Re: [Ql-Users] Q60 + OSSC

2020-01-15 Thread Thierry Godefroy via Ql-Users
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 01:16:14 +0100, Peter Graf via Ql-Users wrote: > Many thanks for taking a highres picture. It is nice to get the screen > filled, still single pixels can not be distinguished in every area. The > picture is significantly clearer on my 1024x768 monitor using the "black > bar"

Re: [Ql-Users] Q60 + OSSC

2020-01-15 Thread Thierry Godefroy via Ql-Users
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:40:26 +0100, Peter Graf via Ql-Users wrote: > Thierry Godefroy wrote: > > In fact, I found out today that by increasing the sample rate to 1260 (from > > the 1200 I used so far) on the OSSC, I could get it to output a 1024x512 > > (without scan doubling) or 2048x1024 (with

Re: [Ql-Users] Q60 + OSSC

2020-01-15 Thread Peter Graf via Ql-Users
Thierry Godefroy wrote: > In fact, I found out today that by increasing the sample rate to 1260 (from > the 1200 I used so far) on the OSSC, I could get it to output a 1024x512 > (without scan doubling) or 2048x1024 (with it) resolution in the 480p HDMI > signal format... and the good news is that

Re: [Ql-Users] Q60 + OSSC

2020-01-15 Thread Peter Graf via Ql-Users
Thierry Godefroy wrote: >> Besides lack of time and the BGA soldering issue, I remain unsure if >> such a massive board modification is appropriate for a historic computer. >> >> A lot depends on the question, what do we actually prefer today: Keeping >> the historic machine alive, or any 68060

Re: [Ql-Users] Q60 + OSSC

2020-01-15 Thread Thierry Godefroy via Ql-Users
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 23:07:53 +0100, Peter Graf via Ql-Users wrote: > Those are small PLDs, optimized almost to the last gate, not FPGAs, > and 800x600 is not doable. Surprising, since it's "just" a change in divisors/counters/ frequencies, but if you say so (I'm certainly no expert in PLD/FPGA