Set the new 2.8k display to 1440x960 instead

Framework Laptop 13 Linux
1

i’m using Fedora 40 KDE, kernel 6.10.12 running on the new framework 13 core ultra 5 125h.

i’m wondering if it is possible to set the display to 1440x960 instead of one of the defaults from the edid. having the display run a full 2880x1920 when i just have the scaling set to 200% seems like a waste of compute and battery drain. i’m not seeing any way to force override the edid settings software side which is really disappointing as 1440x960 seems like it should be included (especially compared to the other options)

any help would be appreciated!

1 Like
2

I have kind of the same problem, but in reverse :smiley:
When I run games, they RUN in max of 1440x960 resolution, I’m trying to bump up to 2880x1920.
Good luck! Maybe your solution can help me too?
If anything, here’s my reddit thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/framework/comments/1g7tfmb/gaming_on_fw13_linux_max_resolution_is_1440x960/

3

Same issue here. (Arch, Gnome, Wayland)

I tried adding the kernel option:
video=eDP-1:1440x960@120

But that did not add the additional resolution to gnomes settings dialog.

Setting the scaling to 200% works, but as the OP already pointed out it feels like a waste…

Would be happy if there are more ideas to try out?

Update:
I will try to generate a custom edid binary, maybe that works.

4

It’s possible to set custom resolutions in some compositors like Hyprland.
I do it on my Framework!

5

Native panels run at their native resolution irrespective of what you set them to. It’s not a CRT.

If other modes are exposed in the edid it’s due to some sort of hardware scaler; or more commonly these days a trick in the smartTV OS to do it in software anyway (often at a much worse result than doing it in software in the device OS).

As others have mentioned you can set any arbitrary output dimensions you like via virtual output force it to scale to fullscreen on the realoutput. sway(wlroots/gamescope), kde_wayland, gnome all have facilities to do this. But it’s going to result in more overhead not less generally than just using the DE’s inbuilt scaling features. It’s more useful for i.e games etc - and this is exactly what steam/gamescope does to force low res outputs on panels.

6

I’m very well aware of this. The goal is to move the scaling as far down the pipeline as possible.
E.g. All the memory buffers before can be 1/4th the size. Any operation on the GPU only has to deal with 1/4th of the pixels. (This is what helps games a lot if they are GPU bound, as you already pointed out)

The benefit of doing exactly half resolution is that nothing will blur, as it fits one pixels exactly to 4 on the panel. Usually that specific half resolution is the only other sanely usable one on non-CRT monitors - thats why I wonder so much why it is not included (next to all the other useless ones)

7

I remember when I first got a 4K monitor 10 years ago, I tried as an experiment running it in 1920x1080, expecting blur-free display just as you did. Nope – it was very noticeably blurry. I’m guessing the manufacturer simply couldn’t be bothered to handle those “perfect multiples” differently than anything else.

And then there are also things like subpixel rendering for improving the visual quality of rendered text. Good luck getting that to work with non-native resolution…

8

Hm, I do remember something like “integer scaling” which fixed that issue.
Although I never had to use it myself before, as I avoided screens with unreasonably high resolutions.

The subpixel font rendering might be a real issue though, if even the proper scaling is not there by default.

Well, I guess I should have waited for some lower res panel instead then ;(