• 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 vs. dvi

G

Glow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 20, 2002
Messages
4,834
how much of a difference do u actually see? I am trying to decide a a vid card and a 4 LCD setup how much of a difference do u honestly see and in what aspects would u see?

Polyview V293 2-Tone 19" 21ms with dvi vs. Rosewill R910P 19" 8ms no dvi
and the 6600GT I am getting depends on what LCDs I get.
 
There are 6600gt's with both DVI and analog, so you can have the option. (My gigabyte was)

I've never seen DVI in action first hand, and I use a CRT, never had an LCD. But I do know that that 8ms monitor with analog will be better than that 21ms with DVI as far as gaming goes, no question. DVI won't cover up a 13ms gap in response time.
 
DVI is going to be higher quality. The amount of quality loss varies person to person and what you are using it for.

IMHO its not worth paying the price premium for an LCD over a CRT and not use DVI personally. It just makes sense that if you have a digital panel that you use a digital interface that can display to all the pixels with full accuracy.

Using VGA, your videocard has to convert digital to analog and the monitor has to convert back analog to digital. Instead of staying fully digital through the whole process.
 
i would go with the 8ms flat panel, simply because 21ms will give you a ton of ghosting in games which i gaurantee you will see.

you probably wont see any ghosting with 16ms and under, and i KNOW that you wont see any ghosting with 12ms and under.

on the vga vs dvi note, i dont really see any difference, i have 2x19" flatscreen's at my work (dvi) and 2x19" flat CRT's at home (vga) and the picture looks the same to me... however, i havent gamed on the 19" flatscreens, so i couldnt tell you.
 
I thought DVI was always supposed to be better crazzy
 
mdameron said:
There are 6600gt's with both DVI and analog, so you can have the option. (My gigabyte was)

I've never seen DVI in action first hand, and I use a CRT, never had an LCD. But I do know that that 8ms monitor with analog will be better than that 21ms with DVI as far as gaming goes, no question. DVI won't cover up a 13ms gap in response time.
Click to expand...
Who says his intent is gaming.

I did a quick google search of specs and the Rosewill 8ms only has 16.2millino colors, 6bit per channel and would not result in the best image quality especially where graphic work. However it would be good for gaming.

The 21ms panel would ghost in games but has 16.7million colors and will likely have the better image quality.

I'm just making the best educated guess I can here about image quality differences. You would have to find some reviews or compare the monitors in person.
 
Menelmarar said:
Who says his intent is gaming.

I did a quick google search of specs and the Rosewill 8ms only has 16.2millino colors, 6bit per channel and would not result in the best image quality especially where graphic work. However it would be good for gaming.

The 21ms panel would ghost in games but has 16.7million colors and will likely have the better image quality.

I'm just making the best educated guess I can here about image quality differences. You would have to find some reviews or compare the monitors in person.
Click to expand...

His post asked for the difference he would see and in what aspects. I know in games the 8ms would be better, but as far as other aspects and applications, I don't know. I speculated too, he never said what he does. :p
 
well running graphically charts that are always changing for like 8 hours a day basically need a 19in LCD under $270 that can do it and look good.
 
What about CRT's with DVI input? Anyone ever ran an analogue based monitor off DVI with improved qualities?

I have an IBM p275 that has both 14pin D-sub and DVI-I inputs...
 
Glow said:
well running graphically charts that are always changing for like 8 hours a day basically need a 19in LCD under $270 that can do it and look good.
Click to expand...
You need to try and check them out in person.

Seems like to me that if you aren't using it for gaming and instead dealing with the desktop environment in windows the 21" 16.7million color one might suit you better.
 
J-Mag said:
What about CRT's with DVI input? Anyone ever ran an analogue based monitor off DVI with improved qualities?

I have an IBM p275 that has both 14pin D-sub and DVI-I inputs...
Click to expand...

Just depends on which device has the better RAMDAC I would think. Your monitor or your videocard. And that could be argued both ways I think.
 
I am using both the analog and the DVI connection of my Dell FP2001. The DVI is from my main rig, the analog from my server, hence used very infrequently. I must say that there is a significant difference in sharpness. Additionally with DVI you will not have to adjust the geometry, ever!

For these reasons, I would not buy a LCD without DVI input.

 
Menelmarar said:
Just depends on which device has the better RAMDAC I would think. Your monitor or your videocard. And that could be argued both ways I think.
Click to expand...

I guess there is really only one way to find out, eh? Unfrotunately I was a bonehead and bought a digital only DVI cable which doesn't work even though it fits fine.
 
J-Mag said:
What about CRT's with DVI input? Anyone ever ran an analogue based monitor off DVI with improved qualities?

I have an IBM p275 that has both 14pin D-sub and DVI-I inputs...
Click to expand...

You will gain nothing. A CRT is an analog device. The DVI connector was put their for compatibility because it was thought that DVI would completely take over D-Sub connections; that didn't happen so only a few CRTs got it. The DVI input on the monitor is DVI-A, which is an oxymoron in and of itself. Therefore, the DVI cable will only access the analog pins of the DVI-I output on your video card.

Bottom line is that using a DVI-A or DVI-I cable with your CRT is no different than using the D-Sub connector with a DVI-to-VGA adapter. You just don't need the adapter.
 
I was reading about VGA needing to conver signals and this and that and DVI is all smooth and such well my personal LCD is either 12 or 16ms and a vga and I think it's great. but what about when you're running multiple LCDs does it make a difference then? I mean say your viewing quake 3 2 of the same monitors one in DVI one in VGA can u tell a vast difference or no?
 
Un4given said:
You will gain nothing. A CRT is an analog device. The DVI connector was put their for compatibility because it was thought that DVI would completely take over D-Sub connections; that didn't happen so only a few CRTs got it. The DVI input on the monitor is DVI-A, which is an oxymoron in and of itself. Therefore, the DVI cable will only access the analog pins of the DVI-I output on your video card.

Bottom line is that using a DVI-A or DVI-I cable with your CRT is no different than using the D-Sub connector with a DVI-to-VGA adapter. You just don't need the adapter.
Click to expand...

Hmm... I had doubted that there would be any difference... Although I can still use it to switch between two rigs like a KVM minus the K and M.
 
when it comes to dvi v.s. vga it really depends on the display you are using. on a crt there's pretty much no difference. i believe other members have explained why. on a lcd, it really depends on the display. on my dell 2405fpw the DVI input is noticeably clearer than the analog input. on another NEC lcd i've seen, both analog and dvi look VERY good. so i guess it really depends on the display? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top