Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › [Official] The Qnix/X-Star 1440p Monitor Club
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] The Qnix/X-Star 1440p Monitor Club - Page 761

post #7601 of 25893
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaolin95 View Post

I think the problem is, we all have different experiences so I cannot call a SCAM something without evidence.
The one I bought was perfect , and the email chats I exchanged were very clear before I purchased, plus I only paid $10 extra for it.
So I can only speak for my personal experience with overclockmonitors.com. Since I was not there, nor were you, I cannot tell they did or did not do check it.

Regards

First hand accounts do not discount this argument. That is like saying dinos didn't exist since you were not there or this guy cannot be proven to have done the theft since no-one was there to see it. We have evidence and it is called ample inconsistencies which you just pointed out in your comment. If someone claims something and is wrong even close to HALF the time(even 25% would be good enough for a scam in my opinion) then it is a complete fictional statement based on luck. 50% is not even good odds really when talking about buying a new product. I can tell you what it would be good odds in GAMBLING. Which is all the Perfect Pixel really is.

And this is not just from my personal experience. I have been in this thread since it was started and have seen most(almost all) the reports here and in the sister thread(plus hardforums thread). Our abundant reports ARE evidence. If you want to toss $10 into the fire thats fine but everyone needs to be well informed that this by definition, evidence and through reported chats with seller IS a scam.

EDIT: The supermarket sells what they call is a "perfect" 12 pack of soda but about half of these "perfect" packs of soda have busted cans that leaked everywhere. Don't you think it is appropriate to call it a SCAM? I mean what exactly are the standards here? Can they be wrong 70% of the time before it can be declared a scam?
Edited by Spartan F8 - 10/1/13 at 1:54pm
post #7602 of 25893
well I did not "throw" it as I did get what I asked and payed for.
I am also referring to the experience with the vendor I chose. So just because others dont test does not mean they all do the same thing. That is the problem. You determined that if these dont do it, then nobody does. That makes no sense.
post #7603 of 25893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coree View Post

I've been battling this image retention issue for 5 weeks now. I even left my monitor OFF for 2½ weeks, because my backup system had a 5450 and for some reason it didn't work on the QX2710, soI used a old 19'' Dell. My last chance is just to lower the pixel clock lower than on stock. Atm is at 59Hz and pixel clock at 226 Mhz. Could underclocking help the issue? Also, can the stock cable be the issue? I allways get the Mozilla Firefox's search bar and magnifying glass visible on the top right corner. But this image retention comes and then fades away. Seems like it's very prone to static images. Any of you guys faced the same issue that I have?

No, I've not seen this issue at all. frown.gif
post #7604 of 25893
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaolin95 View Post

well I did not "throw" it as I did get what I asked and payed for.
I am also referring to the experience with the vendor I chose. So just because others dont test does not mean they all do the same thing. That is the problem. You determined that if these dont do it, then nobody does. That makes no sense.

No i would say that the evidence points to making the assumption they are not going to check it until proven otherwise. Like making the seller send you a personal picture of your monitor on before shipment with no dead pixels. Overall this is known to be a scam and yes there is a possibility that some sellers may actually check(even though some have said so and been proven to be liars) but this would not in any way completely discredit the consensus as a whole.

I mean sure there are some dark, gloomy scary alleys that may be perfectly safe to walk down but the general consensus if to still be careful and make sure. thumb.gif
post #7605 of 25893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Net200777 View Post

That's the problem. Open up Nvidia CP. Go to custom resolution, set a new res with the refresh you want as well as 32 bit color. Go back and apply it. You then should be good to go.

nah, same thing happened with nvcp.
Bladestorm Z
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 5ghz [1.4v] MSI Z77 MPOWER MSI GeForce GTX 1070 @ +225/+450 Corsair Dominator Platinum 16GB @ 2200mhz [1.5v] 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 SSD Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Professional x64 2x Debezeled QNIX QX2710 [77hz] 
PowerCase
Corsair AX860i Corsair 600T SE 
  hide details  
Reply
Bladestorm Z
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k @ 5ghz [1.4v] MSI Z77 MPOWER MSI GeForce GTX 1070 @ +225/+450 Corsair Dominator Platinum 16GB @ 2200mhz [1.5v] 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 SSD Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Professional x64 2x Debezeled QNIX QX2710 [77hz] 
PowerCase
Corsair AX860i Corsair 600T SE 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7606 of 25893
OK i opened it up and added about 5 layers of tape but it didnt do the trick, then i added some pressure to the bleedding area and a little better.. so i tried the opposite way and gave it some pressure from the back and bleed disappeared!, now the only problem is to get the mainframe on biggrin.gif
post #7607 of 25893
Did anyone use the nvlddmkm-patcher-1.2.2.zip lately? The last one I used was 1.2.

The reason I'm asking is because I went to help my buddy install and overclock his new Qnix and he has Norton installed. Norton wouldn't allow us to install the patcher because it said it was a "ws.trojan.h" . We made the exception and everything worked great after that.. Im assuming it's a false positive because its touching sensitive files but has anyone else gotten that Trojan message? I downloaded it from http://www.monitortests.com/forum/Thread-NVIDIA-Pixel-Clock-Patcher . Thanks!
post #7608 of 25893
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaolin95 View Post

I think the problem is, we all have different experiences so I cannot call a SCAM something without evidence.
The one I bought was perfect , and the email chats I exchanged were very clear before I purchased, plus I only paid $10 extra for it.
So I can only speak for my personal experience with overclockmonitors.com. Since I was not there, nor were you, I cannot tell they did or did not check it.

Regards

The issue is not so much that you got a "Perfect pixel" monitor by paying for it, but rather... would you have gotten the very same monitor, and not have paid extra for the "perfect pixel" guarantee? The numbers we've gathered so far point to the conclusion that while many people get pixel perfect monitors when they pay for them, many people also get pixel perfect monitors - without paying for it.

So what then, did you really pay for? Did you pay for them to check it? (I doubt they did, but I will not say they didn't, because they might have, even though there's zero business sense in doing so) Did you pay for a "better" monitor? Not really, as "pixel perfect" covers a very narrow spectrum of pixel defects, of which many other defects are possible (or even more likely!) Did you pay for better warranty protection? Not really, since it seems one common mode of dealing with a bright pixel defect is simply to refund the difference - ie, you paid extra for the privelege of winning the panel lottery when, in all likelihood, you would've gotten the same panel without paying extra. Are you paying for peace of mind? Well, no argument there. Too bad more than a few have found that their "peace of mind" investment proved to be nothing of the sort.
post #7609 of 25893
How is this still even being debated? Read through this thread and it is obvious. If you think some korean ebay seller is going to sift through their stock for an additional $20 you are dreaming. The manufacturer does not make a "pixel perfect" monitor, therefore it cannot be sold.

Im impressed that this scam still works on people. if I ever found a product that had say a 20%+ of being defective, I would claim to sell a "perfect" version for a higher rate. Then if the customer ends up getting a defective one, refund the additional cost. The ones that get a "perfect" one encourage others to pay the extra fee, and the ones who get the refund feel like they were compensated for the trouble. Pure genius! thumb.gif
post #7610 of 25893
Quote:
Originally Posted by junkrok View Post

How is this still even being debated? Read through this thread and it is obvious. If you think some korean ebay seller is going to sift through their stock for an additional $20 you are dreaming. The manufacturer does not make a "pixel perfect" monitor, therefore it cannot be sold.

Im impressed that this scam still works on people. if I ever found a product that had say a 20%+ of being defective, I would claim to sell a "perfect" version for a higher rate. Then if the customer ends up getting a defective one, refund the additional cost. The ones that get a "perfect" one encourage others to pay the extra fee, and the ones who get the refund feel like they were compensated for the trouble. Pure genius! thumb.gif

I specifically made sure to get a PP policy where you don't get a refund if there are issues. The ones where you do are scams, the ones where you don't aren't. That said the sellers will try and scam you if it isn't PP by offering refunds, and some even just ignore you.

So PP isn't a scam, so long as you know what to look for and don't let them give you a partial refund in the case of a bad monitor.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Monitors and Displays
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › [Official] The Qnix/X-Star 1440p Monitor Club