DVI-D cable vs DVI-D to HDMI (female) Adapter + HDMI cable: any real difference?

[OgiD]

Hi!

I have an old (maybe not that old) monitor that has support 1 VGA and 1 DVI-D Dual Link connections.

I just bought a RX 480 that has 1 DVI-D, 2 HDMI and 2 Displayport outputs.

My question is: is there a real difference in signal quality and/or "transmission" time between using 1 DVI-D cable or using 1 adapter + 1 cable (be it DVI-D to HDMI + HDMI cable or DVI-D to Displayport + Displayport Cable)?

Thank you!

P.S.: the difference I'm talking about is only related to video, for I know that DVI-D doesn't carry audio signal.

 

[grmnlxndr]

Just go with DVI-D. I think that using that much adaptors will degrade quality.

Regards

 

[OgiD]

it would be just 1 adapter (DVI-D to HDMI), so I could use the HDMI cable that I've already got. Even so?

 

[Quaiden]

I actually prefer to use the DVI-D to HDMI converter on my GFX card as apposed to using the HDMI slot on the card as the HDMI slot on the card never becomes active until windows starts to boot. So with the converter I get the ability to use my TV as my primary monitor for my computer. There is no noticeable signal loss using a converter to go from DVI-D to HDMI. The bigger issue for signal loss is how long your cable is. If you are on a 6ft or less cable after the adapter then you will have insignificant loss of signal.

 

[ShadyHamster]

It will be fine.
The added latency would be so minimal you would never notice it.

And about audio over DVI, unless things have changed recently, AMD has supported audio over DVI since at least the HD3000 series.

 

[OgiD]

And in the hypothesis of getting an adapter. Do these work with signals in both ways?

In my case: GPU > HDMI cable > Adapter > Monitor

 

[OgiD]

K, I was going to buy the adapter when I found another store close to my work that sold DVI-D to DVI-D cable. Problem solved, but I hope the thread might be useful to someone else some time.

Thank you!