Newbie tries to install graphics card

English Hardware
21

Its not intended to change the graphics. Its intended to give us more information so we can better understand EXACTLY what is on your PC so we can better solve the problem. :slight_smile: … If you can not find the ‘VGA’ section, the simply do this:

su -c 'lspci -vv > lspci.txt'

and open the file lspci.txt with a text editor and copy its contents it paste the contents on either pastebin org or pastebin ca or pastebin be

Yes, many. Just google for them. Or simply: either pastebin org or pastebin ca or pastebin be

22

From what I can see you were sucessful in removing the nvidia rpms, and that output you provided (of the Xorg.0.log file) is with the nvidia driver removed.

Please, when you booted the PC, did you have the ‘nomodeset’ boot coded specified in the option area of your boot menu ? If it is NOT with the ‘nomodeset’ boot code specified, what happens if you boot with the ‘nomodeset’ boot code in the boot menu option line?

From what I can see from the Xorg.0.log file, your Yakumuo TFT17SL is NOT being identified at all. Instead your monitor has been misidentified as some hand held device and a lower resolution accordingly is being forced.

Out of curiousity, when you boot with ‘failsafe’ settings, do you get the same poor 832x624 resolution ?

23

Ah, ok. Thanks for the explanation

Oh, I think I managed to do that, posted it earlier on. Sorry you didn’t find it. Here it comes again:


01:06.0 VGA compatible controller: Matrox Graphics, Inc. MGA 1064SG [Mystique] (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
        Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping+ SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx-
        Status: Cap- 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
        Latency: 32
        Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
        Region 0: Memory at e4000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16]
        Region 1: Memory at e8000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=8]
        Region 2: Memory at e5000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8]
        [virtual] Expansion ROM at e8800000 [disabled] [size=64]

Ah, ok. Thanks. But in the meanwhile I managed to paste it in the pastebin.org. It is here: pastebin - collaborative debugging tool[/size][/size][/size][/size]

24

That lspci output suggests your graphic card has only 8M of RAM (and 16K RAM) in other locations. Many possible resolutions in the Xorg.0.log are reported as “(insufficient memory for mode)” …

Have you ever successfully had this graphic card working with MS-Windows (or any other OS) at a higher resolution ?

25

Yes - for at least 3 years (1152x864px) with WinXP (and exactly the same monitor). And as I am still using Windows in parallel to Linux, I can say that it is still working.

Do you think it makes sense to give another graphics card a try (I don’t have a spare one at home but maybe I could borrow one somewhere)? What about the monitor problem - do you think it could be a subsequent fault caused by the graphics card’s memory issue?

26

Sorry, I can’t answer these questions right now, as I am not in front of the computer in question, but I will try this when I am at home tonight.

27

When I checked, there was ‘vga=0x317’ (and no ‘nomodeset’) in the option line. I erased it and put ‘nomodeset’ into it.
It didn’t change anything on my graphics.

Then I chose the ‘failsafe’ option, and YEEEHAAAAA it has a resolution of 1024x768. Unfortunately not more, but this is already better than 832x624, right?

So what do we learn from that?

28

[quote="“NanaLisa,post:27,topic:54059”]

When I checked, there was ‘vga=0x317’ (and no ‘nomodeset’) in the option line. I erased it and put ‘nomodeset’ into it.
It didn’t change anything on my graphics.[/quote]Ok … note there was no need to remove the vga=0x0317 for that test.

[quote="“NanaLisa,post:27,topic:54059”]

Then I chose the ‘failsafe’ option, and YEEEHAAAAA it has a resolution of 1024x768. Unfortunately not more, but this is already better than 832x624, right?

So what do we learn from that?[/QUOTE]We potentially can learn a LOT (although possible not as much as we might like). Boot to fail safe, and copy the content of /var/log/Xorg.0.log to Pastebin.com - #1 paste tool since 2002! and post here the address/URL provided, so we can examine the file and see if we can see any relevant difference.

Also, note a boot to failsafe uses the exact same kernel, but all it does different is apply a bunch of boot codes. For example, with fail safe selected you likely see something extra in the options line of the grub boot menu like the following, with MANY boot codes:

 apm=off noresume nosmp maxcpus=0 edd=off powersaved=off nohz=off highres=off processor.max_cstate=1 nomodeset x11failsafe vga=0x346

What is useful, is to reboot the PC many many times in fail safe, and each time remove one of those codes. Ultimately you will discover when you remove one, the boot to 1024x768 does not work, and you will discover which one enables you to boot to 1024x768 resolution.

29

Yes, and I was very lucky, had to reboot 2 times only! It is the ‘x11failsafe’ option itself which makes the difference.

Please find the file here: PasteBin.de
(x11failsafe option only!)

30

Can you confirm this now ? The way to do that is to do a regular boot, but add the ‘x11failsafe’ option and see if it goes to 1024x768 ? If not then one needs more than just that one boot parameter.

31

I note that is loading the “vesa” graphic driver, instead of the “mga1064sg” which you now have in your 50-device.conf file.

32

Yes, I did that already in the first place. It is definitely the ‘x11failsafe’ option which makes the difference. When I boot with only this option set, I get the higher resolution.

33

What does that mean?

34

It means there are more than one graphic driver that will work with your PC. The “mga1064sg” should give the highest performance, but for some reason it is not working so good (which we need to figure out). Other graphic drivers are the FBDEV and VESA. Maybe a read here will help (although it does not mention your hardware): openSUSE Graphic Card Practical Theory Guide for Users

35

So what do you suggest I should do?

Sorry, I already roughly read through it but didn’t understand very much of it. :-/

36

Its interesting the VESA driver works better … the Xorg.0.conf filethat you posted with the VESA driver running at 1024x768 made no sense to me, as it had this line:

   166.852] (II) VESA(0): Setting up VESA Mode 0x115 (800x600)

and thus I would have guessed your resolution 800x600 … but you note it 1024x768.

Anyway, thats a mute point. I note your previous post:

… and it appears to me that monitor is NOT identified by X and hence I think we need to wait for some one (like deano_ferrai) to speak up here, as they know way more than I about configuring monitors when/if they are not properly identified (which is my suspicion, but I could be wrong).

37

Again I have to say SORRY.
Reading you post, I just rechecked the resolution, and you are right. In fact it is 800x600 right now. Earlier on it was 1024x768 (for sure!), I think that was when I was using the full list of option in failsafe mode. I’ll try to find out more about it - with which options I’ll have which resolution - tomorrow.

Have a good night.

38

I have found similar threads (in other forums) with similar issues to yours. For example:

Screen update problems (with Matrox Mystique) - Ubuntu Forums

As oldcpu has mentioned, it looks like the problem is with the actual mga driver and memory detection. The Xorg.0.log shows that the monitor modes are detected ok (and EDID looks ok to me). So, unfortunately, I think your stuck with using the generic vesa or fbdev drivers (and the maximum resolution supprted AFAIK is 1024x768).

It may be worth casting your net wider, and seeing what support may be available from

Phoronix Forums - Powered by vBulletin

Realistically, you may be better off changing your graphics card for one that is better supported, and can drive your monitor optimally.

39

I agree this could be difficult to sort, and you could spend a lot of time on this. A different graphic card would likely be easier.

One thing you could try is see if running “Xorg -configure” (do NOT run this in X window/GUI) could create an xorg.conf that will work better … To do that, try the 5th step here: SDB:Configuring graphics cards - openSUSE - 5th step

Before you try any of that, install the midnight commander editor :

su -c 'zypper in mc'

because you may need that to edit files from a full screen terminal. (one installed it is run by typing ‘mc’ ).

40

Heres another one with no solution :
[ubuntu] Unkown Monitor: only 800x600, 640x480 and 400x300 screen resolution ? - Page 3 - Ubuntu Forums]([ubuntu] Unkown Monitor: only 800x600, 640x480 and 400x300 screen resolution ? - Page 3) … same MGA 1064SG [Mystique] and also a Samsung SyncMaster T200 and best reported resolution is 800x600

also this thread reporting problems: [xubuntu] Matrox Mystique & Millennium Problems on xubuntu 10.04 LTS