• 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.

is dvi much better?

L

lesman

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 30, 2004
Messages
3,913
I was just wondering, does DVI do that much of a better job than VGA? or is it just for people who need to have everything top notch?
 
Yes -- The output should be of higher quality because it is a straight digital-to-digital signal. On the other hand, VGA requires digital-to-analog conversion, which can deteriorate the signal.

With that said -- many people cannot notice the difference visually.
 
yeah, im one of those people who WILL notice the difference...unfortunately. i say that because i notice all kinds of crap on normal tvs and cheap displays and im bugged greatly by that!
 
lesman said:
yeah, im one of those people who WILL notice the difference...unfortunately. i say that because i notice all kinds of crap on normal tvs and cheap displays and im bugged greatly by that!
Click to expand...

sure...and monster cables actually rock.... :eek:
 
I think the best way to put it is to say that anyone could notice the difference if they were told to look for it. However, plenty of people will go months, years, whatever, without ever knowing they are missing something. Some people may also see both on the same display and not care to use analog. Its not a deal breaker by any means but its one of those things most people want when they are spending a few hundred on a display.

Analog doesn't make an LCD ugly, nor does DVI solve all other problems.

Its like spending more attention/money to make all the peripherals match your PC case
or using an expensive mouse pad
or buying a brand new car and paying extra for leather, power doors, remote starter, etc.

The only way to really know is to look for yourself, or otherwise just make an educated guess based on the kind of person you are. A friend that owns an LCD with both DVI and VGA is a good way to test. Set up dual display and swap back and forth on different images.
 
forcemac101 said:
sure...and monster cables actually rock.... :eek:
Click to expand...


You know, I did notice a difference in my 5.1 system (home theatre, not my PC) when I changed out the speaker wires to a 14 guage from 22.....Didn't go monster but thats what monster touts, bigger is better. Which for the most part I agree! :D
 
Whether DVI makes a diff vs. VGA also depends on the model and brand of LCD panel you get. Some monitors you will notice a stark improvement in DVI (esp with "ghosting"). Check out anandtech.com reviews of some of the samsung LCD screens for examples of this.
 
Comparing VGA/DVI to Monster cables is inept.

VGA to DVI is like Casette Tapes to DVD-Audio. Anyone would notice and it doesn't take a nitpicker.

Although having said that, in the analog days monster cables made a huge difference for top end equipment.

Recently though, somone just tried to sell me a $200 2 meter HDMI cable for my TV. When I was done laughing I went over and picked up a no-name cable and took a risk on the "jitter" and "phase distortion." Where do they get these salespeople anyway?
 
digital to digital.
trumps
digital to analog to digital.

though average (gamers?) will likely only see the difference with high quality video cards and monitors.

its a good investment if youve spent $1000+ on those 2 componants.

like i am trying to :)

monster cables are a ripoff now.
just go digital.

hdmi and toslink baby. brand doesnt matter.
 
Yes DVI makes a noticeable difference. If you are spending upwards of $300 on a panel there is no reason not to get a $15 cable.
 
CeD said:
Yes -- The output should be of higher quality because it is a straight digital-to-digital signal. On the other hand, VGA requires digital-to-analog conversion, which can deteriorate the signal.

With that said -- many people cannot notice the difference visually.
Click to expand...

I agree AND I could see the difference on my LCD.
 
if you really want to see the difference, hook up two identical monitors, one with DVI, one with VGA side by side

that's what I had to do on my old 9800 Pro, because it only had 1 DVI out

the difference was like night and day, the color on the VGA display was so washed out, I just turned it off until I could get my dual DVI card
 
I just got a Princeton SENergy 714 - it has DVI and VGA - and yes, the DVI makes a difference. I connected it both ways and compared images, it's now DVI.
No, it's not a top of the line monitor ($300 at newegg, -$75 mir) and it's not connected to a top of the line vid card - BFG 5700 Ultra. Even my old tired eyes could see the difference. The text is absolutly crips, colors are solid and not washed out, absolutely NO ghosting what so ever playing UT2004, CS Source, or anything else I've tossed at it.

If you are on a budget, and want DVI with a good 17" LCD - this Princeton is not a bad deal at all.

So yes, DVI makes a difference.

Tim
 
There is a big difference....Everything is a lot shaper/clearer, etc...
 
I am assuming my quality will be fairly sh*tty with the 2005FPW going analog through a VGA KVM switch.
 
I notice a HUGE difference between dvi and analong.. the other 2 LCD's in the house are analog and one is way less clear and in the other the colors are pretty washed out compared to mine on DVI.. and when mine is on analog it's noticeably worse as well...
 
I have an older dell 15nch LCD screen. It came with only a VGA cable (no DVI port on the LCD) and a VGA to DVI adapter, so no true DVI with this screen. Though, I have to say the quality when it comes to sharpness is fine, no problems in quality, and since this monitor isn't the greatest thing in the world, I can't say much about ghosting when moving things. I'm a graphic artist and I get pretty close to my screens, so I am suprised how well this 15inch analog to DVI LCD worked.

Though, I've seen things like a 19inch Benq LCD connected to a powerbook through it's vga port and it had some kind of ghosting around the text, like the alignment was off on a CRT. So the quality really was hurt there. Must come down to the monitor overall. Or maybe the lower resolution LCDs don't have as much trouble with VGA compared to a 20inch 1600*1200 screen.

My 2005fpw will arrive soon and it will be going on the DVI port and the 15inch is moving to the analog without the dvi adapter anymore.
 
rcolbert said:
I'd guess that'd be a fair assumption.
Click to expand...

Anyone have experience related to this topic? Will the quality be that bad?
 
Actually its interesting to hear these different stories. This thread got me motivated and I went ahead and hooked up my 2001FP to my Radeon 9700 through both VGA and DVI. Turned on dual display (same image) and took a looksee for myself.

Now I've used this monitor through VGA before but that was from my laptop, and I could notice a difference, albeit not a huge one, and just attributed that to the VGA to DVI difference.
However looking at it now through the same computer...... the VGA looks great! It really looks clear and sharp. When I switch back and forth over and over I know I could pick out some differences if I had to, but I honestly believe if someone switched my cable to VGA for a day without telling me I probably wouldn't notice. As long as the display is calibrated well, that is.

Believe it or not, but my 2001FP hooked up through VGA, at 1600x1200 resolution, still looks good.

Others experiences certainly vary, but I'd bet a lot of that has to do with monitor quality, cable quality, display adapter quality, etc.

Still, the safe bet is DVI. However a quality LCD still makes a good display on VGA.

edit: Heh. I guess if you want a 2001FP to look bad you have to hook it up through S-video. I just tried it out and it was almost funny.
 
It's somewhat more apparent if you hav two identical displays and you run them side by side. Why don't you just go out and buy a second 2001FP and then get back to us on what you think then?

:D
 
Think of it this way, you ever seen digital cable?
Well compare that to regular cable.
Analog < Digital
 
Digital to Analog cable may be a bad comparison. Non-HD digital cable in some markets tends to be way over compressed and looks like ass compared to the lower 70 or so analog stations.

Sorry 'bout crapping your analogy.
 
All the responses here that SAY DVI hands down is better are Wrong..It all Depends 0n the Display your using. Using my Olevia 30" the VGA is better than DVI for some strange reason. I have had monitors that VGA or DVI makes no visable difference.....then on another monitor the difference is like Night and Day.. It all depends on the display.


Mac
 
My Sony HS94P ghosts in FPS games with digital but doesn't with analog. It also supports higher refresh rates in analog mode. In terms of visual quality...I really don't notice much, if any...although blacklight bleeding on this monitor is a little more pronounced with analog.

I think this varies rather than just saying "yes."

Comparing it like DVD-Audio and Casettes is CRAZY though. Unless you're running some sort of crazy 2000+ X 2000+ resolution I doubt most people would even notice unless you told them to look and compare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top