Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
HDMI is merely DVI with sound. It will be exactly, 100% the same picture quality.
HDMI is merely DVI with sound.
Has anyone upgraded from a DVI to HDMI Cable on their LCD? Could you tell a difference? Was there any improvement?
This is a slightly complected subject, but I'll keep it simple.
1. In monitors, no, there's no difference between the two
2. In HDTVs, yes, but only when taking advantage of the HDMI v1.3 specs (e.g. x.v. color, deep color etc...).
Functionally, yes. Technically different though similar.
explain please
Google said:HDMI and DVI actually are more alike than they are different. Both of these support the transmission of digital signals. Both DVI and HDMI are based on specifications that are similar, because HDMI specification was derived from the specification for DVI.
There are two important differences between DVI and HDMI. The first difference is that HDMI technology incorporates content security that is called High Definition Content Protection, also known as HDCP. The other huge difference between Digital Video Interface and High Definition Multimedia Interface is that DVI can only support digital video, and HDMI can support audio and video on the same cable.
This leads to another big difference between HDMI and DVI. The number of cables that need to be used and run during installation. With Digital Video Interface at least two cables are needed. One cable is needed to support the video signal, and one cable or cord is needed to support the audio signal, because DVI can only support video, not audio. With HDMI only one cable is needed for the installation. This is because the HDMI can support all formats of digital video plus it can support multiple channels of audio signal as well.
The good news is that despite their differences, a backward compatibility for video exists between HDMI and DVI. Because HDMI evolved from DVI, they are both identical when it comes to video. But remember, DVI can not support digital audio. A good example is an older DVI connection on the source and an HDMI connector to the display. In this case, all that is needed to see the video is an HDMI to DVI cable. However, a separate cable for audio is needed to carry the the digital audio so the sound can be heard.
Has anyone upgraded from a DVI to HDMI Cable on their LCD? Could you tell a difference? Was there any improvement?
Because HDMI evolved from DVI, they are both identical when it comes to video. But remember, DVI can not support digital audio. A good example is an older DVI connection on the source and an HDMI connector to the display. In this case, all that is needed to see the video is an HDMI to DVI cable. However, a separate cable for audio is needed to carry the the digital audio so the sound can be heard.
Electrically compatible but can use different colorspaces and has a different clock rate natively, etc.
That is specific to the DVI port on video cards. It will transmit S/PDIF. Thing is, if you just hook up a normal DVI cable, the audio stops at the port, nothing is being transmitted over the DVI cable, so the above information stands true.
Yes, but only if an HDMI cable is connected, if you connect a standard DVI cable to the DVI port, the audio signal is not being passed over the DVI cable. That it was I was trying to say.
Great responses, Tks to all for your replies. Since the consensus is that for a lcd pc monitor you will proably see no difference Ill stick with dvi until the hdmi is needed.
It's likely that HDMI won't be used much with PC monitors/GPUs in the future anyway, as DisplayPort is making inroads at this point. DisplayPort is similar to HDMI, with mostly a better connector and superior to HDMI 1.3 with respect to max resolution and such.
In the end, though, it's all digital
I believe hdmi will be required for copy protected bluray content?
Just because DisplayPort probably will take over the PC doesn't mean that support for DVI/HDMI is scrapped. DisplayPort can even carry (but isn't required to) at least DVI-D so a simple pin-converter will do the trick.
Just look at VGA how long it has lasted. There will always be a way to output DVI/HDMI as long as thats what HDTVs take and it will take many many years before even PC-monitors are expected to have DisplayPort.
Actually Apple monitors are all DisplayPort already and I have seen quite a few (higher-end) LCDs with DP input (like that new H-IPS HP screen). Being able to use a DP to DVI adapter is nice for people with displays that can't natively accept DP, but I don't see a reason to not use DP directly outside that.
As for HDTVs, I grant you that.
Apple has one monitor with DisplayPort.
My Dell has DisplayPort but just because DisplayPort is making it's way to the market doesn't mean that DVI/HDMI won't be supported. There are tons and tons of VGA only (even TFT) displays out there still today. There are only a handfull of graphic-cards on the market with DisplayPort and they are, atleast most of them, overpriced.
It will take long before even all new monitors and graphic cards support DisplayPort - but after that it will take many years before DVI is phased out. Irregardless of HDTVs, but since HDMI won't be replaced for an even longer time in HDTVs you can count on it being available, in some way or another.
I doubt that DisplayPort will get much traction as a standard seeing how HDMI has much wider support and audience. The video card manufacturers don't mind the 4-cent per connector and $10K a year fee if they can standardize on one slim connector type for computer and consumer hardware since it would save them just as much money by getting rid of the dual DVI connections and not having to deal with yet another DisplayPort interface. Now that HDMI 1.3a supports higher bandwidth it's just a matter of time until it moves up to higher resolutions.
Forget DisplayPort and DVI already, and let's go with a single slim connector for all video/audio equipment!