Significant difference in using VGA connection over DVI connection?

Martingale00

Martingale00

New Member
Hi, I am looking at this 7600GS here and it has a DVI connector and a VGA connector. I have the DVI-VGA adapter so I can use either one. Is there a difference in image quality by using the VGA port? Thanks.
 
DVI has more potential bandwidth but then there is the argument of digital versus analog, and so forth. CRTs still have some advantages over digital displays, with things like true black and color blending.

Really it comes down to a preference IMHO.
 
Yeah I have a DVI monitor and an old school LCD I could use with this set up, I think I'll use the DVI monitor and the DVI connection. I wanted to save that monitor for a dual monitor set up on another computer but I think I want the image quality. Thanks everyone.
 
tlarkin said:
but then there is the argument of digital versus analog, and so forth.
Click to expand...

Digital vs. analog argument?

Please..... enlighten me.

Seeing as how both dvi and VGA BOTH begin with a digital signal, i'd be curious just what argument you're referring to, exactly.
 
heyman421 said:
Digital vs. analog argument?

Please..... enlighten me.

Seeing as how both dvi and VGA BOTH begin with a digital signal, i'd be curious just what argument you're referring to, exactly.
Click to expand...

okay....first refer to these two things

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VGA

Digital displays can not display true black, because of a latency issue with how the technology works. So instead they display a dark grey (which appears black, but is not true black). This also effects contrast ratios. A dvi cable is able to pump out like 160Mhz signal, which is more bandwidth than a svga (vga) cable. Digital displays are more advanced these days, however, CRT technology will make a come back because it still has its advantages over digital. SED displays will be coming out maybe this year in asia and everywhere next year.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display

Digital versus analog has been a heated debate. Just talk to a Sr. Grahpic Designer that still uses high end CRT monitors to do design work.

I don't really care about one or the other but I acknowledge the differences between them and the advantages each has to offer. I still have a 20" CRT that rocks, so I haven't bothered getting rid of it.
 
Okay, I just put the thing in and loaded it up and wouldn't ya know it's a 7300GS not a 7600GS. It was in a 7600GS box. :rolleyes: The best part is I bought it at a going out of business sale with no returns so I just spent $120 for a 7300GS...lucky me.
 
heyman421 said:
Digital vs. analog argument?

Please..... enlighten me.

Seeing as how both dvi and VGA BOTH begin with a digital signal, i'd be curious just what argument you're referring to, exactly.
Click to expand...

It's the fact that a CRT converts the signal to analog to display it, while DVI on an LCD is completely digital. There is always going to be some signal loss when you're converting.
 
not to mention the video card has to convert from digital to analog just so that your analog monitor has to convert it BACK at the other end.

It's quite hard for me to believe that much of any benefit you gain by using an analog display device isn't lost during TWO conversions, and a lossier cable.
 
tlarkin said:
CRTs have faster response time, better color blending, better aspect ratios, and can display true black
Click to expand...
Better aspect ratios?

Granted CRT's do have quicker response times then most, but they do make LCD's with the same response time as CRT's (2ms), they also have much higher contrast ratios, much brighter, and can have widescreen formats. Not to mention they are smaller, lighter, use less power, and are MUCH easier on the eyes since they dont have a refresh rate.
 
sorry no coffee yet, I meant contrast ratio

CRTs have 1ms response time and can display true black. That is why the technology is making a come back
 
elitehacker said:
Yeah that is why nearly ALL graphics cards have a dual DVI output now.
Click to expand...

Cathode Ray Tubes have their benefits, which is why a new display technology is coming out soon called SED. It will combine CRT technology with high def digital. These displays are thin, weigh next to nothing compared to a CRT, and will have a gun for each pixel. They are going to be very nice I think, but we will have to wait and see.
 
tlarkin said:
sorry no coffee yet, I meant contrast ratio

CRTs have 1ms response time and can display true black. That is why the technology is making a come back
Click to expand...
What do you mean making a comeback? From what I've seen, CRT's are still around the $100 range for a crappy 17-19", and very few stores actually have a variety of them, pretty much everyone is getting LCD's.

And are you sure about the 1ms? I heard that CRT's have a response time of 2ms.
 
I still prefer my CRT over a LCD. The 2ms response time quoted is not Black to white, it is most likely grey to grey response time.
 
[-0MEGA-];607262 said:
What do you mean making a comeback? From what I've seen, CRT's are still around the $100 range for a crappy 17-19", and very few stores actually have a variety of them, pretty much everyone is getting LCD's.

And are you sure about the 1ms? I heard that CRT's have a response time of 2ms.
Click to expand...

did you not read any of the links I posted earlier?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SED_display

http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/sed_tvs.htm

Basically the next line of high def displays will be based on CRT technology. This time instead of having one electron gun for the whole screen, it will have 1 gun for each pixel, this also allows the screen to be thinner because before the gun had to be far back enough to target the whole screen area. Now you will get the benefits of having a 1ms response time, a true black:white contrast ratio (where digital displays usually have gray:gray).

Digital is able to hold more bandwidth but at the same time has its limits. So, lets say for example you are displaying a resolution at 1280x1024 @75hz so you would need a cable that could handle just under 100Mhz to be able to accurately display the video from the source on your monitor. A standard DVI cable does like 167Mhz bandwidth. That is DVI-D I think...not 100% on that. So that right there will most likely keep the DVI connection alive. DVI-I does both analog and digital through that same cable, so DVI is not always a pure digital signal.

My argument was and still is, CRTs have their advantages over their digital counter-parts. Digital technology is limiting in some ways, especially latency with display true black. That is why SED may be the next new standard in technology. There was a lawsuit that stopped the production of this technology for a while, but last I read it is back on schedule they are going to start producing them this year. So I imagine they will come out in Asia first (japan and HK) and possibly the US in 2008. I was going to buy a new HD display myself this year but am holding off until this comes out mainly because with a true black display, and a 1ms response time I could feasibly game on it from my PC and it would look bad ass. Even though you can do that with HD displays now, it still doesn't look as good as an actual monitor IMO. If the cost is going to be comparable and in some cases cheaper its worth the wait IMO. I don't need a nice TV anyways at the moment I don't even have cable TV nor have I had cable in years. If I got a nice TV I would get cable and build a DVR box, and then I'd watch more TV...so ya I am just going to wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top