Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor
From: JD (Erehwon_at_Example.com)
Date: 03/17/04
- Next message: Bill: "Office 2000"
- Previous message: Plato: "Re: I can't burn with Nero or Wizard"
- In reply to: JD: "Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor"
- Next in thread: Alex Nichol: "Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor"
- Reply: Alex Nichol: "Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 18:05:59 -0800
I reset the screen resolution to 1280 x 1024. I'm overwhelmed by the
difference. It will take some getting used to. Icons and text are so small,
etc.
To my disappointment, I still find text in Word docs becomes distorted when
I scroll through pages fast. Lines are repeated.
I'm about convinced that my Nvidia Ge Force FX 5200 is just not adequate.
What else could it be?
"JD" <Erehwon@Example.com> wrote in message
news:uFle1F6CEHA.3836@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I'll see if I can adjust the resolution to 1280 x 1024. However, the 1024
x
> 768 seems to be the "default."
> Actually, I have no trouble with the screen, except in Word documents
where
> the text becomes blurred (lines repeated) when Word is maximized, but
clears
> when the window is reduced to approximately 75% of screen real estate.
Have
> you an idea what might be causing that?
> "Alex Nichol" <alexn.mvpdts@ntlworld.delete.com> wrote in message
> news:flfe50t5ep42vjtb9nol51qjf1p4jnrdfi@4ax.com...
> > JD wrote:
> >
> > >Does a flat-panel monitor place more demands on a video card than a
> > >conventional monitor does?
> > >Put differently, might a card that worked fine with a standard monitor
be
> > >inadequate to the demands of a flat-panel screen?
> > >I have an Nvidia Ge Force 5200 FX card, which came pre-installed on my
> > >Gateway computer.
> > >The screen is a 17" flat-panel.
> >
> > No - on the whole they make less demand, because they run as standard at
> > 60Hz whereas a CRT is rarely run below 75 (LCD being inherently flicker
> > free). Check with the display's manual that you are running it at its
> > 'native' resolution - probably 1280 x 1024 for a 17 inch, and that you
> > have got it set up in correct adjustment - most have an Auto-adjust but
> > you may have to fine tune the 'phase' so each pixel in the signal
> > corresponds exactly to one on the screen
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
> > Bournemouth, U.K. Alexn@mvps.D8E8L.org (remove the D8 bit)
>
>
- Next message: Bill: "Office 2000"
- Previous message: Plato: "Re: I can't burn with Nero or Wizard"
- In reply to: JD: "Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor"
- Next in thread: Alex Nichol: "Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor"
- Reply: Alex Nichol: "Re: Flat Panel Screen vs. Conventional Monitor"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|