How do I change a Windows 7 IRQ interrupt assignment?

Discussion in 'alt.windows7.general' started by a@b.c, Apr 20, 2010.

  1. Guest

    I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    Samsung T220 monitor.

    But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.

    In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.

    Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?

    Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?

    THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    , Apr 20, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. johnbee Guest

    <> wrote in message news:...
    > I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    > the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    > Samsung T220 monitor.
    >
    > But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    > getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    > the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    > vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    > are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    > 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >
    > In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    > sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >
    > Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >
    > Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    > get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    > something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >
    > THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    >


    I will say something in case nobody knows the exact answers to what you ask.
    The Windows 7 documentation, help system, and all the books I have read
    (well, both of them, The Windows Bible and the Administrator's Pocket
    Consultant) are very adamant that you should use the standard display
    settings for your monitor.

    They have done something to the monitor functions in Windows 7 because much
    software does not work even if one just chooses to up the screen text size
    by clicking on preferences. So that, coupled with the urging to use the
    monitor's native settings seems to me to mean that they know it does not
    work as flexibly as previous versions. (I know nothing of Vista as I missed
    it out).

    Just in case you have not done this, type msinfo32 into the search programs
    and files box on the Start menu. That will give a list of IRQ numbers -
    mine are all the usual little ones except for three labelled hub.
    johnbee, Apr 20, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. c_atiel Guest

    This is not an IRQ problem.
    It may seem silly but make sure the cable to your monitor is properly seated
    and the correct monitor/monitor model is identified by both the Catalyst
    Control Center and Vista SP3.
    There are ways to change the IRQ but if you really understood what that
    meant you would already know how to do it. Changing the IRQ will not solve
    your issue.
    The native resolution reported on a search of Samsung T220 is given as 1680
    x 1050.
    If you run it at a lower resolution image quality falls off markedly. The
    image on most LCD panels at lower resolutions can be blurred and nauseating
    but its your choice. These are not plasma HDTVs but cheapo 6 bit dithered
    consumer LCDs.
    The ATI Catalyst control center should give 1280 x 800 as a choice (mine
    does) as should the Vista SP3 display control for a panel of that height and
    width ratio.
    If you are not seeing these resolutions offered then something is wrong with
    the way your monitor is identified by the video card.
    Some poorly written data base front ends for business will not run at the
    higher resolutions of modern LCDs because data columns and rows will not
    align properly.
    Apart from that I cannot imagine why you would want to run an LCD at a lower
    than native resolution--you can adjust font and Icon sizes to suit your
    taste and myopia.
    c_atiel, Apr 20, 2010
    #3
  4. On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:25:30 -0700, wrote:

    > I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    > the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    > Samsung T220 monitor.
    >
    > But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    > getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    > the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    > vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    > are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    > 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >
    > In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    > sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >
    > Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >
    > Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    > get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    > something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >
    > THANKS IN ADVANCE.


    This is not the native resolution of 1680 x 1050, so something's got to
    give.

    Either the video card expands the picture to fill the screen - which can
    look pretty crappy - or it puts out one pixel per actual screen pixel,
    which makes the image not fill the screen.

    There's possibly a setting in the video driver or even in the monitor's
    on-board setup to make this choice (I've owned monitors where the selection
    is in the monitor's on-board setup).

    --
    Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom
    Gene E. Bloch, Apr 21, 2010
    #4
  5. Guest

    On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:53:29 +0100, "johnbee"
    <> wrote:

    >
    ><> wrote in message news:...
    >> I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    >> the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    >> Samsung T220 monitor.
    >>
    >> But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    >> getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    >> the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    >> vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    >> are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    >> 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >>
    >> In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    >> sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >>
    >> Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >>
    >> Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    >> get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    >> something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >>
    >> THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    >>

    >
    >I will say something in case nobody knows the exact answers to what you ask.
    >The Windows 7 documentation, help system, and all the books I have read
    >(well, both of them, The Windows Bible and the Administrator's Pocket
    >Consultant) are very adamant that you should use the standard display
    >settings for your monitor.
    >
    >They have done something to the monitor functions in Windows 7 because much
    >software does not work even if one just chooses to up the screen text size
    >by clicking on preferences. So that, coupled with the urging to use the
    >monitor's native settings seems to me to mean that they know it does not
    >work as flexibly as previous versions. (I know nothing of Vista as I missed
    >it out).
    >
    >Just in case you have not done this, type msinfo32 into the search programs
    >and files box on the Start menu. That will give a list of IRQ numbers -
    >mine are all the usual little ones except for three labelled hub.



    Thanks for your help. I'll have to live with the 1680x1050 resolution
    until ATI or somebody fixes this. I set W7 to used the Medium screen
    sizing option so most things are resized bigger but I see some stuff
    just doesn't resize and work properly. My interrupt table says the
    video card is using IRQ 4294967294 which sounds like some sort of
    simulated interrupt. I seem to remember that when XP first came out I
    had similar problems with an older ATI card and was only able to solve
    them by installing XP for a generic computer using the F5 option. I
    don't remember if I did this the last time I reinstalled XP or if ATI
    fixed the drivers. I've sent a report to ATI about this so maybe
    they'll fix it soon. Thanks again.
    , Apr 21, 2010
    #5
  6. SC Tom Guest

    <> wrote in message news:...
    > On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:53:29 +0100, "johnbee"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >><> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    >>> the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    >>> Samsung T220 monitor.
    >>>
    >>> But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    >>> getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    >>> the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    >>> vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    >>> are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    >>> 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >>>
    >>> In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    >>> sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >>>
    >>> Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >>>
    >>> Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    >>> get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    >>> something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >>>
    >>> THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    >>>

    >>
    >>I will say something in case nobody knows the exact answers to what you
    >>ask.
    >>The Windows 7 documentation, help system, and all the books I have read
    >>(well, both of them, The Windows Bible and the Administrator's Pocket
    >>Consultant) are very adamant that you should use the standard display
    >>settings for your monitor.
    >>
    >>They have done something to the monitor functions in Windows 7 because
    >>much
    >>software does not work even if one just chooses to up the screen text size
    >>by clicking on preferences. So that, coupled with the urging to use the
    >>monitor's native settings seems to me to mean that they know it does not
    >>work as flexibly as previous versions. (I know nothing of Vista as I
    >>missed
    >>it out).
    >>
    >>Just in case you have not done this, type msinfo32 into the search
    >>programs
    >>and files box on the Start menu. That will give a list of IRQ numbers -
    >>mine are all the usual little ones except for three labelled hub.

    >
    >
    > Thanks for your help. I'll have to live with the 1680x1050 resolution
    > until ATI or somebody fixes this. I set W7 to used the Medium screen
    > sizing option so most things are resized bigger but I see some stuff
    > just doesn't resize and work properly. My interrupt table says the
    > video card is using IRQ 4294967294 which sounds like some sort of
    > simulated interrupt. I seem to remember that when XP first came out I
    > had similar problems with an older ATI card and was only able to solve
    > them by installing XP for a generic computer using the F5 option. I
    > don't remember if I did this the last time I reinstalled XP or if ATI
    > fixed the drivers. I've sent a report to ATI about this so maybe
    > they'll fix it soon. Thanks again.


    The IRQ on my notebook with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD2600 PCIe is the same
    as yours, with my Intel wireless adapter being one less. Things that make
    you go "Huh!"
    One thing I found in your manual is that 1280x800 is not a native preset for
    that monitor, so that may be part of the problem. One thing you might try if
    you have the hardware is to change the way you're connected. For example, if
    you currently have it connected via the DVI port, try connecting it to the
    D-sub port. If you're video card doesn't have a D-sub out, you could try a
    DVI-to-DSUB adaptor.
    Since there is no monitor driver for Win7, you can right-click the setup
    file you have (which is probably for Vista?) and select Properties,
    Compatibility, check the box next to "Run this program in compatibility mode
    for:" and pick Vista Service Pack 2. Win7 should then show the monitor as
    what it is. This link is for the driver through Vista:
    http://www.samsung.com/us/support/d...cd=&prd_mdl_name=T220HD&prd_ia_sub_class_cd=P
    They haven't released one for Win7 and probably won't if they haven't by
    now.
    --
    SC Tom
    SC Tom, Apr 21, 2010
    #6
  7. SC Tom Guest

    "SC Tom" <> wrote in message
    news:DkDzn.243537$...
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:53:29 +0100, "johnbee"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>><> wrote in message
    >>>news:...
    >>>> I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    >>>> the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    >>>> Samsung T220 monitor.
    >>>>
    >>>> But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    >>>> getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    >>>> the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    >>>> vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    >>>> are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    >>>> 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >>>>
    >>>> In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    >>>> sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >>>>
    >>>> Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >>>>
    >>>> Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    >>>> get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    >>>> something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >>>>
    >>>> THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>I will say something in case nobody knows the exact answers to what you
    >>>ask.
    >>>The Windows 7 documentation, help system, and all the books I have read
    >>>(well, both of them, The Windows Bible and the Administrator's Pocket
    >>>Consultant) are very adamant that you should use the standard display
    >>>settings for your monitor.
    >>>
    >>>They have done something to the monitor functions in Windows 7 because
    >>>much
    >>>software does not work even if one just chooses to up the screen text
    >>>size
    >>>by clicking on preferences. So that, coupled with the urging to use the
    >>>monitor's native settings seems to me to mean that they know it does not
    >>>work as flexibly as previous versions. (I know nothing of Vista as I
    >>>missed
    >>>it out).
    >>>
    >>>Just in case you have not done this, type msinfo32 into the search
    >>>programs
    >>>and files box on the Start menu. That will give a list of IRQ numbers -
    >>>mine are all the usual little ones except for three labelled hub.

    >>
    >>
    >> Thanks for your help. I'll have to live with the 1680x1050 resolution
    >> until ATI or somebody fixes this. I set W7 to used the Medium screen
    >> sizing option so most things are resized bigger but I see some stuff
    >> just doesn't resize and work properly. My interrupt table says the
    >> video card is using IRQ 4294967294 which sounds like some sort of
    >> simulated interrupt. I seem to remember that when XP first came out I
    >> had similar problems with an older ATI card and was only able to solve
    >> them by installing XP for a generic computer using the F5 option. I
    >> don't remember if I did this the last time I reinstalled XP or if ATI
    >> fixed the drivers. I've sent a report to ATI about this so maybe
    >> they'll fix it soon. Thanks again.

    >
    > The IRQ on my notebook with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD2600 PCIe is the
    > same as yours, with my Intel wireless adapter being one less. Things that
    > make you go "Huh!"
    > One thing I found in your manual is that 1280x800 is not a native preset
    > for that monitor, so that may be part of the problem. One thing you might
    > try if you have the hardware is to change the way you're connected. For
    > example, if you currently have it connected via the DVI port, try
    > connecting it to the D-sub port. If you're video card doesn't have a D-sub
    > out, you could try a DVI-to-DSUB adaptor.
    > Since there is no monitor driver for Win7, you can right-click the setup
    > file you have (which is probably for Vista?) and select Properties,
    > Compatibility, check the box next to "Run this program in compatibility
    > mode for:" and pick Vista Service Pack 2. Win7 should then show the
    > monitor as what it is. This link is for the driver through Vista:
    > http://www.samsung.com/us/support/d...cd=&prd_mdl_name=T220HD&prd_ia_sub_class_cd=P
    > They haven't released one for Win7 and probably won't if they haven't by
    > now.
    > --
    > SC Tom
    >
    >

    That should be "your video card" instead of "you're" :)
    --
    SC Tom
    SC Tom, Apr 21, 2010
    #7
  8. Guest

    On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:46:12 -0400, "SC Tom" <> wrote:

    >
    ><> wrote in message news:...
    >> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:53:29 +0100, "johnbee"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>><> wrote in message
    >>>news:...
    >>>> I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    >>>> the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    >>>> Samsung T220 monitor.
    >>>>
    >>>> But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    >>>> getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    >>>> the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    >>>> vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    >>>> are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    >>>> 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >>>>
    >>>> In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    >>>> sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >>>>
    >>>> Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >>>>
    >>>> Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    >>>> get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    >>>> something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >>>>
    >>>> THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>I will say something in case nobody knows the exact answers to what you
    >>>ask.
    >>>The Windows 7 documentation, help system, and all the books I have read
    >>>(well, both of them, The Windows Bible and the Administrator's Pocket
    >>>Consultant) are very adamant that you should use the standard display
    >>>settings for your monitor.
    >>>
    >>>They have done something to the monitor functions in Windows 7 because
    >>>much
    >>>software does not work even if one just chooses to up the screen text size
    >>>by clicking on preferences. So that, coupled with the urging to use the
    >>>monitor's native settings seems to me to mean that they know it does not
    >>>work as flexibly as previous versions. (I know nothing of Vista as I
    >>>missed
    >>>it out).
    >>>
    >>>Just in case you have not done this, type msinfo32 into the search
    >>>programs
    >>>and files box on the Start menu. That will give a list of IRQ numbers -
    >>>mine are all the usual little ones except for three labelled hub.

    >>
    >>
    >> Thanks for your help. I'll have to live with the 1680x1050 resolution
    >> until ATI or somebody fixes this. I set W7 to used the Medium screen
    >> sizing option so most things are resized bigger but I see some stuff
    >> just doesn't resize and work properly. My interrupt table says the
    >> video card is using IRQ 4294967294 which sounds like some sort of
    >> simulated interrupt. I seem to remember that when XP first came out I
    >> had similar problems with an older ATI card and was only able to solve
    >> them by installing XP for a generic computer using the F5 option. I
    >> don't remember if I did this the last time I reinstalled XP or if ATI
    >> fixed the drivers. I've sent a report to ATI about this so maybe
    >> they'll fix it soon. Thanks again.

    >
    >The IRQ on my notebook with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD2600 PCIe is the same
    >as yours, with my Intel wireless adapter being one less. Things that make
    >you go "Huh!"
    >One thing I found in your manual is that 1280x800 is not a native preset for
    >that monitor, so that may be part of the problem. One thing you might try if
    >you have the hardware is to change the way you're connected. For example, if
    >you currently have it connected via the DVI port, try connecting it to the
    >D-sub port. If you're video card doesn't have a D-sub out, you could try a
    >DVI-to-DSUB adaptor.
    >Since there is no monitor driver for Win7, you can right-click the setup
    >file you have (which is probably for Vista?) and select Properties,
    >Compatibility, check the box next to "Run this program in compatibility mode
    >for:" and pick Vista Service Pack 2. Win7 should then show the monitor as
    >what it is. This link is for the driver through Vista:
    >http://www.samsung.com/us/support/d...cd=&prd_mdl_name=T220HD&prd_ia_sub_class_cd=P
    >They haven't released one for Win7 and probably won't if they haven't by
    >now.



    I'll probably have to wait until the ATI W7 drivers mature. The whole
    point is that this works fine with XP.
    , Apr 21, 2010
    #8
  9. SC Tom Guest

    <> wrote in message news:...
    > On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:46:12 -0400, "SC Tom" <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >><> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:53:29 +0100, "johnbee"
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>><> wrote in message
    >>>>news:...
    >>>>> I am using an XFX video card based on the ATI 5450 chip. I like to use
    >>>>> the 1280x800 resolution. This works fine in Windows XP with my
    >>>>> Samsung T220 monitor.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> But with Windows 7 it does not display properly. The monitor is
    >>>>> getting a signal which says there are 960 vertical lines rather than
    >>>>> the 800 vertical lines Windows is set for. So the image is compressed
    >>>>> vertically and there's black space at the top and bottom since there
    >>>>> are only 800 lines in the image and the monitor thinks there should be
    >>>>> 960. This is with ATI's latest 10.3 drivers.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> In XP the display adapter uses interrupt 16 but with W7 is uses some
    >>>>> sort of simulated interrupt with a strange long number.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Is there a way I can change W7 to use interrupt 16 for the video card?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Also I remember that in XP you could press F5 during installation and
    >>>>> get an option to install without interrupt sharing. Is there
    >>>>> something similar in W7 and should I try a re-install?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> THANKS IN ADVANCE.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>I will say something in case nobody knows the exact answers to what you
    >>>>ask.
    >>>>The Windows 7 documentation, help system, and all the books I have read
    >>>>(well, both of them, The Windows Bible and the Administrator's Pocket
    >>>>Consultant) are very adamant that you should use the standard display
    >>>>settings for your monitor.
    >>>>
    >>>>They have done something to the monitor functions in Windows 7 because
    >>>>much
    >>>>software does not work even if one just chooses to up the screen text
    >>>>size
    >>>>by clicking on preferences. So that, coupled with the urging to use the
    >>>>monitor's native settings seems to me to mean that they know it does not
    >>>>work as flexibly as previous versions. (I know nothing of Vista as I
    >>>>missed
    >>>>it out).
    >>>>
    >>>>Just in case you have not done this, type msinfo32 into the search
    >>>>programs
    >>>>and files box on the Start menu. That will give a list of IRQ numbers -
    >>>>mine are all the usual little ones except for three labelled hub.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Thanks for your help. I'll have to live with the 1680x1050 resolution
    >>> until ATI or somebody fixes this. I set W7 to used the Medium screen
    >>> sizing option so most things are resized bigger but I see some stuff
    >>> just doesn't resize and work properly. My interrupt table says the
    >>> video card is using IRQ 4294967294 which sounds like some sort of
    >>> simulated interrupt. I seem to remember that when XP first came out I
    >>> had similar problems with an older ATI card and was only able to solve
    >>> them by installing XP for a generic computer using the F5 option. I
    >>> don't remember if I did this the last time I reinstalled XP or if ATI
    >>> fixed the drivers. I've sent a report to ATI about this so maybe
    >>> they'll fix it soon. Thanks again.

    >>
    >>The IRQ on my notebook with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD2600 PCIe is the
    >>same
    >>as yours, with my Intel wireless adapter being one less. Things that make
    >>you go "Huh!"
    >>One thing I found in your manual is that 1280x800 is not a native preset
    >>for
    >>that monitor, so that may be part of the problem. One thing you might try
    >>if
    >>you have the hardware is to change the way you're connected. For example,
    >>if
    >>you currently have it connected via the DVI port, try connecting it to the
    >>D-sub port. If you're video card doesn't have a D-sub out, you could try a
    >>DVI-to-DSUB adaptor.
    >>Since there is no monitor driver for Win7, you can right-click the setup
    >>file you have (which is probably for Vista?) and select Properties,
    >>Compatibility, check the box next to "Run this program in compatibility
    >>mode
    >>for:" and pick Vista Service Pack 2. Win7 should then show the monitor as
    >>what it is. This link is for the driver through Vista:
    >>http://www.samsung.com/us/support/d...cd=&prd_mdl_name=T220HD&prd_ia_sub_class_cd=P
    >>They haven't released one for Win7 and probably won't if they haven't by
    >>now.

    >
    >
    > I'll probably have to wait until the ATI W7 drivers mature. The whole
    > point is that this works fine with XP.
    >


    And part of the reason it worked with XP is that the proper monitor driver
    was installed. Unfortunately, there probably won't be one forthcoming from
    Samsung.
    --
    SC Tom
    SC Tom, Apr 21, 2010
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. popup

    Change Windows 7 language

    popup, Dec 14, 2009, in forum: General Discussion
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,542
    popup
    Dec 15, 2009
  2. foxyflamingos

    Change from a 32-bit to a 64-bit in windows 7

    foxyflamingos, Mar 6, 2010, in forum: Windows 7 Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    826
    ISV_Developers
    Mar 8, 2010
  3. Happy Feet

    64 Bit Windows 7 how do you change it to 32 bit

    Happy Feet, Apr 8, 2010, in forum: General Discussion
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,618
    Nibiru2012
    Apr 9, 2010
  4. no_spam@no_where.invalid

    USB port drive letter assignment

    no_spam@no_where.invalid, Jun 18, 2011, in forum: alt.windows7.general
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,885
    Flint
    Jun 21, 2011
  5. Bob Smith

    How can I change Fonts in Windows 7 pro SP1?

    Bob Smith, Oct 14, 2011, in forum: alt.windows7.general
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    919
    Dave \Crash\ Dummy
    Oct 15, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page