[SDL] XFree86 4.3.0, SDL 1.2.5 refresh rates ...
stephena at roadrunner.nf.net
Tue Apr 8 12:25:02 PDT 2003
On April 8, 2003 04:13 pm, Andy Ross wrote:
> Nicolai Haehnle wrote:
> > Is there a sane reason why somebody would want to run a refresh rate
> > lower than the maximum reported? Basically everybody I know wants to
> > use the maximum refresh rate all the time, because everything else
> > just unnecessarily hurts the eyes.
> Yes. I've seen windows games select ridiculous modes like 1024x768 @
> 150Hz. Beyond being an absurd choice (anything over about 80Hz is
> undetectable to the human nervous system), it confuses monitors. The
> image ends up squashed or stretched or very off-center. Monitors have
> builtin mode calibrations for typical choices, but they don't
> understand 150 Hz, even if they can display it.
> That said, it seems the nice folks at XFree have already dealt with
> this for us. My monitor exports a maximum vertical refresh of 180Hz,
> yet the XFree exported modes top out at a pleasant 85 Hz (even at the
> very low resolutions where the card could do 180 if it wanted to).
> So it's apparently not a problem. XFree does the Right Thing, and SDL
> should be able to select the fastest mode at the given resolution.
Yes, this is what I see. I notice that some modes like 640x480 work out
to have a rate of 170Hz, but I think thats because they're scan-doubled.
I'll have to look at the flags and work those out.
But otherwise, all modes I get are a max of 85 Hz. So my patch will pick
the largest rate of any given resolution.
More information about the SDL