| Re: Monitor [message #365966 is a reply to message #365958] |
Sun, 04 January 2009 13:19   |
dr3w2
Messages: 485
Registered: September 2006
Location: Ottawa,Canada
Karma:
|
Commander |
|
|
| CarrierII wrote on Sun, 04 January 2009 13:35 |
| Muad Dib15 wrote on Sat, 03 January 2009 15:09 |
whats wrong with using vga as opposed to dvi if it works just fine?
|
There's a, very slight, loss of quality. Infact, given the quality of his hardware, and probable quality of cabling, he wouldn't notice, but using digital monitors on VGA inputs can worsen the quality, it's to do with the digital --> analogue conversion, so the signal is in a format the cable can carry, but when the signal gets to the monitor, it requires a digital signal, so it does analogue --> digital conversion. This latter conversion can produce errors, which would manifest as artifacts. It probably wouldn't happen, but DVI is the better interface for digital monitors, that's why it exists.
|
Yup. And personally I do see no difference in quality... im sure some people do, but IDK maybe i dont bother to pay enough detail into things like that. The real issue for me is the lack of use on my VGA for secondary displays  And also like i said, if I buy a product want to make sure all aspects of it work so in the future its there if i need it. If the monitor is defective, and i go build a new desktop in a few months ( most new video cards are dvi only, are they not? )and i find out the monitor doesn't work im screwed. Only a few more days till I can swap it 
n00bstories Server Administrator
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
