• 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.

Vga Dvi???

VGA is the standard analog signal that is sent from the graphics card to your monitor. All CRT's use VGA, while lcd's can have either VGA or DVI.

DVI is the digital signal that is used by higher quality lcd's. From personal experience and from my own research, DVI gives a much sharper, clearer picture than VGA and also reduces signal loss (because there is no digital to analog signal processing along the way).

The only downside to using DVI is that some lcd image adjustment functions no longer work when using DVI (usually because they are no longer necessary).
 
ehZn said:
The only downside to using DVI is that some lcd image adjustment functions no longer work when using DVI (usually because they are no longer necessary).
Click to expand...

Well, there are some other downsides. DVI cables are a touch more expensive than VGA cables, and can't be run over great distances.

There is not much infrastructure support for DVI yet, either. There are no signal boosters, like you might use to run a VGA signal over very large distances.

Some infrastructure doodads are quite expensive (or hard to find) for DVI, but they're well-established and inexpensive for VGA. KVM switches, for example; or repeaters you might use to send the same signal to many monitors.

Maybe these issues will get better in the future as DVI gets more popular. Or, maybe they'll never get better -- perhaps DVI will be replaced by something else before these problems sort themselves out.

.B ekiM
 
Aerobahn said:
so DVi has a better picture if im not mistaken.
Click to expand...

Well, it's certainly not worse. I know some guys who like the way VGA looks, and don't think a DVI screen looks much better.

Me, I won't buy an LCD panel that doesn't have DVI inputs for use at home. I find them very sharp, and simply wonderful to use.

Some of that opinion might come from the fact that I've never seen or used a CRT with a DVI-input.

Even great CRT displays drift over time; they lose focus, particularly in the corners. I have a View Sonic PT810 that was a kick-ass monitor 8 years ago, but it's nearly unusable now because of drift. LCD panels just don't have this problem, and will always look sharper. The LCD panel sitting next to my PT-810 has DVI inputs. Is it really the DVI input that's sharper, or that the monitors I'm using are getting old?

.B ekiM
 
mikeblas said:
Well, there are some other downsides. DVI cables are a touch more expensive than VGA cables, and can't be run over great distances.

There is not much infrastructure support for DVI yet, either. There are no signal boosters, like you might use to run a VGA signal over very large distances.

Some infrastructure doodads are quite expensive (or hard to find) for DVI, but they're well-established and inexpensive for VGA. KVM switches, for example; or repeaters you might use to send the same signal to many monitors.

Maybe these issues will get better in the future as DVI gets more popular. Or, maybe they'll never get better -- perhaps DVI will be replaced by something else before these problems sort themselves out.

.B ekiM
Click to expand...
Not entirely true! The HT markets have pushed to support extremly long runs of DVI, and now some use fibre for runs over 40' ... which basically skyrockets theoretical limits of distance, and cost! ;)

Only obviously works for the digital signal transmitted on DVI, so if your LCD does not truely use the digital and used the analog on DVI-I, it wouldn't work anyway.
 
nweibley said:
which basically skyrockets theoretical limits of distance, and cost! ;)
Click to expand...

Sure -- the cost factor is the problem; 40 feet of fiber cable? Plus the booster and receiver? How much?

40 feet of analog VGA cable is pretty cheap, and if you're not pushing the resolution (and buy nice cable) then you won't even need the boosters. The cost is substantially lower.

.B ekiM
 
The cost for DVI cable is a lot more, but the potential for the technology is greater, too. DVI right now works mainly on single link, while future devices can work on a dual link which should provice faster transfer times, sharper picture, and greater overall bandwidth. The up side is that current single link devices run fine using a dual link cable.

Gotta love backwards compatibility.
 
ehZn said:
DVI right now works mainly on single link, while future devices can work on a dual link which should provice faster transfer times, sharper picture, and greater overall bandwidth.
Click to expand...

Should. But who's shipping them? When? For now, it's a gamble, not an investment.

.B ekiM
 
Well in this case, it's a gamble that really doesn't cost you much more than a normal DVI cable. And usually the dual-link ones are better quality anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top