DVI to HDMI...

Sumanji

Sumanji

Sumanji

Soldato
Joined
12 Mar 2003
Posts
8,290
Location
USA
Hey,

I'd like to use the DVI output of my X800 XL to connect to the HDMI input on my LCD TV. I want to run at the TV's native resolution (1366x768), but I remember reading ages ago that you can only do 1280x720 over HDMI? Is that correct?

If so would I get a better picture using the VGA input at native res (instead of an upscaled HDMI image).

Cheers,

Suman
 
Sumanji said:
Hey,

I'd like to use the DVI output of my X800 XL to connect to the HDMI input on my LCD TV. I want to run at the TV's native resolution (1366x768), but I remember reading ages ago that you can only do 1280x720 over HDMI? Is that correct?

If so would I get a better picture using the VGA input at native res (instead of an upscaled HDMI image).

Cheers,

Suman
Click to expand...

The HDMI v1.1v spec supports a whole range of resolutions right upto 1920x1080 at many refresh rates and scan rates, so it is possible to output to the resoltuion you want. You just need a convertor from DVI to HDMI but that would require linking to another shop.
 
HDMI is the best quality input. On par with DVI but includes sound. You just need a DVI - > HDMI adapter.

VGA isn't the best way to go as you are converting it to analogue then back to digital for the screen.
 
IMO VGA is better connection for the job as you dont have to worry about overscan and making custom resolutions to conpensate for overscan. With VGA you will have 1:1 pixal mapping so the image quality will be better.


In the real world you would hard pressed to see the differance between DVI and VGA even if DVI did have the 1:1 mapping. I would just use the VGA if your tv has one.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
IMO VGA is better connection for the job as you dont have to worry about overscan and making custom resolutions to conpensate for overscan. With VGA you will have 1:1 pixal mapping so the image quality will be better.


In the real world you would hard pressed to see the differance between DVI and VGA even if DVI did have the 1:1 mapping. I would just use the VGA if your tv has one.
Click to expand...
I'm reading this on 56" DLP HDTV and VGA is much much worse, not even worth thinking about. The graphics card is digital, convert to analogue through an ADC then through a DAC back to digital and you don't think the picture looks worse? You do know each circuit has a signal to noise ratio? They add up and you get losses, errors and and processing lag. You cannot get better than 1:1 mapping to the native of the display keeping it in the digital domain.
 
Wouldn't it be better to include a dvi port instead of a vga port on tv's? I thought the whole point of dvi was to replace vga since its digital whereas vga is analogue? :/

I only have dvi on my graphics card so will have to either use a hdmi adapter, dvi > vga adapter or hope a decent 1080p tv with hdmi also comes with dvi in the near-ish future (this is what i'm hoping for the most).
 
fornowagain said:
I'm reading this on 56" DLP HDTV and VGA is much much worse, not even worth thinking about. The graphics card is digital, convert to analogue through an ADC then through a DAC back to digital and you don't think the picture looks worse? You do know each circuit has a signal to noise ratio? They add up and you get losses, errors and and processing lag. You cannot get better than 1:1 mapping to the native of the display keeping it in the digital domain.
Click to expand...

depends on size of screen , I completely agree. I also think that pixel mapping over any given connection is also only relevant to one particular screen, one may do it brilliantly another may not.

There are DVI to hdmi leads out there - I dont believe they have a second lead on the dvi end for the sound however so its just for visuals only (the one i have seen) but they do exist.
 
Yeah of course DVI to HDMI leads exist... I thought this was common knowledge?!

I just need to know whether I can set a custom res using that and get 1:1 mapping on my LCD that's all :D

Cheers,

Suman
 
FrankJH said:
depends on size of screen , I completely agree. I also think that pixel mapping over any given connection is also only relevant to one particular screen, one may do it brilliantly another may not.
Click to expand...
1:1 mapping removes any signal processing. For instance the DLP Faroudja processor of my tv has a native matrix of 1920x1080. If I run any other resolution the pixels have to be recalculated to fit. The signal processing introduces upscaling errors in the picture. Stick to the native resolution for any digital display it will give the best picture.
 
Last edited:
Gundam God said:
Wouldn't it be better to include a dvi port instead of a vga port on tv's? I thought the whole point of dvi was to replace vga since its digital whereas vga is analogue? :/

I only have dvi on my graphics card so will have to either use a hdmi adapter, dvi > vga adapter or hope a decent 1080p tv with hdmi also comes with dvi in the near-ish future (this is what i'm hoping for the most).
Click to expand...
Mine has them all, HDMI VGA Composite..... DVI is HDMI without the sound and encryption. There is no conversion, just get a DVI to HDMI cable, route the sound into an amp or the TV will have its own sound input. Your graphics card also outputs DVD-I which is DVD-D + DVD-A So you have both analogue and digital as standard.
 
Last edited:
fornowagain said:
1:1 mapping removes any signal processing. For instance the DLP Faroudja processor of my tv has a native matrix of 1920x1080. If I run any other resolution the pixels have to be recalculated to fit. The signal processing introduces upscaling errors in the picture. Stick to the native resolution for any digital display it will give the best picture.
Click to expand...

You explained it better than I did thank you

All I was trying to say (very badly) some screens do 1:1 pixel matching others leaven thin lines either side of the screen - so I have been told.

With both HDTV's (LCD based) and lcd monitors, I personally never use them out of natural resolution unless I really have to.
 
Sumanji said:
Yeah of course DVI to HDMI leads exist... I thought this was common knowledge?!

I just need to know whether I can set a custom res using that and get 1:1 mapping on my LCD that's all :D

Cheers,

Suman
Click to expand...
someone above was talking abotu adaptors which is why I mentioned specifically a direct DVI to hdmi cable , that was all
 
I actually found that having my projector scale down from 1280 x 720 to 848 x 480 (native) got much better results than running the VGA output at its native.
 
Ok seen as I can't get a straight answer out of you lot I'm just gonna go and buy a DVI-HDMI cable and see what happens :p any recommendations for a decent cable? I'd really like a 1 metre cable if possible (to reduce clutter).

Cheers,

Suman
 
tom_nieto said:
I actually found that having my projector scale down from 1280 x 720 to 848 x 480 (native) got much better results than running the VGA output at its native.
Click to expand...

I might be misunderstanding you - but your projector has native resolution of 848*480? I am surprised any recent projector cant handle 1280*720 well but it depends on the brand and model of projector you have I guess, just surprising is all
 
Sumanji said:
Hey,

I'd like to use the DVI output of my X800 XL to connect to the HDMI input on my LCD TV. I want to run at the TV's native resolution (1366x768), but I remember reading ages ago that you can only do 1280x720 over HDMI? Is that correct?

If so would I get a better picture using the VGA input at native res (instead of an upscaled HDMI image).

Cheers,

Suman
Click to expand...
You want a straight answer? DVI out, to HDMI in on your LCD will support the native res of your monitor. But,..... your graphics card has to have 1366x768 as a standard driver resolution. If it doesn't, use a program called Powerstrip and force the card to output the resolution and frequency that you want.

And cable wise a lot of people will tell you any old lead will do because its digital. That's not the case, all cable's suffer from noise and loss. But spending to much gains you very little as it holds to the law of diminishing returns. Like 90% for £40 and 97% for £100 and so on. Look for triple screened and gold plated. QED, Supra, there are loads.
 
Last edited:
fornowagain said:
And cable wise a lot of people will tell you any old lead will do because its digital. That's not the case, all cable's suffer from noise and loss. But spending to much gains you very little as it holds to the law of diminishing returns. Like 90% for £40 and 97% for £100 and so on. Look for triple screened and gold plated. QED, Supra, there are loads.
Click to expand...
I have to agree here. Anything over £40 - £50 is questionable when you consider the possible "improvements" in the return. But yes, investment in a good cable is always a good thing. I used several times b-tech HDMI/DVI digital cables:

http://www.b-tech-int.com/Professional Interconnects.html

Very good value for the quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom