Getting 1920 x 1080 resolution

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by james_winslow|1, Dec 26, 2010.

  1. Hi,
    I've been desperately looking around trying to get my new HP 2310m monitor to display the 1920 x 1080 resolution it recommends but can only get to 1280 x 1024. I saw a similar post here but am wondering if I really need a new video card.
    I have a Presario S6300NX that I bought in 2004 and works fine. The video card is integrated and in Display Properties it says VIA/S3G UniChrome IGP. I can't find anything at either VIA or HP about it as far as what it can handle let alone if my machine can take a new video card.
    I see what I currently have has 64 MB of memory. I don't do any gaming--just look at photos and do email so any recommendations for a cheap card (if even necessary) are most welcome. I cannot locate any settings on the monitor menu nor on my PC to push the display to 1920 x 1080. It seems like I should be able to if I'm only doing basic computing on the machine.
    I'd be most grateful for any help at all. The basic problem is all my photos are compressed--the aspect ratio is messed up and even if I wasn't at 1920 x 1080 just having the proper aspect ratio would be nice.
    Thanks so much!
    James Winslow
  2. Did you install the video driver that came with the monitor? It's possible the exiting video adapter can't handle that resolution and you have to replace it. There is usually a setting in the machines BIOS to disable the onboard video and use a plugin card.
  3. I wasn't familiar with the Presario S6300NX, so I looked it up. It appears to be a fairly low-budget model, and Amazon's description says the integrated Intel video is adequate for basic use but might need to be upgraded for professional graphics applications. Based on this information, I would be surprised if it supported a high resolution like 1920x1080.
  4. 1920 x 1080 is HDTV 16:9 aspect ratio (format). The 1280 x 1024 sounds like the native resolution of the monitor which is the max in pixels width x height it sounds to me. How can you change 1280 to 1920??? You can't get something that isn't there. The best you can get would be 1280 x 720 to match the HDTV ratio of 16:9 but you will have black on top and bottom because your monitor is a different format (aspect ratio) .
  5. The HP 2310M is a wide-screen full HD monitor that supports 1920x1080 resolution according to the specs on HP's web site. The issue here is clearly not with the monitor, but probably with the computer's video hardware (especially since we're talking about six-year-old consumer-grade motherboard video that was probably never intended to support 1920x1080).
  6. I very much doubt that you could support 1920x1200 with 64 MB of RAM.
    I'm running that resolution here.
    My video card has 256 MB, with 512 MB recommended for graphics applications.
    Most machines with integrated video have the option to disable that feature and use a plug-in video card.
    - Leigh
  7. You can easily run a 1920*1080 resolution on 64MB of RAM. That's not the issue.
    The problem is 99% sure the videodrivers of S3/Via; they do not support wide-screen resolutions. So, detecting the 1080 pixels vertical resolution of the monitor, it offers its closest match: 1280*1024. It simply does not know any other resolutions than 4:3 and 5:4 screens. So, to try:
    1. You could try check with HP whether they have newer video drivers, or check Via's website and try those.
    2. Failing that, try the software called PowerStrip, which allows to add resolutions to the official supported resolutions of the graphics driver. Not sure whether it'll work with VIa, but worth the shot.
    3. The last resort would be to edit the INF-file of the graphics driver to include support for wide-screen resolutions. Your driver will not longer be digitally signed, and success is not garantued, but usually it works, it's a bit a messy solution but if it works, it works.
    Getting a new videocard could well solve it, but most likely, your system will require an AGOP videocard, which are harder and harder to find and more costly than the normal PCI-Express cards sold nowadays. And frankly, investing in any way in a 7-year old PC is just not very smart, better to keep that money apart for a replacement :) So, I'd recommend to try the software tricks first.
  8. Sorry, that should read AGP instead of AGOP (could not edit in time unfortunately).
  9. Hi Guys,
    Thanks so much for the quick and helpful responses. I sort of suspected the video card all along since it is 7 years old and the driver seems to be from 2004. The one I have on there now,, is old. I found a newer one (.226) but it won't install properly for me.
    That being said, I am going to mess with that some more today and if I have no luck, give Power Strip a try or even the INF edit. Worse case, I can just get a new machine because yeah, it IS a seven year old computer.
    Thanks again for the tips and I'll let you know what I find out.
  10. Indeed, a replacement commodity desktop machine that will support that resolution isn't going to cost a whole lot more than a decent video card (if you can even find one) that will do so while also working on your seven year old machine. Even a budget machine, new today, is going to run circles around that old PC. I wouldn't even bother trying to soup it up as is, and would instead look at the killer end-of-year deals out there for a new box. You can get a dual-core 3+GHz machine with a 500gb drive and 3GB of RAM for well under $400, now, if you look around. Go off to, for example, and look at desktop PCs for $100-$300 - it's amazing what you can scrounge for.
  11. Matt Don't you need better video cards for processing photos the way we do? What's recommended today? 256M or 512M?
  12. Alan: not really, no. 256MB of video RAM is plenty, plenty, plenty. High-end video boards come into play when you're driving multiple displays with different specs, or you're doing a lot of high-speed 3D rendering (say, fancy-pants 3D games or CAD stuff, etc).
  13. Matt: That's interesting. Lately I've been getting over usage warnings on and off while running PS Elements 8. I'm running a Dell with Vista, 3 GB duo core with 3gb memory (current usage says 1.2 gig not used and I'm only running this internet). I have a Radeon HD 2600 XT 256m video. I'm also running Norton anti-virus.
    So why do you think I'm getting these warnings lately? How come so much memory is being used with only Internet? Does that sound right? Should I defragment? On the other hand, I just realized this started after I started to scan film with 100mb + files. Maybe that's the problem. Do you think expanding my memory above the 3gb would help? Alan.
  14. Alan: you can start the Task Manager to see which processes ate using the most RAM. Just sort the process display
    descending by memory use, and the worst offenders will jump right to the top. It will be interesting to hear what's
    busting up your machine.
  15. Alan, memory usage in Windows is not that easy to decipher. When it is using 1.2GB "just to run inernet", Windows is in the background also pre-loading files that are frequently used, using a lot of the RAM to speed up the access to the slower memory part used on the hard drive (page file), it is indexing the hard disk contents etc. Frankly, apart from being complicated matter, it typically does not help too much wondering about how Windows uses the memory. You have way more than 1.2GB, be glad Windows makes some use of your hardware ;-) In short: let Windows do its thing. Matt's tip with Task manager works, but before trying to take actions, check with Google whether it makes sense or not. You may go on a witch hunt with no witches in sight.
    Now, reason why you may get messages is that Photoshop Elements will use no more than 2GB. This is the limit for a process on a 32-bits version of Windows. Opening several large files, do some edits to them, add a bit of layers, and the amount of memory quickly fades (for example, every undo step costs memory!). You could check in the PS Elements settings for the scratch disk too, ensure it has plenty space there.
    Video memory is whole different story. Like Matt says, it comes into play for 3D operations and some video related tasks; in Windows Vista and 7, 3D operations includes the default "Aero" interface. For a Full HD screen resolution, 256MB of video memory may be tight when using Aero. But switch to more traditional normal 2D rendering (like Windows 2000 and XP use), and the amount of videomemory required for high resolutions drops considerably (though at the expense of using the graphics cards abilities).
  16. I think you're right about IE. This seems to happen when I have both PSE and IE opened at the same time. I checked settings for PSE-8. It says I have 1633MB available and I'm currently set on the slider to allow Elements to use 980MB (recommended is 898-1176mb). I'll try to keep IE off when using Elements.
    As an aside I don't use my computer any more for 3-D games since I have PS3 and play a little on my HDTV. However, I do use Adobe Premiere 8 for video editing, and that takes a lot of processing power as well..
    Thanks for the help. Alan

Share This Page