Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New members, please remember to read the Forum Rules and the Posting Guide before posting for the first time!

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down

Author Topic: TV out resolution  (Read 9027 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dst

  • Guest
TV out resolution
« on: 05-October-04, 23:52:34 »

I finally connected my MSI MEGA 180 to my TV, but got some
problems.

If i use 800x600 on my 36"" Sony widescreen i get 3 cm black bars on top/bottom.
What resolution should i use ?

I tried adding a custom resolution of 720x576, then it shrinked to 1 cm top/bottom.

800x800 seems to be too high, it makes the screen scroll, it doesn get right if i try values between 600 and 800, it suddenly gets too big.

Whats the recomended screen resolution on tv out for a widescreen tv ??
Or how do i stretch it so it covers the entire screen ?

I'm not impressed with the quality, it's very blurry, hard to see text etc...

Dst
Logged

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: 06-October-04, 00:19:47 »

I can't advise unfortunately whioch is the right resolution for a widescreen tv (aspect ratio 16:9), however one thing seems to be for sure - in the "normal"video signal there are just 625 lines (vertical pixels that is), out of even this modest number a good deal of them is "wasted" for various purposes, e.g. frame sync pulses, teletext, etc. If I recall right, the actual resolution of a standard TV is something like 500 lines.

so it seems to me that wacthing a PC on a TV is not meant to be from a close distance, or for reading some small print..
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: 06-October-04, 06:22:46 »

Couple of questions first:

1) How are you connecting to your tv (Coax, DVI, other)
2) What are you doing when you have the problem? (Viewing DVDs, computer, other?)
3) Is your TV an SDTV, EDTV, or HDTV?
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: 06-October-04, 07:09:07 »

I'm connecting through a svideo -> scart cable.

Viewing DVDs seems to be ok,  a bit blurry, not razer sharp.
But viewing my desktop is almost impossible, small fonts on shortcuts etc.

I live in norway, i dont think i have heard about those types, it's
a normal analog tv ? lol
Tube tv, 100hz, trinitron, dont rememeber the model number.
Total weight is 100kg (my back knows all about that:).

Dst
Logged

otrofox

  • Platinum
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: 06-October-04, 11:42:09 »

I can hardly see my desktop fonts but... I CAN!!
Maybe your svideo cable is not good enough or too long. Try another cable. the quality, of course, has nothing to do with the one of a monitor but... it's enough for me. I use the zoom function of my wireless mouse to read small fonts, such as emule, explorer, desktop, etc. Gaming and watching videos/DVD, the quality is good  :biggthumbsup:
Logged
MSI Mega 180 Deluxe
Seagate 160GB
Athlon 2800+ Barton
1x DIMM DDR 400  512MB
Toshiba DVD-ROM
Radeon X1600 512MB
SkyStar 2 DVB Satellite
MS Windows XP Pro SP2

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: 06-October-04, 16:46:16 »

Alright, if it's a normal TV then it is SDTV (Standard Definition Television).  

From this URL
Each frame of video contains about 480 active lines of information (482.5 actually, but we will talk round numbers here to communicate the concept). Now a single frame of video is actually painted on the screen line-by-line in two passes. On the first pass, the beam paints all of the odd numbered lines from 1 to 479, top to bottom. That takes 1/60 second. On the second pass it paints all of the even numbered lines from 2 to 480. That also takes 1/60 second. So it takes a total of 1/30 second to display all 480 lines of the frame. This display technique is known as "interlacing."

When they broadcast video information, they need to give CRT-type TVs time to reset the electronic beam to the top of the screen so it can get ready to paint the next sequence of lines. So they build in an interframe gap that equals about 45 lines. There is no picture information in this 45 line gap—it is there just to allow the TV time to get ready to receive the next frame. So the total number of lines in each frame is 480 + 45 = 525. You've probably heard that a TV set has 525 lines. Not so. The signal has 525 lines, but only 480 of them contain active video information that ends up on your screen.


I am willing to bet that you are running your desktop in something other than 640 x 480 resolution (which I believe XP supports 800x600 by default).   Try the 640 x 480 setting and let us know if that fixes the problem.
Logged

otrofox

  • Platinum
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: 06-October-04, 16:58:57 »

I'm not sure but I think that these 480 lines are vertical lines, aren't they? At least, watching TV sooo much close, I can see vertical lines. So the max resolution in TV should be 480 x something.

By the way, the MPEG2 standard SVCD resolution is 480 (horizontal) x 576 (vertical)

Can anyone explain that better?
Logged
MSI Mega 180 Deluxe
Seagate 160GB
Athlon 2800+ Barton
1x DIMM DDR 400  512MB
Toshiba DVD-ROM
Radeon X1600 512MB
SkyStar 2 DVB Satellite
MS Windows XP Pro SP2

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #7 on: 06-October-04, 17:50:49 »

Resolutions that are currently in play are 480i, 480p, 720i, 720p, and 1080i, where the i = interlaced, and the p = progressive scanning.

 480 = 640x480
 720 = 1280x720
1080 = 1920x1080

Since you have a standard TV that is not HDTV compatable, the 640x480 setting should fix the problem.
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #8 on: 07-October-04, 00:06:08 »

Yes well 640x480 makes it more readable, but still
it doesnt cover the entire screen.

As i said, 1 cm on the top and 1 cm on the bottom is black bars.
In addition the picture is a bit wide.

Kinda annoying, isnt it possible at all to adjust the height and width
of the tv out signal with nvidia cards ?

Dst
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
RE: TV out resolution
« Reply #9 on: 07-October-04, 00:18:49 »

Quote
Originally posted by Dst
I tried adding a custom resolution of 720x576, then it shrinked to 1 cm top/bottom.

In your first post you said you tried a custom value of 720x576, and that was what produced the 1 cm on the top and bottom.

So, per your last post, you did try the 640x480, and it's giving you the same results as the custom 720x576?  Strange.
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #10 on: 07-October-04, 00:23:45 »

Yup seems like 1cm top/bottom is the max, i have tried loads
of different resolutions.
Some gives me 3cm, some makes the screen scroll, when that happens the
1cm top/bottom is gone.
Maybe a driver problem i dunno, i'm using 61.12.

Dst
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
Europe or US?
« Reply #11 on: 07-October-04, 00:26:04 »

There are different formats in Europe & the USA, not sure which you are using...

NTSC
NTSC stands for the National Television Standards Committee. It is a video signal standard used by the color television industry in the United States and Japan.

The NTSC is a common format used by many video compression boards.

NTSC video contains frames and fields. Most NTSC video frames consist of two interlaced fields. Each field is displayed as alternating horizontal lines across the screen. Most computer video formats are non-interlaced.

The frame aspect ratio used by the NTSC standard format is 4:3. This format uses a 640 by 480 resolution.

By using the NTSC standard for digital video, there are two areas of concern when dealing with aspect ratios. They are as follows:

· Pixel aspect ratio
· Frame aspect ratio

There are various divisions within the NTSC standard which determine what pixel and frame aspect ratios are used. These formats are as follows:

· NTSC (resolution 648 x 486 - preferred format)
· D-1 NTSC (resolution 720 x 486)
· D-1 NTSC Square Pix (resolution 720 x 540)


PAL
PAL stands for the Phase Alternating Line. This is a video standard used by the color television industry and is the common standard used in Europe. This video signal format sets the video to playback at 25 frames per second which contain 625 lines of pixels in each frame.

There are various divisions within the PAL standard which determine what pixel and frame aspect ratios are used. These formats are as follows:

· PAL (resolution 720 x 486)
· D-1 PAL (resolution 720 x 576)
· D-1 PAL Square Pix (resolution 768 x 576)


One of the resolutions above should work on your TV.
Logged

otrofox

  • Platinum
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
(No subject)
« Reply #12 on: 07-October-04, 10:58:53 »

It's possible to adjust size of position of TV-out. At least, I can do it with my nVidia drivers (using onboard-video and onboard-tvout). Right click on desktop and select nVidia TV --> nView --> Device Config --> Screen adjust (sorry, translated from spanish version). There you can resize and position the image. Not sure if resize works OK for 16:9 TVs
Logged
MSI Mega 180 Deluxe
Seagate 160GB
Athlon 2800+ Barton
1x DIMM DDR 400  512MB
Toshiba DVD-ROM
Radeon X1600 512MB
SkyStar 2 DVB Satellite
MS Windows XP Pro SP2

gladman73

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #13 on: 07-October-04, 20:14:20 »

I am having Video problems also.  So are you using the built in Video card?  I have tried to set up my TV also using the SV cable.  I get three duplicate elongated screens on the TV.  I have not had that much time to play with it yet.  I did not know if I need a new video card or not.  Sorry for stepping in with my question.   :-D)
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #14 on: 08-October-04, 17:17:44 »

Quote
Originally posted by otrofox
It's possible to adjust size of position of TV-out. At least, I can do it with my nVidia drivers (using onboard-video and onboard-tvout). Right click on desktop and select nVidia TV --> nView --> Device Config --> Screen adjust (sorry, translated from spanish version). There you can resize and position the image. Not sure if resize works OK for 16:9 TVs

I can move the screen but cant resize it, which driver are you using ?
It says screen positioning.

Dst
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #15 on: 08-October-04, 17:18:28 »

Quote
Originally posted by gladman73
I am having Video problems also.  So are you using the built in Video card?  I have tried to set up my TV also using the SV cable.  I get three duplicate elongated screens on the TV.  I have not had that much time to play with it yet.  I did not know if I need a new video card or not.  Sorry for stepping in with my question.   :-D)

I'm using the onboard gfx card yes.

Dst
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
RE: Europe or US?
« Reply #16 on: 08-October-04, 17:20:23 »

Quote
Originally posted by jjarrett

There are various divisions within the PAL standard which determine what pixel and frame aspect ratios are used. These formats are as follows:

· PAL (resolution 720 x 486)
· D-1 PAL (resolution 720 x 576)
· D-1 PAL Square Pix (resolution 768 x 576)


One of the resolutions above should work on your TV.

Tnx, going to try them later :)

Dst
Logged

Stu

  • Hawk
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19577
  • Birmingham, UK
    • StuOnline.co.uk
(No subject)
« Reply #17 on: 08-October-04, 19:38:56 »

to fill the screen properly on a widescreen tv you would need to be sending a widescreen signal to it

our tv in the living room is a 16:9 widescreen tv, but we don't have cable or digital so we are only receiving 4:3 on terrestrial TV. what the tv does is cleverly stretch the picture to fit, but we get black borders about 2cm top and bottom when watching terrestrial broadcasts that are not in 4:3. so to get a true widescreen resolution you'd need a resolution of something around 1359x768. you'll probably find that the tv encoder won't support that...  :undecided:

thats what i'm guessing anyway, unless someone has a better idea.
« Last Edit: 08-October-04, 19:39:41 by Stu Online »
Logged
Former moderator and admin, 2004-2012

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #18 on: 14-October-04, 04:37:41 »

Quote
Originally posted by Stu Online
to fill the screen properly on a widescreen tv you would need to be sending a widescreen signal to it

Yep.

Quote
Originally posted by Stu Online
so to get a true widescreen resolution you'd need a resolution of something around 1359x768.

Not necessarily, that looks like a HDTV setting to me.  You can get Widescreen without HDTV.
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #19 on: 14-October-04, 09:50:55 »

No matter what resolution i try i cant seem to get it to use the entire screen.
The picture is a bit wide, and the height should be larger.

I dont know if this has something to do with the nvidia drivers.
Why doesnt the drivers has an option to adjust the height and width of the screen ?
I can only move the screen, not adjust it..
Is the signal locked in the hardware somwhow ? lol
Does anyone use a nvidia driver that has the option to stretch the picture ?
I'm using 61.12.

Also i have enabled tvout in the bios, even then the signal when booting is not correct...

Drives me crazy.

Dst
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #20 on: 14-October-04, 10:06:50 »

It's strange that your tv doesn't change it automatically.   I have a 65" Widescreen Mitsibushi TV, and when I hooked my computer up to it, at 640 x 480, it displayed it perfectly across the screen.  

While browsing I noticed the Radeon cards have the ability to change the signal that is sent to the TV.  Any chance the NVidia cards possess the same capability?

« Last Edit: 14-October-04, 10:15:13 by jjarrett »
Logged

otrofox

  • Platinum
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
(No subject)
« Reply #21 on: 14-October-04, 10:14:35 »

I CAN stretch the picture. I'm using the latest nVidia drivers with the onboard video. The problem is that I can only stretch it maintaing the aspect ratio so I cannot stretch horizontally or vertically only and that doesn't help you, I'm afraid.  :noidea:
« Last Edit: 14-October-04, 10:17:59 by otrofox »
Logged
MSI Mega 180 Deluxe
Seagate 160GB
Athlon 2800+ Barton
1x DIMM DDR 400  512MB
Toshiba DVD-ROM
Radeon X1600 512MB
SkyStar 2 DVB Satellite
MS Windows XP Pro SP2

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #22 on: 14-October-04, 10:24:33 »

Right, but do you have an option to choose NTSC or PAL encoding for the signal?  I wonder if it's sending an NTSC signal and the tv is expecting PAL so it displays what it can.
Logged

otrofox

  • Platinum
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
(No subject)
« Reply #23 on: 14-October-04, 10:36:31 »

I have that option (NTSC/PAL) in BIOS only
Logged
MSI Mega 180 Deluxe
Seagate 160GB
Athlon 2800+ Barton
1x DIMM DDR 400  512MB
Toshiba DVD-ROM
Radeon X1600 512MB
SkyStar 2 DVB Satellite
MS Windows XP Pro SP2

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #24 on: 14-October-04, 10:57:37 »

strictly speaking, terms PAL/NTSC (or SECAM which I was born with) define the way how colour information is encoded in the TV signal, NOT the aspect ratio or things like that...
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #25 on: 14-October-04, 16:51:45 »

Quote
Originally posted by Normunds
strictly speaking, terms PAL/NTSC (or SECAM which I was born with) define the way how colour information is encoded in the TV signal, NOT the aspect ratio or things like that...

The signal has to do with how things are displayed.  Take a look at some of my previous posts on this thread and you can see the difference in resolution settings for the two formats.

Also, there is a fundamental different between PAL/625 and NTSC/525 in regards to the frame rate. With NTSC/525 fitting 30 frames into a second, and PAL/625 only having 25 frames in the same time period, the frames will only start in the same place in the signal on (at best) five occasions within each second.

Also, note that while NTSC is 525 lines, only 480 of the lines are actually displayed.

SECAM seems to be a French standard, and as with most things French, probably isn't very important to the rest of the world.    ;-))
Logged

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #26 on: 14-October-04, 18:13:33 »

we seem to go off-topic, but anyway...

Even the frame rate (with interlaced image like on normal TV perhaps more adequately would be to say semi-frame rate) doesn't determine the aspect ratio :)

Pixel resolution obviously is closely related to aspect ratio, however it's very loosely coupled to PAL/NTSC/etc..

as to SECAM, the term indeed has French origin, and maybe even it is still used in that great country (I don't really know), however another major user of this word was USSR, you know...

Not that the actual standards where anywhere close to compatible  :-D)
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #27 on: 14-October-04, 19:29:00 »

Quote
Originally posted by Normunds
Pixel resolution obviously is closely related to aspect ratio, however it's very loosely coupled to PAL/NTSC/etc..

But the PAL/625 and NTSC/525 are directly associated to the number of horiontal lines ---> 625 for PAL and 525 for NTSC.  How in the world is that loosely coupled?


Quote
Originally posted by Normunds
as to SECAM, the term indeed has French origin, and maybe even it is still used in that great country

The biggest loose coupling I have seen is that of the term great country being associated with France.    Of course, I might be a bit biased.  Je ne sais pas.  ;-))
Logged

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #28 on: 14-October-04, 21:40:58 »

It's defenitly a nvidia driver problem.

I tried the 66.something from guru3d, with this driver i got
another problem, the picture was too big even in the height lol
About 1 cm too high and wide.

But the 1cm black bar on top/bottom was gone.

Anyway couldnt find any resolution that would fit on the screen with that driver.
In addition all drivers after 61.12 doesnt work very well with media portal,
it makes the list view flash like crazy.

If that nvidia resize :censored:  could have resized the height and not both it would have
been sweet, dunno why this isn't possible.

Dst
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #29 on: 15-October-04, 02:05:04 »

Take a look at this article, it's a bit old, but it discusses the problems with NVidias and PAL output.
Logged

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #30 on: 15-October-04, 09:35:58 »

Quote
Originally posted by jjarrett

But the PAL/625 and NTSC/525 are directly associated to the number of horiontal lines ---> 625 for PAL and 525 for NTSC.  How in the world is that loosely coupled?


I guess the number of lines per frame was adopted well before colour TV came in. and the terms PAL/NTSC/etc were non-existent before the colour age

And irrespectively of the actual number of the lines in frame, the aspect ratios of screens seems to be the same accross the globe?
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #31 on: 16-October-04, 06:06:49 »

Quote
Originally posted by Normunds
And irrespectively of the actual number of the lines in frame, the aspect ratios of screens seems to be the same accross the globe?

I can't say for sure, but, it seems to reason that if you don't send enough lines in that there wouldn't be enough information to display.  And that if you send to many in, that there would be too much to display and some type of conversion would have to take place (clipping, reduction).
Logged

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #32 on: 18-October-04, 15:03:26 »

I don't think it's possible to "drop" the lines out of TV signal, as the timing of line/frame sync pulses must be within specs.

Perhaps with the "smart" TV-s of modern days it works, but in generic case risk of having no (viewable) picture at all is very high.
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #33 on: 20-October-04, 04:12:00 »

When they broadcast video information, they need to give CRT-type TVs time to reset the electronic beam to the top of the screen so it can get ready to paint the next sequence of lines. So they build in an interframe gap that equals about 45 lines. There is no picture information in this 45 line gap—it is there just to allow the TV time to get ready to receive the next frame. So the total number of lines in each frame is 480 + 45 = 525. You've probably heard that a TV set has 525 lines. Not so. The signal has 525 lines, but only 480 of them contain active video information that ends up on your screen.

Sometimes you will see this standard analog TV format designated as 525i, which means 525-interlaced. In common usage, a lot of people also use the term "480i" to refer to analog interlaced 480-line active video. However, the industry has recently defined a digital interlaced 480-line format under the array of DTV formats which is known as Standard Definition Television, or SDTV, and 480i is the correct designation for this format.

They are not being dropped in this example per se, but they are not being used either.
Logged

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #34 on: 20-October-04, 09:41:29 »

imho, often even few of "active" lines are not displayed on the TV screen
Logged

jjarrett

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #35 on: 20-October-04, 16:16:58 »

That's probably going to depend on your television.  ;)
Logged

ehassoy

  • Cyclone
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
TV Out Problem
« Reply #36 on: 05-November-04, 06:29:02 »

Hi DST,

what is the situation of TV Out problem. Did you fix it?Finally I decided to use MSI in my living room as HTPC. I plan to use Media Portal with niveus remote. I think you are using MCE 2005.
Logged
MEGA 180
XP 2500+
Kingston 1 Gb DDR 2700 Ram
250 Gbyte SEAGATE HD
NEC Dvd Writer
XP Pro with SP2
ffdshow codec
Sapphire 9600XT 256MB
Intel Mini PCI Card (11g)

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #37 on: 05-November-04, 08:16:53 »

No i gave up ;).

I'm going to buy me a  radeon card soon, hopefully that will be better.

Dst
Logged

Videoz

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #38 on: 18-November-04, 13:55:33 »

Hi,

I've been away a while, so I only just found this thread.

Firstly - the TV standards.

NTSC = National Television Standards Commitee, aka Never Twice the Same Colour, used in US and other third world TV countries  ;-))

SECAM = SEquential Coleur Avec Memoir, aka Something Essentially Contrary to the American Method. Used in France, Russia and related countries.

PAL = Phase Alternating Line, aka Peace At Last. Solves the green faces/ purple trees problems that plague NTSC. Used in enlightened countries  :-D)

TV vertical resolution is set by the number of lines - about 480 for NTSC, 580 for PAL and SECAM. Horizontal resolution is set by the maximum video bandwidth, about 5MHz for PAL, 4MHz for NTSC. Colour bandwidth is worse. The upshot is that 800x600 is the maximum resolution you can reasonably display on a TV, and even then you need to use large fonts for it to be readable.

There are some variations each format, for more info, look here

Most TV sets are deliberately overscanned - the picture is larger than the "frame". The smaller the set, the more the overscan, and the more information is lost around the edges. To compensate for this, and to make sure that the whole PC display area is visible on the TV, most TV out chips are programmed to uderscan the image, with a black border all round. The TV out chips usually can expand the picture to "full screen" or "overscan" mode, but the standard drivers might not give you the option.

Have a look at  tvtool  It's a very useful utility, although it might not work on your hardware (and is nVidia only).

Hope this helps.

Cheers
Logged

Normunds

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #39 on: 18-November-04, 15:08:31 »

thanks for the "Something Essentially Contrary..."  :lol_anim:

It describes pretty well the circumstances of those glorious days, IMHO.
Logged

ehassoy

  • Cyclone
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
(No subject)
« Reply #40 on: 28-November-04, 22:10:43 »

Dst,

I realized that you have radeon card finally. What about it's TV-Out performance? Are you satisfied with it? I tried MSI Tv-Out with composite cable and NTSC Tv. It was terrible.
Logged
MEGA 180
XP 2500+
Kingston 1 Gb DDR 2700 Ram
250 Gbyte SEAGATE HD
NEC Dvd Writer
XP Pro with SP2
ffdshow codec
Sapphire 9600XT 256MB
Intel Mini PCI Card (11g)

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #41 on: 29-November-04, 07:26:25 »

Havent tried it yet lol

Maybe i will try it tonight, i have been pretty busy lately.

Dst
Logged

Stu

  • Hawk
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19577
  • Birmingham, UK
    • StuOnline.co.uk
(No subject)
« Reply #42 on: 29-November-04, 19:12:18 »

well i'm using the TV-out on my Asus FX5200 card, connected via composite video to a SCART adaptor into my Panasonic 21" TV (only 4:3 mind, can't afford / no room for a widescreen  ;-(( ) and the picture quality is quite good in Media Center 2005 - comparable to my old Philips OnDigital DVB box.

with the new nvidia forceware drivers (66.93) i can now set resolution to 640x480 which seems to have stabilised image quality, with the downset that Windows now looks awful, but the Mega is only now for use with Media Center anyway.
Logged
Former moderator and admin, 2004-2012

Dst

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #43 on: 02-December-04, 22:25:05 »

Ok finally tried the tv out on the 9800AIW.

First impression, not good.

It has the same problem as the nvidia card, 1 cm black bars on top/bottom.
It has the abillity to increase width/height independent of eachother.
But doesnt go beyond the black bars.

BUT it has an overscan option, if i enable that it fills the entire screen.
And of course the finetuning gets DISABLED ????? :censored: ...

So with overscan the screen is too large and i cant adjust it lol
Without it's underscanned and adjustable to a degree, but not good enough.

Also the TV out quality kinda sucks compared to the nvidia card.
Very blury, the flicker filter doesnt seem to work very well.
The contrast is maxed.

Oh well another month with forums, tips and tricks, how to's and
99 driver versions. Then it might be ok.

Just wondering, is composite better than svideo ?
I'm using svideo -> scart.

Dst
Logged

Stu

  • Hawk
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19577
  • Birmingham, UK
    • StuOnline.co.uk
(No subject)
« Reply #44 on: 03-December-04, 01:03:10 »

with regards to the tv-out on my nvidia card:

using the latest 66.93 forceware drivers, i too (even at 4:3) get a little black border at top and bottom of the screen.

using the tv settings in the driver control panel i can "zoom" in the displayed image which removes the top and bottom borders and i only lose a little of the left and right of the screen. i presume this is their way of getting round "overscanning".

in tv and media center this is not a problem for me, as i don't use my mega for any windows applications now - i get a fullscreen tv / dvd image, so TV is now displayed the same as when i had my old Philips OnDigital box connected

the nvidia tv-out settings allow for flicker control which works well - i can now set the resolution to 640x480 (previously only allowed 800x600 as a minimum) and image quality has improved for me a lot
Logged
Former moderator and admin, 2004-2012

ehassoy

  • Cyclone
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
(No subject)
« Reply #45 on: 03-December-04, 06:14:17 »

Dst,

first of all I am sory to hear that you are not satisfied with the result.

Secondly, for sure s video is better than composite. But component is better than s video.

I bought this cable http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=5732449098&ssPageName=STRK:MEWN:IT from ebay. This cable looks top quality. Maybe you can use better cable.
Logged
MEGA 180
XP 2500+
Kingston 1 Gb DDR 2700 Ram
250 Gbyte SEAGATE HD
NEC Dvd Writer
XP Pro with SP2
ffdshow codec
Sapphire 9600XT 256MB
Intel Mini PCI Card (11g)

cosmosk

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #46 on: 03-December-04, 17:18:18 »

dst,

Another option to get high quality output from your Mega is to use the VGA output. This is essentially the same as component video which is better than svideo which is better than composite.  I have a VGA input on my widescreen tv. So it was extremely easy to attach. But there are vga to scart and vga to component adapters available.  Whatever your TV will accept.

I had the same problem as you do with windows resolutions.  I spent a week putzing around with  a freeware tool called powerstrip. This tool lets you quite precisely specify the amount of overscan and underscan horzontal and vertical. However it is the most confusing tool I've ever used.  

I eventually finally found a very good combination of frequencies and scan lines and windows resolutions.  The frequencies and scan lines will depend completely on your TV capabilities. Howeve the windows resolution may work for you. The one I use is 960 X 540. That is half the resolution of a 1080i image.  The pixels all line up nicely. Text is readable. On my screen I have about 5 pixels of overscan top, bottom, left, and right but NO black bars.  I consider it totally usable for file work, video filter goofing around, audio selections, etc. I even can browse the web although there is too much scrolling to do this for any length of time.
Logged

otrofox

  • Platinum
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
(No subject)
« Reply #47 on: 03-December-04, 20:32:02 »

Where can I buy a VGA to Scart (components) cable? Is it much expensive? Does it work on every TV that accepts RGB signals?
Logged
MSI Mega 180 Deluxe
Seagate 160GB
Athlon 2800+ Barton
1x DIMM DDR 400  512MB
Toshiba DVD-ROM
Radeon X1600 512MB
SkyStar 2 DVB Satellite
MS Windows XP Pro SP2

cosmosk

  • Guest
(No subject)
« Reply #48 on: 03-December-04, 20:51:10 »

otrofox,

I did a quick google. I found a VGA to component converter...kind of pricey
http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/kd-vtca2.htm

I went thru the first 2 pages on google but didn't see a scart converter for sale... although I swear I saw one a month ago.... just keep looking... but i did find several sets of instructions... Here's one...

http://www.idiots.org.uk/vga_rgb_scart/
Logged

ehassoy

  • Cyclone
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
(No subject)
« Reply #49 on: 04-December-04, 01:13:04 »

cosmock,

I couldn't find any commercial vga to scart converter or cable. There are some options but according to these options, an end-user should build his/her cable himself/herself.

There is another option which is a scan converter. You can look at this link. http://www.vjcentral.com/list?type=hardware&words=scan+converter
Logged
MEGA 180
XP 2500+
Kingston 1 Gb DDR 2700 Ram
250 Gbyte SEAGATE HD
NEC Dvd Writer
XP Pro with SP2
ffdshow codec
Sapphire 9600XT 256MB
Intel Mini PCI Card (11g)
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up