Need help: Is HDMI really better than Analog PC monitor cable?

[tron3]

I already spent a few dollars on an analog pc monitor cable so I could use both my tv's for the pc.

However, my monitor card had DVI outputs and the TV's have HDMI inputs. My question is, will there be ANY NOTICEABLE difference in picture quality?

It already looks great, but will it help with gaming, etc? Or would it just be more money wasted for DVI to HDMI converters?

[crackinhedz]

$12 is not wasted money! its money well spent.

the only real difference is the analog cables are more susceptible to interference...but even then how much does the picture degrade? ...i mean you already think it looks great. but for twelve dollars, it couldnt hurt to try.

[discipline]

You will definately get a better picture with digital HDMI cable than with an analog monitor cable!

[CptGreedle]

It is better, plus it supports HD sound and HD picture, in one cable, not just the picture.

[crackinhedz]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

It is better, plus it supports HD sound and HD picture, in one cable, not just the picture.

hdmi does, the dvi output does not...would need additional audio cables.

[tron3]

Ya know, I always wanted to use the DVI outputs for my video card. I already have 3 HDMI cables sitting around doing nothing.

I just bought 3 adaptors off ebay for under 12 bucks shipped.

[york weir]

I was under the assumption that HDMI and DVI are identical in quality, just HDMI carries audio as well. Am I confused about the premise of this thread?

[tron3]

Originally Posted by york weir

I was under the assumption that HDMI and DVI are identical in quality, just HDMI carries audio as well. Am I confused about the premise of this thread?

You are correct, that and HDMI is a smaller connection. However, the newer HDMI specs may carry more bandwidth as well.

What doesn't make sense to me is the analog PC connector lives on in HDTV but DVI does not. Meanwhile, new video cards and stand alone PC monitors all have DVI. Someone dropped the ball.

[jorg]

Originally Posted by crackinhedz

hdmi does, the dvi output does not...would need additional audio cables.

unless hes running some of the newer ati/amb card which support audio threw dvi

[ceberhart]

I have never been able to tell a difference between my DVI and VGA on my pc's... I do LOVE HDMI but because of the sound and video in one cable. If HDMI was just DVI (I mean no sound) I wouldn't like it.... You can get a video card that does HDMI with sound... there is no putting sound through DVI....

[Allin4greeN]

Analog remains, IMO, a more reliable connection for almost anything A/V related. I'm using VGA and 5.1 multichannel analog audio for connecting a PC into my HT. Both PQ and AQ is excellent.

[Cory108]

Originally Posted by Allin4greeN

Analog remains, IMO, a more reliable connection for almost anything A/V related. I'm using VGA and 5.1 multichannel analog audio for connecting a PC into my HT. Both PQ and AQ is excellent.

What??? Pure Digital = Best PQ

I have never heard of a digital connection going bad or not working properly that wasn't the fault of the user.

[highdefw]

No Matter Wut, Digital Will Always Be Better Than Analog.

[tron3]

Originally Posted by highdefw

No Matter Wut, Digital Will Always Be Better Than Analog.

Tonight my adapters came and I put that to the test. The resolution is so sharp on my primary 19" Sharp HDTV/monitor that I saw obvious banding in my blu-ray wall paper. Plus there was overscan of the picture which I could not fix with any pc or tv menu options. In short, the image was bigger than the screen and I could not see the edges.

My 26" Vizio on the other hand looks great in hdmi so it stays. The softer pc connection stays on my primary 19" Sharp. Oh well, at least now all my cables are black.

[U4K61]

Use a DVI to HDMI cable. If you use the 15 pin analogue VGA D connector that most PCs have, you will be doing a D/A from the PC out, and then an A/D at the TV. Each D/A or A/D is a lossy conversion, adding softness and ghosting. I saw this on my own set. Switching over to HDMI form component analogue resulted in a significant increase of detail in dark ares of the picture. I am sold on HDMI. Many laud the MAC because they were quick out of the gate with digital. HDMI FAQ.

Sorces have it that PCs will eventually have an HDMI port, a big step forward in getting rid of the rats nest of cables for audio/video.

Originally Posted by dadkins

I sure hope that's sarcasm... this machine nearly 2 years old:

Got the heads up.

What is of intrest is how well analogue carries a signal having an Extended gamut xvYCC color, and deep color. I pretend not to see it, but I have always noticed banding in my movies. Goes along side of wanting a 5:5 120Hz (24x5) set to get fid of film judder.

[dadkins]

Originally Posted by Craig Ruchman

Sorces have it that PCs will eventually have an HDMI port, a big step forward in getting rid of the rats nest of cables for audio/video.

I sure hope that's sarcasm... this machine nearly 2 years old:

[welwynnick]

There's not much wrong with VGA if the interfaces, cables and connectors are done properly, and it still has the advantage of being a more mature well-developed interface.

For example, VGA ports have accepted 1080p24 and 1080p60 video for a long time, while most HDMI interfaces are still only just catching up. VGA has long been able to run at 2560x1600p60, and do it over significant distances as well. That's a challenge for HDMI.

Analogue interfaces are also more likely to support native video formats. HDMI often supports just 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p, but those are not always the native formats of either the sources and displays that we are trying to connect. That means additional, unnecessary processing is used, and that almost always degrades quality to some extent. This is quite significant with video processors, and you can often get a better result using analogue interfaces instead of hdmi because of system level cosiderations.

Many analogue problems are often down to poor, cheap cables, but then that has applied to hdmi as well. It's just that analogue is a bit more graceful in degradation.

I've got to say that digital isn't better than analogue just because it's digital. Digital implementations get things wrong as well as analogue; they are just different things. It makes sense to use hdmi for most connections these days, but that doesn't mean its always the best way. There was never much wrong with VGA, i-link, SDI or DVI that needed replacing, but they are being replaced, and I for one am not really jumping up and down about it, as you can tell.

Nick

[hazydave]

Originally Posted by tron3

You are correct, that and HDMI is a smaller connection. However, the newer HDMI specs may carry more bandwidth as well.

Well, basically, there's the concept of DVI link channels... a normal DVI connector can handle two links, but doesn't always. A single DVI link is good for up to around 1920x1200, give or take depending on refresh rate. HDMI is faster per link, and while there's an HDMI dual link option, that's very rare. Rather, the HDMI 1.3 spec (which includes a smaller connector, but doesn't mandate it -- most HDMI 1.3 stuff uses the same HDMI connector as before) supports much faster bitrates on a single channel, as well as extended colorspace. I think it's pretty much the way of the future... DVI was designed to look a bit backwards, what with the analog support (DVI supports the same basic analog RGB as a VGA connector, but it's a cleaner design, so you'll lose less using DVI, even if for some reason you want analog).

Originally Posted by tron3

What doesn't make sense to me is the analog PC connector lives on in HDTV but DVI does not. Meanwhile, new video cards and stand alone PC monitors all have DVI. Someone dropped the ball.

No, it's an evolution thing. DVI was there first, but it's hardly a DVI-only world. I have a graphics card with dual DVI outputs, true, but my laptop and both of my Westinghouse LM2010 monitors support HDMI inputs. It's pretty easy to get a DVI to HDMI cable. True, you won't get audio out of DVI, but it's rare that it's ever a good idea to have sound coming out of your video device. Yeah, my monitors do have speakers in them, but first thing I did was mute those... my computer audio runs through a Samson mixer to a studio amp and some decent speakers. You could make a case for HDMI outs on a PC, though it would require video cards to start worrying about audio, and I'd rather let nVidia do my video card and Tascam do my audio, thanks.

[Cordre69]

Yeah, I use optical out of my Audigy Platinum and DVI-HDMI out of my 8800GTX to my 60" HDTV. Bioshock is rad in 1080p =D
Also, it's really awesome being able to lounge on my couch with my Wacom and sketch in Photoshop.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

It is better, plus it supports HD sound and HD picture, in one cable, not just the picture.

That's not the case for PC - you only get Video through the HDMI no audio.