Description of problem: i can't get the proper resolution (1680x1050_60) with
the intel video driver (modesetting i believe).
I have an Intel DG965WH botherboard with the g965 video chipset and i'm running
Fedora rawhide with latest updates.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Actual results: if i choose the i810 driver i can only get a stretched 1280x1024
resolution, while with the intel driver i get a 1400x1050_60 resolution wiche
does look odd on my screen (worse than 1280x1024).
Expected results: get the 1680x1050_60 resolution
Created attachment 150330 [details]
Created attachment 150331 [details]
log file with xorg.conf
Created attachment 150332 [details]
log without xorg.conf
The intel log looks like it's giving you 1680x1050. What does 'xrandr -q' say?
meanwhile i updated to the latest rawhide (and xorg-x11-drv-i810-1.6.5-14.fc7),
but still the same problem.
[filippo@localhost ~]$ xrandr -q
Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1680 x 1050, maximum 1680 x 1680
VGA connected 1680x1050+0+0 (normal left inverted right) 433mm x 271mm
1680x1050 60.0*+ 60.0
1280x1024 75.0 59.9
1152x864 75.0 74.8
1024x768 75.1 70.1 60.0
800x600 72.2 75.0 60.3 56.2
640x480 75.0 72.8 66.7 60.0
also gnome-display-properties shows 1680x1050_60 as current resolution, but it's
a lie: the desktop looks odd and the OSD of my monitor shows it's working at
As of xorg-x11-drv-i810-1.6.5-19.fc7, 915GM and all 945 and 965 chips will use
the intel modesetting driver by default. Please update, and test with that
driver, and reopen if you have further issues.
I have updated to the latest drivere and still I get the same problems. I'm
giong to upload a couple of files that i hope will make the problem clear.
It looks like that if I check the xorg log and xrandr -q everything should be
fine but it is not. Even if i take a screenshot and look it on a different PC,
it is a perfect 1680x1050 picture with all in the right place.
And when I tried this monitor on a different PC with a Nvidia videocard (with
fedora core 5) everything was perfect.
Created attachment 152259 [details]
latest xorg logfile
I had to choose the intel driver via system-config-display because without it
still load the i810 driver by default.
Created attachment 152261 [details]
this is the osd info of the monitor showing it working at the wrong resolution
Created attachment 152262 [details]
the resolution problem is clear looking at how i see the fonts: look at "Home
di filippo" in particular the first "o" and the "i". This is just an example of
how i see the whole screen.
Do the other resolutions available from xrandr work? For example:
$ xrandr --output VGA --mode 1024x768 --rate=60.0
Yes, I just tried some resolution and they do work. All of them work well except
they are stretched from 4:3 to 16:10, but looks fine.
It seems the problem is just with 1680x1050, maybe not but it's the only 16:10
resolution I can try.
I forgot to tell: the monitor is connected via VGA cable not DVI.
searching on the web, I found this bug:
I guess it's the same problem I have: same motherboard, similar monitor (same
native resolution, same brand) and same driver version.
For what it's worth, a new version of 915resolution was released on Monday which
supports the q965/g965. I'm running a q965 chipset (Dell optiplex 745) and was
having similar problems as documented here (using latest fc7 xorg). Now with
915 I can get 1920x1200, but any lower widescreen resolutions do not fill the
the problem is still there. Looking at freedesktop, a similar bug was "resolved"
for both a Samsung Syncmaster 226BW (bug #10545) and a 225BW (see
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10814), in the same way.
Unfortunately i am absolutely unable to modify and install the patch by myself.
Thus, if anybody could make a patched rpm or explain how to make one, i can test
Created attachment 155623 [details]
Applying the attached patch i got everything working as it should. The patch is
obtained modifying those found on bugzilla.freedesktop.org for SyncMaster226
This is the first patch i ever "made", so probably it could be better or
I really hope there will be an update with the fix for fedora 7 soon after the
This patch has been integrated in F7 updates.