ye I did look at some of those but at 150 quid I aint paying that.
If he has a 640x480 LCD he will need to get a secondary PCI card like an older nVidia to run the monitor at that res. Newer cards dont support that, if he plans to use VGA. If it's just going to be run off the main graphics card say with a composite input, he can just set up the monitor as a secondary or do a span between the two with nView (assuming its an nVidia). Most small LCDs these days are 800x480 or 1024x768 max res.
Last edited by Crimson Sky; 04-19-2007 at 10:55 AM.
In a time of chimpanzees I was a monkey.
just put the autoexec.nt file or a shortcut to it in the startup folder.
"you must be the change you wish to see in the world"
-ghandi
the cards DOES support it. I play Warcraft 3 at 640*480 under XP. It's only that the desktop can't display 640*480 because the UI would be waaaay too big. I could install Windows 98SE and run it at 640*480. Im sure we could do a small registry hack to set Windows' at 640*480.
My point is that both new cards and Windows XP/Vista can support AND display 640*480, but the graphic user interface would be too big to be worth it. And ALL newer screens supports AT LEAST 800*600, so what's the point on keeping an "useless" setting on there? Imagine you are under Windows with your Start button taking 1/10 of the screen. Remember the Win 95 times when we were using 640x480? It was waaaay too small.
The thing is, we need to know if the screen will be able to handle the 640x480 resolution...