6800GT only allowing LOW resolutions?

J

jnick

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Messages
2,888
Hey guys.

I have a BFG 6800GT OC and a Dell 2005FPW.

In BF1942 the highest resolution I can possibly go is 1152x968 . . .

In BF:V the highest resolution I can go is 1024x768

I CS:S At 16:9,, the only res availible is 1600x900. In 16:10, I can only go 1600x900 as well.

Now before hand, I had a norm CRT monitor with a 9800 pro. In the Battlefield series, I could get up to 1280x960. In CS:S at 16:9, I had 3 resolutions availible (they escape my head at the moment). In 16X10 I had 1680x1050, and I think 1 other one.

Does anyone know what oculd be wrong? I'm using the Xtreme G 66.67 Drivers, though have tried zeropoint, with the same results :(.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. I have this high quality card, but can only get low resolutions.

I do have 2 of the same computers, and both comps are doing the same thing. I personally think it has something to do with the monitor, but I'm not sure.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Jnick
 
its not the monitor, 2005FPW supports up to 1680x1050. you need to manually add some res. in...NV driver is not as friendly as the Ati's with widescreens
 
So how do you like that monitor aside from the problem youre having right now? I was thinking about getting one. What's the response time?
 
plz don't derail the thread, theres plenty of other threads describing the goodness of the 2005fpw
 
Dr. X said:
So how do you like that monitor aside from the problem youre having right now? I was thinking about getting one. What's the response time?
Click to expand...
I think its 12ms if my memory serves. Its a decent dispaly plus an easy price tag. Some ppl have reported backlighting issues but it seems no biggie. Personally, I am kinda put off by
its mediocre design. Maybe that's the tradeoff point. Anyway, the Apple is a little better...
 
Monitor is fantastic. Some backlighting, but no biggie. Yesm it's a 12ms response time. Definitiely pick on up.

===BACK ON TOPIC===

I just realised, being I posted my original post in a furious rush, lol, that it has NOTHING to do with my monitor. I had this monitor for a good month, possibly a bit longer, before I bought my new system. On my 9800 everything was fine. So I'm guessing this is a driver related issue? I'm going to try the new 75'xx today, and see if they help, otherwise I bought a $1500+ system and it runs the same as my OLD OLD TI4200! LOL.

Any other suggestions, feel free to let me know!
 
Well, I'm really confused now. You first said that you werent getting the same resolution compared to a 9800 Pro, but in your last post you said a Ti 4200, so which one is it? :confused:
 
jnick, go ahead and try out the new driver first. it won't hurt. If your prob remains, come back here...
 
Skyring -- I'm NOT getting the same Res. as my 9800 pro. I'm saying the QUALITY of low res is that of like a ti4200. Since it's low res, it's low quality . . . Just throwing in sarcasm. Sorry for the confusion.

Jnick
 
Ok, so I just installed the FW 75.90 drivers. I used Driver Cleaner 3 to uninstall the XG 66.67. Unfortunately, nothing changed. So then I searched the NV control panel with a fine comb to fine anything that may allow these higher resolutions.

I saw a place where you can MANUALLY add your own resolution and refreshrate. So what the hell, I added 280x960x60hz. I started up BF:V, and to my amazement, it was listed! I then selected it, got in game, and woohoo! It worked!

The only thing I noticed was that if I went to my monitors menu, it shows the resolution on the bottom. It said it was running at 1280x1024 . . . Weird . .

Anywho, can some of you guys help me with identifying the resolutions at the correct refresh rates for an LCD (2005fpw?), so I can add them manually? I have most of the resolutions, but I'm not sure on what refresh rate to run it.

1152x864x75
1280x960x70
1280x1024x70
1600x900x60
1600x1200x60
1650x1080x60

Does that look right?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Jnick
 
I'm glad you were able to get it fixed, I hope someone can offer help on the refresh rate problem.
 
The refresh rate is meaningless to LCDs b/c they use a different method (from CRT's) to display images (tiny lightbulbs instead of scanning). Keep all res @ 60hz would be just fine. Higher rates won't help at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top