CRT Resolution Trouble

[~misfit~]

Was a bit tired after shoveling out the 3rd house. From the KB
article at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865, yep, I got it
wrong. The memory spec was for system RAM, not video RAM.

Thought so. Wasn't getting at you, just correcting for the lurkers. ;-)

The Dell
Dimension 8300 (what the OP says his friend has) looks to have out
around 2003. At that time, 128MB was mainstream (at a price point in
the cost curve that made for an attractive purchase and not at the
high cost of the bleeding edge). I got an ATI 9600 128MB back then
because the price was doable. I don't buy high-cost bleeding edge
stuff.

Same here mate. However, when XP came out (in 2001?) 128MB VRAM was
cutting-edge. 64MB was more common and a lot of systems were still using
32MB or even less.

The VRAM really isn't much of an issue with the OS but more with the
apps the user wants to run (which usually ends up being games pushing
users to get more VRAM, more pipelines, later DirectX and Shader
version support, and a better GPU).

The OP reports his friend solved the problem by installing a
different video card. Probably what happened is the friend also
installed a video driver for that card which doesn't use a screen
resolution or frequency that isn't supported by the
so-far-unidentified monitor. Problem might've gone away by
installing the .inf file that defines the monitor or by going to a
newer or older video driver for the original video card that was
inside the friend's computer.

Yup.
--
Cheers,
Shaun.

"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.

 

[~misfit~]

I suspect the video card was actually an FX5200.

I wondered that too. I'm not that 'up with the play' since my friends grew
up a bit and stopped needing me to build them gaming machines and I've gone
to laptops myself. However I've not heard of a 'FX3200'.

At one
point the nVidia driver probably did't support such (at the
time) unusual resolutions and didn't have custom resolution
settings, so the prior advice some gave to get the most up
to date nVidia driver should suffice.

I think it's fair to assume the system owner isn't much of a
gamer, or at least not anything that was modern within the
last several years if still using an FX5200.

Agreed. It was a small step above on-board graphics at best.
--
Cheers,
Shaun.

"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.

 

[Jon Danniken]

Yeah, you're right. As I was writing my post I had a vague
recollection of such a beast (the Sony) that I'd seen in a magazine's
'new and extremely expensive' section. I never did see one in a store
and have never heard of one in use though.

Aye, they were mainly for workstation graphics. Don't think many at the
consumer level looked at them as an affordable option (they still ain't!).

The only reason that monitors for computer use (as opposed to
multimedia use) have gone widescreen is because the most common and
cheapest technology for making them, twisted nematic (TN) LCDs have
dismal vertical viewing angles. Changing your viewing angle by 10
degrees can change colours so having a 'tall' monitor really shows it
up. Form a normal viewing position the angle from top to bottom may
differ by 10 degrees. Consequently, to get more screen real estate
the answer was to go shorter and wider (which also fitted in with TV
trends).
Seriously, for most computer work having a 4:3 screen is far better
than a widescreen. With widescreen you're forever scrolling and a lot
of apps (and websites) don't stretch all the way to the sides of the
monitor anyway. I wouldn't swap my (laptop's) 4:3 ratio 15" 1400 x
1050 IPS (not TN) screen for anything. (At least not in a 15" size).
Also, if I ever see a ~22" 4:3 1600 x 1200 LCD for sale second-hand,
preferably IPS, in good condition at the right price I'll be buying
it straight away (a mate has a couple, they're great).

I'll avoid the widescreen trend for as long as I reasonably can.

I agree with you on that; the only reason I have a widescreen now is that
they are common, so the price is actually cheaper than looking for a more
square version. Mind you, I also play games, which makes use of the width
and it's nice in photoshop because you can have a chunk of screen left over
for your palettes and such.

Jon

 

[~misfit~]

Aye, they were mainly for workstation graphics. Don't think many at
the consumer level looked at them as an affordable option (they still
ain't!).

Hmm, yeah, I figured that from the price and the blurb. Damn expensive!

They must have been really rare though, I'm on a lot of mailing lists for
clearance / auction houses that specialise in IT gear as well as a couple
outfits that deal with ex-lease stuff. I get screeds of lists a week and
I've never seen one.

I agree with you on that; the only reason I have a widescreen now is
that they are common, so the price is actually cheaper than looking
for a more square version.

Way cheaper, more's the pity. :-(

Mind you, I also play games, which makes
use of the width and it's nice in photoshop because you can have a
chunk of screen left over for your palettes and such.

I play a couple games too but they're older ones that don't / can't use
widescreen. It just deforms the characters / maps.

Good point about photoshop though, I don't use it (probably like 95% of
users out there who have widescreens) so hadn't thought about that.
--
Cheers,
Shaun.

"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.

 

[Jon Danniken]

I play a couple games too but they're older ones that don't / can't
use widescreen. It just deforms the characters / maps.

And it'll give you a headache, too!

My monitor has the feature which, by pressing a few butons on the monitor
body, provides a 4:3 ratio screen (vertical letterbox on either side). Some
other monitors I have seen will automatically detect a 4:3 input and adjust
themselves automatically.

I wouldn't have purchased this monitor if it didn't have that feature (I
still play an older game that likes to be 4:3).

There are also ways to trick some older/non-widescreen games into get along
with wide screens through custom resolutions and such; here is a site I had
bookmarked with that information:

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/Essential_Games_List

Jon

 

[~misfit~]

And it'll give you a headache, too!

My monitor has the feature which, by pressing a few butons on the
monitor body, provides a 4:3 ratio screen (vertical letterbox on
either side). Some other monitors I have seen will automatically
detect a 4:3 input and adjust themselves automatically.

I wouldn't have purchased this monitor if it didn't have that feature
(I still play an older game that likes to be 4:3).

There are also ways to trick some older/non-widescreen games into get
along with wide screens through custom resolutions and such; here is
a site I had bookmarked with that information:

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/Essential_Games_List

Thanks for that Jon. However, I'll be sticking with 4:3 ratio monitors for
as long as I possibly can.