ati xorg driver low res only

I have a 9550 ati card, I get better resolution using the vesa driver
but i can only get the dvi interface to work with the ati xorg
driver. I am currently using 1152x768 and it works great in vesa. ati
gives me weird resolutions with less than 500 horizontal lines.
any tricks, may be wait for a new driver? Any conf samples? thanks.

This is how my xorg.conf looks

Section "Module"
Load "bitmap"
Load "ddc"
Load "dri"
Load "extmod"
Load "freetype"
Load "glx"
Load "int10"
Load "vbe"
EndSection

Section "Device"
Identifier "ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon 9550]"
Driver "vesa"
BusID "PCI:1:0:0"
EndSection

SubSection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1152x768" "1024x768" "800x600"
EndSubSection

joe <jcharth@gmail.com> writes:[color=blue]
>I have a 9550 ati card, I get better resolution using the vesa driver
>but i can only get the dvi interface to work with the ati xorg
>driver.[/color]

In theory the "ati" driver should defer automatically to the "radeon"
driver, but I have had little luck with that. You might try
specifying "radeon" explicitly.
[color=blue]
>I am currently using 1152x768 and it works great in vesa. ati
>gives me weird resolutions with less than 500 horizontal lines.[/color]

Take a look at /var/log/Xorg.0.log, there you should see what X does
not like about the modes you have specified.
[color=blue]
>any tricks, may be wait for a new driver?[/color]

I have used X.org 7.1.1 with the "radeon" driver with an RV350-based
card, and it worked fine.
[color=blue]
> Any conf samples? thanks.[/color]

I have had good experiences with various Radeon cards by starting X
without any conf file (X.org 7.1.1 is intelligent enough to find out
most relevant things by itself). However, you have a screen with a
resolution that is probably not covered by the EDID information; in
that case you need a conf file. What might be missing from your conf
file is a mode line for the 1152x768 mode, and maybe also monitor
frequency ranges.

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
[email]anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at[/email] Most things have to be believed to be seen
[url]http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html[/url]

joe staggered into the Black Sun and said:[color=blue]
> I have a 9550 ati card. I get better resolution using the vesa driver,
> but i can only get the dvi interface to work with the ati xorg
> driver.[/color]

"ati" is really for Mach64 cards. Use "radeon" if you have something
with a Radeon name. Which distro are you using, and which version of X
are you using?
[color=blue]
> I am currently using 1152x768 and it works great in vesa. ati
> gives me weird resolutions with less than 500 horizontal lines.
>
> Section "Module"
> Load "bitmap" Load "ddc" Load "dri" Load "extmod"
> Load "freetype" Load "glx"[/color]
[color=blue]
> Identifier "ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon 9550]"[/color]

glx may or may not work properly with this card. The man page for a
recent radeon module mentions that the RV350 chipset only works in 2D
right now. First thing to do is to try commenting that line out.
[color=blue]
> Modes "1152x768" "1024x768" "800x600"[/color]

What's the native resolution of the monitor? You need that in your
Modes line for best results, unless you're using a CRT. In that case,
you need to have the Hsync and Vsync ranges correct. Look in
/var/log/Xorg.0.log for anything that seems odd and follow up with
appropriate lines from that. *DO NOT* post the whole logfile; it's ~600
lines long and most of it is completely useless.

--
....a 12 kV pulse capacitor a buddy of mine has. Charging it to 4,000
V is enough to vaporize a small peach. The air smells of a rather
pleasant combination of ozone and peach after that. --M.Erickson, ASR
Matt G|There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see

Dances With Crows <danceswithcrows@usa.net> writes:[color=blue][color=green]
>> Identifier "ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon 9550]"[/color]
>
>glx may or may not work properly with this card. The man page for a
>recent radeon module mentions that the RV350 chipset only works in 2D
>right now.[/color]

The man page at my machine says that, too. It is outdated. I have
experienced accelerated 3D on RV350 cards (9600, 9600XT)
<2007Feb2.184806@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>.

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
[email]anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at[/email] Most things have to be believed to be seen
[url]http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html[/url]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

joe wrote:[color=blue]
> I have a 9550 ati card, I get better resolution using the vesa driver
> but i can only get the dvi interface to work with the ati xorg
> driver. I am currently using 1152x768 and it works great in vesa. ati
> gives me weird resolutions with less than 500 horizontal lines.
> any tricks, may be wait for a new driver? Any conf samples? thanks.[/color]

In general Xorg strives to configure itself. How about if you backup
your xorg.conf and try removing all references to depth, resolution,
modes etc?

In theory, if you do this Xorg will EDID your display device for its
native configuration and will use that.

- --
Regards,
Sheridan Hutchinson
[email]Sheridan@Shezza.org[/email]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHpjY+nBrliHqz8aARArV6AKCAl+VzEYiQa313nLeUPqiVWg3JegCgz0nZ
E2Me7Skm/Ro5zIx9cWbWhc8=
=5WBk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

$ cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep -i "mode"

This should list modes recognized for your driver/card.

If you're using the ATI drivers, then you might try DefaultDepth 24. I've
only been able to get 24 bit colors working. If you're using the radeon
driver then more modes and color depths should be available.

Section "Screen"
Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]"
Device "aticonfig-Device[0]"
Monitor "aticonfig-Monitor[0]"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Depth 24
Modes "1152x768" "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
EndSubSection
EndSection

Make sure you have the kernel module(s) for your card available and/or
loaded (modprobe). Otherwise Vesa is your friend.

I got it to work at 1920 x 540 but no way I can look at it like that.
I tried 960x540 but I got a blank screen. No Cheese so far.

On Feb 3, 6:19*pm, Shadow_7 <wwwShad...@yaNOhoo.comNULL> wrote:[color=blue]
> $ cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep -i "mode"
>
> This should list modes recognized for your driver/card.
>
> If you're using the ATI drivers, then you might try DefaultDepth 24. *I've
> only been able to get 24 bit colors working. *If you're using the radeon
> driver then more modes and color depths should be available.
>
> Section "Screen"
> * * * * Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]"
> * * * * Device * * "aticonfig-Device[0]"
> * * * * Monitor * *"aticonfig-Monitor[0]"
> * * * * DefaultDepth * * 24
> * * * * SubSection "Display"
> * * * * * * * * Depth * * 24
> * * * * * * * * Modes * *"1152x768" "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
> * * * * EndSubSection
> EndSection
>
> Make sure you have the kernel module(s) for your card available and/or
> loaded (modprobe). *Otherwise Vesa is your friend.[/color]

Anton Ertl staggered into the Black Sun and said:[color=blue]
> Dances With Crows <danceswithcrows@usa.net> writes:[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> Identifier "ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon 9550]"[/color]
>>glx may or may not work properly with this card. The man page for a
>>recent radeon module mentions that the RV350 chipset only works in 2D
>>right now.[/color]
> The man page at my machine says that, too. It is outdated. I have
> experienced accelerated 3D on RV350 cards (9600, 9600XT)[/color]

Ah. Good to know. This is where somebody should holler at the Xorg
people and give them a patch for their radeon man page, right?

--
PIG: How dare you try to bribe me with amenities like anime, Annie Mae
my sea anemone enemy.
RAT: ENOUGH! --Pearls Before Swine
Matt G|There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:18:40 -0800, joe wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> $ cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep -i "mode"
>>
>> This should list modes recognized for your driver/card.[/color][/color]

Any results on this query? I've never gone higher than 1280x800 myself.
But that's the max resolution of my laptops LCD. Some of my 17" monitors
do 1152x???, but I have a hard enough time looking at them at 1024x768.
Especially if I use -dpi 75 to put more text in a given space. Thank
goodness for Cntrl+Alt+[+/-]. I think mom's 20" LCD does a bit higher,
but she rarely uses it at anything greater than 800x600. The joys of
getting older. Maybe someday when I get a beefy video card and a 30+"
LCD...

I demand that Dances With Crows may or may not have written...
[color=blue]
> Anton Ertl staggered into the Black Sun and said:[color=green]
>> Dances With Crows <danceswithcrows@usa.net> writes:[color=darkred]
>>>> Identifier "ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon 9550]"
>>> glx may or may not work properly with this card. The man page for a
>>> recent radeon module mentions that the RV350 chipset only works in 2D
>>> right now.[/color]
>> The man page at my machine says that, too. It is outdated. I have
>> experienced accelerated 3D on RV350 cards (9600, 9600XT)[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> Ah. Good to know. This is where somebody should holler at the Xorg
> people and give them a patch for their radeon man page, right?[/color]

No :-)

[url]http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati.git;a=commit;h=e155659f4b00[/url]

--
| Darren Salt | linux or ds at | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| RISC OS, Linux | youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | Army
| + Travel less. Share transport more. PRODUCE LESS CARBON DIOXIDE.

'In closing' is always followed by the other half of the speech.