Any advantage of using displayport over dvi?
- Thread starter zod96
- Start date
Well the only thing I can think of is color depth - DP (and HDMI 1.3) do support 10bit color, can't find any information about DVI - though possibily that duallink DVI supports it too (it'd have enough bandwidth at 1920x1200 at least)
And not to forget you need a GPU that supports 10bit - which I think is limited by both Nvidia/ati to their professional drivers, i.e. you'd have to hack them.
And not to forget you need a GPU that supports 10bit - which I think is limited by both Nvidia/ati to their professional drivers, i.e. you'd have to hack them.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
the differences between display port and DVI are small...
1. display port has higher bandwidth, allowing higher max resolution / color depth / etc. (we are talking about really big resolutions here, for a 1920x1200 DVI is more than enough)
2. display port is an open standard that does not require the manufacturer to pay a licensing fee per port on the device.
3. display port has the capability to be daisy chained, data passthrough, and other creative uses... none of which are currently in use.
thats really it.
1. display port has higher bandwidth, allowing higher max resolution / color depth / etc. (we are talking about really big resolutions here, for a 1920x1200 DVI is more than enough)
2. display port is an open standard that does not require the manufacturer to pay a licensing fee per port on the device.
3. display port has the capability to be daisy chained, data passthrough, and other creative uses... none of which are currently in use.
thats really it.
I like the clicky things on the DisplayPort connector once I realized they were there and stopped trying to rip it out the back of my video card.
MentalIlness
Platinum Member
- Nov 22, 2009
- 2,383
- 11
- 76
Not to thread hijack or anything, but is there any difference between DVI and HDMI ? Resolution at 1920/1080.
Practically speaking, no.
HDMI can also carry audio. Otherwise, electrically equivalent.
mnewsham
Lifer
- Oct 2, 2010
- 14,539
- 428
- 136
No, both have enough bandwidth, HDMI allows audio if it is the right revision.
MentalIlness
Platinum Member
- Nov 22, 2009
- 2,383
- 11
- 76
Its not really the bandwidth I'm asking about. Its about the image quality. Is there much difference in it ?
So if I were to use HDMI to my monitor, I could just use the built in speakers on the monitor ? And switch back to the onboard sound for my Z-5500's ?
So if I were to use HDMI to my monitor, I could just use the built in speakers on the monitor ? And switch back to the onboard sound for my Z-5500's ?
fffblackmage
Platinum Member
- Dec 28, 2007
- 2,548
- 0
- 76
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
They are very very similar, but there are some small differences.
DVI can have single link or dual link. Dual link DVI is just two single links together on one plug (a single link only uses half as many pins). The single link DVI is limited to a lower max res. There is no difference in quality of image, there is a difference in max resolution. Original HDMI (or DVI Single link) has a max resolution of 1,920×1,200 at 60 Hz. HDMI 1.3 increased that to 2,560×1,600. DVI single link is identical to HDMI, DVI dual link has higher max resolution.
An HDMI is always a single link DVI, it cannot be dual link. This allows for a smaller plug as it only needs half as many pins. DVI has an optional analog out pins which HDMI dropped, and HDMI has audio.
Last edited:
and DVI has pins reserved for analog VGA pass-through, hence it's monster size.
Displayport is cool since the cable is so much smaller
nice for using with monitor arms.
Displayport is cool since the cable is so much smaller
nice for using with monitor arms.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
I actually mentioned that.
Also, that was only 4 tiny pins...
it has lots of empty space, lots of pins, and large pins.
I actually mentioned that.
Also, that was only 4 tiny pins...
it has lots of empty space, lots of pins, and large pins.
Actually a third of the connector is that VGA section, it's the one with the big blade pins. And yes I read "analog out" but that didn't click as VGA for me until just now. hehehe...
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
And that "third of the connector" is made up almost entirely of open space.
1 through 24 Digital connections
C1 Analog red
C2 Analog green
C3 Analog blue
C4 Analog horizontal sync
C5 Analog ground (Return for R, G, and B signals)
It should be noted about C5, that even if you don't use the analog pins it is still there.
As you can see on the DVI-D (digital only) plugs, they still have the analog ground megapin (probably for extra grounding, can't harm to have more grounding).
it should be noted it isn't the only ground pin, there are others amongst the small digital pins.
Anyways, the connector is huge and the pins can all be made a lot smaller. There is empty space (those squares look like they fill everything, but in reality it isn't squares, its much smaller). Its not just my theory...
see Micro-DVI and Mini-DVI for proof of just how much that can be compacted. My guess is that its just cheaper to produce a big simple large pin plug than it is those sleek mini ones.
Last edited:
So if I were to use a monitor that was 1920x1200@85hz, I would need to use HDMI correct?
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
no.
Your options are:
HDMI v1.3 +
DVI single link v1.3+
DVI dual link (any version)
Display port
HDMI v1.2 or earlier and DVI v1.2 or earlier are in fact the only connections you can't use for 1920x1200@85hz
Having just switched to a DisplayPort connector on my new video card, I agree with NoQuarter - I like the fact that the DisplayPort plug just clicks in, and you just press the locking button and pull out to remove it. There's no looseness like DVI sometimes has (requiring you to screw down both sides of the plug on both the monitor and PC). It's a much more easy, elegant system.
Picture quality is ostensibly the same, although DisplayPort supports audio just like HDMI does.
Picture quality is ostensibly the same, although DisplayPort supports audio just like HDMI does.
No one has really factored the 'coolness' factor into the equation. I think the correct answer is that displayport is clearly the coolest, raddest kid on the block.
You'll be a bawller for using new, good standards.
But besides from being too legit, DP is really just another way to do the exact same thing.
You'll be a bawller for using new, good standards.
But besides from being too legit, DP is really just another way to do the exact same thing.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
well
1. it is an open royalty free standard. so if it catches on we will see slightly cheaper hardware.
2. it has higher max bandwidth, making it more future proof. (at least for daisy chaining and passing over of other content)
yea, not amazing reasons to get it... but if your monitor already has it...
Last edited:
MustangSVT
Lifer
- Oct 7, 2000
- 11,554
- 12
- 81
My favorite features are:
1.) Can carry other data streams in addition to the video stream, including USB, Firewire, eSATA, etc - meaning you can have a USB hub on your monitor without needing extra cables.
2.) Can drive an LCD panel directly, simplifying monitors and making them cheaper, thinner and lighter by removing the controller from the monitor and letting the GPU do it.
3.) Royalty free, right now everyone who includes an HDMI port or DVI port has to pay a royalty fee, increasing the cost to us.
4.) Can daisy chain or hub DisplayPort monitors, letting you connect more monitors from a single port or monitors to each other.
5.) Doesn't require a clock generator for each output, saving die space on GPUs that can be used for more shaders.
Course none of these features matter right now but they can in the future if DP catches on.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
3 = my 1
1 & 4 = my 2
But you do go more in depth...
also I completely forgot about #2, &5 so thank you for correcting me.
#2 is really nice, thinner and lighter is always a win.
#5 actually does get used today. The AMD 6 port cards (6 display ports)
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desk...-5870-eyefinity-6-edition/Pages/overview.aspx
I don't know if they could have even made one with 6 outputs without using display port.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter