# New nvidia drivers and screen DPI [workaround found]

## IntergalacticWalrus

Ever since I upgraded my nvidia video drivers to the latest (8174), my display dimensions aren't detected anymore, and I end up with tiny fonts. Has anyone else got this problem?Last edited by IntergalacticWalrus on Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:21 am; edited 1 time in total

----------

## piercey

Yep, exact same problem. Might have something to do with them forcing EdidFreqs in this version

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

This is definitely a bug. The previous drivers probed the dimensions of my display perfectly, and AFAIK EDID was enabled.

----------

## piercey

Ok so here's a bit of an update, my monitor can do 1600x1200 res, however a 1600x1000 picture takes up no more that 2/3's of my screen. Its not just small fonts it appears to be pushing a higher res. :/

----------

## anyc

Same problem here.

I downgrade now, because i had to work.

In my fontdialog i also see only a few fonts, but i have not the time to look if it have the same cause.

ok, after downgrading it works again as before.

----------

## piercey

My fonts appear fine, I just lowered my res. I got a glx error when I downgraded so Im still using latest, I just reset the screen res back down to 1600x1200 for the moment. It seems firefox (or maybe anything with long text it) overflows of the taskbar application name also, (eg. Gentoo Forums :: Post a reply - Deer Park)

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

I forced DPI to the previously detected settings through the DPI option in the driver section of my xorg.conf. Still sucks though, because now I have to lower my maximum resolution to what I'm using most of the time (1024x768) or else I still get tiny fonts... Yeah I don't really understand, other than I am now stuck not being able to switch to a higher resolution whenever I need it.

If I ever meet the moron who decided that fonts under X11 should respect the DPI settings of the server, I swear I am going to punch/kick him until he cries. The concept of a font of a given size not always show up at the same size depending on some unreliable global setting is stupid. Period.

----------

## piercey

According to my xfce settings for the display, my monitor can now do an amazing "2048x1536". My gfx is a 6600GT if that makes any difference. I'll have to assume that this is a Edid bug as I didnt have edid on before.

----------

## Moloch

This is what I did. I opend up /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old. Look for these similar lines

```
(**) NVIDIA(0): Display dimensions: (370, 270) mm

(**) NVIDIA(0): DPI set to (87, 96)
```

These settings are specific to my monitor. 

Then edited /etc/X11/xorg.conf and under the 'Section "Monitor"' I added the line: DisplaySize  370 270

This seemed to fix it. Please note that if you have restarted X since the upgrade your Xorg.0.log.old would have been overwritten by the "broken" drivers. So you will have to install previous versions nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx, stop X, rmmod nvidia, modprobe nvidia. Load X, then get the proper display dimensions from your /var/log/Xorg.0.log. Put them in your xorg.conf. Then finally upgrade the nvidia drivers as normal.

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

Thanks Moloch! Your workaround works much better than mine.

I really hope nvidia will fix this on their next release.

----------

## jasn

Neither fixing the DPI nor setting the DisplaySize in xorg.conf worked for me. So I'm  running prior versions of glx and kernel..

----------

## cantao

Almost everything working fine with 8174 (fonts, glx, etc), except that now my resolution is 1400x1050 (previously it was 1280x1024) and I am unable to switch back, no matter what I do to xorg.conf.

My question is, how can my monitor reach 1400x1050 if, according to the monitors' manual, the maximum resolution is 1280x1024???

Cheers, Cantão!

----------

## PaulBredbury

See also this thread.

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

 *cantao wrote:*   

> Almost everything working fine with 8174 (fonts, glx, etc), except that now my resolution is 1400x1050 (previously it was 1280x1024) and I am unable to switch back, no matter what I do to xorg.conf.
> 
> My question is, how can my monitor reach 1400x1050 if, according to the monitors' manual, the maximum resolution is 1280x1024???
> 
> Cheers, Cantão!

 

Despite what your manual says, CRT monitors have no such thing as a maximum resolution. They have horizontal and vertical frequency ranges. A CRT can pull off a resolution as high (or as low) as the frequency ranges allow them to at a given frequency. For example, at 85Hz vertical frequency my monitor can process a 4:3 resolution of at most 1264x948. The lowest vertical frequency it can pull off is IIRC around 56Hz, and at that frequency the maximum resolution is insanely high, but naturally it's way too stressing for the eyes.

Read the nvidia docs about Modelines, they explain very well about how monitors work, and how you can whip up some extra Modelines yourself.

----------

## cantao

 *Quote:*   

> Read the nvidia docs about Modelines, they explain very well about how monitors work, and how you can whip up some extra Modelines yourself.

 

I was afraid that my monitor would explode or something like that   :Very Happy:  . I'll check de nvidia docs!

Thanks a lot, Cantão!

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

 *cantao wrote:*   

>  *Quote:*   Read the nvidia docs about Modelines, they explain very well about how monitors work, and how you can whip up some extra Modelines yourself. 
> 
> I was afraid that my monitor would explode or something like that   . I'll check de nvidia docs!
> 
> Thanks a lot, Cantão!

 

Blowing up a monitor by messing around with frequencies is basically impossible, because

1) X has detected your frequency ranges, so it won't allow any out of range modelines.

2) Unless your monitor dates back to the times when dinosaurs ruled the Earth, it will just blank out if given a signal out of its range. At best, it might even display a message telling you it's getting an out of range signal. Did you honestly think monitor manufacturers made displays that can explode by merely giving them a signal they can't process?

----------

## cantao

I was joking, of course   :Razz:  .

Cheers, Cantão!

----------

## jasn

 *jasn wrote:*   

> Neither fixing the DPI nor setting the DisplaySize in xorg.conf worked for me. So I'm  running prior versions of glx and kernel..

 

In case it applies to anyone else, nVidia has an open bug with what looks like Go 6200/6600 chipsets which cause the EDID settings to be screwed up. It's pre-existing bug # 195559. You can read a bit more about it on the nV News forum website;

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=61077&highlight=tecra

What this means is that fiddling with these settings won't help if you are using these chipsets.. (like my Toshiba Portege S100). We'll need nVidia to address this in a future version (apparently..).

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

I have a 5600 (not Go) and I'm experiencing problems.

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

The latest drivers still have this bug. Sigh... And I bought a new screen and this one is also not detected properly, so it's definitely not my screen that's at fault.

----------

## jasn

Small update at the nVidia Linux Forum;

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=61077&highlight=195559

Basically the forum moderator, Lonni, claims that this bug should be fixed in the next driver release...

Can't wait..

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

Cool. Meanwhile I've reverted back to the version prior to the breakage because it's so annoying.

----------

## jasn

8756 did indeed fix my DPI problems (as advertised in the release notes)..

(whew.. what a juggling act.. Migrated to modular X, expat 2.0, 2.6.16-r1 suspend2 kernel, and nVidia 8756 drivers in one weekend.. whole lotta revdep-rebuilds and everythin's groovy.. (so far..))

----------

## IntergalacticWalrus

Me too, but now I don't automatically get resolutions anymore... sigh....

----------

