2005FP display settings

[PoopyPants]

ok so i got my 2005FP today and WOW lets jsut get that out of the way.

ok now the 1 and only resolution that actually scales to fit the entire screen is 1680x1050
which is awesome but , maybe i jsut need to get used to it but its bothering my eyes.
there is another but it looks so horrible i wont use it
1)
its rather small
2)
its only 60hz very bad for your eyes

ok so there are a few resolutions that will "scale" to the monitor if i use the ATI control panel and check "scale to panel" but they look like utter crap.

now when using the built in Scale, 1:1 or Aspect thats in the monitor control panel nothing works while im in windows.
But if im in the bios itself. it will actually change the aspect of the screen.
Why wont this work in windows ?

and am i doomed to only be able to use 1680x1050 in windows ?
games are different.
CS Source and HL 2 i had to use 16x10 instead of 16x9 in order for the monitor to display widescreen properly.
16x9 did work for 1680x1050 but nothing else. they were all shrunk down like the refresh wasnt high enough but it supposedly was 75 hz

one thing i did notice is that the monitor when you hit the menu button always displays 1680x1050x60hz..... why i that.. i thought it should display the current refresh and such

i do have the 2005 drivers installed but it didnt make any difference when it was just plug and pray

this is also a 9800 XT (god i regret getting rid of the 6800 GT)

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: PoopyPants
ok now the 1 and only resolution that actually scales to fit the entire screen is 1680x1050
which is awesome but , maybe i jsut need to get used to it but its bothering my eyes.

How exactly is it bothering your eyes? It's just a 16:10 aspect ratio resolution... (And yes, all LCD's have one native resolution...I assume you knew this before spending hundreds of dollars on a monitor? )

there is another but it looks so horrible i wont use it

Not sure what you're talking about.

1)
its rather small
2)
its only 60hz very bad for your eyes

I don't know what resolution you're referring to (whether 1680x1050 or something else), but "60Hz" on an LCD IS NOT BAD FOR YOUR EYES. LCD's don't even have "refresh rates" in the traditional sense like CRT's do...CRT's refresh the whole screen from top to bottom, whereas LCD's really just address each individual pixel. You absolutely do not need "85Hz" on an LCD.

ok so there are a few resolutions that will "scale" to the monitor if i use the ATI control panel and check "scale to panel" but they look like utter crap.

What resolutions are you trying to use/scale to full screen? The panel's scaling is pretty good (I own this monitor too), but it's not as good as a CRT in that respect obviously.

now when using the built in Scale, 1:1 or Aspect thats in the monitor control panel nothing works while im in windows.
But if im in the bios itself. it will actually change the aspect of the screen.
Why wont this work in windows ?

Since you have your drivers set to "Scale to Panel", it's probably scaling everything to 1680x1050 on the card before it even sends it out to the monitor. You can verify this by looking at the monitor's OSD and seeing what resolution it says that it's running. Turn off that option in your drivers, and you should be able to use the 1:1/Fill/Aspect options in the monitor.

and am i doomed to only be able to use 1680x1050 in windows ?

No, of course not, you can use other resolutions, but I'm not sure why you would really want to. LCD's always look best at their native resolutions, especially for text. Scaling, while good on this monitor, is something I would almost never do except if I had a game that didn't run well at native resolution.

games are different.
CS Source and HL 2 i had to use 16x10 instead of 16x9 in order for the monitor to display widescreen properly.

That's because the monitor and its native resolution are a 16:10 aspect ratio, not 16:9. All computer widescreen monitors are like that.

16x9 did work for 1680x1050 but nothing else. they were all shrunk down like the refresh wasnt high enough but it supposedly was 75 hz

Again, that sounds like the card is scaling up all resolutions to 1680x1050 before sending it. The actual resolution was something else.

one thing i did notice is that the monitor when you hit the menu button always displays 1680x1050x60hz..... why i that.. i thought it should display the current refresh and such

Reference my above answers.

i do have the 2005 drivers installed but it didnt make any difference when it was just plug and pray

this is also a 9800 XT (god i regret getting rid of the 6800 GT)

It'll be fine with any video card for the most part.

 

[PoopyPants]

thanks for the refernce of what scalling means in the ati control panel i simply thought that stretched the resolution to fit.

and using different resolutions even though they show as a wide screen resolution. they are not full screen wide screen. they dont fit the monitor.

and the 1:1 fit or aspect only works in dos modes or very low resolutions.

the 1680x1050 is sore on my eyes as my eyes have never liked 60hz refresh rates. if that was the case i would have ran that on my crt.

this by no means is any type of a waste of money i love it for what it is and if 1680c1050 is what i have to deal with in true 1:1 full screen then so be it.
I just find it rather odd that other resolutions that clearly show as widescreen arent or wont fit to screen.
as ive stated the built in fit 1:1 aspect does not work on higher resolutions. only very low resolutions.

thank you very much for the input,. i'll keep playing around.

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: PoopyPants
thanks for the refernce of what scalling means in the ati control panel i simply thought that stretched the resolution to fit.

and using different resolutions even though they show as a wide screen resolution. they are not full screen wide screen. they dont fit the monitor.

and the 1:1 fit or aspect only works in dos modes or very low resolutions.

the 1680x1050 is sore on my eyes as my eyes have never liked 60hz refresh rates. if that was the case i would have ran that on my crt.

this by no means is any type of a waste of money i love it for what it is and if 1680c1050 is what i have to deal with in true 1:1 full screen then so be it.
I just find it rather odd that other resolutions that clearly show as widescreen arent or wont fit to screen.
as ive stated the built in fit 1:1 aspect does not work on higher resolutions. only very low resolutions.

thank you very much for the input,. i'll keep playing around.

Like I said, I would recommend turning off that Scaling option in your ATI drivers, so you can use the monitor to switch between 1:1, Fill, and Aspect.

About your "not full screen widescreen resolutions", I assume you're talking about Half-Life 2 here. The game natively supports both 16:9 and 16:10 aspect ratios. The resolutions that appear for me at those AR's are 1600x900 and 1680x1050, respectively. Just use the 16:10 resolution (well, unless you have a somewhat slow video card that can't quite push the game at that resolution...but then, you probably wouldn't be able to run 1600x900 well either).

Again...60Hz is not a bad thing on an LCD monitor. It has absolutely nothing to do with the "refresh rate" as it applies to CRT's. 60Hz on a CRT is headache-inducing, "60Hz" on an LCD is not. (Unless you have some other strange sensitivity to the brigheness of the screen or something, I guess...but that's something else.)

What other resolutions have you been trying that the 1:1/Fill/Aspect options do not work? And which have you been trying that do work?

Edit:

I just find it rather odd that other resolutions that clearly show as widescreen arent or wont fit to screen.

What specifically do you mean by this? What resolutions are they, how do they "clearly show as widescreen"?

 

[PoopyPants]

let me try and say this once again

no matter what setting i sue fill/1:1/aspect does not work unless its 1024 or less ive mentioned that like 3 times now.

the monitor, while in the bios and booting says 1280x1024 x 75 optimal 1680x1050 and fill/aspect/1:1 works but not when i hit windows.
It does not matter is Scale to panel is enabled or not.

1360x1024
1360x768 --- Widescreen
1280x1024
1280x960
1280x768 --- Widescreen
1280x720 --- Widescreen
None of those work with the Dell Fill/1:1/Aspect

1152x864
1024x768
800x600
those DO work with the fill/1:1/Aspect

some of those that do NOT work are widescreen displays and neither the Monitor control, NOR the ATI Controls will make then stretch to fit.

there are only a few of the resolutions that DO work with "Scale to Fit" option but they are distorted like blown up jpeg's meaning the windows shell is being stretched and its causing the screen to look bad.

I'm not sure why those i have labelled as widescreen do not scale to fit except for 1280x768
I'm not sure why 1368x768 nor 1368x1024 wont fit out of those 2 i would assume 1368x768 would automatically scale to fit or work using the monitor controls as its a very obvious widescreen display setting but they dont.


I suppose I could go thru in the registry and add a few entries for supported resolutions of the card and see if they actually work.


lastly there is a 1004 difference of 75hz to 60 hz on a LCD 60hz is native but 75hz is 75hz its not some made up number.
Thsoe who dont see the difference either have very poor eyes or they have been using 60hz on an lcd so long they cant tell the difference.

 

[SynthDude2001]

When you use a resolution that the monitor won't stretch, is it listed correctly in the OSD (i.e., as what the resolution really is)? I think I have seen resolutions interpreted as something else, at times. Also are you just using these resolutions in Windows or in games?

Edit:

lastly there is a 1004 difference of 75hz to 60 hz on a LCD 60hz is native but 75hz is 75hz its not some made up number.
Thsoe who dont see the difference either have very poor eyes or they have been using 60hz on an lcd so long they cant tell the difference.

I realize that you can do 75Hz on an LCD, I was just saying that you don't need to for eyestrain purposes (since LCD's do not flicker like CRT's do). The only time 75Hz should make a difference over 60Hz is in motion/games/etc, when the response time of the panel is low enough that it could possibly do more than 60 updates on a particular pixel per second. With the 2005FPW being rated at 12ms gray-to-gray, this is certainly possible.

 

[PoopyPants]

well after resetting to factory defaults on the monitor the Fill option no works for 1280x1024
have to try a few others to see what happens.

 

[cbehnken]

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
When you use a resolution that the monitor won't stretch, is it listed correctly in the OSD (i.e., as what the resolution really is)? I think I have seen resolutions interpreted as something else, at times. Also are you just using these resolutions in Windows or in games?

Edit:

lastly there is a 1004 difference of 75hz to 60 hz on a LCD 60hz is native but 75hz is 75hz its not some made up number.
Thsoe who dont see the difference either have very poor eyes or they have been using 60hz on an lcd so long they cant tell the difference.

I realize that you can do 75Hz on an LCD, I was just saying that you don't need to for eyestrain purposes (since LCD's do not flicker like CRT's do). The only time 75Hz should make a difference over 60Hz is in motion/games/etc, when the response time of the panel is low enough that it could possibly do more than 60 updates on a particular pixel per second. With the 2005FPW being rated at 12ms gray-to-gray, this is certainly possible.

Dude, give up. This guy is helpless, he can't understand that LCDs do not refresh.

 

[PoopyPants]

ok cbehnken thanks for that input >:|

they do refresh but not necessarily in the sense your talking. or in the CRT way.

and if they dont refresh then why can i instantly tell the difference from 60-75hz
and why would the monitor even have a 60-75hz refresh rate.
why would they even have a horiz or vert refresh rating ?
why at 60hz do scrolling thru webpages have a tendancy to "jump" aside form crappy video card
why is there verticle sync tearing in video's and games at 60hz aka rolling lines ? aside from vert sync not being enabled in the video drivers
why do you think only a select few monitors that run 60hz are gaming monitors ?
why do you think the GOOD gaming lcd's use a better refresh than 60hz (that isnt particularly true the response timing is key there also. )
they dont refresh im sorry who is clueless ? thats like saying your eyes and the human brain don't refresh with every mmicro second you are alive and seeing.

anyways Synth i appreciate your thoughts it gave me a bit more knowledge into this particular monitor
i was by no means disappointed i simply wanted to set it up properly and until i reset to defaults it wasnt letting me do so.

 

[cbehnken]

Originally posted by: PoopyPants
ok cbehnken thanks for that input >:|

they do refresh but not necessarily in the sense your talking. or in the CRT way.

and if they dont refresh then why can i instantly tell the difference from 60-75hz
and why would the monitor even have a 60-75hz refresh rate.
why would they even have a horiz or vert refresh rating ?
why at 60hz do scrolling thru webpages have a tendancy to "jump" aside form crappy video card
why is there verticle sync tearing in video's and games at 60hz aka rolling lines ? aside from vert sync not being enabled in the video drivers
why do you think only a select few monitors that run 60hz are gaming monitors ?
why do you think the GOOD gaming lcd's use a better refresh than 60hz (that isnt particularly true the response timing is key there also. )
they dont refresh im sorry who is clueless ? thats like saying your eyes and the human brain don't refresh with every mmicro second you are alive and seeing.

anyways Synth i appreciate your thoughts it gave me a bit more knowledge into this particular monitor
i was by no means disappointed i simply wanted to set it up properly and until i reset to defaults it wasnt letting me do so.

You have no clue about how LCDs work. The screen is a constant image that only changes when the colors need to change. IT IS CONSTANT AND DOES NOT REFRESH.