Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Display Port or.....

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 3:19:20 AM

I have a video card that has a Display port , a DVI-I port , a DVI-D port and a HDMI port that will be connected to a 30" monitor at 2560x1600. The audio will be seperate and there will only be the one monitor so no multiple monitors. What would be the best connection cable for this video card and monitor. Is Display port better than HDMI , I know for multiple displays it is but what about a single display. I feel that HDMI and DVI are the same and I have never used Display Port so that's the question. Right now it's connected by DVI-D.

More about : display port

September 25, 2012 3:22:10 AM

I thought HDMI couldn't output 2560x1600 resolution?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 25, 2012 3:26:22 AM

HDMI, DVI, and Display port are all digital and are all capable of 2560x1600. Take your pick. There shouldn't be any difference in your picture quality.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 3:53:30 AM

BigMack70 said:
I thought HDMI couldn't output 2560x1600 resolution?



HDMI 1.3 and later can support 2560x1600 , HDMI 1.4 can support up to 3840x2400 so there is no restricion with HDMI.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 25, 2012 4:03:44 AM

I would use DVI-D or DP whenever possible...

Not sure on the technical side of it but I know HDMI has a tiny amount of lag, not that I really notice it... although its quite noticeable when you play audio from it and line out at the same time...not sure if that's connected...

They are all the same to me, but can't hurt to use the cables with higher bandwidth..
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 4:08:47 AM

only problem I ever have with HDMI is that it is unsecureable, which means that if you are like me and move your monitor left/rgiht/up/down a lot then it tends to come loose and fall out. It doesn't hurt anything, but kinda annoying.
m
0
l
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 4:23:30 AM

It's said that Display Port has higher bandwidth then both DVI and HDMI , almost double it would seem and I'm wondering if that's for multiple displays or perhaps it can be for produceing a better picture.
At this point I think HDMI is out and it's basicly between DVI-D and Display Port.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 25, 2012 4:31:49 AM

Yea I would guess that display port is the best overall, wouldn't suprise me, its the newer tech by nearly 10 years....

Don't think you would see much difference on todays resolutions but may be more important in the future with 4k etc..
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 115 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 4:33:28 AM

inzone said:
I have a video card that has a Display port , a DVI-I port , a DVI-D port and a HDMI port that will be connected to a 30" monitor at 2560x1600. The audio will be seperate and there will only be the one monitor so no multiple monitors. What would be the best connection cable for this video card and monitor. Is Display port better than HDMI , I know for multiple displays it is but what about a single display. I feel that HDMI and DVI are the same and I have never used Display Port so that's the question. Right now it's connected by DVI-D.


Hey there, I have a 30 inch IPS panel at 2560x1600 so I can speak authoritatively on this

You cannot use HDMI or Single-Link DVI to drive full colour resolutions higher than 1920x1200. HDMI should work for 24bit colour (true colour) but your display usually won't support it; My u3011 doesn't. You must use DisplayPort or Dual-Link DVI for your display.

DisplayPort has the advantage of having a thinner cable and being able to carry audio to in-display speakers or to an onboard mux and DAC for 3.5mm output. DisplayPort support is still a bit touchy in the drivers and you may find a few anomalies when you turn the display on and off.

Dual-Link DVI is more mature and is what I recommend as it also frees up the DisplayPort connector for a compatible laptop. Please note that while many Laptops will have a Dual-Link DVI-I output, they may only be wired for single link.
Share
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 6:46:10 AM

DP isn't any better for multi monitor setups btw. The only reason to think that is AMD on their cards attached one of the display outputs to the DP REQUIRING you to use it. As a digital out it should be no different then DVI/HDMI.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 25, 2012 1:26:33 PM

the whole idea of digital is that it is... well... digital. It says 'pixel 1 is color x, pixel 2 is color y' etc. Therefore there is literally no difference in image quality moving from one digital connector to another for most things.

What is different is the capability of the standard: Having extra bandwidth enables the capability to run higher frame rates (120-240Hz monitors instead of your standard 60), higher resolution screens (though HDMI can do just about everything except 8K which is not really available yet), and better support for extras like audio streams and 3D (which again, HDMI does well).

For pro cards the higher bandwidth enables the throughput of 10bit color (compared to a gamer card that is 8bits per color). Keep in mind though that games are made in 8bit colors, and most displays show less than 8bit color (especially TN displays), so there is no point to having that extra color range unless you have an image to display that has it, and if the monitor supports it as well... and again, at most resolutions HDMI can do this just fine, it is only an issue with really big screens. Keep in mind that this is 8bit per color, which in windows is 24bit, compared to 10bit per color, which in windows is 30bit. My background is in video where color bit depth is measured per color, where OS systems measure color as a sum-total. And by the way: If you have the equipment to do 10bit color... OMG, it is sooo freaking beautiful!

HDMI does have a little more overhead to decode the signal on the monitor before displaying, but it is a very short time, and much faster than 1 frame change at 120
Hz, so if you think you notice it, it is because it is all in your head.

Generally speaking: you offer extra ports on the back of a computer so that the consumer has more connectivity options for monitors, or (in the case of Apple in specific) in order to sell expensive adapters. Simply use what is available, and so long as it is not VGA/HD15 then you will never know the difference.
m
0
l
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
September 25, 2012 1:40:19 PM

HDMI, currently is poor for 3D, because of bandwidth issues, it limits you to 24/30hz at 1080p. The same issue applies to 1600p, while it supports it, it limits you to 30hz. The same might apply to 1600p. I guess it depends on the cable and connection of your monitor, as to whether 1600p can support 60hz.

This will change, and there is a standard in place (1.4a does not support it yet, it is newer), but until then, HDMI 3D for computer gaming.
m
0
l
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 28, 2012 4:10:19 PM

I guess I should have benn somewhat clearer in my original post after reading all the responses that I got.
My only interest here is quality of display.
I have all of the cables and some are after market top quality like the DVI-D cable is of very high quality. I have HDMI cable , display port cable and even HDMI to DVI cable and most af them came with something that was purchased.
I'm not into 3D gaming and don't know if that will ever be an option. The other thing that I did forget to mention is that the HP monitor I have does not have a HDMI port. I guess they figured that with no built in speakers there is no need for HDMI. So that leads me to believe that HDMI and DVI are similar enough to not need one of the connectors. However it does have the Display Port and that made me question the difference.
I have now run the monitor in both Display Port and DVI-D and see no difference in regular use, I'm going to try some gaming with both to see if there is any difference and I'm starting to think that there will not be any.
m
0
l
a c 115 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 28, 2012 4:45:06 PM

inzone said:
I guess I should have benn somewhat clearer in my original post after reading all the responses that I got.
My only interest here is quality of display.
I have all of the cables and some are after market top quality like the DVI-D cable is of very high quality. I have HDMI cable , display port cable and even HDMI to DVI cable and most af them came with something that was purchased.
I'm not into 3D gaming and don't know if that will ever be an option. The other thing that I did forget to mention is that the HP monitor I have does not have a HDMI port. I guess they figured that with no built in speakers there is no need for HDMI. So that leads me to believe that HDMI and DVI are similar enough to not need one of the connectors. However it does have the Display Port and that made me question the difference.
I have now run the monitor in both Display Port and DVI-D and see no difference in regular use, I'm going to try some gaming with both to see if there is any difference and I'm starting to think that there will not be any.


Digital signals are digital, they either get there intact or they don't. High quality cables are only necessary when the cable is longer than the specification allows for (eg, 50 foot HDMI cables), or when it's going through a harsh environment like a wall.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 29, 2012 11:38:27 AM

Pinhedd said:
Digital signals are digital, they either get there intact or they don't. High quality cables are only necessary when the cable is longer than the specification allows for (eg, 50 foot HDMI cables), or when it's going through a harsh environment like a wall.

ironically a wall is a wonderfully protected environment where even a cheap cable can last well for years and years. A harsh environment would be a place where the cat chews on it, or if you are running a long cable parallel to a power line that has florescent lights, etc.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 29, 2012 11:47:27 AM

inzone said:
I guess I should have benn somewhat clearer in my original post after reading all the responses that I got.
My only interest here is quality of display.
I have all of the cables and some are after market top quality like the DVI-D cable is of very high quality. I have HDMI cable , display port cable and even HDMI to DVI cable and most af them came with something that was purchased.
I'm not into 3D gaming and don't know if that will ever be an option. The other thing that I did forget to mention is that the HP monitor I have does not have a HDMI port. I guess they figured that with no built in speakers there is no need for HDMI. So that leads me to believe that HDMI and DVI are similar enough to not need one of the connectors. However it does have the Display Port and that made me question the difference.
I have now run the monitor in both Display Port and DVI-D and see no difference in regular use, I'm going to try some gaming with both to see if there is any difference and I'm starting to think that there will not be any.

How about you give us information that we can actually be helpful to you with:
1) GPU model
2) Monitor model
3) Software being used
4) If doing productivity work, what is the color depth of the cameras you are using?

Typically, a monitor manufacturer will not give you connectors for your monitor that will not work with it

consumer GPUs (Radeon, GeForce) are limited to 8bit color, as are the games that are designed to be used with them
pro GPUs (FirePro, Quadro) are designed for 10bit color, as are the softwares designed to be used with them (Adobe Suites, CAD/CAM, etc.)
That extra bit depth at high resolution, and 120Hz monitor may make things like HDMI a bad choice, but unless we know exactly what you are doing there is no definitive answer, and for 99% of the people out there, digital is simply digital. You plug it in, and the monitor decodes and displays the signal, and there is no signal degregation at all unless the bandwidth of the interface gets maxed out... which is really really hard to do.
m
0
l
a c 115 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 29, 2012 4:08:46 PM

CaedenV said:
ironically a wall is a wonderfully protected environment where even a cheap cable can last well for years and years. A harsh environment would be a place where the cat chews on it, or if you are running a long cable parallel to a power line that has florescent lights, etc.


Walls can also have a lot of nasty corners, sharp objects, nails, and other crap. Walls that are made with metal frames need extra care
m
0
l
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 29, 2012 4:47:32 PM

Walls can't be that bad. Office's have tons of cables running through them.
m
0
l
a c 115 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 29, 2012 9:36:03 PM

4745454b said:
Walls can't be that bad. Office's have tons of cables running through them.


Right. Those cables are mostly all Cat3/5/6 cables which are unshielded and designed to span long distances, coaxial which is heavily shielded and designed to span long distances, or stiff unshielded copper wiring. Most of these cables have between 2 and 8 individually insulated conductors whereas HDMI has 19. Stretching, bending, twisting, length, and shielding all have different impacts on the electrical properties of a signal so it's wise to use the right one. If you want to run an HDMI cable over a long distance you must use one that has thicker conductors.
m
0
l
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2012 3:54:20 AM

2801242,16,912420 said:
How about you give us information that we can actually be helpful to you with:
1) GPU model
2) Monitor model
3) Software being used
4) If doing productivity work, what is the color depth of the cameras you are using?

This information has been available in this thread, as far as hardware goes all you have to so is look at my sig. and as far as software goes I did say I was going to ues both cables in gaming so that should have ruled out any productivity since I would have also tried out the cables in that area also.
m
0
l
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 25, 2012 2:57:33 AM

Pinhedd said:
Hey there, I have a 30 inch IPS panel at 2560x1600 so I can speak authoritatively on this

You cannot use HDMI or Single-Link DVI to drive full colour resolutions higher than 1920x1200. HDMI should work for 24bit colour (true colour) but your display usually won't support it; My u3011 doesn't. You must use DisplayPort or Dual-Link DVI for your display.

DisplayPort has the advantage of having a thinner cable and being able to carry audio to in-display speakers or to an onboard mux and DAC for 3.5mm output. DisplayPort support is still a bit touchy in the drivers and you may find a few anomalies when you turn the display on and off.

Dual-Link DVI is more mature and is what I recommend as it also frees up the DisplayPort connector for a compatible laptop. Please note that while many Laptops will have a Dual-Link DVI-I output, they may only be wired for single link.



This answer is probably as close to the answer for my question as is possible given that I eventually found my answer in the specifications of my video card. Whether it's totaly accurate or not the video card spec's is saying that in order to connect to a 30" display with a 2560x1600 resolution I should be using a dual link DVI cable. I did try the Display Port and it worked but since the video card is recomending the DVI-D then that answers my question.
m
0
l
a c 253 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 25, 2012 2:59:24 AM

Best answer selected by inzone.
m
0
l
a c 115 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
October 25, 2012 3:31:35 AM

inzone said:
This answer is probably as close to the answer for my question as is possible given that I eventually found my answer in the specifications of my video card. Whether it's totaly accurate or not the video card spec's is saying that in order to connect to a 30" display with a 2560x1600 resolution I should be using a dual link DVI cable. I did try the Display Port and it worked but since the video card is recomending the DVI-D then that answers my question.


Glad it worked out for you. The only technical advantage that DisplayPort has over DL-DVI-D is that it can carry audio and be daisy chained to another display. Driver support for DL-DVI-D is better though and causes less problems.
m
0
l
!