[vox-tech] Re: vox-tech digest, Vol 1 #417 - 1 msg
Peter Jay Salzman
vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
Thu, 5 Sep 2002 18:20:27 -0700
i never knew this!
rick, perhaps you should contact ESR and ask him to include this email,
nearly verbatim, to the video mode timing howto? i sure could've
benefited knowing this stuff before.
i've been writing home-brewed video modes for years now to squeeze
performance out of my video cards for gaming, but didn't know any of
this. i just assumed that if something didn't look or sound right,
ctl-alt-backspace would save me. guess i didn't need saving all along.
btw, how much of this stuff is true for tft's or laptops? i'm always
worried about laptops because half the time i can't find the power
switch, let alone ctl-alt-backspace. do low-space items like these also
carry protection circuitry?
pete
begin Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com>
> Quoting Peter Jay Salzman (p@dirac.org):
>
> > 1. try raising the maximum vertrefresh rate in the monitor section of
> > your XF86Config-4 file. i wouldn't push it past 10% of the current
> > max value.
>
> This is a conservative approach that will pretty much always keep you
> out of trouble. But I thought I'd try to add some historical
> perspective:
>
> Way back when, analogue monitors (VGA and improvements thereof) started
> out doing maybe three or four fixed frequency combinations -- "detent"
> resolutions, if you will. Soon thereafter, NEC introduced the original
> Multisync series of monitors, and everyone else cloned the concept. The
> Multisyncs automatically locked onto any incoming video signal within
> its horizontal and vertical frequency limits. And they had really good
> protection circuitry to blank the display any time you fed them signals
> outside those limits.
>
> Which was very nice. The temptation was to assume that _all_ monitors
> were that well built, and that capable. Unfortunately, there were lots
> of existing, older monitors that weren't. With a Multisync (and
> imitators), you could throw caution to the wind and just feed it the
> fastest signal you _hoped_ it would autosync onto. If you got blank
> video, it meant you were overreaching, and needed to step down a bit.
> The moment you dropped low enough, it worked.
>
> With a lesser (typically much older) monitor, it was possible to feed it
> a signal that either it couldn't sync to but kept trying, or (as claimed
> by some) that produced a picture but stressed the monitor to eventual
> failure. I have extreme doubts about the latter: Over a decade of
> XFree86 setup work, I never once had a monitor burn out on a successful
> sync. In my experience, when you fired up the X11 session to test your
> configuration work, if you immediately (within a minute or two) killed
> the X server if you heard a monitor whine or saw it fail to sync, then
> you would never hurt it.
>
> And it has basically been something over a decade since multisynchronous
> monitors basically totally supplanted the vulnerable kind. So, within
> reason, the "You could destroy your monitor" warning to be cautious
> about frequency limits _should_ be obsolete.
>
> Yet, caution on this point persists. Why? Because:
>
> 1. The day you stop advising caution, Great Murphy will send you
> someone with an antique, vulnerable, heap of junk monitor -- leaving you
> at the end of the day with blame, an invoice, a lawsuit threat, or like
> that.
>
> 2. Even if you explain the bit about "Hit Ctrl-Alt-Bkspc instantly if
> you either hear a high-pitched whine or you fail to get a stable image"
> slowly and in very small words, _someone_ will fail to get it, and again
> you can be the goat.
>
> So, every time I'm tempted to say "Screw the HorizSync and VertRefresh
> safeguards; set them deliberately wide", expediency makes me bite my
> tongue.
>
> > Section "Monitor"
> > Identifier "Miserable Monitor"
> > HorizSync 30-84
> > VertRefresh 50-75
> > Option "DPMS"
> > EndSection
> >
> >
> > who called it "miserable monitor"? if the monitor is truly this
> > miserable, there's much you can do about it. your vertical refresh
> > rate is surprisingly low for a newish monitor. as a first line of
> > attack, i would do some websearching and make sure these numbers are
> > correct.
>
> Second the motion. Sounds like a logical suspect.
>
> --
> Cheers, There are only 10 types of people in this world --
> Rick Moen those who understand binary arithmetic and those who don't.
> rick@linuxmafia.com
> _______________________________________________
> vox-tech mailing list
> vox-tech@lists.lugod.org
> http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
--
Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D