Cluttermagnet Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 I've been playing with a couple of my computers with minimal nVidia cards. One has an FX5200 which should do better than what I'm getting. Probably the same for the other one, an old MX440 card. Both seem to only be natively able to run 800x600. I'm beginning to think that maybe there is some problem with either the monitor or the KVM switch box. The Preferences/Display only lists 800x600 and smaller, and always identifies the monitor as "Unknown" BTW this seems to affect several Debian based distros like Ubuntu 9.04, Linux Mint 7, gOS, etc. Any suggestions for where to start? FWIW This monitor is a Mag 770FS, not too old of a 17 inch a CRT display, and I do remember it running higher screen resolutions like 1280x1024 or whatever. Quote
V.T. Eric Layton Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 Let me start with the initial silly question...Have you installed the Nvidia drivers? Quote
lewmur Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 Let me start with the initial silly question...Have you installed the Nvidia drivers?You beet me to it. He isn't going to get better resolution until he does. Quote
V.T. Eric Layton Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 You beet me to it. He isn't going to get better resolution until he does.That is ABSOLUTELY correctamundo! Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 17, 2009 Author Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) Siiiighhhhh!Yes.They made it worse. So much worse that executable windows, such as the display settings, become unusable. The 'action buttons' are below the bottom of the screen- inaccessible. It removed the formerly available 800x600 screen size option and runs it in 640x480.I have never seen anything but trouble arise as a result of installing the 'proprietary binary drivers' from nVidia. I always end up taking it back off. But this time, I am forced to either get help doing it by command line or else just reinstall the OS. As I say, it is now so bad I can't even use graphical methods, due to inaccessible buttons at the bottom of windows.Siiiighhhhh!On many of my machines, Ubuntu etc. are well behaved. For some reason, these two boxes have always had video problems- so bad, at times, the certain releases of Ubuntu (Hardy, Gutsy) could never produce a usable, visible screen at any time- even in compatibility mode. There is something about this setup. I'm tempted to try and see if there is any difference connecting the monitor directly to one of the towers. Could it be the KVM? The whole setup is 'functional', however. The KVM appears to be doing its job.Here are the particulars on one of the boxes I just upgraded from Feisty to Jaunty:P4 3.2GHz, Asrock P4VM800, 80G HD, 1G DDR RAMRaritan Switchman SW2 (KVM)Mag 770FS 17 in CRT MonitornVidia FX5200 AGP Edited July 17, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
striker Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 Clutter, the FX5200 can do 1280 x 1024 with ease. I'm using a pair of those in some boxes over here. They did very well with Ubuntu HH and all others I tested at that time, so I'm led to believe something is amiss with your KVM. I would pull it out completely of the config and test the machine with the display to see it can cope with the 1280 x 1024 resolution: it should be able to do that, however IIRC you might get only at 1024 x 768. An edit in xorg.conf was all I needed way back then to get 1280 x 1024. Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 17, 2009 Author Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) Thanks, striker! Some very useful info. Well, I went upstairs to look at my Dell 8300. It runs Ubuntu Jaunty 9.04, and it also shows the display as being 'unknown'. There is no KVM in this setup. It also has an 'off brand' (not nVidia) FX5200. This box manages 1024x768 which has always felt 'adequate' to me. It does not have the 1280x1024 option right now. BTW this box is not running any proprietary nvidia binaries, just the generic stuff, I guess. And I have never done any command line tweaks on the video on this box- so this is an entirely 'stock' setup.BTW all of my machines are generically P4 types, and run DDR RAM and AGP video cards (or else sometimes built in video- rarely). Edited July 17, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 17, 2009 Author Posted July 17, 2009 Clutter, the FX5200 can do 1280 x 1024 with ease...however IIRC you might get only at 1024 x 768. An edit in xorg.conf was all I needed way back then to get 1280 x 1024.Yes, the 1024x768 appears to be the best option as a stock OS. Maybe editing xorg.conf will help me too? I have never tried that so far. I might as well start learning. I have always been very easy to please with video settings. I don't do games, etc. But 640x480 fails to please even me! Quote
striker Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 It also has an 'off brand' (not nVidia) FX5200. This box manages 1024x768 which has always felt 'adequate' to me. It does not have the 1280x1024 option right now.'off brand' FX5200 or not, doesn't matter Clutter. You see the chip which does the hard work is the same on all these cards. Some come from MSI, some from ASUS, but all of them have the FX5200 chip below the cooler and some even are passively cooled. (and some were modified to change from active cooling to passive, which I did: no more high pitch noise . Just put an 'eagle' on it, that's adequate.)Anyway, like I said 1024 x 768 seems to be standard resolution detected by most distros for this card without modifying xorg.conf. I seem to remember I always loaded a nVidia driver for it, after that 1280 x 1024 became an option which I selected and never looked back.However, the nowadays available nvidia drivers and the used xorg mods don't make it easy. That's why I prefer ATI nowadays, but that's another story. Quote
striker Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 BTW: I dunno your KVM's specs, but while I was looking around for a KVM a couple of months ago - I needed one able to give me 1680 x 1050 with DVI connections - I discovered they couldn't ... 1600 was the max. So maybe your KVM can't do 1280 x 1024, but again I don't know its specs. Maybe something to look up? Quote
striker Posted July 17, 2009 Posted July 17, 2009 Before I forget, I'm just thinking about that, I'm having five distros on the old machine driving a 22" LCD with 1680 x 1050. Guess what? The graphics card is a FX5200 (Asus). Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 17, 2009 Author Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) BTW: I dunno your KVM's specs, but while I was looking around for a KVM a couple of months ago - I needed one able to give me 1680 x 1050 with DVI connections - I discovered they couldn't ... 1600 was the max. So maybe your KVM can't do 1280 x 1024, but again I don't know its specs. Maybe something to look up?I searched this model (with ps2 connectors) on the net here. The key spec is:Max Resolution 1600 x 1200 @ 75 HzThat is more than I need. On my 17 in CRT monitors, 1280x1024makes the type sizes a little too small, although that size is at least usable.I'm not presently suspecting any KVM problems here. Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) 'off brand' FX5200 or not, doesn't matter Clutter. You see the chip which does the hard work is the same on all these cards...Anyway, like I said 1024 x 768 seems to be standard resolution detected by most distros for this card without modifying xorg.conf. I seem to remember I always loaded a nVidia driver for it, after that 1280 x 1024 became an option which I selected and never looked back.However, the nowadays available nvidia drivers and the used xorg mods don't make it easy. That's why I prefer ATI nowadays, but that's another story.I developed a really bad attitude about ATI. I'm beginning to reconsider that, however. But why is it my experience with the nVidia proprietary drivers has always decreased my screen size options, never increased them? (Under Linux- in Win98SE the drivers always helped) That makes absolutely no sense, yet that has been my results. Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
lewmur Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 I searched this model (with ps2 connectors) on the net here. The key spec is:Max Resolution 1600 x 1200 @ 75 HzThat is more than I need. On my 17 in CRT monitors, 1280x1024makes the type sizes a little too small, although that size is at least usable.I'm not presently suspecting any KVM problems here.You do NOT try to set up a distro with a KVM switch blocking HAL from trying to detect your hardware. Take the switch out of the loop and get everything working. And THEN put the switch into the loop. It is difficult enough to get KVM switches working AFTER the fact. It is impossible to get things working with them in the loop to begin with. Quote
BillD Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) Well, in recent times I have always had my KVM switch in while setting things up, and as long as I manually switch it to the computer I am setting up before I start installation, I have never had any problems. Indeed, if I press the appropriate keys as it boots up for the installation disk so that I can actually see the correct computer on the monitor, I have never had any problems. Since I install both PCLinuxOS and Ubuntu from live CD's, the monitor and mouse have to be working on the right computer before I can do anything anyway!One interesting thing about the cards; I used FX5200 cards on my computers until PCLinuxOS 2009 came out, and I discovered to my annoyance (and surprise) that it has much sharper text rendition with the 6200. EVGA was selling off the last of their 6200 cards for $20 last spring, and I purchased a couple of them and they work great with either PCLinuxOS or Ubuntu, but Ubuntu has never had as sharp text as PCLinuxOS with any card, despite extensive help from Urmas in attempts to resolve the fuzzy problem.My monitors have been "square" ones with native resolution of 1280 x 1024, and I have never had any problems getting the full range of resolutions from there down once the Nvidia drivers were installed.Bill Edited July 18, 2009 by BillD Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) You do NOT try to set up a distro with a KVM switch blocking HAL from trying to detect your hardware. Take the switch out of the loop and get everything working. And THEN put the switch into the loop. It is difficult enough to get KVM switches working AFTER the fact. It is impossible to get things working with them in the loop to begin with.That's an interesting thought, lewmur. Perhaps that will prove to be a cause here. FWIW, my Dell 8300 upstairs is not looking through a KVM and it also says the monitor (a well known Dell CRT model) is 'unknown'. The only difference is that the dell comes out of the box capable of 1024x768 under Jaunty 9.04. My two problem machines can manage only 800x600 stock. The one I'm focusing on at the moment is also running Jaunty- and also an FX5200 card. Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
V.T. Eric Layton Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 No Nvidia drivers = no higher resolutions. The generic "nv" driver just won't cut it. Once you run the Nvidia driver installation script, you may need to tweak your xorg.conf manually to get what you want out of it.Poor Clutter! I've never had any issues installing the Nvidia drivers on any distro... even using crappy onboard mobo vid hardware. Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) No Nvidia drivers = no higher resolutions. The generic "nv" driver just won't cut it. Once you run the Nvidia driver installation script, you may need to tweak your xorg.conf manually to get what you want out of it.Poor Clutter! I've never had any issues installing the Nvidia drivers on any distro... even using crappy onboard mobo vid hardware.OK, well, it's the same crap. Used System/Admin/Hardware drivers. Installed nVidia binaries. Resolution dropped from 800x600 to 640x480. There is no longer any 800x600 option.I get an info window:It appears your graphics driver does not support the necessary extensions to use this tool. Do you want to use the graphics driver vendor's tool instead?Gee thanks. The graphics driver vendor's tool opens in windows too big for the aperture. Some clickable options are off screen and inaccessible. In any case, I don't see how the nVidia tool would be used to set larger apertures, like 1024x768. And the tool is a little flaky, behavior not as expected in response to mouse clicks. I click on one item in left column, if gives me a different page than the one I tried to select. I click on certain buttons, it just ignores me etc.This is a new record, folks. Installed Jaunty to 2 different machines and screwed them both up in a single day. I'm depressed.I don't know how to modify xorg. Probably that will get things working again.Oh, BTW, on this box, only 1.8GHz P4 and an ancient NV17 GeForce4 MX420 card. But I still bet it will support at least 1024x768...Foreboding quote from a website concerning the tweaking of xorg.conf:You should only do manual configuration if the automatic and GUI tools aren't working. xorg.conf configuration has many traps and is the number one problem area for new linux/bsd users.Yes, I'm afraid of xorg. Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Urmas Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 No Nvidia drivers = no higher resolutions. The generic "nv" driver just won't cut it. Once you run the Nvidia driver installation script, you may need to tweak your xorg.conf manually to get what you want out of it.That's a bit harshly put... over time I've been using four different monitors (a 1024x768 CRT, a 1280x1024 CRT, a 1280x1024 LCD and a 1680x1050) with my computer (yup, a Nvidia FX 5200 card!), and "nv" drivers have given me the right resolution with EVERY ONE of them. Color me lucky. Yes, I've always gone from "nv" to "nvidia", but not because of resolution issues.Editing xorg.conf... see, Sir Clutter says he's using "Ubuntu 9.04, Linux Mint 7 [and] gOS". gOS is based on 8.04 (with a "traditional" xorg.conf). Jaunty and Mint 7 are a bit different; user resolution settings [at least in GNOME] are kept in ~/.config/monitors.xml. As in...Jaunty uses the settings in "/etc/X11/xorg.conf" to configure the display resolution at Ubuntu startup. "xorg.conf" settings are written by "nvidia-settings". Jaunty uses the settings in "/home/username/.config/monitors.xml" to reset the display resolution (when you log into your user). The settings in ".config/monitors.xml" are written by "gnome-display-properties". 1. The values in ".config/monitors.xml" are not automatically synchronized when "nvidia-settings" is used to change the display resolution, so it is necessary to update those values by running "gnome-display-properties" (System->Preferences->Display). 2. In my case (I have a nvidia FX-5200) "gnome-display-properties" is not detecting correctly the "Refresh Rate" parameter, so I manually updated the ".config/monitors.xml" file ("rate" parameter) with the correct value. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/n...ngs/+bug/362704@Clutter: Which OS do you have installed right now? if it's Jaunty or Mint 7 (with Nvidia stuff installed), post /etc/X11/xorg.conf and /home/clutter/.config/monitors.xml here. And if it's not too much trouble, remove the KVM switch from the equation for the time being... just in case.The key here - methinks - is that the gosh darn CRT doesn't get recognized properly. I did some digging, and a kosher "traditional" xorg.conf monitor section should look like this:Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" VendorName "MAG" ModelName "770FS" HorizSync 30.0 - 70.0 VertRefresh 50.0 - 160.0EndSection The lines you may need to edit in ,config/monitors/xml look like this: <width>1920</width><height>1080</height><rate>60</rate> (Well, don't you know) That's the sound of the men working on the chain ga-a-ang That's the sound of the men working on the chain gang Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) Thanks, Urmas! Here's what my xorg.conf says: # xorg.conf (X.Org X Window System server configuration file)## This file was generated by dexconf, the Debian X Configuration tool, using# values from the debconf database.## Edit this file with caution, and see the xorg.conf manual page.# (Type "man xorg.conf" at the shell prompt.)## This file is automatically updated on xserver-xorg package upgrades *only*# if it has not been modified since the last upgrade of the xserver-xorg# package.## Note that some configuration settings that could be done previously# in this file, now are automatically configured by the server and settings# here are ignored.## If you have edited this file but would like it to be automatically updated# again, run the following command:# sudo dpkg-reconfigure -phigh xserver-xorgSection "Monitor" Identifier "Configured Monitor"EndSectionSection "Screen" Identifier "Default Screen" Monitor "Configured Monitor" Device "Configured Video Device" DefaultDepth 24 Option "AddARGBGLXVisuals" "True"EndSectionSection "Module" Load "glx"EndSectionSection "Device" Identifier "Configured Video Device" Driver "nvidia" Option "NoLogo" "True"EndSection BTW it appears that most of my computers identify the monitors as 'unknown' (under System/ Preferences/ Display). This even applies with a Dell 8300 directly connected to a Dell CRT monitor. What gives? I'm not at all sure the KVM's are causing this.Obviously there is much info I could add to xorg.conf. So what do you think I ought to put in there?Yes, I'm keeping it simple- all systems in question will be running Jaunty 9.04 for purposes of this discussion. I'll fiddle with Mint later.Another important consideration- on this computer it's a different Raritan Switchman SW2 and a different monitor- an old DEC. I can get the model number if necessary, So I will try any changes on the box connected to the Mag 770FS. But the xorg.conf I just provided applies to the box connected to the DEC monitor...I just checked the box connected to the Mag monitor. xorg.conf appears identical, at first reading. Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Urmas Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 OK... gimme /home/clutter/.config/monitors.xml as well.Let's fiddle with xorg... in Terminal: gksudo gedit /etc/X11/xorg.conf Let's edit this subsection a bit: Section "Monitor" Identifier "Configured Monitor"EndSection Edit it to... this: Section "Monitor" Identifier "Configured Monitor" VendorName "MAG" ModelName "770FS" HorizSync 30.0 - 70.0 VertRefresh 50.0 - 160.0EndSection Save changes. Reboot. Think of the Queen. EDIT: HOLD THE WEDDING! Yes, I need the goods on DEC if you're gonna use it! Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) [/b]Let's fiddle with xorg... in Terminal:gksudo gedit /etc/X11/xorg.conf OK, that must not be quite right because it opens up to a blank page, not to my copy of xorg.conf.Syntax error? Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Urmas Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 Erm... what's the path to "your" xorg.conf? No grahmer snafus. gksudo<SPACE>gedit<SPACE>/etc/<UPPERCASE_X><ONE><ONE>/xorg.conf Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) EDIT: HOLD THE WEDDING![/b] Yes, I need the goods on DEC if you're gonna use it!DEC model PCXAV-YBBut you know what? I'm going to edit over on the Mag 770FS side, so I can use the data you already supplied.All these vertical and horizontal scrollbars in 640x480 suck. It's a major pain to do what is normally a cinch. Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 Erm... what's the path to "your" xorg.conf? No grahmer snafus. gksudo<SPACE>gedit<SPACE>/etc/<UPPERCASE_X><ONE><ONE>/xorg.confYep, I used lowercase X and digits 1 1, no spaces. let me try again, this time on the Mag setup, brb... Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 OK, xorg.conf now opens in gedit.Next, let me get you the other info you asked for before I do any editing of xorg... Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) OK... gimme /home/clutter/.config/monitors.xml as well. I'm not finding this... I did configure for Show Hidden Files. I can find .config, but no monitors.xml appears to exist... Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Cluttermagnet Posted July 18, 2009 Author Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) Schuuuuultz! I know nothing... Edited July 18, 2009 by Cluttermagnet Quote
Urmas Posted July 18, 2009 Posted July 18, 2009 Yup, it's a hidden file all right... the name is .config/monitors.xml. Note that the period in the beginning is "an alphabet"... file names beginning with a period get listed "after others". (How's that for a clear explanation? ) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.