Distortion when bezel management >68 pixels

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 25 Sep 2008, 21:32

I'm getting strange distortion when bezel management is set to 70 pixels or more. It's just the left screen, and does it on multiple resolutions, drivers and screens. Can anyone with a similar rig confirm bezel management at >68 without distortion? Currently on 177.35 but also does it on 177.41.

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 25 Sep 2008, 21:36

Forgot the images:

Note it's not just squashed, there's a black border on the right too :?

Post by **scavvenjahh** » 25 Sep 2008, 23:49

Yes, I get the exact same glitch :( except I can go all the way to 74 pixels ! :P Needless to say the display is broken on the desktop and in games as well, not only on the Bezel Management screen. Pretty annoying since
1) I really like this feature, 3D scenes feel broken and unnatural to me without proper Bezel Management
2) my new 16:10 monitors have much thicker bezels than my former 5:4s

Currently running forceware 177.41 under Vista64, but it seems pretty obvious to me that this is a TH2G issue. I'll give it a try on my Ati rig tomorrow anyway...

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 26 Sep 2008, 00:51

Well printscreen doesn't squish so I think it's fair to say what the graphics card is outputting is A-Ok. Here's hoping Matrox are aware of the issue and working on a fix. I need more like 160 pixels to be happy.

Post by **skipclarke** » 26 Sep 2008, 01:29

I found the same thing as well. I think I got to 70 as well.

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 26 Sep 2008, 08:33

This issue makes me regret bothering in the first place...I use bezel management in all games/movies.

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 26 Sep 2008, 17:24

While we're on niggles...does anyone else lose desktop divider settings after each reboot?

[email protected] · Post by **[email protected]** » 26 Sep 2008, 19:33

Not me but I do get an annoying Matrox dialogue box every time
I start up.

And some programs ignore the divider.

Post by **Mach1.9pants** » 27 Sep 2008, 21:31

Same error for me:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14248

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 27 Sep 2008, 22:13

Thanks, didn't know what search terms to use for this particular weirdness :oops:

DeeCee · Post by **DeeCee** » 01 Oct 2008, 22:30

Im getting it by more than 76 ! But only on the left screen !!! The right is o.k. !!

A Small White Box · Post by **A Small White Box** » 11 Jan 2009, 07:17

Error still exists on most recent Powerdesk, mine distorts after 68 pixels on the left screen only.

ricknau · Post by **ricknau** » 11 Jan 2009, 17:20

I emailed Matrox tech support about the bad bezel management. Here's what they said:

-----------------
Unfortunately 80 pixels seem to be the best that PowerDeskSE can do, especially under 3x1680*1050.

If you run a different resolution, like 3x1280*1024, the Bezel Management might be better.

Thank you.
-----------------

Doesn't look like a burning priority for them! I sent a disgruntled reply. More people should do so.

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 11 Jan 2009, 17:32

Useless *&^%$Â£!s :evil:

Post by **MobsterOO7** » 11 Jan 2009, 19:25

I run 3840x1024 and I do not recall any distortion even above 90 pixels. When I get back to my rig I'll make a point of checking.

Mud · Post by **Mud** » 11 Jan 2009, 19:27

At 3840x1024 there's no problem to any silly number of pixels IIRC...I never tried numbers greater than about 200 pixels, but it just didn't misbehave at that resolution for me.

ricknau · Post by **ricknau** » 14 Jan 2009, 02:53

I got one more reply from Matrox on the bezel management issue. Seems there are hardware limitations. Otherwise they probably would have fixed it from the get go. It's nice that they at least fessed up and didn't ignore my inquiry.

----------------------
Hi Rick,

Due to the bandwidth limitation between the graphic card and the TripleHead2Go, the available pixels in Bezel Management may vary on different triple mode.

And we could not do much more about the bandwidth.

Thank you.
----------------------

A Small White Box · Post by **A Small White Box** » 14 Jan 2009, 03:14

I got one more reply from Matrox on the bezel management issue. Seems there are hardware limitations. Otherwise they probably would have fixed it from the get go. It's nice that they at least fessed up and didn't ignore my inquiry.

----------------------
Hi Rick,

Due to the bandwidth limitation between the graphic card and the TripleHead2Go, the available pixels in Bezel Management may vary on different triple mode.

And we could not do much more about the bandwidth.

Thank you.
----------------------

I got the same response from them. Makes me wonder exactly how the bezel management works. I assumed it was either done within the box itself or within the software and instructions sent through USB to the box. If bezel management is done within the box, then the bandwidth between the card and box has nothing to do with it. If it is being processed in software and sent along the DVI cable, I suppose it could mess it up. But then why does one screen (the right screen) scale all the way to some ridiculous bezel offset without a problem?

More likely is that the bezel offset is done within the box due to the fact that the box splits the images. If it is done in the box, then the bandwidth should not be an issue. Seems like a shoddy explanation to me.

Mesh · Post by **Mesh** » 14 Jan 2009, 08:05

Easy way: output image to th2g box including black bars to offset bezel part. Takes more bandwidth but less overhead/programming on the box itself.

Hard way: output image without black bars, reducing rendered image by x pixels in 2 spots before sending to box. Only extra bandwidth are a few numbers so it knows separations.

On the box, split image at separations and display. Less bandwidth, more sophisticated code needed.

My bet is their way is the first.

A Small White Box · Post by **A Small White Box** » 14 Jan 2009, 21:44

Easy way: output image to th2g box including black bars to offset bezel part. Takes more bandwidth but less overhead/programming on the box itself.

Hard way: output image without black bars, reducing rendered image by x pixels in 2 spots before sending to box. Only extra bandwidth are a few numbers so it knows separations.

On the box, split image at separations and display. Less bandwidth, more sophisticated code needed.

My bet is their way is the first.

If that were the case wouldn't Windows be outputting a resolution higher than 5040x1050?

Widescreen Gaming Forum