On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 03:26:49 +0100, Idar Tollefsen wrote: > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10.02.03 14:15 >>> > >> But what about 24? Are there any reasons why that should look bad > >> as well? > > > Depends on your board. Send me a log at depth 24 and I'll take a > >> closer look. > > Included at the bottom. Again, "Not loading .debug line" lines > are cut out. The only change made to my XF86Config was to change > DefaultDepth to 24 instead of 16. Yep, even though the cards can do it, they're not great boards to be displaying 1600x1200@75Hz with 24bit depth. I'd use 1280x1024 if you really need 24bit depth. Or drop to 16bit depth and keep using 1600x1200.
> >>> One last thing; if someone else has this card, could you verify that it > >>> has 8MB of RAM? I thought it had 16MB, but I might be mistaken and have > >>> long since lost the manuals (X auto probes 8MB). > > >> Yes, The card has 8MB of videoram, but probably has another 8MB of EDO >> memory >- usually used for 3D. The driver only reports the videoram as > >> it currently doesn't have a 3D driver and looses the other 8MB of EDO. > > >> Doesn't have a 3D driver? Does that mean I won't get any OpenGL > >> acceleration out of this card with XFree86? > > > Nope. > > "Nope" as in my conclusion is wrong and I will get OpenGL acceleration or > "Nope" as in confirming that I won't get any OpenGL acceleration? > (/me clinging to a straw of hope) Nope as in, it doesn't have a 3D driver. So therefore you won't get any GL acceleration. Alan. _______________________________________________ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
