Intel Integrated Graphics Drivers HD4600, only offering 1024*768 or lower -- Mint Mate
 

I have a new install on an HP Elitedesk 800 Core i5 PC. It has a VGA Monitor connected and the only resolutions being offered in the Display settings are 800*600 and 1024*768. I'd like to use the Monitor's native resolution of 1366*768

I've tried a re-format of the hard drive and a clean install on Mint cinnamon, Ubuntu and ended up on Mint Mate. But it still comes up as the lower resolutions on all three.
I have also upgraded the Kernal, again to no net effect.
Note: I'm really classified as a newbie, but I posted the question here as it's video driver related.

Hardware - HP EliteDesk 800 G1 Desktop Mini PC

The following is the system info that Mint detected.

Can you please also post output of command: xrandr

X produces a log with every run, either /var/log/Xorg.#.log and/or ~/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.#.log, where # is an integer, usually 0. Please upload this complete file using the pastebinit cli command and share the resulting URL here. Perusing this file yourself you might find a clue to the problem. Other clues may be found be a perusal of the systemd journal:Inxi usually produces better info using -Gxx.

I would delete the vesa driver, and the framebuffer driver, or blacklist the modules. They are 4:3 aspect ratio (=1024*768) but you have 16:9 aspect ratio(=1366*768)

Restart X and see what happens then.

is the optimal DDX for Haswell CPUs for up to 4096x2304 resolution. It cannot be removed via any standard package manager (e.g. apt, aptitude, synaptic, dpkg, etc.), as it's an element of the xserver-xorg package, and the upstream default DDX for all non-cutting edge and non-ancient Intel, AMD and NVidia GPUs. Something is missing or misconfigured. Xorg.0.log should provide clues. See also Intel's how to report bugs page.

Delete the VESA driver while the modesetting and intel are broken and you'll either get the similarly poor FBDEV driver, or no X at all.

@mrmazda: Then you're telling him he can only have 4:3 resolution and a 1990s driver. I'm on the modesetting driver for an hd4000 and I can have 2 screens at 16:9 with kernel 4.19.59. Are things that bad?

No. Modesetting provides my older and newer Intel GPUs up to 2560x1440, would also 4k if I had any, and 3 native resolution displays on my newer Kaby Lakes. The Intel DDX while still valid is unofficially deprecated, hasn't had an official upstream release in nearly 5 years.

OP has a problem simply not yet here indicated which likely would be if he were to answer our requests for information. Possibly he used the requests to solve his problem himself without reporting back here.

Somehow I have the impression that you give the same answer to every graphics-related problem...
Don't mean to trigger you, but it needs to be said.
As I wrote before, I once tried following your ever-same advice and it got me nowhere.

Start a new thread so we can dissect what happened.

I don't have a graphics problem; and since OP doesn't appear to be interested anymore, there's no reason to start a new thread imo.

But I had a closer look, and I'm a little confused now; according to my Xorg log, it loads /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so, which belings to the xf86-video-intel (that's the one you're criticizing, yes?) package, but then later also claims "Using Kernel Mode Setting driver: i915" - that's the one you keep praising, no?

Here it is in its entirety:

/usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/intel_drv.so is a DDX, as is /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/modesetting_drv.so. modesetting_drv.so doesn't belong to any xf86-video-* package, because it's the upstream default DDX, provided by the server package. It's different and newer technology than xf86-video-*. Both DDX depend on the KMS driver named /lib/modules/version/kernel/drivers/gpu/drm/i915.ko (unless the Intel GPU is ancient, pre-Eaglelake/2008). Upstream xf86-video-intel hasn't had an official release in over 4 years, in an apparent quasi-maintenance mode.

Performance of intel_drv and modesetting_drv is a function of kernel version, xorg version, mesa version and more. Without trying both, one cannot be sure which is the better choice.

IMO the reasons the modesetting DDX is provided by the server package instead of a separate one are: 1-it's the default when kernel modesetting is engaged; 2-Intel's developers consider it first choice for most GPUs. I've looked for proof, but never found anything about this among any sort of developer-produced documentation.

The reason I bring this up often generally is for multiple reasons, among which: 1-because X not working (satisfactorily) is a common problem people ask for help solving, and; 2-most distros override the upstream default, via the combination of X automagic sourcing the intel DDX before the modesetting DDX, and automatically installing xf86-video-*, resulting in most users never giving the newer DDX an opportunity to prove itself.

As I said, all's good on my system...

Conclusion: whether or not it could be better is of no importance to you.

Might I point out that compared with the competition, every Intel graphics card to date sucks?
What you guys are at in motor biking terms is like trying to soup up a 50cc?

You don't accept Intel only (Like I did) if you're concerned about graphics performance. Why bother greatly, when at the end of your efforts the thing still sucks?

What business are you in? Spending more for a graphics card than the whole rest of the PC sucks more. When the PC is a tool rather than a toy, odds are lebenty bazillion megawhatevers generating extra heat and accelerating battery depletion generally aren't cost effective. It certainly makes no sense in a typical business environment, where tens, hundreds or thousands are employed.

Also, it must be nice to have unlimited funds to spend on a PC, and time to putz around with proprietary driver installation when a newer kernel version is installed. Others just want the best they can get out of whatever they are given or can afford.

Have you even seen an Intel GPU from recent years in action? Did you know Apple years ago stopped putting discrete GPUs in every model?