[S.u.S.E. Linux] video modes
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024. I dual boot, and this is this case in both os'es, so it isn't an x issue. I'm just curious, is my graphics card or my monitor more likely to be the culprit? I get outstanding image quality at 800x600, but at 1024x768 I get the wavy effect from too low a refresh rate. I would hate to buy one of the new matrox g200 cards about to be released if it turns out my monitor is the problem. Thanks in advance. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
i don't know for certain, but perhaps you have to adjust the card manually? just an idea Michael Lankton wrote:
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024. I dual boot, and this is this case in both os'es, so it isn't an x issue. I'm just curious, is my graphics card or my monitor more likely to be the culprit? I get outstanding image quality at 800x600, but at 1024x768 I get the wavy effect from too low a refresh rate. I would hate to buy one of the new matrox g200 cards about to be released if it turns out my monitor is the problem. Thanks in advance. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
--
Aaron Seelye
Aaron Seelye
i don't know for certain, but perhaps you have to adjust the card manually? just an idea
Michael Lankton wrote:
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024. I dual boot, and this is this case in both os'es, so it isn't an x issue. I'm just curious, is my graphics card or my monitor more likely to be the culprit? I get outstanding image quality at 800x600, but at 1024x768 I get the wavy effect from too low a refresh rate. I would hate to buy one of the new matrox g200 cards about to be released if it turns out my monitor is the problem. Thanks in advance. -
Chip Set (speed), Video memory, and the monitor's capabilities. Of course a Matrox Millenium G200 w/8megs will push your monitor's capabilities, as with AccelX, it will do 1920x1440 . I'd try a different card to narrow it down, or the other option, a different monitor, and eliminate one or the other. Best Regards -Dee W.D.McKinney (Dee) -=- deem@wdm.com No claim to fame, just saved by Grace. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Michael Lankton wrote:
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024. I dual boot, and this is this case in both os'es, so it isn't an x issue. I'm just curious, is my graphics card or my monitor more likely to be the culprit? I get outstanding image quality at 800x600, but at 1024x768 I get the wavy effect from too low a refresh rate. I would hate to buy one of the new matrox g200 cards about to be released if it turns out my monitor is the problem. Thanks in advance.
Mike, what card do you presently have? Fred -- Fred A. Miller, Systems Administrator Cornell Univ. Press Services fmiller@lightlink.com fm@cupserv.org -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Hi! Trying to kill the keyboard, satan@nfinity.com produced:
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024.
While setting up the X Window System, did you correctly specify the min and max horizontal and vertical frequencies your monitor will accept? If not, you stumbled over a safety feature in XFree86 --- it will not let you use frequencies you did not allow as OK, so your monitor won't be fried (worst case). Oh, you can also play with xvidtune to move/resize the screen ... -Wolfgang -- PGP 2 welcome: Mail me, subject "send PGP-key". If you've nothing at all to hide, you must be boring. Unsolicited Bulk E-Mails: *You* pay for ads you never wanted. Is our economy _so_ weak we have to tolerate SPAMMERS? I guess not. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Yeah, everything I fed XF86Setup was straight from my monitor's manual. Both os'es I run exhibit the same behavior, which I don't get , because I have perfect image quality at 800x600, but not at anything higher. Surely there are people with s3 virge based cards that are running high res successfully, is it my monitor perhaps? Both items are only a year old. Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
Hi!
Trying to kill the keyboard, satan@nfinity.com produced:
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024.
While setting up the X Window System, did you correctly specify the min and max horizontal and vertical frequencies your monitor will accept? If not, you stumbled over a safety feature in XFree86 --- it will not let you use frequencies you did not allow as OK, so your monitor won't be fried (worst case).
Oh, you can also play with xvidtune to move/resize the screen ...
-Wolfgang
-- PGP 2 welcome: Mail me, subject "send PGP-key". If you've nothing at all to hide, you must be boring. Unsolicited Bulk E-Mails: *You* pay for ads you never wanted. Is our economy _so_ weak we have to tolerate SPAMMERS? I guess not. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- _____ .-'WWWWW'L. WindowMaker.... .'WWWWWWWWWWWW.__ /WWWWWWW| \W| The choice of ;WWWWWWWW| ;| a GNU generation. |WWWWWWWW| || ;WWW| ;| ===================================== \WW| /W| |Michael Lankton, satan@nfinity.com | __'W| .'WW| | University of Nebraska-Omaha CIST | |WWWWW-._____._WWWWW| ===================================== -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Hi!
Trying to kill the keyboard, satan@nfinity.com produced:
horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are
Trying to kill the keyboard, satan@nfinity.com produced:
Yeah, everything I fed XF86Setup was straight from my monitor's manual. Both os'es I run exhibit the same behavior, which I don't get , because I have perfect image quality at 800x600, but not at anything higher. Surely there are people with s3 virge based cards that are running high res successfully, is it my monitor perhaps? Both items are only a year old.
Aaahhh ... s3 virge != s3 The virge even has a different server, and my s3 (non-virge) card runs happily 1280x1024 on my 17" (80 Hz). So what refresh rate (and horizontal sync) does xvidtune tell you do you have (both on 800x600 and on other modi)? Different people are different perceptive to flicker, so we need raw numbers ... and you may wish to construct a custom modline with a different Pixel Clock if the normal ones don't cut it. The XFree86-Video-Timings-HOWTO provides more info. Also it might be a marginal monitor cable which dies (more or less) after certain frequencies. Maybe one could borrow another card/monitor and test if the image enhances. -Wolfgang -- PGP 2 welcome: Mail me, subject "send PGP-key". If you've nothing at all to hide, you must be boring. Unsolicited Bulk E-Mails: *You* pay for ads you never wanted. Is our economy _so_ weak we have to tolerate SPAMMERS? I guess not. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
At 01:15 AM 98/06/14 -0500, you wrote:
As long as we're on the subject, anything over 800x600 and I get a horrid refresh rate. Both my card (s3) and my monitor (ADI 5AP 17") are capable of doing better at up to 1280x1024. I dual boot, and this is this case in both os'es, so it isn't an x issue. I'm just curious, is my graphics card or my monitor more likely to be the culprit? I get outstanding image quality at 800x600, but at 1024x768 I get the wavy effect from too low a refresh rate. I would hate to buy one of the new matrox g200 cards about to be released if it turns out my monitor is the problem. Thanks in advance.
Mike, Low refresh rate will manifest in flicker. The wavy effect is called moire and unless your monitor has adjustments for it, you are out of luck. I too, have dual boot machine with a STB Velocity 128 AGP card and Viewsonice P810 monitor. Under Win95 the display is fine right upto 1600x1200 @76Hz. Unfortunately, under X windows I have not had much luck. There is visible moire and the moire control is only effective for minor adjustments (too much correction results in out of focus text). The display is jerky (sideways) in all the popular modes 800x600 -> 1280x1204. I am using the latest XF86_SVGA server and have configured it using SuSE's xf86config. Yes, I have read the README.RIVA128 and made all the adjustments it mentions and verified no IRQ conflict. Let us know if you make any progress. -- Arun Khan -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
participants (6)
-
arunkhan＠xnet.com -
deem＠wdm.com -
fm＠lightlink.com -
roberto＠cbvcp.com -
satan＠nfinity.com -
weissel＠jupiter.ph-cip.uni-koeln.de