That is pretty amazing! Thank you for testing that out. I had absolutely no idea that they kept that ability long into the PPC era. I guess I've had my head down reading specs on Nubus video cards for too long!
No, because then you would get a “OUT OF RANGE” message (like I noted above), not a 640x480 signal. But I 100% get what you're saying, it won't work... but I was looking at it from the POV of trying to get it to at least produce a verifiable error. Thank you for looking over the manual. It's...
There's a real short list of video cards for the Mac that support 512x384. The Macintosh II High Resolution Video Card, the Macintosh Display Card 4•8, the Macintosh Display Card 8•24 and the built-in video hardware on the early "LC" Macs (since they were designed to have compatibility with...
Last ditch effort this morning, I hooked up an original LC (which absolutely supports 512x384) and set the jumpers to the MODE 1 settings. My Sony CRT finally produced an "OUT OF RANGE" error message. Connected the video to my Extron RGB-HDMI 300 A and I get a 512x384 image.
Reconnected the...
The adapter has settings for the 12" RGB, but no matter what jumper settings I try it will always default to 640x480.
UPDATE: I tested again this morning to make sure that tired eyes weren't the issue here, and I've confirmed that none of these jumper settings will work.
Apple's Nubus Macintosh II High Resolution Video Card for the Mac II ***supposedly*** supports 512x384 resolution. I also have a Sony CPD-200sf multisync VGA monitor. I purchased a PTC MAC to VGA Adapter on Amazon which also ***supposedly*** supports 512x384 resolution.
With the card installed...
I've used the card in a B&W G3 running 8.5 and I've used it in a Motorola clone running 7.6.1
The idea here is to eliminate the Mac and see if the card is just bad.
Sorry to misunderstand. If you use the DOS/Win3.1 image, are you able to run any of the higher end benchmarks (like the Quake timedemo) and not have the card crash?
If your machine can handle it, install 7.6.1 to see if the issue is the OS or hardware.
The Windows 95 image is especially wonky... just like Windows 95. Use the Windows 98 image, it's much more stable.
Sorry. I should have clarified. The board in my photo is from a 4400... which is basically the board most of the clone machines. Save a buck however you can on the clones, right?
I seem to remember reading something about the MFM prototypes not being about to read 800K floppies?