Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Higher res?

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-26 16:06

Is there a way to trick my laptop into allowing higher res without goddamn screen panning?

or is some sort of non-passable visible pixel limit?

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-26 16:16

get off of your sis integrated graphics and get a video card

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-26 16:28

I'm planning on it, but for the moment I don't have the money.

is there some driver update I can download?
I'm using xp on a thinkpad t40.

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-26 16:36

how do i download more ram?

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-26 16:54

>>1
Bahaha, it has nothing to do with drivers dumbass. An LCD screen does not work like a CRT; pixels are a fixed size on an LCD screen. If your maximum resolution is 1024x768, it's because there are literally only that many pixels manufactured on the screen itself.

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-26 20:06

>>5

truth

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 0:51

tx u asshole :D

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 5:30

>>5
It's also like that on a CRT to some extent. Can't go higher than 1024

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 9:11

>>8
Lol, what? CRT's don't have a "horizontal resolution" other than the dot pitch and maximum bandwidth limit. They have a flexible vertical resolution (then again, limited by the dot pitch) within a range, which is limited by the max/min horizontal frequency, which in turns gives how many frames a second can you draw, which are also limited (but quite openly) by the max/min vertical frequency.

In your average low-end 17" CRT (69 K max hfreq), the following modes are (examples of what's) possible, and they all look sharp: 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x960, 1280x1024, 1400x1050, 1500x1120, 2048x1024, 2048x1120, ...

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 11:48

average low end monitor will not go beyond 1280x1024

above average low end monitor will never go beyond 1600x1200

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 13:03

>>10
Because manuals and vendors say so?

An average low end CRT monitor easily does any, or at worst most of the modes I said, and of course, it won't do 1200 lines at 60 Hz, that'd work at 56 Hz at best and it sucks. And like I said, horizontal resolution matters little.

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 13:35

>>11
Enjoy your 40-column screens

Name: Anonymous 2006-09-27 17:03

>>12
Troll better next time

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List