, if you could take some temps of the various chips at stock, and then at the highest overclock you can do stable, and see which ones heat up the most, that would be great. Also remember to account for ambient temps.
Stop talking out of your ass.
The burn in problem is in no way related to the PCB, it's tha panel itself. It also has nothing to do with overclocking.
I had burn in at 60 Hz and at 96 Hz. The Macbook Pro Retina screens have burn in aswell and the original Samsung one has aswell since it uses the same panel.
We're not pumping twice as many electrons through the monitor. The more current flows, the more electrons flow through the cable.
And increasing the frequency will most likely not increase the current, and if then only slightly.
The chip itself on the PCB is most likely running with it's own crystal on a fixed frequency and wont be influenced by a changed refresh rate.
Overclocking might make it hotter since it needs to process and send data to the panel more often but that is a minor change.
A heatsink wouldn't do a thing to overclocking, better isolation of the cables probably would.
Remember, you're overclocking the display and not the display PCB. You're just letting it display more frames in a second.
Please reread this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_persistence
And what do you mean about the display "crashing"? Do you mean that guy which got all these lines on his one?
That monitor probably didn't go into power saving mode and started displaying crap since it got no input signal.
I've never experienced this and I run mine at 96 Hz all the time.
The display controller doesn't have any problems in my eyes.
Oh and this panel doesn't use PWM light dimming for anyone interested.
Would be cool if this were a 10-bit panel, but you can't have everything.