Just out of curiosity - what is the point of DVI ports? Why not standardize on DP & HDMI? How many standards do we need?
Correct because the current standard is HDMI. I had trouble finding a video card in 2019 that had DVI. Low end models had them but mid range was lacking.Most graphics cards don't have DVI these days. However, cheap mobos may not have DP and instead go with HDMI, D-Sub or DVI ports.
I also have a couple of old 30" 2560x1600 dual link DVI in the office. They are still great, and I like the 16:10 ratio for office work (taller than 16:9).Correct because the current standard is HDMI. I had trouble finding a video card in 2019 that had DVI. Low end models had them but mid range was lacking.
Point being DVI was fine for its time and that is why it exists, low end stuff still has DVI because there is a strong chance it will be plugged into an old display. Expensive cards will almost certainly be plugged into something with HDMI.
Yeah I know, I just don't like adaptors. Sucks to have a problem and you do all sorts of stuff to fix it then you remember there is an adaptor and its probably loose. I like to avoid stuff like that as much as possible.I also have a couple of old 30" 2560x1600 dual link DVI in the office. They are still great, and I like the 16:10 ratio for office work (taller than 16:9).
I was able to get a DP to dual link DVI adapter, that is powered by USB to generate the signal. Another, new option is, there is a similar adapter out there that takes the video from USB4 DisplayPort Alt-mode and generates dual link DVI output.
Yeah I know, I just don't like adaptors. Sucks to have a problem and you do all sorts of stuff to fix it then you remember there is an adaptor and its probably loose. I like to avoid stuff like that as much as possible.
Been very happy with my Acer(?) 1050 monitor but its time has come.
Yeah I know, I just don't like adaptors. Sucks to have a problem and you do all sorts of stuff to fix it then you remember there is an adaptor and its probably loose. I like to avoid stuff like that as much as possible.
Been very happy with my Acer(?) 1050 monitor but its time has come.
Have you thought of putting that thing on the National Historic registry?Been very happy with my Acer(?) 1050 monitor but its time has come.
HDMI is DVI with a different plug/socket design. The electrical signalling is the exact same up to 1200p. DVI doesn't do above that, except in dual link mode. But that isn't used much today. That's why there are cheap HDMI-to-DVI (and reverse) adaptors.Just out of curiosity - what is the point of DVI ports? Why not standardize on DP & HDMI? How many standards do we need?
I still have several monitors that have VGA ports. In my triple monitor setup, one of the monitors is using Dual Link DVI right now. It's all based on what video connections you have on your computer or GPU. At the end of this week. I will be exclusively Display Port on my triple monitor setup.Im scared to even ask the OP how old he is to not remember DVI.
It wasn't that long ago, or is it that we all here that know it are just too old.
I still have several monitors that have VGA ports. In my triple monitor setup, one of the monitors is using Dual Link DVI right now. It's all based on what video connections you have on your computer or GPU. At the end of this week. I will be exclusively Display Port on my triple monitor setup.
I still have a 25ft VGA cord with a 3.5mm sound cable built in.
DVI as a video connection is perfect for what it is. I have never had a problem with any monitor using DVI. It's always been extremely reliable. The only problem is the limitations of the standard. I think 60hz is all you get but the resolution can go up to 2k (1440p) with a dual link connection.
One of my 32" 1440p 144hz monitors is on DVI. Max hz is 60. I am glad to be going full DP later this week. I used DVI because my 1660super had a DP, HDMI and DVI connections. So I had to use all three different connections. I will not miss the DVI connection simply because the cable is super thick. On a single monitor setup, I am more than happy to use DVI to this day.Yeah. Not being able to increase frequencies, and instead having to go to dual link is less than ideal design, that ended up not being fully supported, and ended up a bit of an orphan.
I am able to get 2560x1600 at 60 Hz. But from a modern card, without DVI, I have to use an adapter, which is less than ideal. Gives me a bit of a flicker during the boot time. Also, the card detecting resolution of the monitor, gang through the adapter is not fool proof.
We did use active 3D stereo (NVidia 3D Vision) on workstations (Quadro and Linux). 120 Hz at 1080p via dual link DVI. The HDMI of the time had no support for that, IIRC.DVI as a video connection is perfect for what it is. I have never had a problem with any monitor using DVI. It's always been extremely reliable. The only problem is the limitations of the standard. I think 60hz is all you get but the resolution can go up to 2k (1440p) with a dual link connection.
Still using that or switched to some VR solution?There was Sony TV (last generation with 3D support) and for that the "HDMI 3D" was the only option. A 59.9 Hz mess, but "mess or no stereo" were the choices.
In a classroom. We have about dozen pairs of Sony active shutter glasses for it (unless stolen).Still using that or switched to some VR solution?
HDMI is DVI with a different plug/socket design. The electrical signalling is the exact same up to 1200p. DVI doesn't do above that, except in dual link mode. But that isn't used much today. That's why there are cheap HDMI-to-DVI (and reverse) adaptors.
Fun fact; the HDMI standard actually provides an option for dual link with the Type B connector. It's just that it was never used.
Not yet, still looks & works well. Over the years I have acquired a stuck pixel however it’s in the upper right of the screen. I can’t think of the last time I noticed it.Have you thought of putting that thing on the National Historic registry?
They realize that lots of people have no interest in upgrading from ancient PCs when their daily use isn't pushing them too hard. My main work PC (few browser tabs, Outlook Web, few Excel sheets) is still i5-2500 with 16GB RAM and 750GB SSD on Win7.A basic HP monitor I picked up two years ago was just dp, hdmi and vga.
I think VGA is an open standard thus no payments to a body that owns the standard.I've been suprised at how vga has outlasted dvi and will soon hdmi as well. A basic HP monitor I picked up two years ago was just dp, hdmi and vga.
Many many many server boards and intigrated components also still use VGA.I think VGA is an open standard thus no payments to a body that owns the standard.
Not an expert but I sort of remember reading that somewhere.
yup yup love me some burn in!In ideal monitor, you would want OLED,