how do i set my peice of c*** computer' s resolution to 1366 x 768 it has an
integrated intel chipset(which is junk)

ps i still have the same problem with it crashing when i go to play any game
that uses directx(igxpdx32.dll) is there somthing like nvemulate but for
intel so i can use opengl

You can only select a video resolution that your monitor and graphics
system support.

To see what resolutions are supported: Control Panel > Display > Settings.

If your computer has an LCD monitor, the video resolution should be the
same as the monitor's native resolution; any other setting will look fuzzy.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Justin wrote:
> how do i set my peice of c*** computer' s resolution to 1366 x 768 it has an
> integrated intel chipset(which is junk)
>
> ps i still have the same problem with it crashing when i go to play any game
> that uses directx(igxpdx32.dll) is there somthing like nvemulate but for
> intel so i can use opengl

=?Utf-8?B?SnVzdGlu?= <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
in news:16CEE974-2E4C-4EBC-B7D5-(E-Mail Removed):

> how do i set my peice of c*** computer' s resolution to
> 1366 x 768 it has an integrated intel chipset(which is
> junk)

Got a 3 year LCD Bravia 40" like I do?

The closest you can get with the Intel chip (I have same) is
1280 x 768. Not bad - a 43 pixel black bar per side is almost
invisible. But the Bravia looks like **** when showing movies.
You need a CRT for that.

MAYBE your chip is newer and DOES have a better resolution -
just go to control panel/Intel video properties and search for
all modes. Don't forget for LCD monitors the refresh rate must
be 60 Hz.

> ps i still have the same problem with it crashing when i go
> to play any game that uses directx(igxpdx32.dll) is there
> somthing like nvemulate but for intel so i can use opengl

I don't know, uninstall and reinstall DirectX - maybe an older
version - and Google - DirectX's main claim to fame is that
every release I remember has had a disclaimer that it "may make
you machine inoperable, in which case you should go back to the
previous version". Good ol' MS.



--
There are only two classifications of disk drives: Broken drives
and those that will break later.
- Chuck Armstrong (This one I think, http://www.cleanreg.com/,
not the ball player. But who knows. I can't remember where I got
the quote. But it's true.)

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> In message <Xns9D01A141CD724thanexit@188.40.43.245>,
> thanatoid <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

<SNIP>

> You _may_ have to tell your system you have an unknown
> monitor as well (unless you can find a driver for the
> actual monitor in question); it may otherwise assume the
> monitor it thinks you're using isn't capable of some
> resolutions, and not offer them.

I have NEVER seen ANY differnce in control or operformance
between "generic monitor" and the specific model in use.

>>all modes. Don't forget for LCD monitors the refresh rate
>>must be 60 Hz.
>
> Not so: I have one that recommends 75, IIRR.

Never seen THAT figure - and I have an Argos catalogue! You're
in the UK. It's 50HZ there, or 200 or 400, or possibly 3200 in a
year or two. Like ANY difference will be visible.

<SNIP>

>> DirectX's main claim to fame is that
>>every release I remember has had a disclaimer that it "may
>>make you machine inoperable, in which case you should go
>>back to the previous version". Good ol' MS.
>>
> I suspect the going back isn't easy, either. (Especially if
> it's made your machine truly inoperable!)

Of course it isn't. It's a MS product. But thankfully, mostly
just gamers and people who "have to have the latest version of
everything MS makes" use it.


--
There are only two classifications of disk drives: Broken drives
and those that will break later.
- Chuck Armstrong (This one I think, http://www.cleanreg.com/,
not the ball player. But who knows. I can't remember where I got
the quote. But it's true.)

A specific monitor .inf can allow nonstandard resolutions so long as the
driver and hardware are capable of them. Sometimes a driver update will also
allow more resolutions.

No display has a 50Hz vertical rate. The standard values are 43,60,73,75,85
or 100Hz. LCDs typically support 60 or 75Hz only, but this is of no
significance as unlike a CRT a low rate doesn't induce flicker.

"thanatoid" wrote:

> I have NEVER seen ANY differnce in control or operformance
> between "generic monitor" and the specific model in use.
>
> Never seen THAT figure - and I have an Argos catalogue! You're
> in the UK. It's 50HZ there, or 200 or 400, or possibly 3200 in a
> year or two. Like ANY difference will be visible.
>

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:7Q$(E-Mail Removed):

> In message <Xns9D02EA1F48767thanexit@188.40.43.245>,
> thanatoid <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

<SNIP>

>>in the UK. It's 50HZ there, or 200 or 400, or possibly 3200
>>in a year or two. Like ANY difference will be visible.
>
> Hmm. I don't think even our HD transmissions are anywhere
> near 200 Hz frame or field rate

It's purely a marketing gimmick having nothing to do with the
signal as it enters the monitor. There MAY be a minor
improvement with 200 Hz Vs. 50Hz or 240Hz Vs. 60Hz but frankly I
am skeptical, although I have no doubt there WILL be LCD
shitboxes with 3200Hz refresh rates just like there will be 13.3
surround sound systems - sooner or later.

> Indeed. (Though sometimes you have to use the latest
> version of something, not necessarily DirectX, to view some
> YouTube videos, even if you're not a must-have-latest sort
> of person.)

Well, we were talking about DirectX. Of course my affinity (and
yours) for older (and better ) software has to take into
consideration minor adjustments (or temporaryy major
adjustments) due to new technology, assuming there is one that
is actually worth anything.


--
There are only two classifications of disk drives: Broken drives
and those that will break later.
- Chuck Armstrong (This one I think, http://www.cleanreg.com/,
not the ball player. But who knows. I can't remember where I got
the quote. But it's true.)