On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:43:12 +0800 Ed Greshko <ed.greshko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/19/18 08:21, Patrick Dupre wrote: > >> Is your poorly performing monitor is connected to HDMI? > > Yes > >>> xrandr > >>> Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 3520 x 1200, maximum 8192 x > >>> 8192 HDMI-1 connected 1920x1080+1600+0 (normal left inverted > >>> right x axis y axis) 609mm x 347mm 1366x768 59.79 + > >>> 1920x1080 60.00 50.00 59.94* 30.00 25.00 > >>> 24.00 29.97 23.98 > >> I ask since I see an oddity in the above. What is the model of > >> the monitor connected? > > HDMI-1 connected 1920x1080+1600+0 (normal left inverted right x > > axis y axis) 609mm x 347mm 1366x768 59.79 + > > 1920x1080 60.00* 50.00 59.94 30.00 25.00 > > 24.00 29.97 23.98 > > > > Hence, it is running in 1920x1080 > > > > It is a T24E310EW Samsung > > > Well, the specs for that monitor are at .... > https://uk.hardware.info/product/321689/samsung-t24e310ew/specifications > and other places. > > They list the resolution at 1366x768 and you have it set to > 1920x1080. Using an LCD monitor at anything other than its native > resolution is sure to give substandard results. I suspect that the high-res computer screen copies somehow its own resolution to the lower res TV. That's why I asked in another message for the xrandr output for all three monitors, including the one for the built-in computer monitor. But it might be possible to force via xrandr some sane resolution to an attached monitor. So far I'm confident we'll catch that horse ... :) Early in the morning here - I think I'll sleep now -- Wolfgang Pfeiffer _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
