DVI vs. analog

Syxx_Killer · 02-08-07, 10:18 AM

My new monitor has a DVI output and I realized my video card also has a DVI port. I had never given it any thought before with my old monitor. My new one, however, did not come with a DVI cable. What I'm wondering is, is there a noticeable improvement with DVI over analog displays? I don't want to spend $15 on a DVI cable only to find out the display isn't all the better.

JSLTIGER · 02-08-07, 10:28 AM

I've never really seen it to have much of an impact, although in theory it's supposed to make the images more crisp. I think a lot of it is opinion. Below is some mild propaganda for you.

Quote:

Digital Visual Interface connections allow users to create a digital-to-digital connection between their display and source. We most commonly see the digital-to-digital connection between flat screen monitors and computers. However, new HDTV set top boxes can be found which offer DVI output.

The signal your television receives with an antenna is analog. Sometimes the picture is fuzzy, sometimes it comes in perfectly clear, and sometimes it fades in and out. With a digital signal, the signal is either on or off, so "fuzziness" is not possible. That is not to say that an analog signal always looks fuzzy. A high quality analog signal also produces beautiful, clear images. The signals are just not quite as consistent as digital.

SOURCE: http://www.flattvpeople.com/tutorial...onnections.asp

SUBMAN1 · 02-08-07, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Syxx_Killer

My new monitor has a DVI output and I realized my video card also has a DVI port. I had never given it any thought before with my old monitor. My new one, however, did not come with a DVI cable. What I'm wondering is, is there a noticeable improvement with DVI over analog displays? I don't want to spend $15 on a DVI cable only to find out the display isn't all the better.

DVI lacks the interferance associated with the analog cable. Always use DVI if at all possible.

It is noticeable since there is no ghosting. I've tried both ways on my Samsung monitors.

-S

flintlock · 02-08-07, 01:18 PM

As others have already suggested, a DVI cable technically provides a crisper image as it is digital. In reality analog signal processing today has improved greatly, to the point where significant differences in image quality can be challenging to detect. Pro photographers, graphics pros or similar would undoubtedly notice a difference because of the equipment they use and the nature of their work. That said, I'd still recommend using a DVI cable for a digital LCD. Why use an analog cable in your digital system if you're no longer connecting to an analog CRT?

fredbass · 02-08-07, 01:31 PM

It does seem to look a bit better using the DVI cables on a digital LCD monitor, but I certainly understand Syxx Killers concern, because those friggin cables are way overpriced to say the least.

SUBMAN1 · 02-08-07, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredbass

It does seem to look a bit better using the DVI cables on a digital LCD monitor, but I certainly understand Syxx Killers concern, because those friggin cables are way overpriced to say the least.

$15 is cheap. They used to be $80!

flintlock · 02-08-07, 01:45 PM

True, the price has come down a lot. Also, many of todays LCDs come packaged with DVI and analog cables. I had DVI cables packaged with both of my LCD displays.

Zantham · 02-08-07, 03:45 PM

Just thought I'd mention there are different types of DVI connectors:

DVI-D is the real digital connection.
DVI-A (quite rare) is analog, and has no real benefit over a standard VGA cable.
DVI-D is a combination cable that combines DVI-D and DVI-A into a single cable.

There is also Single Link and Dual Link cables....unless your running a really high resolution screen that requires dual-link there is no benefit to using a dual-link cable.

In my experience I noticed little difference between DVI-D, DVI-A and VGA on a Viewsonic VP2130b 21" LCD (hooked to a GeForce 7950GT), whether watching movies, playing FPS games, or playing with photos. I do notice more difference on a second Viewsonic 17" LCD on the same card...

If you buy a DVI cable, make sure it really is a digital cable; when I used a DVI-I cable my screen came up analog... I had to get a proper digital cable to finally get it to run digital mode.

fredbass · 02-08-07, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredbass

It does seem to look a bit better using the DVI cables on a digital LCD monitor, but I certainly understand Syxx Killers concern, because those friggin cables are way overpriced to say the least.

$15 is cheap. They used to be $80!

Well yes, that is a lot better. Last time I had looked it was around $35 for 6'.

AVGWarhawk · 02-08-07, 04:36 PM

I have a friend who is using the digital cable and he claims it is no different. With that, I kept mine with the analog. I'm happy.

bookworm_020 · 02-08-07, 05:31 PM

I'm using a DVI to VGA adaptor on my video card as I still have a VGA monitor (my Video card has a low profile bracket, so I had to remove the VGA socket) I'll use the DVI adaptor when I get a new monitor

SUBMAN1 · 02-08-07, 06:00 PM

My actual experience is that I origianlly had an analog cable hooked up to my Samsung and it looked great, but it was so ever not perfectly clear, even though you probably wouldn't notice upon using the machine. It is the text really. Switching to the DVI cable, though you wouldn't notice it right off, it fixed the ever so slight ghosting of the text to the point where it is perfect and no longer bothersome.

Though you may not notice it, it is way easier on the eyes. The other way could give you a slight headache without you even knowing it. The DVI however removes that issue.

My suggestion is - buy the cable and if you think it doesn't make any difference (unlikely), then take it back. I can almost bet that you will end up keeping it however.

No matter what is written above - there is 'always' a loss on conversion in any format. In this case you are converting from D to A and back to D. This wouldn't be an issue if you were staying A. So any noise generated in the analog line is going to be transfered back to D, leaving you with ever so slight ghosting that you can barely see or worse. On top of this, there is guaranteed to be 'some', but probably not enough to be noticeable, color loss. Its how electronics work. In a pure D to D environment, you get none of these issues.

Hopefully that explains it a bit better.

-S

02-08-07, 10:18 AM	#1
Syxx_Killer Admiral Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Michigan, USA Posts: 2,387 Downloads: 21 Uploads: 0	DVI vs. analog My new monitor has a DVI output and I realized my video card also has a DVI port. I had never given it any thought before with my old monitor. My new one, however, did not come with a DVI cable. What I'm wondering is, is there a noticeable improvement with DVI over analog displays? I don't want to spend $15 on a DVI cable only to find out the display isn't all the better.

02-08-07, 01:31 PM	#5
fredbass Ace of the Deep Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: New Port Richey, Fl, USA Posts: 1,066 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	It does seem to look a bit better using the DVI cables on a digital LCD monitor, but I certainly understand Syxx Killers concern, because those friggin cables are way overpriced to say the least. __________________

02-08-07, 04:36 PM	#10
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 28,253 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	I have a friend who is using the digital cable and he claims it is no different. With that, I kept mine with the analog. I'm happy. __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

02-08-07, 05:31 PM	#11
bookworm_020 Navy Seal Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Sinking ships off the Australian coast Posts: 5,966 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	I'm using a DVI to VGA adaptor on my video card as I still have a VGA monitor (my Video card has a low profile bracket, so I had to remove the VGA socket) I'll use the DVI adaptor when I get a new monitor __________________ "There is always one person in any organization who knows whats going on, That person must be fired"

02-08-07, 06:00 PM	#12
SUBMAN1 Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 11,866 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	My actual experience is that I origianlly had an analog cable hooked up to my Samsung and it looked great, but it was so ever not perfectly clear, even though you probably wouldn't notice upon using the machine. It is the text really. Switching to the DVI cable, though you wouldn't notice it right off, it fixed the ever so slight ghosting of the text to the point where it is perfect and no longer bothersome. Though you may not notice it, it is way easier on the eyes. The other way could give you a slight headache without you even knowing it. The DVI however removes that issue. My suggestion is - buy the cable and if you think it doesn't make any difference (unlikely), then take it back. I can almost bet that you will end up keeping it however. No matter what is written above - there is 'always' a loss on conversion in any format. In this case you are converting from D to A and back to D. This wouldn't be an issue if you were staying A. So any noise generated in the analog line is going to be transfered back to D, leaving you with ever so slight ghosting that you can barely see or worse. On top of this, there is guaranteed to be 'some', but probably not enough to be noticeable, color loss. Its how electronics work. In a pure D to D environment, you get none of these issues. Hopefully that explains it a bit better. -S __________________

02-08-07, 01:18 PM	#4
flintlock Ace of the Deep Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,177 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	As others have already suggested, a DVI cable technically provides a crisper image as it is digital. In reality analog signal processing today has improved greatly, to the point where significant differences in image quality can be challenging to detect. Pro photographers, graphics pros or similar would undoubtedly notice a difference because of the equipment they use and the nature of their work. That said, I'd still recommend using a DVI cable for a digital LCD. Why use an analog cable in your digital system if you're no longer connecting to an analog CRT?

02-08-07, 01:45 PM	#7
flintlock Ace of the Deep Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,177 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	True, the price has come down a lot. Also, many of todays LCDs come packaged with DVI and analog cables. I had DVI cables packaged with both of my LCD displays.

02-08-07, 03:45 PM	#8
Zantham 中国水兵 Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 283 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 1	Just thought I'd mention there are different types of DVI connectors: DVI-D is the real digital connection. DVI-A (quite rare) is analog, and has no real benefit over a standard VGA cable. DVI-D is a combination cable that combines DVI-D and DVI-A into a single cable. There is also Single Link and Dual Link cables....unless your running a really high resolution screen that requires dual-link there is no benefit to using a dual-link cable. In my experience I noticed little difference between DVI-D, DVI-A and VGA on a Viewsonic VP2130b 21" LCD (hooked to a GeForce 7950GT), whether watching movies, playing FPS games, or playing with photos. I do notice more difference on a second Viewsonic 17" LCD on the same card... If you buy a DVI cable, make sure it really is a digital cable; when I used a DVI-I cable my screen came up analog... I had to get a proper digital cable to finally get it to run digital mode.