xbox360 display modes

[XTrek]

From this article: www.gamespot.com/features/6139672/p-2.html

The VGA cable only provides these resolutions:
640x480, 848x480, 1024x768, 1280x720, 1280x768, and 1360x768


The Component cable gives these:
480p, 720p, and 1080i

So I'm not sure what will happen if you have a Dell 2005FPW VGA only monitor that displays natively in 1680x1050? If this display does not scale, then you will not get a full screen width display.

 

[London Geezer]

From this article: www.gamespot.com/features/6139672/p-2.html

The VGA cable only provides these resolutions:
640x480, 848x480, 1024x768, 1280x720, 1280x768, and 1360x768


The Component cable gives these:
480p, 720p, and 1080i

So I'm not sure what will happen if you have a Dell 2005FPW VGA only monitor that displays natively in 1680x1050? If this display does not scale, then you will not get a full screen width display.

*only*??

Man that would make pretty much everyone happy!!! Except the 1080p freaks.

 

[creon100]

I don't see what's so surprising, it's supporting the more common VGA compatible resolutions over the VGA connection and it's supporting standard HDTV resolutions over the component cables.

I will personally come verbally abuse anyone who plays an Xbox360 through VGA at 640x480 though.

 

[XTrek]

So how will a 1680x1050 native monitor like the dell 2005fpw display 1280x768, or 1360x768? Will it be in a letter box?

 

[kyleb]

I'm pleased for the most part. I would have really hoped they would have supported 1280x960 and 1280x1024 as those would be the optimal choices for many PC monitors when displaying stuff that is rendered at 1280x720, but I honestly expected them to botch it and only give VGA the same output options as component so they did better than I had planed on.

So I'm not sure what will happen if you have a Dell 2005FPW VGA only monitor that displays natively in 1680x1050? If this display does not scale, then you will not get a full screen width display.

The display does scale, so simply outputing 1280x720 and letting the display scale it from there would probably do just great, though it would be worth the effort to try letting the 360 handle some of the scaling depending or not and see how it's scaling hardware on the console compares to that of the display.

 

[XTrek]

I'm pleased for the most part. I would have really hoped they would have supported 1280x960 and 1280x1024 as those would be the optimal choices for many PC monitors when displaying stuff that is rendered at 1280x720, but I honestly expected them to botch it and only give VGA the same output options as component so they did better than I had planed on.

The display does scale, so simply outputing 1280x720 and letting the display scale it from there would probably do just great, though it would be worth the effort to try letting the 360 handle some of the scaling depending or not and see how it's scaling hardware on the console compares to that of the display.

Actually I have the Dell 2405FPW 1920x1200 display. It looks like the VGA cable will be preferable for this 16:10 ratio display. 1280x768 mode will yield the closest to the native ratio when streatched to full screen. Of course I could use 1280x720 and have bars top/bottom unstreatched. Anyway it looks like I'll be getting the VGA cable.

 

[kyleb]

The console is going to be rendering internaly at fixed resolution arleady, so I don't see how 1280x768 would change anything about the aspect ratio or do you much good at all. You'd probably be just as well sending 720p or 1080i to the display depending on if the console or the monitor does a better job at scaling.

 

[XTrek]

The console is going to be rendering internaly at fixed resolution arleady, so I don't see how 1280x768 would change anything about the aspect ratio or do you much good at all. You'd probably be just as well sending 720p or 1080i to the display depending on if the console or the monitor does a better job at scaling.

Thanks for the replys.

Why did they provide both 1280x768 and 1280x720 for VGA? The ratio of 1280x768 is 1.67 which will result in less morphing for my 1.60 ratio 2405fpw. 1280x720 is 1.78 which is less of a match for a 16:10 display.

 

[kyleb]

Quite a few 16:9 LCDs and some plasmas as well are 1280x768 with non-square pixels, so the resolution is likely just to match the native resolution of those displays and I'd bet you'd still be getting a 16:9 aspect ratio for the actual image.

 

[[maven]]

I'm pleased for the most part. I would have really hoped they would have supported 1280x960 and 1280x1024 as those would be the optimal choices for many PC monitors when displaying stuff that is rendered at 1280x720, but I honestly expected them to botch it and only give VGA the same output options as component so they did better than I had planed on.

1280x1024 is supported with the the later retail boxes (or the earlier kits with a firmware upgrade), see http://www.dreisechzig.net/wp/wp-content/1280x1024dash.jpg

 

[kyleb]

Cool, I was figuring the 1360x768 previously listed as the max res was simply due to console not being able to output anything higher than that. Now all we need is 1280x960 as that would be optimal for 4:3 displays.

 

[PiNkY]

Besides 1080p over an analogue VGA cable will probably only appeal to masochists...

 

[kyleb]

What would you have against 1080p over VGA? I use it quite a bit for older games on my HTPC.

 

[pakotlar]

I run 1920*1200 over VGA and it looks fantastic.

 

[PiNkY]

Hmm, I never saw a high-bandwidth VGA Sub-D connection without it introducing very noticable image degradation and I have yet to see a TV with a quality 5 bnc vga input.