radeon supported resolutions?
mrmazda at ij.net
Sat Dec 27 20:13:10 PST 2008
On 2008/12/27 23:07 (GMT+0200) Nikos Chantziaras composed:
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> I have DVI cards and
>> displays and cables, but have never found reason to try them.
> Better picture quality. Many people can't make out a difference though.
Exactly. How does any normal person find an opportunity to see any
difference? Most of the internet is extreme lowfi designed for 1024x768 or below.
All my systems use 1400x1050 or higher, mostly to minimize text jaggies by
having mor available px for any given text size. Other than the anti-jaggie
effect, I find it difficult to see the benefit of high resolution, and can
hardly imagine being able to identify the benefit of the digital hardware
> For, the most important point is that I don't have to press the
> "auto-adjust" button of my monitor with DVI nor set-up any
> "phase/white/etc" values in the monitor's OSD; DVI always gets it perfectly.
If my 1080p HDTV is any indication, "perfect" is entirely subjective. It has
9 preset modes plus custom, all of which are various combinations of
backlight, brightness, contrast, "color", tint & sharpness. With my only
other LCD, the screen I'm writing this on, the only adjustments I've made are
to reduce the brightness & contrast from the stupid 100% defaults. As long as
I'm not looking at a color wheel, I find it difficult to see any color "error".
OTOH, I've been reading Linux mailing lists for years. I often see workaround
for problem = use VGA instead of DVI, and never the other way around.
"Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor
in vain." Psalm 127:1 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
More information about the xorg