Upgrade to DVI?

D D Danneh · 5 Mar 2009 at 18:42

Put it this way, DVI will never be worse than VGA, and can sometimes be better. The signal is digital rather than analog so it's less affected by eletrical noise, thus you don't have to spend more on a shielded cable. That's why there's very little difference between a £5 cable and a £100 monster cable.

You might as well pay the £5 for one to see if you get a benefit. It's not a big loss if there's not much difference.

Eddie · 5 Mar 2009 at 18:44

MarkW7 said:
yes, still fine with vga

Well I suppose you need to test the cable on another system, or get a cable you know to be working from a pal and test it on your system, see if you can pin it down.

I'm not sure if it'll make any difference, but what about drivers for your gfx card, are they up to date? Short of that I can't really think of any other reason why it wouldn't work tbh.

willhub · 5 Mar 2009 at 19:06

I have DVI on my Hyundai N220W and see absolutely no difference between DVI and VGA.

Eddie · 5 Mar 2009 at 19:10

willhub said:
I have DVI on my Hyundai N220W and see absolutely no difference between DVI and VGA.

Which one did you decide to go with then?

MarkW7 · 5 Mar 2009 at 21:19

Ah, it may be drivers i have an Radeon 9200.

I've looked but cant seem to find any,

FrenchTart · 5 Mar 2009 at 21:28

If you're getting a picture during post but nothing in windows it's def a driver/setting issue. There's no problem with your cable.

MarkW7 · 6 Mar 2009 at 17:58

i got ati center but still nothing.

Dingleberry88 · 6 Mar 2009 at 23:14

Could be a dodgy DVI port on the monitor. Same thing happened to me a few weeks back - a replacement monitor fixed it.

wolvers · 7 Mar 2009 at 09:15

shoot1st said:
My opinion is that I will buy a £10 DVI cable over a £1.50 one from Ebay, that's all.

+3.

I really hate cheaply made cables. Used to buy them, had a few 'sagas', never again. Spent too much on kit to risk it again.

james.miller · 7 Mar 2009 at 09:25

Rroff said:
The difference depends a lot from monitor to monitor but any good quality monitor, with a good graphics card and decent leads on the analogue side will show minimal difference between them.

you arent considering the length of the cable - makes a big difference with vga.

MarkW7 · 7 Mar 2009 at 13:01

Hi again all, i have now got the DVI cable to be recognised as the primary but the max res i can have is 1280x1024. Whenever i try to make it bigger (smaller icons) it just gives me 'no signal input' or 'disconnected'/

hohum · 7 Mar 2009 at 13:08

Sounds like a dodgy cable to me (i.e. can't provide the bandwidth needed for higher resolutions).

james.miller · 7 Mar 2009 at 13:22

there's a few options in the CCC relating to dvi frequencies and timings, have you tried messing with those?

wolvers · 7 Mar 2009 at 13:30

MarkW7 said:
Hi again all, i have now got the DVI cable to be recognised as the primary but the max res i can have is 1280x1024. Whenever i try to make it bigger (smaller icons) it just gives me 'no signal input' or 'disconnected'/

Does it have all of the pins in the connectors?

Could just be that it can't carry enough bandwidth for higher res. How long is it?

MarkW7 · 7 Mar 2009 at 13:53

I've tried messing with all the setting, all the pins are there.
Its 1.8m.

Plugged my VGA back in.

Eddie · 7 Mar 2009 at 14:09

All you can do really is try another cable, or try your cable on another system.

You need to know, one way or the other, if the cable is the problem.

mjones1 · 7 Mar 2009 at 14:20

As i don't want to poen another thread up what is better for a pc dvi or hdmi?

MarkW7 · 7 Mar 2009 at 14:32

PC can't have HDMI can it?
DVI is digital.

MarkW7 · 7 Mar 2009 at 14:33

Don't have another cable or another monitor with DVI.

mjones1 · 7 Mar 2009 at 14:37

Pc's can have hmdi, a lot of mobos are starting to have them.