![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
Will using DVI look better?
- Thread starter Exce
- Start date
It will look a lot better...the bigger the screen the bigger the difference. I first used VGA on my 32" Westy and it was so blurry I felt like throwing up looking at the screen, I then swapped in a DVI cable and it is very clear and crisp now.
taylorwilsdon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,286
Its unreal how different it looks. The colors and clarity are way better.
If you think buying a really expensive VGA cable just to be almost as good as a cheap DVI is a good idea then you're insane. DVI will always be better, also with short (less than 3m) lenghts all DVI cables are the same (perfect). Oh and the quality of the VGA is also based on the ADC inside the LCD so your comment is pretty meaningless. The short answer is if you have bought a Nvidia 8800 card it's silly not to buy a DVI cable. Exce: go and get a DVI now before we all murder you =).
DVI cables I have plenty... 10+ and counting from 2 to 5 meters..sl-dvi-d, dl-dvi-d. dl-dvi-i,HDMI/HDMI to DVI, and my multiple Nvidia 8800 series and 7 series are powering 3840x1024 through vga and multiple 1920x1200 and 1920x1080 and some 1280x1024 displays through multiple dvi and vga inputs. And decent/good built/proper shielded vga does not mean really expensive... I never buy my cables exceeding USD 10.
Ok, then I'll fall back on to my previous point about all DVI cables being better than any VGA then. Also the one about all monitors having different ADC's is pretty valid since a cheap monitor is not going to have a very good one. Since all computer video signals are digital as are LCDs why convert it twice just to stubborn about old technology? I've used 6 LCDs now and they all look blurry using VGA compared to DVI, so I cannot agree with you at all.
Godmachine
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2003
- Messages
- 10,472
Sorry but anyone that says VGA looks the same as DVI is nuts to say the least. DVI is a direct non-conversion connection ...VGA is converted from analog to digital, to digital to analog which causes picture quality loss , while DVI stays digital completely from point A to B and back.
Just try it and you will not be disappointed.
Just try it and you will not be disappointed.
i think you need buy a better display card/VGA cable
i've tested on my CG220,i can't see any different on VGA/DVI input.the resolution is 1920x1200.
and yes,DVI are better than VGA when you using LCD with cheap equipment.
Harddriver
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Messages
- 88
I have a question... Can better DVI cables increase the quality of the picture?
if you can't see a difference you're blind.
^^^Or you need glasses. When I switched I was like WTF this shit is crazy the difference. I saw textures on walls on movies and other small stuff like that but it is a big difference to me it compliments the video card
^^^Or you need glasses. When I switched I was like WTF this shit is crazy the difference. I saw textures on walls on movies and other small stuff like that but it is a big difference to me it compliments the video card
Sgraffite
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2006
- Messages
- 4,405
Using good vga cables with ferrite cores you won't be able to tell the difference between vga and dvi. Using vga cables without ferrite cores and the difference will be obvious.
Lets get a few points across...
1. DVI input to your monitor at native pixel resolution is the best picture quality that your LCD monitor is going to get. By all means get one.. as it certainly not expensive (mostly)..
2. With VGA signal, picture quality on LCD would certainly will not exceed DVI's, but with a proper combination of graphic card, cable and monitor... visually perceived equal in quality is achievable., hard to... but possible. Signal quality will certainly degrade as resolution increase. 1Mpixels to 2Mpixel would suffer little degradation... pushing 4 to 5 Mpixel would sure to have some artifacts.. DVI does not suffer this.
3.Until HDMI 1.3 is available in graphic card (non-ps3) analog VGA RAMDACs still holds more bandwidth than SL-DVI and DL-DVI presently can.
1. DVI input to your monitor at native pixel resolution is the best picture quality that your LCD monitor is going to get. By all means get one.. as it certainly not expensive (mostly)..
2. With VGA signal, picture quality on LCD would certainly will not exceed DVI's, but with a proper combination of graphic card, cable and monitor... visually perceived equal in quality is achievable., hard to... but possible. Signal quality will certainly degrade as resolution increase. 1Mpixels to 2Mpixel would suffer little degradation... pushing 4 to 5 Mpixel would sure to have some artifacts.. DVI does not suffer this.
3.Until HDMI 1.3 is available in graphic card (non-ps3) analog VGA RAMDACs still holds more bandwidth than SL-DVI and DL-DVI presently can.
No, unless you're talking about really long cables.
Ahaha... A better card?!!! Do you think people buy a graphics card dependant on how good the VGA output is? Wow, where do these people come from? I knew someone with a Eizo would turn up suggesting VGA is fine, does everyone buy those things just to use VGA cables? If I'd waisted that much money on a monitor I would be deluding myself too
