Resolution refresh Rate path + 3d Refresh (toastyX please help!)

[ToastyX]

(01-19-2021 10:52 AM)mycop Wrote:  Why are you talking about 24p if 1.4B is already 50 and 60? Not to mention HDMI 2.

I'm talking about frame packing 3D. HDMI 1.4 only requires 1920x1080 @ 24 Hz and 1280x720 @ 50/60 Hz, and your card doesn't have HDMI 2.0.

(01-19-2021 10:52 AM)mycop Wrote:  Nvidia did not delete, but on the contrary ADD free 3D support 3DTvplay to the 425 driver version. And you don’t need 3D equipment. it works even on a regular display in anaglyph mode. those. red and blue glasses for a couple of bucks. (but they are not required for the patch either) I would like to dig deeper. In my understanding, it would be possible to make a primitive replacement of a couple of bytes in HEX to replace, for example, 24 by 50 But I do not want to step on a rake right away from the first step, but it is better to ask the person who was doing this which area is better to see them there probably more than a dozen of the same name ...

No, 425.31 is the last driver to include any 3D support. It wouldn't be as simple as changing 24 to 50. It's probably checking for VIC numbers. 1080p24 16:9 is 32. There might be a list of allowed VICs somewhere, but I don't know if changing that is enough. There's probably a table of timing parameters somewhere, and the refresh rate would probably be represented by the pixel clock, which would be 74.25 MHz for 1080p24, or 148.5 MHz with frame packing. Does your monitor's EDID have the appropriate VICs for 1080p/i @ 50/60 Hz in the 3D section of the HDMI data block?

(01-19-2021 10:52 AM)mycop Wrote:  To tell the truth, I don't know what you mean. And why try to put rgb when it does not work in it? the bandwidth is just enough for 4.2.0, which, in principle, is already enough for watching, for example, 4k movies.
Perhaps there were no resolutions then, however, the same driver on different cards allows you to set 4k resolution, because the pixelation frequency is important. If we fit into it, it will work. And if so, for the Fermi they made a small software restriction and quite clumsy because step left or right in the refresh rate results in normal operation. apparently this is their miscalculation.

Why do you think it's a restriction rather than a lack of implementation? It's more than just the pixel clock. It also has to support the color format. YCbCr 4:2:0 support wasn't added until Kepler. Fermi doesn't officially support more than 165 MHz pixel clock, so YCbCr might not work correctly beyond that. As I said before, newer cards would not have this problem.