Analogue vs DVI Query

Deiwos

Deiwos

Deiwos

Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2006
Posts
3,174
Hi folks!

I'm looking at buying a new monitor, and the Belinea on the TWO offer looks really tasty. What I'm wondering is though, am I better off going down to a 19" LCD with DVI input, or sticking with the Belinea which is analogue only?

Cheers, Tom.
 
from the sticky:)

Q. Does DVI make a difference?

A. This depends very much on the panel in question. Some users of some panels say that switching between VGA and DVI makes NO difference on their screens. Notably users of the Samsung range (171T, 181T, 172X) have said it makes little or no difference, and has even been tested by users with 2 side by side. Other users of different panels swear it DOES make a difference. For example, I have personally seen the LG1710B in action in both modes, and the DVI was noticeably better quality and much sharper than the VGA. However the DVI connection on the LG I would rate as comparable to the VGA on some TFT’s without DVI at all, including the AOC LM720a. It seems logical that perhaps some manufacturers who build their screens without DVI spend more time perfecting the VGA connection as that is all they offer. Whereas companies who supply both connections sensibly would expect their users to use the DVI connection, as it is there, and so sacrifice quality of the VGA as the DVI can show off the full potential of their panel. Therefore screens without DVI tend to have a better VGA than those with DVI and in some cases a good VGA connection can be comparable in quality to a DVI connection.

Quality of the VGA connection is also related to the GFX card used. Most modern GFX cards have a good VGA output and this is important in image quality of the TFT. NVidia cards have been said to have a slightly better VGA output than the ATI cards, but as said, most new cards will give u a good quality output. Good output combined with a good VGA input on the screen will give u a good quality picture.

One other thing to note is that when using DVI connection, most TFT's lose the option of some of the on screen settings like contrast and brightness, so if u use DVI and u cant change them, some people have found the screens too bright. Software fixes are available for this though (inc Powerstrip etc)

RILOT: "I have non DVI TFT’s and the picture quality is exactly the same as my friends Samsung TFT that does have DVI. We tested them both together. Oddly though, when using the Samsung with VGA input the image quality was significantly worse......If you have a card with a decent 2d quality output it shouldn't make any difference whatsoever."
Click to expand...

Modern screens like the Belinea have very good VGA connections anyway, it would probably be a shame to go for a smaller model just for the sake of getting a digital interface
 
I may be wrong on this but I've got a feeling that DVI is limited to 60hz whereas VGA are not subject to this restriction.
 
depends on the interface chip used, some TFT's let you use 75Hz on either, but it will vary. Ultimately the optimum and recommend refresh rate for a TFT is 60Hz anyway, so doesn't matter too much :)
 
Can you provide further explanation as to why 60hz is optimal? i.e. what disadvantage is there from using 75hz?

(not a challenge, I'd just like to find out if there's any technical reason I shouldn't be using 75 or 77hz)
 
I thought refresh rate was irrelevant on a tft? Whatever rate you send to it, it will interpret it into its own native timings.
 
Well, the OSD claims that mine is running at 75hz, and if I enable vsync the framerate is limited to 75fps. If it doesn't make any difference and it runs at native timings regardless, it begs the question as to why they bother having different refresh rates at all on TFTs.
 
HangTime said:
Can you provide further explanation as to why 60hz is optimal? i.e. what disadvantage is there from using 75hz?

(not a challenge, I'd just like to find out if there's any technical reason I shouldn't be using 75 or 77hz)
Click to expand...

yeah no worries. To start with, consider that all manufacturers list 60Hz as the recommended and optimum refresh for a TFT and 75Hz as a maximum, depending on resolution and interface usually. There is a reason for this and it's down to the way the interface chips work, and the panel invariable needs to scale the vertical frequency to ~60Hz as well anyway. Running at 75Hz in practice can sometimes lead to some image degradation, sometimes noticably in image clairty and PQ. It can also affect the application of any overdrive technology being used, in a negative way. Have a read about refresh rate here if you're interested and want more info. It is correct that TFT's don't operate in the same way as CRT's in terms of refresh certainly.
 
Mmmmm. I did some testing yesterday at 60hz compared to my usual 75hz, and gaming was slightly more jerky (framerate capped at 77fps for both, vsync disabled).

I'm well aware that the way TFTs and CRTs refresh is different (TFT is more... continuous rather than the discrete images provided by a CRT), but to me that doesn't justify only having a 60hz refresh rate. Sure, you aren't going to get eyestrain from it, but it still means that your image is only updating 60 times per second - which is suboptimal in the eyes of some gamers. Effectively at 60hz/60fps your image only updates every ~16.7ms, compared to, say, 8ms at 125hz/125fps.
 
I wouldnt say get a worse monitor for DVI but if you have a choice then DVI is worth it imo

firstly .. just a little thing.. image is always perfect on the screen. no more of this autoadjust thing.

also i noticed on my monitor the image quility got a tiny bit better.. and i hear it makes more difference on some monitors and less on others.. only thing i would say is the dvi cables are a tenner (or a couple quid from eeee) :) enjoy whatever monitor you get in the end mate.. lucky git :P lol

ta

alec
 
HangTime said:
Mmmmm. I did some testing yesterday at 60hz compared to my usual 75hz, and gaming was slightly more jerky (framerate capped at 77fps for both, vsync disabled).

I'm well aware that the way TFTs and CRTs refresh is different (TFT is more... continuous rather than the discrete images provided by a CRT), but to me that doesn't justify only having a 60hz refresh rate. Sure, you aren't going to get eyestrain from it, but it still means that your image is only updating 60 times per second - which is suboptimal in the eyes of some gamers. Effectively at 60hz/60fps your image only updates every ~16.7ms, compared to, say, 8ms at 125hz/125fps.
Click to expand...

if you're using vsync then yes, this is a good reason to run at 75Hz as you will get more fps out of it. It can affect overdrive control though, so you may find pixel responsiveness takes a hite. If you find gaming smoother though at 75Hz, no problem running the screen at that
 
sorry to hijack this thread but it kinda is relevant. I have 2 TFTs both analogue VGA connections. On my gfx card i have 1xVGA and 1xDVI. I have a dvi-vga adapter to make both into analogue. Will there be any difference in picture quality if using an adapter?

I currently have my new belinea 22" on the VGA socket and my 19" TFT on the DVI using an adapter.

Does it not make any odds which way I do this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom