• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

HDMI vs DVI

J

JoseJones

Gawd
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Messages
602
I've just been looking into this question about HDMI vs DVI since I just got a new monitor:

ASUS VS229H-P
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236205

Standard HDMI "High-Speed" is 10.2g/ps and HDMI 1.4 "Ultra" now offers 16g/ps bandwidth. There's a new version: "HDMI 2.0" suppose to come out any time now too but, I've not found anything on that yet - anybody else know about that? If so, please post a link here.

I'm not sure if that would be a noticeable improvement while gaming on a 1080p monitor or not? Is it really worth switching over to a high dollar HDMI "ULTRA" cable or should I not waste my time and money and just stick with the DVI cable that came with the new monitor?

Amphenol Ultra Series 16.0 Gbps High Speed HDMI Cable
http://www.cablesondemand.com/categ...MHMM-001/URvars/Items/Library/InfoManage/.htm

HDMI Cable FAQ

"Only "High-Speed" certified HDMI Cables support 340 MHz (10.2 Gbps) bandwidth; essential for running demanding HD platforms such as the Sony PS3 and BluRay platforms. If you have any desire to utilize features like 3D HD Video, high refresh rates @ 120 Hz and above, or extended 48-bit deep color gamuts, a High-Speed Certified HDMI Cable is a necessity. "

http://www.cablesondemand.com/Folde...MI_Cable_FAQ_by_Amphenol_Cables_on_Demand.htm

http://www.hdmi.org

Finding the Right Cable
http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/finding_right_cable.aspx

FAQ for HDMI 1.4
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/hdmi_1_4_faq.aspx
 
From Wikipedia: HDMI version 2.0

"The HDMI Forum is working on HDMI 2.0 and the specification for it is expected to be released in late 2012.[148][149] In a 2012 CES press release HDMI Licensing, LLC has stated that the expected release date for the next version of HDMI is the second half of 2012 and that important improvements needed for HDMI include increased bandwidth to allow for higher resolutions and broader video timing support.[150] Longer term goals for HDMI include better support for mobile devices and improved control functions.[150]

Based on HDMI Forum meetings it is expected that HDMI 2.0 will increase the maximum TMDS per channel throughput from 3.4 Gbit/s to 6 Gbit/s which would allow a maximum total TMDS throughput of 18 Gbit/s.[151][152] This will allow HDMI 2.0 to support 4K resolution at 60 frames per second (fps).[151] Other features that are expected for HDMI 2.0 include support for 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, support for 25 fps 3D formats, improved 3D capability, support for more than 8 channels of audio, support for the HE-AAC and DRA audio standards, dynamic auto lip-sync, and additional CEC functions.[151]"
Click to expand...

When I goto the footnotes mentioning HDMI 2.0 they're just dead links - http://compcontent.com/cms/hdmi-2-0-is-on-the-horizon/

What's up with that?
 
The additional bandwidth with the new spec is there for future proofing, it does absolutely nothing for your 1080p monitor. Unless you specifically need to use HDMI for something, stick with DVI.
 
I agree with sticking with DVI. Most monitor reviews I read have a sentence or two on DVI vs HDMI and usually say there are color issues with HDMI. I feel like manufacturers spend more time working on DVI connections more than HDMI.
 
BoomSlang001 said:
I agree with sticking with DVI. Most monitor reviews I read have a sentence or two on DVI vs HDMI and usually say there are color issues with HDMI. I feel like manufacturers spend more time working on DVI connections more than HDMI.
Click to expand...

As I suspected.

I just called that website to let them know that link is dead and they said they'd either fix it or remove it. He also said that HDMI version 2.0 could be out anytime in the first half of 2013 but wasn't sure.

Maybe HDMI 2.0 would be helpful with the new XBox 720 when it comes out?
 
JoseJones said:
As I suspected.

I just called that website to let them know that link is dead and they said they'd either fix it or remove it. He also said that HDMI version 2.0 could be out anytime in the first half of 2013 but wasn't sure.

Maybe HDMI 2.0 would be helpful with the new XBox 720 when it comes out?
Click to expand...

Doubtful, as HDMI 2.0 isn't really bringing anything to the table. The main thing the additional bandwidth enables is 4K@60fps, but that's about it. Are you actually calling up this cable seller and asking for advice?
 
LOL, no I'm not asking them for any advice - I just wanted to let them know that link was dead so maybe they could fix it. I just wanted to read that article about HDMI 2.0 but, since I had 'em on the phone I asked about the specs for HDMI 2.0 and when it might come out. He wasn't really sure about the new specs but, he did say HDMI 2.0 would come out in the first half of 2013. That's all.
 
I've never really understood the desire to use HDMI in a typical PC-to-monitor setup. Granted, many monitors come with said ports nowadays, and I get that some use their monitor's speakers, which HDMI is good for. The same goes for an HTPC. But if you use desktop speakers and have DVI ports, I would go with DVI.
 
HDMI connections on my Radeon are handled differently by the Catalyst driver vs DVI for some reason. Shouldn't technically be any difference, but DVI for me always works better.
 
DVI over HDMI any day...

But if I can choose between DVI or DP, I would choose DP... :D
 
gan7114 said:
I've never really understood the desire to use HDMI in a typical PC-to-monitor setup. Granted, many monitors come with said ports nowadays, and I get that some use their monitor's speakers, which HDMI is good for. The same goes for an HTPC. But if you use desktop speakers and have DVI ports, I would go with DVI.
Click to expand...

why?
 
I'm just bringing this topic up again because I read that the new XBox One was going to come with a "category 2" HDMI cable. So, I was trying to figure out what a "category 2" HDMI cable was, thinking it was the new "version 2" but, it's not. It's the same thing that's already out.

HDMI Version 2.0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_2.0

Category 2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Cables

4K HDMI cables (are nonsense)
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57592539-221/4k-hdmi-cables-are-nonsense/
 
HDMI is the worst standard ever created it sucks in just about every possible way. I can say only 1 good thing about HDMI, it passes audio, lol that's it. Shitty connectors always getting loose or falling out, limited length, data layout sucks forcing strupid work arounds, which almost always introduce input lag. It blows, it blows, it blows and now that the xbone has snubbed DP for HDMI we can bet that we will be stuck with this horse shit standard for another 10 years.
 
Hey I'm glad that you made this thread, JoseJones, and brought it up again, because otherwise I would not have come across this info.

Could anyone elaborate on the benefit of DVI? Does HDMI cause the colors to be less accurate? If so, why? I don't think I've seen any HDMI vs. DVI comparisons in monitor reviews. I just checked the most recent review on tftcentral, and they didn't talk about it. It had never occurred to me before that there could be any drop in quality from using HDMI...
 
HDMI = SL-DVI with a smaller plug

"High-speed" HDMI doesn't exist
There's no device that takes more than SL-DVI bandwidth over HDMI
 
Wow, I had no idea that HDMI was sooooo bad.

I also didn't notice previously that I had already quoted Wiki in post #2 saying: "The HDMI Forum is working on HDMI 2.0 and the specification for it is expected to be released in late 2012."

That was pushed to the first half of 2013 & they missed that too. I guess that's ok so long as they get it right this time once and for all. They need to set a quality standard as well as a price standard so customers aren't getting ripped off by getting price gouged - nobody should ever pay more than like $10 - $15 for any HDMI cable.

"HDMI charges an annual fee of $10,000 to each high volume manufacturer plus US$0.04 per device."

DVI is fine and so is DisplayPort but, it could use some updating for some of the issues it has.

http://www.displayport.org

https://www.youtube.com/user/VESADisplayPort/videos

Display Interfaces (VGA, DVI, HDMI, Display Port) Round Up (NCIX Tech Tips #84)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMVDejZH4kw

So, DVI is limited to 60 Hz refresh rate? I suppose that's fine with a flat screen that's limited to 60 Hz as well?
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1271677

But then there's this: "By default displays connected via DisplayPort or HDMI will max out at a 30 Hz refresh rate. This is due to bandwidth limitations inherent with the existing standardized specifications for these display connectivity busses. In order to support a 60 Hz display refresh rate at 4K you need to use more than one stream."

and now this:

Motherboard for 4K @ 120Hz native

Microsoft sets up three 4K PC monitors
 
Last edited:
DVI and HDMI are the same as far as video is concerned, just different connectors. You can convert between them freely with cheap cables or adapters as long as you don't mind losing the audio. They use the same pins on the chips, just depends which connector they route it to. The "high speed" cables are a crock unless you're trying to go more than 6 feet, and even then it's just using good cables and connectors, the pinout it the same. The speed increase wasn't that big and all but the crappiest existing cables are just fine with the higher speeds. You can screw in DVI so it doesn't get loose or pulled out so that is one win for it. There shouldn't be any color difference between the two unless someone has done something dumb somewhere.

Displayport is where you can get the real increases in speed for the big displays. Plus it's free to use so most of the ports past the first couple will be DP on most video cards. The connectors are better in that the full size ones can have OK cable retention built in (push to release) or you can get smaller connectors without it. The standard also supports optional bi-directional sideband stuff but I've never seen any real product support it. I'd make sure any display >1080p or that you plan on using in the 3+ monitor config have DP.
 
Here's the latest on 4k:

4 Reasons Not to Get a 4K TV — Yet

"4K video can be choppy

The small selection of 4K video that is available won't appear at top quality, because the latest HDMI connections (version 1.4) delivering video to the TV can't handle all the data. The signal going into most HDTVs, such as from a cable box or a Blu-ray player, is at 60 frames per second. But the only way today's HDMI connections can carry data with four times as many pixels is to cut the frame rate in half. At 30 fps, video may not look as smooth.

4K video color is lacking

The other compromise is in color detail. With the bandwidth limitations, HDMI 1.4 can carry 4K signals with only enough data for 8 bits (256 shades) for each of the red, green and blue components of a pixel. Those primary colors can combine to produce a spectrum of about 16.7 million shades of color. That may sound good, but today's LCD panels can display at least 10 bits (about 1 billion shades) of color — so this high-resolution video will appear with a comparatively low amount of color nuance.
Click to expand...
 
It would be sweet to be able to test your own HDMI cables to see if you're really getting all the features the manufacturer claims.

The new HDMI version 2.0 is obviously not out just yet but, when it does come out it would be nice to be able to confirm the features and claims.

All the HDMI testers I've seen so far "Test all pins signal of HDMI cables" but, that's it. How would you know if it supports 4k at 60Hz or even 1080 at 120Hz? The lack of a credible standard thus far has created an enormous amount of distrust of HDMI cable claims and features. I hope that after the new HDMI 2.0 comes out that there will be new testers too.

Here's what I found thus far:

$25 HDMI Cable Tester
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?p_id=8131&seq=1&format=2

$25 HDMI Cable Tester
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhSpa949BbY

$50 HDMI Cable Tester
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcptbqb1AOo

$59
http://www.primuscable.com/store/p/...trk=gdfV21784_a_7c150_a_7c4470_a_7cTL4_d_3178
 
DVI is a safer bet for computer use, it will default to full RGB (0-255 grayscale) and in some cases has less input lag

edit: also I think it would be interesting to know what the dot clock limitations are for all the popular interfaces
 
Last edited:
there is no such thing as a " limitation" on DVI.
DVI specs speak about minimums. Using DVI your practical limit is the quality of the cable used and the control board of the monitor.

You will see threads here with 1440p monitors running at 127Hz using 24 gauge DL-DVI cables. That is almost like 4k@60hz. HDMI can not run this much resolution, but you still have headroom to push 1080@140Hz over HDMI.

People talk a lot about displayport but i dare to say that most of the DP potential is not yet used.
 
i've read HDMI is fine for TV's, but if you use a monitor and enable the speakers built in through hdmi, you lose 4:4:4 chroma colorspace, and will have your pc renering in full RGB but outputing in 4:2:2 to the display, its a flaw with hdmi, its fine if you send no audio through it though, and don't mind low resolutions like 1920x1080. again fine for televisions but....
 
From what I'm reading, if HDMI 2.0 fails to deliver the goods this time, it could potentially give 'Display Port' an opportunity to over-take it, unless they drop the ball too, which is possible.

Is HDMI 2.0 Coming Soon to a Home Theater Near You?

HDMI 2.0 explained

JoseJones said:
Wow, I had no idea that HDMI was sooooo bad.

I also didn't notice previously that I had already quoted Wiki in post #2 saying: "The HDMI Forum is working on HDMI 2.0 and the specification for it is expected to be released in late 2012."

That was pushed to the first half of 2013 & they missed that too. I guess that's ok so long as they get it right this time once and for all. They need to set a quality standard as well as a price standard so customers aren't getting ripped off by getting price gouged - nobody should ever pay more than like $10 - $15 for any HDMI cable.

"HDMI charges an annual fee of $10,000 to each high volume manufacturer plus US$0.04 per device."

DVI is fine and so is DisplayPort but, it could use some updating for some of the issues it has.

http://www.displayport.org

https://www.youtube.com/user/VESADisplayPort/videos
Click to expand...
 
The date below has been pushed back to Sept. 12, 2013, 2:00pm EDT

"On August 28th I will host a webinar with CE Pro’s editor-in-chief, Jason Knott, on HDMI’s new revision. CE Pro is taking a special interest in this so be sure to sign up for this event. Also, if you have specific questions you would like to have answered please send them to me ahead of time so I can organize them all to make this short 60-minute event as powerful and yes as enjoyable as possible. I am very confident most of all your questions can be answered — and then some."

- HDMI Rev 2.0: A Sneak Peek
Click to expand...

http://www.cepro.com/webinars/details/keeping_an_eye_on_hdmi_rev_20
 
Last edited:
This video with Joe Kane explained almost everything:

Home Theater Geeks 158: It's More Than 4K!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZqhA3iIHm4

The first 25 minutes explains true 4k vs 4k that's really 2160 and other aspect ratios/scaling and native cinema 4k

signal critique skip to: 25

2160p at 33

Sony 4k triluminous at 39

bit depth at 41 8-bit vs 10, 12, 16 & 24-bit

H.264/5 at 48

HDMI 2.0/display port at 53:45
 
I've had nothing but issues when it comes to HDMI, especially when it comes to PC connectivity.
 
I just came across a few cons about HDMI 2.0 I did not see before.

"Of that 18 Gb/sec bandwidth, only 14.4 Gb/sec is usable. The rest is overhead used for error correction and to make the signal more robust over long distances. (This 20% overhead exists in all HDMI versions.)"

HDMI 2.0 and Rec. 2020

Rec. 2020 is a list of technical “recommendations” for UHD put forth by the International Telecommunications Union, an agency of the United Nations. As for broadcast or cable UHD TV, no standards exist yet. One key advantage that Rec. 2020 has over the current HDTV standard is that it allows for increased image bit-depths, which produces pictures with smoother gradients and less banding artifacts. Current HD video is 24 bits per-pixel, while Rec. 2020 allows for 30 bits or even 36 bits.

Does HDMI 2.0 fully support these higher bit-depths? From what our industry sources have told us, the answer is no. While our math shows that HDMI 2.0 has the bandwidth to support them, we’ve been told that they are not officially covered by the HDMI 2.0 specification. It’s possible that some displays may work at the higher bit-depths, but they aren’t required to.

Sending more bits means more bandwidth. For example, sending a UHD image at 60 fps with full 36-bit color depth, 32 channels of audio and no compression requires 17.99 Gb/sec of bandwidth. This is more than HDMI 2.0 can handle. The key to making it fit is a color compression technique called chroma subsampling."

"There are a couple of other Rec. 2020 features such as 120 fps content that HDMI 2.0 does not have the bandwidth for. Such content, and displays designed to handle it, might be a few years off, but it looks as if HDMI will need another revision at some point to accommodate 120 fps."

http://hdguru.com/hdmi-2-0-what-you-need-to-know/
Click to expand...

There is just no way I'm buying any 4k TV or monitor until they work out all the kinks so, it looks like I'll be waiting for like 10 years or for HDMI 3.0. I want TRUE 4k and 120 FPS and it doesn't look like I'd ever be able to afford it anyway. I was honestly hoping that all the HDMI 2.0 delays were taking care of those issues - they weren't so, what the hell were all the delays for.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top