🚀 go-pugleaf

pfk@rz.uni-jena.de (Frank Klemm) writes:


>In article <smithbm.720819736@craft.camp.clarkson.edu>, smithbm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Azrak) writes:
>|> The ATI Graphics Ultra Pro with 2 Megs of VRAM will do the following
>|> resolutions (I am only including a portion of what it can do for brievity):
>|> 640x480x16.7M    (True 24 bit color)
>|> 800x600x16.7M    (True 24 bit color)
>|> 1024x768x65536   (Hi-color 16 bit) (No 24 bit color in this resolution)
>|> 1280x1024x256    (8 bit color)
>|> 
>|> Note that 1024x768x65536 uses 1.5 Megs of memory. Impossible to get 24 bit
>|> color at this resolution due to memory limitations.
>|> Note that 1280x1024x256 uses 1.3 Megs of memory. Impossible to get 16 bit
>|> color at this resolution due to memory limitations.

>Why do this card not support 1152x900x64k and 960x720x16M ???

I don't actually have the card in front of me (It is at home, 320 miles from
me at college), but I would imagine if you were to write some nasty assembly
code, you could tweak the card into some "undocumented" resolutions like
the two you mentioned above. I think I remember Fractint could switch the
old ATI VGAWonder (Which USED to be in the PC at home) into some weird
resolutions to gain a few hundred extra pixels for displaying fractals.
Maybe the same type of things can be done to the new Graphics Ultra Pro.

For the PC, the two resolutions you mentioned are not standard resolutions.
Are they SUN resolutions?

>Frank

- Brian  (smithbm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu)