Custom Resolution Utility (CRU)

[ToastyX]

(08-13-2014 12:47 PM)purmou Wrote:  Could you clarify what the extension block is and how to disable it? I'm not entirely familiar with Nvidia, this is my first time using a computer with a GPU.

The extension block just has more EDID information, usually for TV-related things like audio and HDMI support. Disable it using the checkbox in CRU, or import the blank-extension.dat file to remove TV-related information. You have to do either of these anyway for the configuration to work properly with NVIDIA.

[ToastyX]

(08-12-2014 01:05 AM)NiceGuy Wrote:  Is there a way to use CRU to create custom low resolutions? Please don't harass me and ask me why, but I need to be able to create custom resolutions like 640x360, 512x288, 320x240, etc. Please help me, I've been searching the internet far and wide with no luck. However, this tool seems very promising. I am running an AMD Radeon HD 7600G on Windows 8.1.

I don't think the graphics driver will accept resolutions lower than 640x480 with modern video cards.

[NiceGuy]

(08-13-2014 12:55 PM)ToastyX Wrote:  

(08-12-2014 01:05 AM)NiceGuy Wrote:  Is there a way to use CRU to create custom low resolutions? Please don't harass me and ask me why, but I need to be able to create custom resolutions like 640x360, 512x288, 320x240, etc. Please help me, I've been searching the internet far and wide with no luck. However, this tool seems very promising. I am running an AMD Radeon HD 7600G on Windows 8.1.

I don't think the graphics driver will accept resolutions lower than 640x480 with modern video cards.

Is there any other method or software I can use to create lower resolutions? Does anyone have any experience with this?

[Nintendo Maniac 64]

The issue is that the hardware itself cannot run at said resolutions, so no amount of software can make it run as such.

For reference, I was actually able to specify "320x240" in CRU on my Radeon 6310 as was even able to select it in games, but due to hardware limitations it just resulted in a black screen.


May I ask what it is you're trying to achieve? Depending on what it is, there may be a way to achieve what you want without actually needing a 320x240 resolution..

[MetalRush]

ToastyX,

My system and monitors owe their lives to you. They thank you
I was about to set fire to them.
For some (VERY) strange reason, my system decided that my Dell 3007WFP had a maximum reso of 1280x800. Although CCC (yup, it's an ATi) reported the monitor is a Dell 3007WFP and has a max resolution of 2560x1600.
Even a brand new card, brand new Win7 install, brand new DVI cable, brand new HDMI (to DVI-D) cable did not do the trick.
I am still wondering WHY
More knowing that it all worked already... for months !

Your tool made me happy again

I was referred to this forum by WSGF, by the way.
Credits go to them as well.

I do have a brainteaser for you, though;
I have a PLP monitor setup.
One 30" in the middle (2560x1600 (again! Hurraaay )),
Two 20" on the sides, (1200x1600) in portrait mode (of which one is in flipped portrait mode).
I read @ WSGF that "suiken_2mieu" got all kind of resolutions working. Even spread over three monitors (sometimes using ATi's Eyefinity).
You think it is possible to create a custom resolution, of 4960x1600, where PLP is included?

[Nintendo Maniac 64]

(08-13-2014 11:02 PM)MetalRush Wrote:  For some (VERY) strange reason, my system decided that my Dell 3007WFP had a maximum reso of 1280x800. Although CCC (yup, it's an ATi) reported the monitor is a Dell 3007WFP and has a max resolution of 2560x1600.

Just out of curiosity, when you ran at 1280x800, was it just pixel-doubled so that every pixel output by the GPU was physically exactly 4 pixels on-screen? Or was the output still filtered and/or upscaled?

[MetalRush]

(08-13-2014 11:10 PM)Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote:  Just out of curiosity, when you ran at 1280x800, was it just pixel-doubled so that every pixel output by the GPU was physically exactly 4 pixels on-screen? Or was the output still filtered and/or upscaled?

It was upscaled.
Nonetheless; ridiculous to look at

[Cobra95Kev]

Before I go through the hassle of getting my IT department to install this for me I would like to know what you guys think of my problem.

I have a Quadro 4000 high end workstation card and I am unable to get it to do 3840X2160 @30HZ. I know the card has the resources to do it but I think the drivers are holding it back. The card has 2 gig of ram and was bought just a few years ago. I am using a display port to HDMI cable and I can get this resolution to work on my personal computer at home which is using an older Quadro FX3800 with only 1 gig of ram. So I know the cable is not the problem, I think it may be something in the drivers holding the 4000 back?

Anyone here have any thoughts??
Would be glad to donate if I can make this combo work!

Thanks a bunch.
Kevin C.

[Nintendo Maniac 64]

Actually I believe that DisplayPort 1.2 can not output an HDMI 1.4 signal, only something like HDMI 1.3 or lower.

[ToastyX]

(08-15-2014 02:54 PM)Cobra95Kev Wrote:  I have a Quadro 4000 high end workstation card and I am unable to get it to do 3840X2160 @30HZ. I know the card has the resources to do it but I think the drivers are holding it back. The card has 2 gig of ram and was bought just a few years ago. I am using a display port to HDMI cable and I can get this resolution to work on my personal computer at home which is using an older Quadro FX3800 with only 1 gig of ram. So I know the cable is not the problem, I think it may be something in the drivers holding the 4000 back?

The cable is probably the problem. I don't know how it worked on your other system. Only "Type 2" DisplayPort-HDMI active adapters are capable of 3840x2160 @ 30 Hz. Passive cables and adapters are not capable. You'd be better off trying DVI-HDMI instead, and make sure to import the hdmi.dat or hdmi-audio.dat file.