Trying to clone displays

Hello experts.
I've been searching the web to find a solution, even called ATI tech support. Spoke to different levels of reps. Nothing so far. What was so easy in Win XP seems impossible to do in Win 7. At least I couldn't find the way yet and hope you can help me to solve the problem.
I'm trying to clone my 21" monitor (connected with DVI cable) with 47" TV (connected with HDMI cable).
All images are clickable and will open in a separate window to see full size.



"Extend" feature works just fine but this is not what I want/need. Here is the way it was on XP: cloned with 1600X1200 - no problem.



After playing with different versions of drivers (the newest one is not even as advanced as the old ones IMHO) I ended up with one that is really close to what worked for me for such a long time. I thought I was there already, but when I click on clone the display refreshes and nothing changes.



Thanks in advance for your help.

Please provide the version of Catalyst driver and Catalyst Control Center that you're now trying to use with your HD4350. That's a very old CCC.

Anyway, here is an example of a 2-monitor setup on a Compaq computer at a bridge club, running Win7. The ATI graphics is HD3000 (also old). The Catalyst driver and CCC being used here is the latest 13.9 "legacy" version downloaded from the AMD driver download page. 8.97.100.11-130429a-158498C-ATI for the driver, 2013.0429.2313.39747 for CCC.

Nevertheless..

One monitor is on the desk (19" 4:3 running 1280x1024) and the second is a 22" 16:9 flatscreen LCD mounted on the wall of the club. In clone mode both monitors MUST run identically, i.e. at the same resolution. So that means the 16x9 22" flatscreen has to also run at 1280x1024, rather than at its true native resolution if it were being used in "extended" mode. Running the 22" flatscreen at 1280x24 is not a bad thing anyway, as everything on it is thus larger and more readable for the patrons to see their scores displayed.

Nevertheless, you need to have TWO settings done correctly to run things in "clone mode":

(1) Windows desktop properties (right-click on desktop, select "screen resolution"). Select "duplicate these displays" on the multiple displays dropdown list:



(2) In Catalyst Control Center, Desktop Management -> Creating and Arranging desktops -> it should show up as follows, with both monitors 1 and 2 identified as "1"

dsperber, I'm sorry it took so long for me to reply. I was out of town and just got back to LA.

Thank you for your post. The driver version that I'm using now:



I know it's old but this is not the problem. The problem is that Windows 7 wants me to have both displays with the same resolution in order to do the clone. My monitor's resolution is 1600X1200 and the TV is 1920X1080. Somehow the same exact card with almost the same driver



was able to clone those two in Windows XP with no problem leaving native resolutions for both displays and the image would scale to full size on TV.



I can clone them now with 1440X900 or with 1280x1024 just like you did yours. But then looking at the blurry monitor or TV is no fun. Right? I work on a lot of HD movies and unlike the patrons you were describing I need a sharp, good quality picture on the monitor and TV as well. So my question is still open.
Thanks again.

Sorry. Not possible in Win7 to both (1) "duplicate/mirror/clone" the same output to two monitors, while (2) also allowing independent resolution settings for each monitor. This is only possible with "extend" mode, where each of your two monitors is dealt with separately and uniquely, and the Windows desktop spans across both.

AMD Support and Game Forums - Windows 7 Clone Mode - Limited Resolution?

Can dual monitors with different resolutions be mirrored at their native resolutions? - Displays - Linus Tech Tips

It is simply the same single Windows desktop area which is DUPLICATED/MIRRORED onto both monitors... even if that means a stretch/shrink for one of the two monitors to confirm to the size/shape of the other.

If the two monitors have different shapes and different native resolutions, it simply cannot be handled in Win7 any way other than producing the identical output at one single resolution on both displays, at whatever resolution you pick (which is acceptable to both monitors, although it might not look great on one of the two monitors).

The same issue arises in the world of HDTV, with 4:3 640x480 images displayed on 16:9 screens that support 1280x720 or 1920x1080 native displays. You can choose to display that 4:3 image in several different ways:

(1) "original aspect ratio" (OAR) centering the 4:3 image inside of the 16:9 screen (running full vertical height of the 16:9 screen), producing black bars on left and right of the screen on either side of the 4:3 image.

(2) "stretch-o-vision" pulling the 4:3 image horizontally to utilize the entire 16:9 screen but distorting the original 4:3 aspect ratio of the image to make full horizontal use of the 16:9 screen.

And you have a similar problem in reverse, if you want to display a 16:9 HDTV image (1280x720 or 1920x1080) on a 4:3 SD screen. In this case you can again manipulate the original 16:9 image to fit on the 4:3 screen, each of which will have its own look and appearance:

(1) "clip the wings" of the 16:9 image, losing image area on the far-left and far-right of the original 16:9 image so that what is left is the "center cut" 4:3 portion, sufficient to fill the entire 4:3 SD screen. All you see is the "center cut" 4:3 central area of the original 16:9 image, but it will fill the entire 4:3 TV screen.

(2) "letterbox" the 16:9 image, using the entire horizontal width of the 4:3 screen but reducing the vertical height of the original 16:9 image so as to retain the original 16:9 rectangular aspect ratio of the image as seen on the 4:3 screen. This will produce black bars on the top and bottom of the 4:3 screen, but the visible image you see on the screen will retain its original 16:9 rectangular shape.

(3) "stretch-o-vision" to use the full horizontal and vertical space available with the 4:3 "square" display screen in order to display what was originally a 16:9 "rectangular" image. This cannot be done without distorting the original image, which simply is incompatible with the shape of the display screen.


MIRROR/CLONE/DUPLICATE mode does not "center cut" the 1280x1024 portion of a 1920x1080 desktop for display on the smaller 1280x1024 monitor, while simultaneously displaying all 1920x1080 on the 1920x1080 screen. It simply presents the identical desktop area at THAT resolution (i.e. pixel dimensions) onto both displays, no matter that this resolution will clearly be "native" on only one of the two displays if they are different types/shapes.

The Bridge Club was using a WinXP computer with these same two monitors before the XP machine died and was replaced with the current Win7 machine. As far as I recall, the wall-mounted 16x9 monitor ALWAYS displayed the 1280x1024 image (which looked perfect on the desktop monitor as 1280x1024 was its "native" resolution) "stretched" to fill the 16x9 shape of the LCD screen.

The fact that the two monitors are NOT the same shape simply guarantees that the non-native monitor will not look great when DUPLICATING (i.e. at the identical resolution) the single display output image onto both monitors. Note that your CCC setup has "scale image to full panel size" checked, which is guaranteed to "stretch" as necessary from the smaller screen size/shape to fill the larger screen size/shape.


I'm certain your Win7 results with a current 2013 driver/CCC (rather than using a 4-year old 2009 version as you're doing) will make no difference.

dsperber said:

Sorry. Not possible in Win7

This was my biggest fear.
Logically Microsoft has to improve the features of newer OS. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.
Thanks again for trying to help.

Kari said:

You are talking about something that is physically impossible. It depends on the hardware you are using

You can take my word for it. It IS possible with Windows XP. Please take a look @ my first post again. The second screenshot shows that.
I still have the same computer with the same hardware that I used for last 4 years. The only thing I changed was the new HDD to install Windows 7 on it. I still have the other HDD fully operational with XP on it. My previous computer (also with XP) did not have the HD video card with HDMI but it had S-Video output and was successfully cloned to the same TV (again - different resolutions). So it IS Windows 7 limitation when cloning screens with different resolution.

rmike1991 said:

Kari said:

You are talking about something that is physically impossible. It depends on the hardware you are using

You can take my word for it. It IS possible with Windows XP. Please take a look @ my first post again. The second screenshot shows that.

I don't follow how your screenshots in post #1 show that the two separate display devices are actually running at two separate resolutions or being sent two separately sized desktop areas. You've only shown things with the display adapter selected, which to me suggests that both display devices are being sent the identical 1600x1200 desktop area.

You have not shown any screenshot with monitor #2 selected, only with monitor #1 along with its 1600x1200 size (corresponding to the Windows desktop area of 1600x1200).

Where is your "proof" that each monitor (DTV via HDMI and flatpanel via DVI) are being sent unique and separate desktop portions? Yes, the two monitors are different... with the Lenovo allowing at most 1600x1200 and the Vizio allowing 1920x1080 (and of course which WOULD be supported that way in "extend" mode). But "clone" mode by definition sends EXACTLY THE SAME DESKTOP AREA (which by definition has to be acceptable to the lesser capable device, i.e. the one with the smaller resolution for H or W, scaling or stretching things as needed for display on the other device).

So 1600x1200 is also being sent to the Vizio. Why do you think it is not? Where is a screenshot that shows otherwise?

How about posting a PHOTO of both monitors being handled by your XP environment, so that we can see if the Vizio 16x9 display is "in correct 16x9 rectangular aspect ratio" (and showing MORE desktop area than 1600x1200) or whether it is "stretch-o-vision" and presenting the IDENTICAL 1600x1200 desktop space as shown in perfect 4:3 1600x1200 on your Lenovo monitor... stretched horizontally (to 1920 "16" width) and compressed vertically (to 1080 "9" height) to appear on the 16x9 screen.

I'd also like to see screenshots of the Windows "desktop properties" dialog, for both your WinXP and Win7 setups. You've only shown Catalyst Control Center (and an old version at that).

rmike1991 said:

I know it's old but this is not the problem. The problem is that Windows 7 wants me to have both displays with the same resolution in order to do the clone. My monitor's resolution is 1600X1200 and the TV is 1920X1080. Somehow the same exact card with almost the same driver was able to clone those two in Windows XP with no problem leaving native resolutions for both displays and the image would scale to full size on TV.

In my mind, "the image would scale to full size on TV" simply means that there was "stretch-o-vision" on the pixels to (a) pull the 1600 horizontal desktop area being sent wider in the horizontal direction, in order to fill the entire 1920 horizontal (i.e. "16" dimension of the 16x9 screen) native capability of the 1920x1080 TV screen, along with (b) compression of the 1200 vertical desktop area being sent shorter in the vertical direction, in order to present 1200 pixels in a vertical space only allowing 1080 pixels vertical (i.e. "9" dimension of the 16x9 screen) native.

So, in my opinion, what displays on the Vizio might actually FILL the entire screen, but it's actually a 1600x1200 area stretched horizontally and compressed vertically.

The INFORMATION shown on both the 4:3 Lenovo monitor and 16:9 Vizio TV should be identical! There should be no information lost nor gained on either screen. They are CLONES, and thus IDENTICAL and both showing a 1600x1200 desktop area... albeit presented with the constraints of the physical aspect ratio differences (as defined by 1600x1200 vs. 1920x1080 native "best presentation" resolutions) in the two screens.

Presenting 1600x1200 on a 1920x1080 screen (and "scaled to fill the entire display") should, again by definition, NOT BE "BEST PRESENTATION" and should clearly appear distorted when contrasted to the appearance of 1600x1200 desktop area on a 1600x1200 "native" screen.