mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > New To GIMPS? Start Here! > Information & Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-10-01, 08:34   #12
kruoli
 
kruoli's Avatar
 
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

26·19 Posts
Default

Prime95 does not use any special fonts so I am at a loss why the possibility of missing fonts was suggested.
kruoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-01, 18:29   #13
mapsonix
 
Sep 2022

616 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixfd64 View Post
Try these steps:
  1. Right-click the Prime95 executable and select Properties.
  2. Go to the Compatibility tab and click the "Change high DPI settings" button.
  3. Ensure the "Override high DPI scaling behavior" option is checked and set the scaling behavior to "System (Enhanced)" in the drop-down menu.
That's an improvement. Can you see the difference?


Thanks
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	prime.png
Views:	40
Size:	144.9 KB
ID:	27400  
mapsonix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-01, 18:39   #14
mapsonix
 
Sep 2022

610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
Why run such an odd custom scaling, 156% = 39/25?
When I zoom in 4x on your png file, it is eminently readable here and shows individual square pixels in MS Paint on my 1920x1080 display laptop, and at 100% or 150% Windows zoom and with or without 4x app zoom.

But having set your custom scaling here, Windows 10 requires signing out and in again to have the custom scaling take effect, and does not allow canceling custom setting without signing out and in again. So other readers, beware.
I have 32" TV monitor. At 1920x1080, that's the scaling I need to to have everything in general display properly and proportionately, for Windows 10, apps, and particularly my browsers.
mapsonix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-01, 21:42   #15
kriesel
 
kriesel's Avatar
 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

22×52×71 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mapsonix View Post
I have 32" TV monitor. At 1920x1080, that's the scaling I need
Really, you can't make do with 150% (3/2, ~4% less) instead of 156% (39/25)? I think that would cut down on aliasing effects somewhat. Neither of the images you posted in the thread have ANY unreadable characters when I view them. But there are significant differences between them, that make the comparison unfair: different total resolutions, (~10%) different magnifications, more than 3:1 file size difference.
If you were to use a digital camera to try to show us what the TV screen looks like, that would add an additional occurrence of aliasing effects at the camera sensor. What's the native resolution of the TV screen?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	p95scompared.png
Views:	24
Size:	216.8 KB
ID:	27401  

Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2022-10-01 at 21:42
kriesel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-01, 23:26   #16
mapsonix
 
Sep 2022

2·3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
What's the native resolution of the TV screen?
1920x1080, as I previously stated.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
Really, you can't make do with 150% (3/2, ~4% less) instead of 156% (39/25)?
I spent a lot of trial and error time figuring out what works best for my setup. Why would I change it? For, supposedly, the only program I use, or have ever used, that didn't display with the expected clarity, that was already solved thru ixfd64's expert advice


Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
I think that would cut down on aliasing effects somewhat.
What aliasing effects?


Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
Neither of the images you posted in the thread have ANY unreadable characters when I view them. But there are significant differences between them, that make the comparison unfair: different total resolutions, (~10%) different magnifications, more than 3:1 file size difference.
I must disagree, the results offered by ixfd64 are clear evidence.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
If you were to use a digital camera to try to show us what the TV screen looks like, that would add an additional occurrence of aliasing effects at the camera sensor.
Huh? I dunno, this seems to have really gotten under your skin. I don't get it. It works better now. What's the problem?

Last fiddled with by mapsonix on 2022-10-01 at 23:26
mapsonix is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Update PRP (on the web interface) preda PrimeNet 47 2018-12-27 16:05
First time using Prime95, looking for advice for setup dka71 Software 10 2016-04-26 07:07
MPrime graphical interface emily Software 1 2012-02-19 23:53
User interface bug fixed on LLR V3.8.4 Jean Penné Software 0 2011-01-22 16:47
interface f-bert Programming 3 2004-05-24 14:25

All times are UTC. The time now is 13:00.


Sat Nov 26 13:00:41 UTC 2022 up 100 days, 10:29, 0 users, load averages: 0.71, 0.97, 1.08

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔