Ahh. Totally took that the wrong way, I did. My bad!
Although, truth be told, when I ran different resolutions it also ran different DPI scaling for each monitor (125% on the 4K and 100% on the 1080p) but I also experienced what the OP is experiencing, only in reverse, when connected to my GTX 970.
Interesting, very interesting...
I imagine you can also watch MSNBC (in Belgium??) and Netflix all at the same time.?. Here in California we neither have the thruput nor a single cellphone tower!
Can you please review the following and tell me what you think.
(Note: I very much appreciate the work you've gone through, yet so far haven't implemented any of the DPI scaling solutions)
Instead, I paused to consider the larger picture:
- I'm having a serious problem (i.e., it involves significant/continual time wasting resizing issues)
- The solution to my problem isn't simple. It probably involves changes specific to every program, instead of what could conceivably be a single, microsoft implemented, fix .
- Currently, my problem doesn't have a simple fix. If handled with DPI scaling, I'll probably have to bring up and change aspects of every single program I currently have and may buy-or-download/use in the future. For my day-to-day non-specialized computer that's a lot!
That having been said, there seem to be two solutions that solve this problem:
1) If you use a laptop, be satisfied doing everything with a tiny screen.
2) Use a desktop computer--with as many monitors as you need.
3) (Where things are going currently??) Just use your cell phone. No one cares to investigate problems deeply, nor investigate things in detail--it's just about tiny garbage in/tiny garbage out.
4) Watch TV. If it worked in the 50s no reason the boob-tube won't work again.
Which leads to the question: Are there any computers available that package everything necessary to run a desktop--without a monitor--in a very small form-factor cabinet--a cabinet with enough external ports that it can be expanded to accommodate additional Memory, Power, CPU and GPU capabilities (and the air flow necessary to cleanly run these components) using externals that are easily added (or removed) and maintained. I ask this because I always thought the solution to upgrading the computer I configured would be as easy as swapping my CPU out of my desktop cabinet and replacing it with a newer/more current Gigabyte CPU (and other components if necessary)--which, when I looked into it, was told, could not be done.
And then I happened upon what might be a solution to my current situation. When I closed the laptop cover the other two monitors immediately went black. What I didn't know was that if I hit the spacebar the two larger monitors would light and all the windows on the laptop's monitor would transfer, in a larger size but (cross-my-fingers) not larger than either of the other monitors, onto one or the other. Therefore in one fell swoop the problem seems to have been solved--I'll just have to add another monitor to make up for the laptop's (and totally, to Diane's chagrin, use up the dining room table).
I'm wondering if this unexpected 'solution' could've take care of the problem w. johnlgalt's GTX 970.
in reverse order - no, it would not - I'm not using a laptop, for one, this was on desktop, and two, it's taken care of itself because I went back to using a matched set of monitors with ht same resolution, so not more mix and match for me.
The space bar trick might work - but have you tried then open the laptop lid again and seeing if it stays fixed?
Regarding your solutions - #2 can break, as it did for me, if the monitors are not the same resolution.
#3 is useless - I can do a lot of things on my cell, but I refuse to make it my primary point of contact for all things business and pleasure. And #4 - well, I watch TV every night anyway lol.
The thing about all of this is that the resolution difference (and thus scaling difference) between the built-in screen and the external monitors is what is really causing the issue. If you're determined to keep using laptops, you could try to match the external monitors' resolution (by buying new monitors, can't just change values and increase resolution past max) to have this issue also go away.
But your little workaround sounds like a good plan.
This is news to me. I have 3 multi-monitor setups. the only one giving me problems is this (Win11) one. (Later, I'll check on the other two's display resolution and get back to you.) I was under the impression that all desktop (i.e., monitors added to the CPU/GPU cabinet, ergo "desktop") LCD monitors were the same resolution. Since I'd had no problems with my 3-monitor DAW setup (running from a laptop because it might be necessary to (disconnect the larger monitors and) take the laptop on the road, I also assumed laptop monitors were (somehow) compatibly configured.
This (Win11 setup, the one that needs to replace my non DAW Win10 desktop) proves otherwise. I'm just glad I'd not added CRT ones to the mix!!.)
I last had monitors with differing resolutions back in the days of XP. With 7 and 10 I had matching monitors with matching resolutions. It was only after I had moved to 11 that I found myself with mis-matched monitors again.
A search for monitors will show you that they run the gamut. Even searching a single manufacturer will show multiple monitor resolutions for different systems.
All of my monitors were bought, as I build my own machines. And when I started buying 4K monitors, they were pricey - couldn't afford to replace all of them at the same time.
3) (Where things are going currently??) Just use your cell phone. No one cares to investigate problems deeply, nor investigate things in detail--it's just about tiny garbage in/tiny garbage out.
A search for monitors will show you that they run the gamut. Even searching a single manufacturer will show multiple monitor resolutions for different systems.
Can you tell, just picking up a monitor and reading a tag (not plugging it into a computer and asking for Display Settings), what its resolution is?
(I volunteer for a local Goodwill-like organization where we clean up and try and repair items before they go on the shelves.)
Was I wrong when I was told I wouldn't be able to physically swap my CPU (a GIGABYTE GA-B75M-D3H LGA 1155 Intel B75 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard) for a current, up to date, motherboard? (I assumed they tried to keep the board sizes the same...)
When you build a machine, do you plan on future hardware upgrades by thinking you might need to upgrade the CPU, GPU, or Power Supply?
Are there any computers available that package everything necessary to run a desktop--without a monitor--in a very small form-factor cabinet--a cabinet with enough external ports that it can be expanded to accommodate additional Memory, Power, CPU and GPU capabilities (and the air flow necessary to cleanly run these components) using externals that are easily added (or removed) and maintained.
I would probably be needing a 4K monitor if I were still in my Photoshop/Illustrator/Vectorworks (CAD) days. Now it's about sound, so visual clarity is a secondary consideration.
By researching that tag online, yeah. Some monitors may give you a hint (if the monitor is named, say, blah blah blah 1440p then it is more than likely has a resolution of 2560 * 1440. But technically, a 1440p monitor can have a few resolutions, the 1440p is really only referring to the vertical resolution.
But if all it has is a name, like, say, ES07D03, then searching for that only (along with the manufacturer's name) should get you results rather easily.
Was I wrong when I was told I wouldn't be able to physically swap my CPU (a GIGABYTE GA-B75M-D3H LGA 1155 Intel B75 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard) for a current, up to date, motherboard? (I assumed they tried to keep the board sizes the same...
If you have that motherboard, and want to keep using that motherboard, then you are vastly limited on the CPU choices, but it does allow for some upgrades. The list of CPUs supported by that board can be found at GA-B75M-D3H (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
And that is what I meant by being limited - to keep using that board you can only use one of those listed CPUs.
That's another long discussion lol. Different builders have different needs. Time, money, use cases, and more, all come together (along with many other factors, depending upon the builder), to determine what will be used.
I can probably illustrate this better by giving a bit of history for me.
In 2008 I spent a decent bit of money build a machine based around the Intel Core2Quad 6600 CPU, with dual 500 GB HDDs, 8 GB RAM, and various sundries. Right about the same time I went back to college to earn degrees I had never gotten when I initially dropped out. Machine did its job well enough.
Fast forward to 2011, when Ive had 2 Bachelor's degrees under my belt and am working on my Master's degree, lightning took out that machine, (or, more precisely, the PSU and HDDs, the rest of the board actually survived) and I had to make an emergency build, using an Intel Core i7 965 EE CPU and building around that (I had gotten that CPU in 2010, I think, for a steal from eBay - $1000 CPU I got for around half that). I picked my components a little more loosely than I would have because I was severely time constrained - so I went with an eVGA X58 motherboard, a pair 1 TB HDDs, and a new ThermalTake 850W PSU, and sundry bits.
That machine was retired in 2020. Yes, I ran that machine for 9 years. With the motherboard, I kept that CPU, as it was almost the most powerful I could put in that socket, and trying to get a little faster would have run sever hundred dollars, not worth the minor performance gain. But, I upgrade several other parts numerous times:
I had an nVidia GTS 8800 from eVGA which I used with their Step up program to upgrade to a GTX 260 (and to which I then added a second GTX 260, to run in SLI, and a GTS 250, to run as a dedicated PhysX card). I then bought a GTX 560 Ti 448 Core to ruin as main, and kept one of the 260s in for PhysX. I then bought a GTX 970, and put that in for the 560, and then stopped using a dedicated card for PhysX, so the 970 was in there solo.
For the HDDs, I kept the 1 TB are storage, and start getting SSDs - first, the Intel X25-M 80 GB, then Intel Cherryville 180, the Crucial MX100 256 GB, then a SanDisk 960 GB SSD.
The RAM in that machine never changed, the same 12 GB from start to finish. Same for the CPU and PSU, for that matter.
In 2020, I built my current rig. Initially, it had the GTX 970 from the previous build, and I brought over the SanDisk SSD as a 4th drive for it, and my 1080p monitors, too. I wanted a powerhouse workstation that I could play games on as well, but also do crazy things like run multiple VMs on simultaneously (not just running, but actually in use simultaneously). You can click on my computers to get the details, or also click on AMD Ryzen 9 3950X @ 3998.32 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR for my detailed Validation at CPU-Z.
The video card I was waiting for the 30-series release - and we all know how that went.
The monitors were waiting to be upgrade afterthe video card was.
Then, in 2022, I upgraded the video card to a 3080 Ti, one monitor to a 4K, and my NVMe drives from Sabrent Rocket 4.0 (gen 1) to Samsung 980 Pro, also doubling each one's storage.
The initial build was almost $5000 US, but I did that on purpose - I put in a good bit of future proofing (in terms of usability) with that massive amounts of RAM and massive amounts of NVMe SSD space (3x 1 TB, plus the 960 GB, for a total of over 3.5 TB). My Upgrade took me to 3x 2 TB, minus the 960, which I permanently removed, and move the original NVMe to USB enclosures, so I now have 9 TB (8 formatted TB) of drive space across 6 drives. My RAM is maxed out at 128 GB - but this lets me run all those VMs all at once - because they are (mostly) older OSs, Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 10, but 5 are Windows 11. Most of the VMs have 8 GB of RAM and 4 virtual CPUs attached, and with my 16 code 32 process CPU, it's not much of a strain on the system. (I don't run the VMs all the time, but if I need to at any given moment, I can run them all and access them all simultaneously. Plus, I also taught CompTIA Certification classes, so I needed to have several of their VMs up and running (before they transitioned to their online labs setup). For the PSU, I Was looking to get a 1200 W PSU from Seasonic, but everything higher than 1000 W was out of stock at that time, and I settled for my PCPP 1050 W as a really, really good alternative. It's more than enough power for even my entire system with hte 3080 TI ramped up to full load (I don't OC GPUs, btw 0 nothing against doing it, I just choose not to).
So, my seemingly outrageous build cost makes much more sense - The future proofing is in the components, the supported components, and your use case. My last system lasted 9 years (with numerous upgrades). Your motherboard will always limit your CPU choices - to significantly upgrade a CPU, you'll almost always need to upgrade your motherboard. My current MSI MEG X570 GODLIKE mobo can take Ryzen 9 5000 series, so I could go to a Ryzen 9 5950X in place of my current 3950X, but even now, the cost versus performance increase is not worth it. I can always get larger drives (though my motherboard only supports PCIe 4.0, it supports it across all three onboard NVMe slots, so I could, theoretically, go as outrageous as 3x 8 TB drive for a total of almost 30 TB (after moving the current drives to USB enclosures). The case I used is a very large Tower, with ample space for all sorts of things, like extensive water cooling, numberous drives, and more - it's the Fract Design Define XL (with the dark glass panel).
So, all in all, I'm in a good position right now, and the machine is over 3 years old already. I should be able to easily go another 3-5 years, if not more, without and real significant expenditure on it.
That massively long soliloquy gives you an idea on a few of the reasons I went all out to build this rig - I wasn't trying to win any awards, I wasn't trying to OC the holy heck out of it - I had legitimate use cases for it that mandated going above and beyond what 95% of system builders would ever throw into their rigs.
And that circles back to what I said initially:
Different builders have different needs. Time, money, use cases, and more, all come together (along with many other factors, depending upon the builder), to determine what will be used.
You have to determine what you need, what you can afford, and what you want to do. The good thing is that building your own mahcine is more modular (usualy) than buying. The 'bad' thing is that you only have one place to turn to for issues - yourself. You are the tech support for your machine. Yes, individual components have their own manufacturers, and thus their own tech support, but you ahve to figure out what is going on first, before they can help you with an issue (unless it is an easily diagnosable issue that is directly related to one single component). Machines bought from OEMs have the OEM as the tech support, which still require your input when troubleshooting, but can be a lot mroe guided as they know the complete machine build as it was shipped, and can focus trouble shooting efforts more directly and more quickly.
I've been building systems for around 30 years, and I have a ton of experience, so I also know all the things you should (and should not) do when building a machine. This particular build was a minor feather in my cap in that, after getting all components, and taking my time and extensive care with, booted up perfectly on first assembly - I never had to check anything / readjust anything, it all worked the very first time. That is not usually the case, so extensive hardware knowledge (and / or top notch sleuthing skills lol) are a requirement when building your own,. In fact, I'd say both are requirements - you neve rknow what could happen.
The knowledge base is really key, knowing your components once you've decided where your cutoffs (time, budget, etc.) are - and a great resource is PC Parts Picker - you can simulate a build and it will both guide you with products and warn you if you pick products that may be incompatible. And, also, be adviced that the initial build cost also includes tons of peripherals - KB, mouse, headset, case, and other stuff, too.
OK, enough about that. I'll answer the rest of your points in another post as this one is tremendously long already.
Which leads to the question: Are there any computers available that package everything necessary to run a desktop--without a monitor--in a very small form-factor cabinet--a cabinet with enough external ports that it can be expanded to accommodate additional Memory, Power, CPU and GPU capabilities (and the air flow necessary to cleanly run these components) using externals that are easily added (or removed) and maintained.
Hmmm. Are you asking if you can buy a desktop machine without monitors, and use your existing monitors? Sure. Just have to make sure that the desktop has video ports (HDMI, DP, or even older DVI) output to use with existing monitors, and that your monitor(s) have the matching port(s) too.
If you're asking about size, they run the gamut from SFF (Small Form Factor) machines all the way up to full tower (which I built for myself). The smallest ones to do basic stuff like Intel's NUC line (and other manufacturers make them too) are very, very tiny these days, though you're, again, limited in upgrades to them in various ways.
So, let me ask - are you asking about buy just a desktop without monitors, or are you actually asking about the physical size of the computer?
I would probably be needing a 4K monitor if I were still in my Photoshop/Illustrator/Vectorworks (CAD) days. Now it's about sound, so visual clarity is a secondary consideration.
There you go - you've identified a use case for yourself - the monitors and resolution are not a primary concern for you. So, using your current monitors may be doable - it depends upon their connection type, if they use DVI, those types of connections are becoming less and less prominent, though adapters from both HDMI and DP to DVI do exist (but can also cause issues).
But you can almost always buy just Desktops wihtout monitors from most OEMs if you already have monitors that you want ot use - you'll just want to confirm that your monitors will work with the given dekstop you are looking at.
doesn't seem to have been very well thought out (or tested). It's pot luck if the window you click on shows up in front and equally lucky if the window shows up Snapped Left or Snapped Right when chosen.
This tutorial will show you different ways to switch between multiple virtual desktops for your account in Windows 11. You can add multiple desktops to group apps for productivity, entertainment, or whatever you choose. Multiple desktops are also great for keeping unrelated, ongoing projects...
www.elevenforum.com
It has nothing to do with choosing which running app's window comes to the front. For that you want to use WinKey+Tab or Ctrl+Alt+Tab.
This tutorial will show you how to show all open windows on Alt+Tab or Ctrl+Alt+Tab for the current or all desktops for your account in Windows 11. Task View (Win+Tab) is a virtual desktop manager that allows you to quickly switch between all of your open apps on multiple desktops. This makes...
1366x768 native resolution, up to 2560x1440 with Radeon Virtual Super Resolution
Hard Drives
1TB Samsung EVO 870 SSD
Internet Speed
50 Mbps
Browser
Edge, Firefox
Antivirus
Defender
Other Info
fully 'Windows 11 ready' laptop. Windows 10 C: partition migrated from my old unsupported 'main machine' then upgraded to 11. A test migration ran Insider builds for 2 months. When 11 was released on 5th October 2021 it was re-imaged back to 10 and was offered the upgrade in Windows Update on 20th October. Windows Update offered the 22H2 Feature Update on 20th September 2022. It got the 23H2 Feature Update on 4th November 2023 through Windows Update, and 24H2 on 3rd October 2024 through Windows Update by setting the Target Release Version for 24H2.
My SYSTEM THREE is a Dell Latitude 5410, i7-10610U, 32GB RAM, 512GB NVMe ssd, supported device running Windows 11 Pro (and all my Hyper-V VMs).
My SYSTEM FOUR is a 2-in-1 convertible Lenovo Yoga 11e 20DA, Celeron N2930, 8GB RAM, 256GB ssd. Unsupported device: currently running Win10 Pro, plus Win11 Pro RTM and Insider Dev, Beta, and RP 24H2 as native boot vhdx.
My SYSTEM FIVE is a Dell Latitude 3190 2-in-1, Pentium Silver N5030, 8GB RAM, 512GB NVMe ssd, supported device running Windows 11 Pro, plus the Insider Beta, Dev, Canary, and Release Preview builds as a native boot .vhdx.
Operating System
Windows 11 Pro
Computer type
Laptop
Manufacturer/Model
Dell Latitude E4310
CPU
Intel® Core™ i5-520M
Motherboard
0T6M8G
Memory
8GB
Graphics card(s)
(integrated graphics) Intel HD Graphics
Screen Resolution
1366x768
Hard Drives
500GB Crucial MX500 SSD
Browser
Firefox, Edge
Antivirus
Defender
Other Info
unsupported machine: Legacy bios, MBR, TPM 1.2, upgraded from W10 to W11 using W10/W11 hybrid install media workaround. In-place upgrade to 22H2 using ISO and a workaround. Feature Update to 23H2 by manually installing the Enablement Package. In-place upgrade to 24H2 using hybrid 23H2/24H2 install media. Also running Insider Beta, Dev, and Canary builds as a native boot .vhdx.
My SYSTEM THREE is a Dell Latitude 5410, i7-10610U, 32GB RAM, 512GB NVMe ssd, supported device running Windows 11 Pro (and all my Hyper-V VMs).
My SYSTEM FOUR is a 2-in-1 convertible Lenovo Yoga 11e 20DA, Celeron N2930, 8GB RAM, 256GB ssd. Unsupported device: currently running Win10 Pro, plus Win11 Pro RTM and Insider Dev, Beta, and RP 24H2 as native boot vhdx.
My SYSTEM FIVE is a Dell Latitude 3190 2-in-1, Pentium Silver N5030, 8GB RAM, 512GB NVMe ssd, supported device running Windows 11 Pro, plus the Insider Beta, Dev, Canary, and Release Preview builds as a native boot .vhdx.
I know. The NUC 13 Extreme is the only "exception" so to speak, as that one measures 337 x 318 x 129mm in size so, not nearly as small as a "regular" type NUC, but still a lot smaller than your average desktop PC.
johnlgault...your post from 9 Nov 23 really helped me! I've been beating my head for 5 days now & my local computer guy that clean reinstalled Win11 after the Dec 23 Update trashed my system for the 4th time since I've installed Win11! THIS is the 1st time that I've experienced almost the same problem that jro11 described. The compatibility troubleshooter fixed my Firefox problem BUT as of this writing I haven't been able to get to it in my Microsoft365 apps (weird??) & so far, none of my other 3rd party apps seem to be affected (weirder??)!
