[GRLUG] Some pixel stuff.

[Bob Kline]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam at whitemice.org
> wrote:

> On Sat, 2012-11-24 at 15:03 -0500, Bob Kline wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Adam Tauno Williams
> > <awilliam at whitemice.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-11-24 at 13:24 -0500, Bob Kline wrote:
> > > Moving along, my desktop, an HP
> > > Pavilion a6750f, contains an ATI
> > > Radeon HD 3200 display card.  On
> > > a monitor capable of 2560x1600, I'm
> > > currently using the VGA output of the
> > > card to get 2048 x 1280.  Not chopped
>
>
> The **** "currently using the VGA output of the card" **** might be
> relevant.  If you connect the display to the GPU via DVI does it make a
> difference?
>

I have both video card outputs attached
to the monitor, and simply switch between
them using the monitor.

VGA works fine at the maximum 2048 x 1280 -
so says the manufacturer.  It's the DVI connection
that does not seem to hack it.


>
> > >You want your maximum accelerated display size to be larger than the
> > >one you are using.
>
> > Where does that get set?  The maximum
> > size shown in the "Size and Orientation"
> > window in "System Settings" is 2560 x 1600.
>
> That is a feature of the GPU (video card).  But it can also be part of
> how you are connecting the GPU to the display.  Display resolutions you
> are talking about possibly may be DVI only [otherwise you are talking
> about WQXGA and higher - which I've been told by others can be dicey,
> that is really at the edge of the hardware.  I've never dealt with them
> myself].
>
>
> OK, the monitor claims the resolution
on the DVI connection is much lower
than the VGA connection.  Again,
"960x1200."  The numbers make no
obvious sense.  I can twiddle the
display settings until the display looks
OK, and the display size will be in that
range.

   -- Bob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shinobu.grlug.org/pipermail/grlug/attachments/20121124/4e0e0b7b/attachment.html>