Search Results

Search found 21327 results on 854 pages for 'display resolution'.

Page 2/854 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Display not using xorg.conf?

    - by mark kirby
    How can I force my PC to use the xorg.conf file ? I have it set up correctly and it is located at etc/x11/xorg.conf but it is ignored by at start up, I know the file is valid as I created it using nvidia-settings. I just do not know why it is been ignored. Thanks for any help Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "Layout0" Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer" Option "Xinerama" "0" EndSection Section "Files" EndSection Section "InputDevice" # generated from default Identifier "Mouse0" Driver "mouse" Option "Protocol" "auto" Option "Device" "/dev/psaux" Option "Emulate3Buttons" "no" Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5" EndSection Section "InputDevice" # generated from default Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" EndSection Section "Monitor" # HorizSync source: edid, VertRefresh source: edid Identifier "Monitor0" VendorName "Unknown" ModelName "Vestel 40 FHD_LCD-TV" HorizSync 15.0 - 46.0 VertRefresh 49.0 - 61.0 Option "DPMS" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Device0" Driver "nvidia" VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation" BoardName "GeForce GTX 650" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Device0" Monitor "Monitor0" DefaultDepth 24 Option "Stereo" "0" Option "nvidiaXineramaInfoOrder" "DFP-0" Option "metamodes" "1920x1080_60 +0+0" Option "SLI" "Off" Option "MultiGPU" "Off" Option "BaseMosaic" "off" SubSection "Display" Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection

    Read the article

  • Setting Screen Resolution for Extended Display on Windows 8

    - by ptamzz
    I'm using a Dell Inspiron laptop with Windows 8 Developers Preview. I've connected a second screen (some Dell 22 inch one) and have been using it with 'Extend these displays' options in the Screen Resolution settings. It use to be all fine but yesterday I changed my VGA cable to the 2nd monitor and since then the resolution of the 2nd monitor is not setting properly. Earlier, while auto detecting the monitor, the right resolution use to appear but now, as you can see from the attached image, none of the resolution in the drop down fits with the right proportion. So how do I set the right screen resolution. (I think the right one is 1680 x 1050 which is not there in the list)

    Read the article

  • How can I set the display resolution to 800x480?

    - by Oswaldo Barceló
    I have just installed Ubuntu 12.04 and I have a problem with it. My mini-laptop has a display resolution of 800x480, however Ubuntu seems to support only a resolution of 800x600. I have looked for a solution, but I have found nothing which works. So, how can I set the display resolution to 800x480? hey, hola a todos! Acabo de instalar Ubuntu 12.04 y en verdad me gusta mucho. pero aunque me guste bastante, tengo un pequeño gran problema, LA RESOLUCION DE MI PANTALLA!!! mi mini-laptop tiene una resolución de 800x480, pero Ubuntu viene con una por defecto de 800x600. en verdad me gustaria que me pudieran ayudar. llevo rato buscando una solucion, pero NADA!!! espero que me puedan ayudar!!! gracias de antemano!!! SALUDOS

    Read the article

  • Display resolution in duplicate monitor

    - by Taher
    I use duplicate one monitor laptop LCD and other monitor that monitor resolution is bigger than laptop LCD how can i set laptop LCD resolution for them? when i use mirror button it set 1024 * 768 but my laptop LCD resolution is 1366 * 768 how can i set this resolution for them? because when i set this resolution i get error. My laptop is hp dv6 6080 and vga is intel sandy bridge if i change to AMD vga can i resolve this problem?

    Read the article

  • high resolution on small screen size

    - by vishesh
    I have recently got an intel ultrabook,but its screen size is 13.3' and the native resolution is 1600X900.So the problem is that the letters that appear on screen are very small.Reducing resolution blurs the display and making everything bigger also doesn't feel very good.is there a way to get around this problem without changing hardware. I am even ok with this high resolution but I am concerned about the harmful effects it might have on my eyes in long term. Any advice will be very useful.Please help

    Read the article

  • Viewsonic VG2427wm detected max resolution too low

    - by Hassan
    So I have a Viewsonic VG2427wm, which supports max resolution of 1920x1080 and I had it working at this resolution from both windows and linux PCs. Now, I need to connect it to my Dell XPS17 (L702x), which has only DP mini and HDMI, so I'm trying to connect this monitor via HDMI-to-DVI adapter (doesn't work at all) and via DP-mini-to-DVI adapter. The later works, but is limiting my max resolution to 1680x1050. Using same two adapters to connect my dell monitor works fine, so I don't suspect any of the adapters to be faulty. The driver is the latest viewsonic driver (although it's been last updated 3 years back). Any ideas, how I can force it to display it's correct native resolution?

    Read the article

  • Display is slightly blurry on (native) 1920x1080 resolution

    - by Martin Tuskevicius
    I have a computer monitor that is approximately 23" in size. Its native resolution is 1920x1080, and Windows 7 will not allow it to be any higher. However, I cannot make the resolution a little lower as well. When I right-click on my desktop and select 'Screen resolution,' the vertical slider has only two options: 1920x1080 and 1280x720. There are no real problems that I am having besides the fact that the image is slightly blurry. I can easily make things out and see them, but I definitely feel that the image is not as clear as it could be. My graphics card is ATI Radeon HD 5450 and it has the latest graphics drivers installed. I've tried playing around with the AMD VISION Engine Control Center to see if I can change an option to make the image clearer, but I had no luck. I did find one odd thing, though. When I lowered the refresh rate from 60Hz to 50Hz, the image kind of "zoomed in" but it also became perfectly clear like I would expect it to look. The problem is that when I use 50Hz, the image zooms in a little on the center and I lose maybe an inch and a half of the screen (I do not see the bar at the top of applications, I do not see the Windows taskbar thing, etc). I figured if I could somehow zoom in so that the entire image fills the screen (not the slightly cropped version) then I would have the perfectly crisp image of 50Hz, and also the uncropped image of 60Hz. However, upon zooming in, the image began to look blurry again just like it did with 60Hz. So I am at a loss here. I do not know how to make the image look as clear as it should. I have the latest drivers (I updated them today) and I know that my monitor supports the resolution that I am trying to use. Has anybody experienced something like this before? I'd really appreciate any input - thanks! Update: I have figured out how to make the display look crisp! I set it to the 50Hz option, and then I changed the scaling through the monitor itself, rather than software. Now, however, I am finding that games look pretty bad because since it is clear, the lower quality really becomes apparent. I cannot run new games at 1080p, so I run them at the lowest resolution possible (1280x720, since it is the only other option offered, as I have mentioned). So I am wondering, is there a way to have Windows display more resolution options?

    Read the article

  • Making a 2D game with responsive resolution

    - by alexandervrs
    I am making a 2D game, however I wish for it to be resolution agnostic. My target resolution i.e. where things look as intended is 1600 x 900. My ideas are: Make the HUD stay fixed to the sides no matter what resolution, use different size for HUD graphics under a certain resolution and another under a certain large one. Use large HD PNG sprites/backgrounds which are a power of 2, so they scale nicely. No vectors. Use the player's native resolution. Scale the game area (not the HUD) to fit (resulting zooming in some and cropping the game area sides if necessary for widescreen, no stretch), but always fill the screen. Have a min and max resolution limit for small and very large displays where you will just change the resolution(?) or scale up/down to fit. What I am a bit confused though is what math formula I would use to scale the game area correctly based on the resolution no matter the aspect ratio, fully fit in a square screen and with some clip to the sides for widescreen. Pseudocode would help as well. :)

    Read the article

  • Making a game with responsive resolution

    - by alexandervrs
    I am making a game, however I wish for it to be resolution agnostic. My target resolution i.e. where things look as intended is 1600 x 900. My ideas are: Make the HUD stay fixed to the sides no matter what resolution, use different size for HUD graphics under a certain resolution and another under a certain large one. Use large HD sprites/backgrounds which are a power of 2, so they scale nicely. Use the player's native resolution. Scale the game area (not the HUD) to fit (resulting zooming in some and cropping the game area sides if necessary for widescreen, no stretch), but always fill the screen. Have a min and max resolution limit for small and very large displays where you will just change the resolution(?) or scale up/down to fit. What I am a bit confused though is what math formula I would use to scale the game area correctly based on the resolution no matter the aspect ratio, fully fit in a square screen and with some clip to the sides for widescreen. Pseudocode would help as well. :)

    Read the article

  • Adjust resolution in xfce4 virtualbox guest guest

    - by David
    I have Virtualbox 4.1.2_ubuntur3859 installed on an Ubuntu 11.10 host, running a guest ubuntu server 10.04 with xfce4 and xorg installed with no-install-recommends. I have installed guest additions, but the maximum resolution in the display settings is 800x600. I have read related questions: How to change resolution of the VirtualBox (Ubuntu guest and host)? Higher screen resolution in VirtualBox? upgrading VirtualBox 3.2.10 breaks my guest Ubuntu screen resolution Ubuntu as guest OS (with Vista host) stuck at 800x600 resolution but none contain the solution to my issue. Am I missing any particular packages that would allow me to change resolution? I would like to keep the machine as small as possible.

    Read the article

  • How do I change local display resolution via SSH?

    - by krumble1
    I have a machine running Ubuntu Server 12.04 LTS and I'm having problems with the local monitor. The Dell flat panel I'm using only displays this message while the computer running: "Cannot Display This Video Mode" and then the information: "Optimum resolution 1280x1024 60Hz". I'm fairly new to using an operating system wholly via command line but I'm learning fast. :) I can access the server fine via SSH so using it is not a problem. However, for where it is positioned at the moment, it would be much more convenient to use the computer locally. I'm just wondering how to change the local screen resolution via SSH to something usable by my monitor. Thanks for your time! BTW: I have also tried switching displays and I still have the same problem. Also BTW: I tried putting in the xrandr command and all I get back is: Can't open display

    Read the article

  • Different display arrangements for two identical displays

    - by Niels
    I have a MacBook Pro running OSX Lion and two workplaces with identical setups: at both places I have an 27" LED Cinema display. At one workplace my MacBook is on the left side of the external display, and at the other workplace it is on the right. I would like to have two different display arrangements for the two different setups, however, when I change the display arrangements in System Preferences when connected to one display, the arrangement is changed for the other display as well. I used to have a 27" and a 24" Cinema Display, and OSX used to remember the display arrangements for those different displays, but now the displays are identical, so they use the same arrangements setting. Is there any way to tell OSX to handle two identical displays as different ones so I can configure two different arrangements for the two setups?

    Read the article

  • Is it Possible to Increase Display Resolution for OS X Maverick

    - by Michael
    The new OS X Maverick operating system has reduced maximum display resolution from 1920 x 1200 in Mountain Lion to 1680 x 1050, which is a SIZABLE reduction. The difference is obvious when viewing videos or photos. In addition, the colors are less vibrant. Does anyone know a way to change the display resolution for Maverick, thus restoring Mountain Lion resolution (1920 x 1200)...along with color vibrancy. By the way, I am using a 2012 Macbook Pro, with Matte display, which I think makes matters worse. At 1920 x 1200 my Macbook Pro was excellent...but at 1680 x 1050, it is very pedestrian.

    Read the article

  • Why Is Vertical Resolution Monitor Resolution so Often a Multiple of 360?

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Stare at a list of monitor resolutions long enough and you might notice a pattern: many of the vertical resolutions, especially those of gaming or multimedia displays, are multiples of 360 (720, 1080, 1440, etc.) But why exactly is this the case? Is it arbitrary or is there something more at work? Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites. The Question SuperUser reader Trojandestroy recently noticed something about his display interface and needs answers: YouTube recently added 1440p functionality, and for the first time I realized that all (most?) vertical resolutions are multiples of 360. Is this just because the smallest common resolution is 480×360, and it’s convenient to use multiples? (Not doubting that multiples are convenient.) And/or was that the first viewable/conveniently sized resolution, so hardware (TVs, monitors, etc) grew with 360 in mind? Taking it further, why not have a square resolution? Or something else unusual? (Assuming it’s usual enough that it’s viewable). Is it merely a pleasing-the-eye situation? So why have the display be a multiple of 360? The Answer SuperUser contributor User26129 offers us not just an answer as to why the numerical pattern exists but a history of screen design in the process: Alright, there are a couple of questions and a lot of factors here. Resolutions are a really interesting field of psychooptics meeting marketing. First of all, why are the vertical resolutions on youtube multiples of 360. This is of course just arbitrary, there is no real reason this is the case. The reason is that resolution here is not the limiting factor for Youtube videos – bandwidth is. Youtube has to re-encode every video that is uploaded a couple of times, and tries to use as little re-encoding formats/bitrates/resolutions as possible to cover all the different use cases. For low-res mobile devices they have 360×240, for higher res mobile there’s 480p, and for the computer crowd there is 360p for 2xISDN/multiuser landlines, 720p for DSL and 1080p for higher speed internet. For a while there were some other codecs than h.264, but these are slowly being phased out with h.264 having essentially ‘won’ the format war and all computers being outfitted with hardware codecs for this. Now, there is some interesting psychooptics going on as well. As I said: resolution isn’t everything. 720p with really strong compression can and will look worse than 240p at a very high bitrate. But on the other side of the spectrum: throwing more bits at a certain resolution doesn’t magically make it better beyond some point. There is an optimum here, which of course depends on both resolution and codec. In general: the optimal bitrate is actually proportional to the resolution. So the next question is: what kind of resolution steps make sense? Apparently, people need about a 2x increase in resolution to really see (and prefer) a marked difference. Anything less than that and many people will simply not bother with the higher bitrates, they’d rather use their bandwidth for other stuff. This has been researched quite a long time ago and is the big reason why we went from 720×576 (415kpix) to 1280×720 (922kpix), and then again from 1280×720 to 1920×1080 (2MP). Stuff in between is not a viable optimization target. And again, 1440P is about 3.7MP, another ~2x increase over HD. You will see a difference there. 4K is the next step after that. Next up is that magical number of 360 vertical pixels. Actually, the magic number is 120 or 128. All resolutions are some kind of multiple of 120 pixels nowadays, back in the day they used to be multiples of 128. This is something that just grew out of LCD panel industry. LCD panels use what are called line drivers, little chips that sit on the sides of your LCD screen that control how bright each subpixel is. Because historically, for reasons I don’t really know for sure, probably memory constraints, these multiple-of-128 or multiple-of-120 resolutions already existed, the industry standard line drivers became drivers with 360 line outputs (1 per subpixel). If you would tear down your 1920×1080 screen, I would be putting money on there being 16 line drivers on the top/bottom and 9 on one of the sides. Oh hey, that’s 16:9. Guess how obvious that resolution choice was back when 16:9 was ‘invented’. Then there’s the issue of aspect ratio. This is really a completely different field of psychology, but it boils down to: historically, people have believed and measured that we have a sort of wide-screen view of the world. Naturally, people believed that the most natural representation of data on a screen would be in a wide-screen view, and this is where the great anamorphic revolution of the ’60s came from when films were shot in ever wider aspect ratios. Since then, this kind of knowledge has been refined and mostly debunked. Yes, we do have a wide-angle view, but the area where we can actually see sharply – the center of our vision – is fairly round. Slightly elliptical and squashed, but not really more than about 4:3 or 3:2. So for detailed viewing, for instance for reading text on a screen, you can utilize most of your detail vision by employing an almost-square screen, a bit like the screens up to the mid-2000s. However, again this is not how marketing took it. Computers in ye olden days were used mostly for productivity and detailed work, but as they commoditized and as the computer as media consumption device evolved, people didn’t necessarily use their computer for work most of the time. They used it to watch media content: movies, television series and photos. And for that kind of viewing, you get the most ‘immersion factor’ if the screen fills as much of your vision (including your peripheral vision) as possible. Which means widescreen. But there’s more marketing still. When detail work was still an important factor, people cared about resolution. As many pixels as possible on the screen. SGI was selling almost-4K CRTs! The most optimal way to get the maximum amount of pixels out of a glass substrate is to cut it as square as possible. 1:1 or 4:3 screens have the most pixels per diagonal inch. But with displays becoming more consumery, inch-size became more important, not amount of pixels. And this is a completely different optimization target. To get the most diagonal inches out of a substrate, you want to make the screen as wide as possible. First we got 16:10, then 16:9 and there have been moderately successful panel manufacturers making 22:9 and 2:1 screens (like Philips). Even though pixel density and absolute resolution went down for a couple of years, inch-sizes went up and that’s what sold. Why buy a 19″ 1280×1024 when you can buy a 21″ 1366×768? Eh… I think that about covers all the major aspects here. There’s more of course; bandwidth limits of HDMI, DVI, DP and of course VGA played a role, and if you go back to the pre-2000s, graphics memory, in-computer bandwdith and simply the limits of commercially available RAMDACs played an important role. But for today’s considerations, this is about all you need to know. Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? Check out the full discussion thread here.     

    Read the article

  • How to add display resolution fo an LCD in Ubuntu 12.04? xrandr problem

    - by SeregaI
    I am fresh for Ubuntu and Linux in general. I have installed Ubuntu 12.04 and stuck trying to setup correct resolution for my LCD display. The native resolution for the LCD is 1920x1080 here is the output from xrandr: $xrandr Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1280 x 720, maximum 4096 x 4096 LVDS1 connected 1280x720+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 0mm x 0mm 1280x720 60.0*+ 800x600 60.3 56.2 640x480 59.9 VGA1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) Then I create new modeline: $ cvt 1920 1080 60 1920x1080 59.96 Hz (CVT 2.07M9) hsync: 67.16 kHz; pclk: 173.00 MHz Modeline "1920x1080_60.00" 173.00 1920 2048 2248 2576 1080 1083 1088 1120 -hsync +vsync So far so good. then I create new mode using xrandr: $ xrandr --newmode "1920x1080_60.00" 173.00 1920 2048 2248 2576 1080 1083 1088 1120 -hsync +vsync But for some reason that new mode was created for VGA (VGA1) output instead of LCD output (LVDS1): $ xrandr Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1280 x 720, maximum 4096 x 4096 LVDS1 connected 1280x720+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 0mm x 0mm 1280x720 60.0*+ 800x600 60.3 56.2 640x480 59.9 VGA1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 1920x1080_60.00 (0xbc) 173.0MHz <---------- ????!!!!!! h: width 1920 start 2048 end 2248 total 2576 skew 0 clock 67.2KHz v: height 1080 start 1083 end 1088 total 1120 clock 60.0Hz So, if I try to add mode to LVDS1, I get an error: $ xrandr --addmode LVDS1 "1920x1080_60.00" X Error of failed request: BadMatch (invalid parameter attributes) Major opcode of failed request: 149 (RANDR) Minor opcode of failed request: 18 (RRAddOutputMode) Serial number of failed request: 25 Current serial number in output stream: 26 Adding that new mode to VGA1 works fine, but I don't use that VGA1 output.

    Read the article

  • Not getting native resolution of external monitor in Ubuntu

    - by darthvader
    Since there us a defect in my laptop screen, I am using an external Dell 1600x1000 monitor. Windows was recognizing the native resolution correctly. But when I installed Ubuntu 10.10, I get only up to 1024x768 in the Monitor preferences. I had a look at this and tried to add resolution by running xrandr --addmode VGA 1600×1000 but I am getting the error xrandr: cannot find output "VGA" What is the way out.

    Read the article

  • xgamma -display parameter for dual monitor setup

    - by Shiplu
    I want to change gamma for my first monitor. Every time I invoke xgamma with different -display parameters it somehow points to my second monitor. But I want to modify first one. I tried these commands. The parameters I have used for -display are :0, :0.0, :0.1, :1.0, :1.1, :1. Only the first 2 works. But it points to my second monitor. Not the first one. Here is a shell script to test it. shiplu@KubuntuD:~$ xgamma -display :0 -> Red 1.000, Green 1.000, Blue 1.000 shiplu@KubuntuD:~$ xgamma -display :0.0 -> Red 1.000, Green 1.000, Blue 1.000 shiplu@KubuntuD:~$ xgamma -display :0.1 xgamma: unable to open display ':0.1' shiplu@KubuntuD:~$ xgamma -display :1.0 xgamma: unable to open display ':1.0' shiplu@KubuntuD:~$ xgamma -display :1.1 xgamma: unable to open display ':1.1' shiplu@KubuntuD:~$ xgamma -display :1 xgamma: unable to open display ':1' How can I change the gamma for the first/primary monitor?

    Read the article

  • Dual Monitor (Monitor and TV)

    - by umpirsky
    I connected TV to my computer, and trying to set dual display. Whatever resolution I choose for my second display (TV) I get message like this: The selected configuration for displays could not be applied required virtual size does not fit available size: requested=(2704, 1050), minimum=(320, 200), maximum=(1680, 1680) How can I fix this? Also, while I was experimenting system went to deadlock, I restarted and after boot monitor just turns off once system is up. I boot in recovery mode and after several retries fixed it somehow, I don't know how, probably by changing display config from display manager. now I found xorg.conf.new file in my home dir: Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "X.org Configured" Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 Screen 1 "Screen1" RightOf "Screen0" Screen 2 "Screen2" RightOf "Screen1" InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer" InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" EndSection Section "Files" ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/misc" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/cyrillic" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi/:unscaled" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi/:unscaled" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/Type1" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi" FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi" FontPath "/var/lib/defoma/x-ttcidfont-conf.d/dirs/TrueType" FontPath "built-ins" EndSection Section "Module" Load "extmod" Load "dbe" Load "glx" Load "dri" Load "dri2" Load "record" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Mouse0" Driver "mouse" Option "Protocol" "auto" Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice" Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" VendorName "Monitor Vendor" ModelName "Monitor Model" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor1" VendorName "Monitor Vendor" ModelName "Monitor Model" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor2" VendorName "Monitor Vendor" ModelName "Monitor Model" EndSection Section "Device" ### Available Driver options are:- ### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False", ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz", ### <percent>: "<f>%" ### [arg]: arg optional #Option "NoAccel" # [<bool>] #Option "SWcursor" # [<bool>] #Option "Dac6Bit" # [<bool>] #Option "Dac8Bit" # [<bool>] #Option "BusType" # [<str>] #Option "CPPIOMode" # [<bool>] #Option "CPusecTimeout" # <i> #Option "AGPMode" # <i> #Option "AGPFastWrite" # [<bool>] #Option "AGPSize" # <i> #Option "GARTSize" # <i> #Option "RingSize" # <i> #Option "BufferSize" # <i> #Option "EnableDepthMoves" # [<bool>] #Option "EnablePageFlip" # [<bool>] #Option "NoBackBuffer" # [<bool>] #Option "DMAForXv" # [<bool>] #Option "FBTexPercent" # <i> #Option "DepthBits" # <i> #Option "PCIAPERSize" # <i> #Option "AccelDFS" # [<bool>] #Option "IgnoreEDID" # [<bool>] #Option "CustomEDID" # [<str>] #Option "DisplayPriority" # [<str>] #Option "PanelSize" # [<str>] #Option "ForceMinDotClock" # <freq> #Option "ColorTiling" # [<bool>] #Option "VideoKey" # <i> #Option "RageTheatreCrystal" # <i> #Option "RageTheatreTunerPort" # <i> #Option "RageTheatreCompositePort" # <i> #Option "RageTheatreSVideoPort" # <i> #Option "TunerType" # <i> #Option "RageTheatreMicrocPath" # <str> #Option "RageTheatreMicrocType" # <str> #Option "ScalerWidth" # <i> #Option "RenderAccel" # [<bool>] #Option "SubPixelOrder" # [<str>] #Option "ClockGating" # [<bool>] #Option "VGAAccess" # [<bool>] #Option "ReverseDDC" # [<bool>] #Option "LVDSProbePLL" # [<bool>] #Option "AccelMethod" # <str> #Option "DRI" # [<bool>] #Option "ConnectorTable" # <str> #Option "DefaultConnectorTable" # [<bool>] #Option "DefaultTMDSPLL" # [<bool>] #Option "TVDACLoadDetect" # [<bool>] #Option "ForceTVOut" # [<bool>] #Option "TVStandard" # <str> #Option "IgnoreLidStatus" # [<bool>] #Option "DefaultTVDACAdj" # [<bool>] #Option "Int10" # [<bool>] #Option "EXAVSync" # [<bool>] #Option "ATOMTVOut" # [<bool>] #Option "R4xxATOM" # [<bool>] #Option "ForceLowPowerMode" # [<bool>] #Option "DynamicPM" # [<bool>] #Option "NewPLL" # [<bool>] #Option "ZaphodHeads" # <str> Identifier "Card0" Driver "radeon" BusID "PCI:2:0:0" EndSection Section "Device" ### Available Driver options are:- ### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False", ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz", ### <percent>: "<f>%" ### [arg]: arg optional #Option "ShadowFB" # [<bool>] #Option "Rotate" # <str> #Option "fbdev" # <str> #Option "debug" # [<bool>] Identifier "Card1" Driver "fbdev" BusID "PCI:2:0:0" EndSection Section "Device" ### Available Driver options are:- ### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False", ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz", ### <percent>: "<f>%" ### [arg]: arg optional #Option "ShadowFB" # [<bool>] #Option "DefaultRefresh" # [<bool>] #Option "ModeSetClearScreen" # [<bool>] Identifier "Card2" Driver "vesa" BusID "PCI:2:0:0" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Card0" Monitor "Monitor0" SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 1 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 4 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 8 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 15 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 16 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen1" Device "Card1" Monitor "Monitor1" SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 1 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 4 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 8 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 15 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 16 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen2" Device "Card2" Monitor "Monitor2" SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 1 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 4 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 8 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 15 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 16 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection Can I delete it? Second display (TV) only works when I check Mirror displays option.

    Read the article

  • Problem mirroring two monitors with different resolution

    - by quad
    Hello I am trying to put two monitors in mirror mode (Windows 7 Professional) with Ultramon 3.1.0. The two monitors: Main monitor: 24" Asus. 1680x1050 resolution (16/10). Secondary monitor: 19" LG. 1280x1024 resolution. The graphic card is a Nvidia GeForce 8600 GT. I have installed the Ultramon 3.1.0 and I have created a mirror, with the "stretch mirror image to fill monitor" and the "disable video overlays and 3D acceleration". When I start the mirroring, there are two zones in the lateral edges that are not displayed in the second monitor. I think this is because the width of the main monitor is 1680 px. and the width of the secondary monitor is 1280 px., but I have indicated "stretch mirror image to fill monitor" in the options. The same occurs in the top and the bottom edges, but the diference is minimal (1050 vs 1024 pixels). I want the same image (distortioned in the secondary monitor if is neccesary), but I don't know what is failing. Someone can help me, please? I have read Mirrored monitors of different resolution. Cloned screen on monitors with different resolutions

    Read the article

  • Change resolution in Waking Mars

    - by Wes
    I purchased and installed the humble bundle game "Waking Mars" via the Ubuntu Software Center and it works really well except for some issues with changing settings, namely with the resolution. The in-game settings for changing resolution and entering/exiting fullscreen were easy enough to find and toggle, and when you do it asks to restart the application. When you restart it, all other settings you updated are reflected except for the changes to the resolution. (I'm trying to get it to play in windowed mode that fits onto one monitor, but it will only default to windowed mode with the full dual monitor resolution). I noticed that it writes these values to ~/.local/share/WakingMars/UserSettings.ini. When I change the resolution, it is properly written to in this settings file...but it never is reflected when you restart the application. Any ideas what's wrong?

    Read the article

  • Dual monitor, with a low resolution projector

    - by user900978
    I need to show a presentaion to a conference tomorrow. Today I tryed my Ubuntu 10.04 with the projector. My notebook has a resolution of 1440x960, the projector seems to have a really lower resolution. However, thanks to nvidia-settings I configured my video card (a nvidia 9800), it works with other display, but not with the projector. I found the projector, configured as Twin-view, resolution Auto and pressed on Apply, then "Save to x Configuration". On projector is visualized just a quarter of my notebook display. I tryed also to reduce my resolution and to change the resolution of projector, but I obtained no better results. How can I Solve it? On windows all goes well, but I need Ubuntu for personal reasons. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • NVIDIA Graphics - resolution problems with new 12.04 LTS installation

    - by Daveisuser56810
    I've been trying to install Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on my desktop most of the day. The desktop uses a NVIDIA GEFORCE 9800 (GT I think) graphics card. I am unable to set the correct resolution (1680 x 1050) for the display. The first problem I had was that of the "Black Screen" during install. I overcame this by utilising the "nomodeset" switch on the install options (once I'd found how to do that). The second problem of course was the "Black screen" following the first reboot. Once again this was overcome by using "nomodeset", this time by "editing" the GRUB. This gave me a resolution of 1280x768 which, the Displays GUI allowed me to change to 1280x720 (appears to fit on screen). I then tried to install the NVIDIA drivers. 1) using additional drivers 2) manually by downloading driver and installing in root As soon as NVIDIA drivers are installed - resolution become restricted to 640x480 (max). At this resolution Ubuntu GUI is not usable as most screens are larger than the display. Removing the NVIDIA driver and removing the XORG.CONF file does not lift this restriction. I have tried most things that I have found and that were vaguely intelligible, but nothing appears to get me closer to a resolution of 1680x1050. UPDATE: reinstalled Ubuntu 12-04 and used the "NoModeSet" in the Grub to restore the resolution to 1280x720, which is at least usable. Will live with this for now.

    Read the article

  • Viewing a large-resolution VNC server through a small-resolution viewer in Ubuntu

    - by Madiyaan Damha
    I have two Ubuntu computers, one with a large screen resolution (1920x1600) that is running default ubuntu vnc server. I have another computer that has a resolution of about 1200x1024 that I use to vnc into the server (I use the default ubuntu vnc viewer). Now everything works fine except there are annoying scrollbars in the viewer because the server's desktop resolution is so much higher than the viewer's. Is there a way to: 1) Scale the server's desktop down to the viewer's resolution. I know there will be a loss of image quality, but I am willing to try it out. This should be something like how windows media player or vlc scales down the window (and does some interpolation of pixels). 2) Automatically shrink the resolution of the server to the client's when I connect and scale the resolution back when I disconnect. This seems like a less attractive solution. 3) Any other solution that gurus out there use? I am sure someone has experienced this before (annoying scroll bars) so there must be a solution out there. Thanks,

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >