The NEW Build Your Own Arcade Controls

Software Support => GroovyMAME => Topic started by: krick on June 23, 2018, 03:06:09 pm

Title: Windows desktop resolution - 512x512 instead of 640x480 ?
Post by: krick on June 23, 2018, 03:06:09 pm
When you set up CRT_EmuDriver, the default windows desktop resolution is 640x480 (interlaced).

Note: I'm using "super" resolutions.

How would I go about adding 512x512 (interlaced) to the list of choices?

Back in the day, when I used to use an ArcadeVGA, I always used that desktop resolution when configuring Windows since it was usually tall enough to get to the OK/Cancel buttons at the bottom of dialog boxes.

It would be nice to be able to switch back and forth between 640x480 and 512x512 for this situation.


EDIT: I found this thread...

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,149592 (http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,149592)

...that talks about adding extra resolutions to  "user_modes - super.ini"  but I'm not clear on what, exactly, I need to add to the file.

For example, the default file looks like this at the top...

Code: [Select]
## Desktop ##

 640 x 480 @ 60.000000 desktop

## Super resolutions ##

2560 x 240 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 248 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 256 @ 60.000000 super
...


Say that I wanted to add three resolutions, 512x512, 768x512, and 800x600 (I think my monitor could handle this with my old ArcadeVGA card).

Do I update the "Desktop" section like this?...

Code: [Select]
## Desktop ##

 512 x 512 @ 60.000000 desktop
 640 x 480 @ 60.000000 desktop
 768 x 512 @ 60.000000 desktop
 800 x 600 @ 60.000000 desktop

## Super resolutions ##

2560 x 240 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 248 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 256 @ 60.000000 super
...


Do I keep the frequency at 60.000000 ?  If not, what should it be?

I noticed that a few of the super resolutions are not 60.000000 but I'm not sure why...

Code: [Select]
...
2560 x 480 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 496 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 512 @ 59.000000 super
2560 x 544 @ 55.000000 super
2560 x 560 @ 54.000000 super
2560 x 768 @ 60.000000 super
2560 x 800 @ 60.000000 super
...



Title: Re: Windows desktop resolution - 512x512 instead of 640x480 ?
Post by: haynor666 on June 24, 2018, 06:16:22 am
I used such resolution but there was some limitations:

- max 56 Hz for 512 lines
- some emulators like nullDC always work with desktop resolution so forcing them at 512 lines will cuase distorted picture and/or bad sync
- such resolution is neither NTSC or PAL standard so it does not fit CRT as 640x480 nicely by default. I had to enter service mode everytime I back to desktop or use custom layout for my frontend or set such resolution with custom settings in ArcadeOSD
Title: Re: Windows desktop resolution - 512x512 instead of 640x480 ?
Post by: buttersoft on June 25, 2018, 07:46:59 pm
Bearing in mind the advice Haynor gives, you can add a single resolution to an existing crt_emudriver setup - http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,153488.msg1608259.html#msg1608259 (http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,153488.msg1608259.html#msg1608259) noting that there are even more options now, as this was for VMM v9.

I'd keep the refresh at 60.0000Hz if that's what you want it to be. If you're using the Generic_15 preset, Haynor is right in that the scan limit of 15.725kHz will cut the refresh rate to about 56Hz. You can either live with that or increase the scan limit using the monitor.ini file.

Read the monitor presets sticky up above, and possibly section e) of this guide - https://www.aussiearcade.com/showthread.php/87668-A-guide-to-connecting-your-Windows-PC-to-an-SD-CRT-TV-PVM-or-Arcade-Monitor (https://www.aussiearcade.com/showthread.php/87668-A-guide-to-connecting-your-Windows-PC-to-an-SD-CRT-TV-PVM-or-Arcade-Monitor)



Title: Re: Windows desktop resolution - 512x512 instead of 640x480 ?
Post by: Calamity on June 26, 2018, 05:02:09 am
I prefer 688x512 for desktop use, because it's 4:3.

And an important warning: if you use a resolution for the desktop that's not exactly 4:3*, make sure to force the aspect option mame.ini to 4:3 explicitely. Otherwise GM scaling won't work. This is because MAME infers the monitor aspect ratio from the desktop resolution, making the assumption that pixels are square, which false for CRT monitors. And that's the only data that's availabe to Switchres. The monitor aspect ratio is used by Switchres to make aspect corrections. If this value is wrong, aspect corrections will be wrong too. So it's important to force this value to your actual physical screen aspect ratio ignoring the desktop resolution.

* Even 688x512 is not exactly 4:3
Title: Re: Windows desktop resolution - 512x512 instead of 640x480 ?
Post by: krick on June 26, 2018, 11:16:51 am
an important warning: if you use a resolution for the desktop that's not exactly 4:3*, make sure to force the aspect option mame.ini to 4:3 explicitely. Otherwise GM scaling won't work.

Good to know.  I never would have thought about that.

It's not really an issue for me as I'm only looking for (an) additional desktop resolution(s) for general cabinet maintenance.  I always switch back to 640x480 when I'm done.

I really need to investigate VNC or some kind of remote login for cab maintenance but I've heard a few horror stories of weird problems caused by VNC drivers.
Title: Re: Windows desktop resolution - 512x512 instead of 640x480 ?
Post by: haynor666 on June 26, 2018, 04:08:57 pm
And an important warning: if you use a resolution for the desktop that's not exactly 4:3*, make sure to force the aspect option mame.ini to 4:3 explicitely. Otherwise GM scaling won't work. This is because MAME infers the monitor aspect ratio from the desktop resolution, making the assumption that pixels are square, which false for CRT monitors. And that's the only data that's availabe to Switchres. The monitor aspect ratio is used by Switchres to make aspect corrections. If this value is wrong, aspect corrections will be wrong too. So it's important to force this value to your actual physical screen aspect ratio ignoring the desktop resolution.

* Even 688x512 is not exactly 4:3

I totally forgot about this :)