O
OVS
Just for my benefit(to prove I'm not going MAD!) and also to hopefully
come across someone who has managed to sort this problem out, I have
decided to take photo's of the problem I am experiencing with my monitor
output.
The relevant parts of the PC are
Iiyama E431S TFT
Sapphire 9800 Pro
MSI K8N Neo
The problem is the image output on non-native resolutions. Everything is
fine and smoothing/scaling works wonderfully with *no* ATI drivers. As
soon as I install the required ATI driver, output is a mess.
This first picture is with no graphics driver installed(uninstalled all
instances of the ATI driver)
http://img71.exs.cx/img71/7591/nonATI2.jpg
Maybe not crystal clear as native. But still a surprisingly excellent
result.
This next photo is when I install an ATI driver (in this case Catalyst
4.9). I have tried different variations of these drivers with same results.
http://img71.exs.cx/img71/9900/ATI4.jpg
The photo doesn't do it justice, in actuality its completely unusable.
It doesn't make sense to me. How can the Windows XP default VGA adaptor
driver be able to output better than the ATI driver. You'd think ATI
would be able to implement a feature found on the most basic of drivers.
Anyway, thats the end of my story!
Thanks
come across someone who has managed to sort this problem out, I have
decided to take photo's of the problem I am experiencing with my monitor
output.
The relevant parts of the PC are
Iiyama E431S TFT
Sapphire 9800 Pro
MSI K8N Neo
The problem is the image output on non-native resolutions. Everything is
fine and smoothing/scaling works wonderfully with *no* ATI drivers. As
soon as I install the required ATI driver, output is a mess.
This first picture is with no graphics driver installed(uninstalled all
instances of the ATI driver)
http://img71.exs.cx/img71/7591/nonATI2.jpg
Maybe not crystal clear as native. But still a surprisingly excellent
result.
This next photo is when I install an ATI driver (in this case Catalyst
4.9). I have tried different variations of these drivers with same results.
http://img71.exs.cx/img71/9900/ATI4.jpg
The photo doesn't do it justice, in actuality its completely unusable.
It doesn't make sense to me. How can the Windows XP default VGA adaptor
driver be able to output better than the ATI driver. You'd think ATI
would be able to implement a feature found on the most basic of drivers.
Anyway, thats the end of my story!
Thanks