1440p

[damanloox]

Is there any chance MiSTer could "natively" support 2,560 x 1,440 resolution?

[Sorgelig]

2560x1440 uses pixel clock beyond the range MiSTer can output.
But you can use 1920x1440p which is 4:3 resolution.

[Insert Disk Two]

Any particular reason 1920x1440p specs have to manually edited into the .ini file?

[redsteakraw]

Any particular reason 1920x1440p specs have to manually edited into the .ini file?

Probably because it is experimental and not a common resolution ATM and it is questionable how most monitors would interpret 1920x1440p. If more people test it out and there is more information it would make more sense to add it.

[Sorgelig]

i think 1920x1440 can be constructed from 1920x1080 with replacing 1080 by 1440 and adjusting the pixel clock. Better to move to custom resolution thread.

[djsquare]

1440p (1920x1440p) is my favorite MiSTer resolution. I works awesome on my Dell 4k monitor and old bedroom HDTV however, it is not supported on my newish Samsung 4KTV.

video_mode=1920,32,32,50,1440,4,5,26,180000 ;1920×1440
video_mode_ntsc=1920,32,32,50,1440,4,5,26,180000
video_mode_pal=1920,32,32,50,1440,4,5,26,150000

1200p is nice too

[Sorgelig]

1440p is not for 4K.
4K is 2160p, so 1440 will be scaled as 1.5x
Better to use 1920x1080 which is exactly 2 times smaller on X and Y.

[AkujiTheSniper]

For my MiSTer I'm currently using a 1440p Acer KG271U using the same settings djsquare mentioned. I used to have weird display issues, but around the time 1536p stuff was getting brought up in places I updated and haven't had an issue since. I'm even running GBA and NeoGeo perfectly fine at 1440p when Smokemonster said that 1200p was required.

One minor nitpick I have (which I already complained about in the Wallpapers thread, sorry if this is annoying) is that if you swap between different aspect ratio resolutions with alt settings (as I'm doing, 4:3 1440p on my monitor and 16:9 1080p on my TV) you either have to deal with your wallpaper being stretched or smushed depending on what size wallpaper you use. It'd be nice to either have the choice of separate menu backgrounds for alt settings, or have the background cropped then resized for your aspect ratio before it's displayed.

[damanloox]

1440p is not for 4K.
4K is 2160p, so 1440 will be scaled as 1.5x
Better to use 1920x1080 which is exactly 2 times smaller on X and Y.

Yep - 4K is probably the best (because it's 9x240p and 2x1080p) but for me 1440p is the "optimal" resolution (I have to share my home office monitor with MiSTer ). 1080p is not enough real estate on the screen for work plus it doesn't scale with 20p. 4k is perfect for MiSTer (assuming there are 4k monitors with good refresh rates, delay etc). but for work it's either 100p "retina" (which again is not enough real estate for work) or tiny, tiny pixels (which is enormous space but unusable really)... On top of that I don't think there are 4k monitors that can do 1:1 pixel mapping (or even better 1:2)
1440p works better for me - lots of real estate for work, nice scaling for MiSTer... I just wish MiSTer could support 2k "wide screen" natively (but - as you mentioned - it can't)...
BTW - does anybody know 24/25 inch 4k monitor with max 4ms to 5ms delay?

[Sigismond0]

This isn't out yet, but I'm cautiously following and waiting for reviews. If it does what they say, and has native integer/nearest neighbot scaling, it might just be perfect for retro gaming. Even better if their integer scaler could take the direct video signal from MiSTer.

https://evedevices.com/pages/full-specs

[aberu]

This isn't out yet, but I'm cautiously following and waiting for reviews. If it does what they say, and has native integer/nearest neighbot scaling, it might just be perfect for retro gaming. Even better if their integer scaler could take the direct video signal from MiSTer.

https://evedevices.com/pages/full-specs

When they say "Pixel-perfect upscaling (Integer-ratio upscaling by pixel duplication for low-resolution input signals)" this is still marketing gibberish to a degree. No algorithim can overcome native resolution mathematics. If you try and fully upscale a 224p signal to a 1440p/2160p screen, it's not pixel perfect, plain and simple. If you do horizontal lines tests in 240p, you'll see some bigger than others.

[Sigismond0]

No algorithim can overcome native resolution mathematics. If you try and fully upscale a 224p signal to a 1440p/2160p screen, it's not pixel perfect, plain and simple. If you do horizontal lines tests in 240p, you'll see some bigger than others.

That's simply not true. All you have to do is scale to the native aspect ratio or some other direct multiplication scale instead of 4:3.

For example, on an HDMI modded NES, you can scale 4x horizontal and 4x vertical for 1024x960 (in a 1080p window) with perfect square pixels and no uneven horizontal pixels. I personally run it at 5x horizontal and 4x vertical for a 1280x896. That gives you pixel perfect scaling, and something that looks more like the traditional 4:3 aspect ratio. It's only when you try to squeeze it into an aspect ratio that isn't some sort of integer scale that you start getting inconsistent pixels like you're describing.

MiSTer currently forces 4:3 or 16:9 aspect ratios, with no option for square pixels so you're right in regards to its digital output. But 240p in general absolutely can be scaled in a way that gives equal sized horizontal pixels.

[SuperBabyHix]

Have you tried using any of the NN (e.g. gaussionsharp_NN7) filters in conjunction with vscale=1? At 1080p, for example, would scale 240p vertically to 960p and apply the tiniest whisper of blurring ,on the horizontal axis only, to help mask any uneven scaling. To my eyes it's every bit as sharp as an actual integer upscale, but these eyes ain't what they used to be.

[aberu]

No algorithim can overcome native resolution mathematics. If you try and fully upscale a 224p signal to a 1440p/2160p screen, it's not pixel perfect, plain and simple. If you do horizontal lines tests in 240p, you'll see some bigger than others.

It's only when you try to squeeze it into an aspect ratio that isn't some sort of integer scale that you start getting inconsistent pixels like you're describing.

MiSTer currently forces 4:3 or 16:9 aspect ratios, with no option for square pixels so you're right in regards to its digital output. But 240p in general absolutely can be scaled in a way that gives equal sized horizontal pixels.

Right that's what I'm talking about, someone filling the screen of a 1080p/1440p/2160p screen with a 224p resolution will not be an integer scale. What classic resolution are they talking about that they have "pixel perfect" upscaled specifically? It depends upon math and the base resolution you are upscaling versus the native resolution of the monitor.

The advertised monitor says it has "pixel perfect upscaling", which is nonsense if they mean you can run a 224p image on a 1440p screen without some kind of interpolation which will create something mathematically not "pixel perfect upscaling". It's only pixel perfect to full screen if the resolution you are upscaling divides into the monitor's native resolution evenly.

240p can be scaled evenly, but the only screen that can evenly scale both 240p and 224p on the same screen, to full screen, doesn't even exist:

https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Resolution

When you do the math it would have to be a 3360p or 6720p screen to natively scale full screen 240p and 224p.

So a 4k screen isn't "pixel perfect" upscaling all smaller resolutions, some pixels are being represented in a slightly oblong way. As you go up to higher resolutions, like 4k or even 5k, it is harder to see that effect, but it's still a trick and it's not "perfect upscaling". That's my point. It's like someone telling me that 1 = 1.2.

Now if they have a mode on the screen to add black borders like MiSTer does internally, sweet. But when you run a 1080p monitor at 720p or 960p, it's already doing it's own interpolation/algorithm to scale inside native pixels it has on the screen already, so if you max out you are still not going to get a "perfect" scaling.

1440p is not for 4K.
4K is 2160p, so 1440 will be scaled as 1.5x
Better to use 1920x1080 which is exactly 2 times smaller on X and Y.

BTW - does anybody know 24/25 inch 4k monitor with max 4ms to 5ms delay?

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monit ... 000&page=1

According to this, this is the only one on there

https://www.viewsonic.com/eu/products/l ... mhl-4K.php

[Sigismond0]

We're arguing two entirely different points here. You're arguing assuming that the vertical resolution of the display is to be filled. I was talking about integer scales with windowboxes to fill the rest of the frame. That's a feature a lot of retro gamers would love to see in a display. To my knowledge there aren't really any like that on the market. I think the ZisWorks aftermarket LCD driver kits were supposed to work like that.

Regardless, unless MiSTer were to have a square pixels aspect ratio option, it's all entirely moot no matter what display you have, or if you care about fill screen vs windowboxed content.

[Newsdee]

The built in scaler fills the screen as much as possible in integer scaling mode, but leaves some areas black.

With that, I can report that 1200p (16:10 display) works much better than 1080p for integer scaling... there is less wasted vertical space. I did the math and 1080p actually is the worst for 240p (didn't check for 224p).

Given how prevalent 1080p displays are, it would be nice if we had the option to "zoom overscan" a bit so we could fill the screen sacrifing some top and bottom pixel rows.

[SuperBabyHix]

If you have a 1080p display that will accept 960p you can integer scale to 960p on the Mister and let your display scale that up to 1080p. I have found that if I am using a scanline filter this looks much better than setting the Mister to vscale=0 at 1080p and it fills most of the screen. I´m pretty sure that´s because most monitors use a linear filter to scale resolutions up, so the scanlines are not so noticeably uneven. This will of course add a little blur, but to my eyes it´s not egregious. It pretty much works like a 4x prescale with linear upscale used in emulators like Mame.

If you aren´t trying to use a scanline filter, but instead want that sharp pixel look, just let the mister scaler do all the work with some of the sharper interpolation filter.

As for 224p, don´t those systems actually output a 240p signal, just with 224 active lines? Much like most C64 games output 200 active lines in a 288p signal. It´s still 288p, not 200p.

[aberu]

We're arguing two entirely different points here. You're arguing assuming that the vertical resolution of the display is to be filled. I was talking about integer scales with windowboxes to fill the rest of the frame.

Based upon their description of that linked monitor, I didn't interpret that this way, my bad. I see no indication anywhere that this upscaling means with borders to keep pixel representation 1:1. I just see news reports repeating the same "pixel perfect upscaling". Why this makes me skeptical are situations like Nvidia and AMD claiming to have released "integer scaling" in their newer drivers about a year or two ago. It wasn't integer scaling in the sense those of us who are more immersed in this though. It was just nearest neighbor scaling. If the they are calling integer scaling using NN to stretch a 224p image to full screen 1080p... then their "integer" they are using is 4.821428571~ unless they have a border, which they don't. So I'll wait for reviews before criticizing Eve Spectrum's marketing terminology again.

My skepticism was probably a bit misplaced, but I am just seeing loads of fluff-filled preorders of supposed "gamer" products even moreso than before, and they always come up short.

For instance, this uses an LG panel. They say it's already Freesync Certified, it's not on the AMD Freesync Certified list as a monitor (and someone pointed this out 9 months ago), but LG has only a few 27" 1440p Freesync certified monitors. None of them are 240hz though. So are they overclocking a 144hz 1440p IPS panel from LG? Most likely.

It's just kinda fluffy to me and I'm skeptical. I'm sure it'll be a great monitor. There are other 27" 144hz 1440p monitors I usually recommend to people, but 240hz would be nice.

EDIT - 07/08/2021: Thanks @darksakul for thanking this comment just now and reminding me that I had commented I was skeptical of the Eve Spectrum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcGpU5LL9PA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRO2dbGvNZo

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comme ... ebook_ads/

Also...

bgkSfp3.jpeg (162.35 KiB) Viewed 9197 times

Look at the line down the middle of their 4k monitor, saving money with dual panels lmao

They are almost doing scammy practices at this point.