Paul wrote:
> Grinder wrote:
>> Keith W wrote:
>>> "Grinder" <grinder@no.spam.maam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:z9X6k.217613$yE1.154032@attbi_s21...
>>>> Grinder wrote:
>>>>> Keith W wrote:
>>>>>> Along with my normal PC I have a second elderly one that is used
>>>>>> for back ups and general messing about. They share keyboard,
>>>>>> mouse and widescreen monitor via a KVM switch. The second
>>>>>> machine is a Pentium 3 (500mhz) with an Intel 810 mobo and an ATI
>>>>>> Rage Pro Turbo PCI graphics card. I have Windows XP Pro
>>>>>> installed and the latest drivers for the card from the ATI
>>>>>> website. However, it cannot produce the 1440x900 resolution that
>>>>>> the mintor requires and I am having to make do with 1280x1024
>>>>>> which reduces picture quality somewhat but I had accepted that,
>>>>>> because of the age of the machine, it was all I could get and I
>>>>>> cannot justify buying a new card. Now however, I have just made
>>>>>> it dual boot by installing xubuntu and amazingly that has
>>>>>> identified the monitor size and is producing 1440x900 through the
>>>>>> same mobo and graphics card.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My question is, now that I know Linux can do it, how can I
>>>>>> accomplish it in Windows? I have tried Powerstrip but that gives
>>>>>> the same results as before, i.e. 1280x1024.
>>>>> You added a custom resolution? I would have thought that would
>>>>> work. It has for me, several times, but it's only diagnostic as I'm
>>>>> too cheap to shell out $30 for the benefit. There is an earlier
>>>>> version kept on the site because some of the older video cards are
>>>>> no longer supported. You might try that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Check out Tip #4 on this list:
>>>>> http://www.onlinesoftwareguide.com/0606xptips.html
>>>>>
>>>>> That looks a bit promising to me so I think I'll try to make that
>>>>> final tweak on my neighbor's setup. I'll let you know how it turns
>>>>> out.
>>>> Ok, I tried the tip and it didn't work. The registry just got
>>>> changed back on restart.
>>>>
>>>> I installed Powerstrip, and had mixed results. Creating and
>>>> installing a custom monitor inf did get the stated maximum (optimal)
>>>> resolution to show up in my options. I was, however, able to add
>>>> that resolution within Powerstrip, and it worked after a restart.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I tried Powerstrip, which has worked for me on other PCs but in this
>>> instant the vertical and horizontal settings are locked and just beep
>>> when I try to change them. I will download the earlier one that you
>>> mention and try that.
>>
>> Ok, for what it's worth, I have a Windows 98 SE system around here
>> that has an 8MB ATI 3D Rage Pro AGP in it, and I've hooked it up to a
>> 1440x900 LCD monitor.
>>
>> 1) Windows 98 does not offer the native resolution for selection.
>>
>> 2) Powerstrip 2.78 complains that what I want to do is
>> "not supported" when I try to set the resolution
>>
>> 3) Powerstrip 3.78 allows me to add a custom resolution
>> without complaint, but bitches on restart. The new
>> resolution has not been added.
>>
>> 4) Xubuntu 7.10 can display 1440x900 with no problems.
>
> I don't think this is important, but what color depth is being used ?
>
> X Windows is flexible, and I spent more of my life staring at an
> 8 bit color depth, than any other. Maybe your Xubuntu test case
> is not in 32 bit color depth, but one of the lesser options ?
>
> Some of the old video cards, offered their top resolutions in
> a reduced color depth.

I think there's enough memory to go around. I'm not certain of this,
but I've noticed on several occasions that you can predict resolution
and bit depths from a simple calculation:

For a 1MB video card:

640 x 480 x 3 Bpp (24 bpp) = 921600 B <= 1MB
800 x 600 x 2 Bpp (16 bpp) = 960000 B <= 1MB
1024 x 768 x 1 Bpp (8 bpp) = 786432 B <= 1MB
1152 x 864 x 1 Bpp (8 bpp) = 995328 B <= 1MB

I don't recall that 4-bit color can count as 0.5 Bpp.

By the time you get to 8MB you've got enough to run 1600 x 1200 x 32
bpp. It seems almost to simplistic to be true, but I've yet to see the
rule violated.

In this situation, we're both using ATI 3D Rage Pros, which run a
minimum of 8MB.

1440 x 900 x 4 Bpp (32 bpp) = 5184000 B <= 8MB