forceten Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 I have a brand new system build for Mac OS X86. Specs: Intel D915GAGL motherboard (replacing an asrock 775dual-915g) 2GB RAM HP ADD2-N PCIx16 DVI expansion card for GMA900 Intel Pentium 4 Prescott 630 3.0Ghz 2MB L2c Acer AL2032W 20.1" wide aspect monitor (max res: 1680x1050 @60hz) Video is connected using DVI Problem: I can not get the video to work in 1680x1050. The system recognizes the monitor as "AL2032W" and shows a list of resolutions including: 640x480 800x600 832x624 848x480 1024x768 1152x870 1280x960 1280x1024 1360x768 1600x1200 (similar modes are listed when you provide the boot a ?video) The box boots into 1600x1200. Quartz Extreme and Core Image are supported. I'm stuck as to what to do next. I ripped out the AsRock 775Dual-915GL motherboard which was almost identical to the Intel D915GAGL motherboard I replaced it with (the GAGL is the microatx version of the GAVL) except for the Intel's support of the PCI x16 slot for the ADD2-N. About $60-70 extra sunk in just for widescreen! :-) Any ideas are greatly appreciated. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loc[a]lhost Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 I have a brand new system build for Mac OS X86. Specs: Intel D915GAGL motherboard (replacing an asrock 775dual-915g) 2GB RAM HP ADD2-N PCIx16 DVI expansion card for GMA900 Intel Pentium 4 Prescott 630 3.0Ghz 2MB L2c Acer AL2032W 20.1" wide aspect monitor (max res: 1680x1050 @60hz) Video is connected using DVI Problem: I can not get the video to work in 1680x1050. The system recognizes the monitor as "AL2032W" and shows a list of resolutions including: 640x480 800x600 832x624 848x480 1024x768 1152x870 1280x960 1280x1024 1360x768 1600x1200 (similar modes are listed when you provide the boot a ?video) The box boots into 1600x1200. Quartz Extreme and Core Image are supported. I'm stuck as to what to do next. I ripped out the AsRock 775Dual-915GL motherboard which was almost identical to the Intel D915GAGL motherboard I replaced it with (the GAGL is the microatx version of the GAVL) except for the Intel's support of the PCI x16 slot for the ADD2-N. About $60-70 extra sunk in just for widescreen! :-) Any ideas are greatly appreciated. Thanks! maybe this will help: http://www.madrau.com/html/SRX/indexSRX.html it's a program for adding custom resolutions. I couldn't get it to work with the VESA drivers, but maybe with the GMA900 it will work. to use the System Preferences pane, you need to open System Preferences under Rosetta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Nrrrd™ Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 This might not help much, but I use Macs at home and at work (23" Cinema HD Display at home; 22" Cinema Display at work) and I've never heard of such a resolution (1680x1050) - 1600x1024 is the native resolution of the 22" Cinema Display, and 1920x1200 is the native resolution on the 23" Cinema HD Display. The only "oddball" resolution offered by the Displays system preference panel on the 23" Cinema HD Display is 1344x840. My guess is that if the OS can't detect "native" resolutions offered by your display device, you will only get "standard" resolutions available in the Displays panel. Is there a particular reason why you would rather work at 1680x1050 rather than at 1600x1200? (The more height the better, if you ask me) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forceten Posted September 16, 2005 Author Share Posted September 16, 2005 lhost' date='Sep 16 2005, 02:01 AM' post='16715']maybe this will help: http://www.madrau.com/html/SRX/indexSRX.html it's a program for adding custom resolutions. I couldn't get it to work with the VESA drivers, but maybe with the GMA900 it will work. to use the System Preferences pane, you need to open System Preferences under Rosetta. This worked great! I was able to enter the 1680x1050 resolution and switch to the mode! It's working! Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forceten Posted September 16, 2005 Author Share Posted September 16, 2005 This might not help much, but I use Macs at home and at work (23" Cinema HD Display at home; 22" Cinema Display at work) and I've never heard of such a resolution (1680x1050) - 1600x1024 is the native resolution of the 22" Cinema Display, and 1920x1200 is the native resolution on the 23" Cinema HD Display. The only "oddball" resolution offered by the Displays system preference panel on the 23" Cinema HD Display is 1344x840. My guess is that if the OS can't detect "native" resolutions offered by your display device, you will only get "standard" resolutions available in the Displays panel. Is there a particular reason why you would rather work at 1680x1050 rather than at 1600x1200? (The more height the better, if you ask me) Riot - the reason I want 1680x1050 is that it is a "wide aspect" resolution. The monitor is slightly wider than a regular 20.1" monitor - that is, it is a widescreen lcd monitor. Therefore, the optimal resolution is as stated by the manufacturer - 1680x1050. It's an unusual resolution because it is a wide aspect resolution. If it were larger, then yes I could see 1900x1200. Luckily the suggestions here worked great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Nrrrd™ Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Riot - the reason I want 1680x1050 is that it is a "wide aspect" resolution. The monitor is slightly wider than a regular 20.1" monitor - that is, it is a widescreen lcd monitor. Therefore, the optimal resolution is as stated by the manufacturer - 1680x1050. It's an unusual resolution because it is a wide aspect resolution. If it were larger, then yes I could see 1900x1200. Right, I understand that - but you said it recognized 1600x1200, I was just curious why you would want to work at 1680x1050 - you gain 40 pixels on each side, but you lose 75 pixels on the top and on the bottom. I'm aware that 1680x1050 is 16:10 (odd - why not 16:9), but as I said, I tend to prefer more height than width, so I would not want to work in 1680x1050 and lose those 150 vertical pixels. I was just curious why you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forceten Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 Right, I understand that - but you said it recognized 1600x1200, I was just curious why you would want to work at 1680x1050 - you gain 40 pixels on each side, but you lose 75 pixels on the top and on the bottom. I'm aware that 1680x1050 is 16:10 (odd - why not 16:9), but as I said, I tend to prefer more height than width, so I would not want to work in 1680x1050 and lose those 150 vertical pixels. I was just curious why you do. The screen looks better - clearer, crisper - there is no stretching at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blkblt Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 The screen looks better - clearer, crisper - there is no stretching at all. Do you know if the ADD2 card supports 1900x1200? It was my impression that they only went up to 1600x1200. Thanks, /blkblt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawkeye11 Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Right, I understand that - but you said it recognized 1600x1200, I was just curious why you would want to work at 1680x1050 - you gain 40 pixels on each side, but you lose 75 pixels on the top and on the bottom. I'm aware that 1680x1050 is 16:10 (odd - why not 16:9), but as I said, I tend to prefer more height than width, so I would not want to work in 1680x1050 and lose those 150 vertical pixels. I was just curious why you do. LCD Panels are fixed resolution. If you vary from that the image will be fuzzy and distorted. The Apple 20 inch widescreen and Dell 20 inch widescreen are both 1680 X 1050. That is the only resoulution that the image is acceptable. This would not be the case with a CRT, but I am not aware of any widescreen CRTs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lestat Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Do you know if the ADD2 card supports 1900x1200? It was my impression that they only went up to 1600x1200. Thanks, /blkblt DVI-ADD2 card supports 1920 1200. I use it with my 915 mobo and HP Add2 card.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riot Nrrrd™ Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Intel Pentium 4 630 (3GHz, SSE3) | Intel D915GEVL | Seagate 160G SATA | Samsung DDR2 512MB X 4 | Pioneer DVR-A07 | PCI IEEE1394 | External USB Audio (Audiotrak MAYA EX5) | 23" Wide LCD | HP DVI-ADD2 Card Lestat - Does your Pioneer DVR-A07 work? With burning from the Finder, and/or perhaps Toast under Rosetta as well? (I have an external FireWire DVR-108 that I'd be keen to find out if it would work if placed inside a PC.) Also, does the PCI FireWire card work? What make/model is it, and do you know what chipset it's based on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lestat Posted September 18, 2005 Share Posted September 18, 2005 Lestat - Does your Pioneer DVR-A07 work? With burning from the Finder, and/or perhaps Toast under Rosetta as well? (I have an external FireWire DVR-108 that I'd be keen to find out if it would work if placed inside a PC.) Also, does the PCI FireWire card work? What make/model is it, and do you know what chipset it's based on? Hi.. my DVR-A07 works fine.. and it is recognized as a super drive (system profiler says "Apple Shipped one") also. PCI Firewire works fine. (I guess TI chipset..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts