16 May
2008
16 May
'08
6:32 p.m.
On Friday 16 May 2008 21:00, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
On Friday 16 May 2008 15:31, Tony Duell wrote:
Well, if the Hsync pulses are indential whether the display is stable or
not, then the Hsync generation circuitry is not the prolem. And if the
monitor is not locking to them, the fault is either the monitor or the
PSU, presumably.
Without any indication of amplitude or repetition rate it's hard to say
whether they're good Hsync pulses or not. The image of that Vsync pulse
sure looks a little odd to me...
The tech manual pointed to in another post gives a nice set of diagrams for
what those sync pulses _should_ look like, around 43 or so pages into it...
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
That's why I'd start by looking at the
horizotnal sync pulses
when you have the lines and when you have a good display
(even if the machine has crashed). If they're the same
timing, then the fault is monotor (or PSU?) releated. If not,
then the video timing circuitry is palying up _or being
mis-configured by software_
H-sync pulses (and the vsync, for what it's worth) are identical when
the machine is crashed or running. However, I don't understand why that
would put the fault in the monitor? And it still doesn't explain the
digital artifacts...