Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

when is a cable not a cable - when it's a DVI-D

<< < (2/3) > >>

4wd:
See the edit I added above - you'll probably find the cable you bought was DVI-D Single Link.

Wikipedia has a decent DVIw explanation.

I'm surprised that cables are so rubbish over such small distances. I thought the "digitalness" would be more capable.
-nudone (August 19, 2011, 03:36 AM)
--- End quote ---

I've been caught out many times, usually with USB cables, (some are just so crap they won't work past a meter).

nudone:
Well, that's the thing, I wasn't awake enough to spot the original item description only stating 1920 x 1200, but I did make sure it said dual link - this is the item's title on ebay "3M DVI-D Male to DVI-D 25 Pin Dual Link Gold Cable Lead".

I did wonder if I was missing something obvious so I did check if there was any physical difference between the the two cables and they both look identical in connection socket terms. I've just taken a (bad) photo to show that the black plug cable looks like a normal dual link - I've several single link cables which do look different (less pins, just as wikipedia mentions).



Note the number of pins are the same, width of "flat" pin is the same (these can be different depending on spec of cable). Only difference I see is that the green socket cable (the 2m working cable) has a slightly thicker cable than the 3m black socket cable.

lotusrootstarch:
How about getting an HDMI 1.4 cable with DVI adapter? Wouldn't it be a more future-proof investment than getting a "monolithic" DVI cable? just a thought.

I have a feeling that we won't be seeing a high-end gfx card with onboard DVI in a few years.

nudone:
Maybe - but again, I've no confidence in these things working. To me, it seems reasonable to expect DVI-D "dual link" to work - the specification says it does, beyond higher resolutions of 2560 x 1600. I don't expect magic cables to be required to make it work. If things are so different in the high res world then they ought to make the sockets on the monitor completely different to avoid confusion with the non magical DVI-D socket (call it DVI-D triple link or something).

Future-proofind may be an issue for me later. But I expect it will be the same old nonsense. The HDMI cable will say it works - but it won't work beyond 2 meters unless it's only at 1920 x 1080.

I mean, this isn't cutting edge technology. LCD 30 inch monitors have been around for years - is it so hard to make a cable over 2 meters for them.

Anyway, we shall see. The Lindy cable I've ordered claims it will work at the res I need. I will be more surprised if it does work, rather than surprised that it doesn't.

JavaJones:
It's not so hard to make such a cable but it does cost money so it's just not reasonable to expect a cheap £5 cable to do high resolution over longer distances. Monster Cable may be a complete rip-off, but they're not totally wrong in that cable quality *does* affect signal transmission length. Where the BS comes in is that it will "degrade your picture quality" with a digital signal. The reality is it either works or it doesn't, as you found. :D

- Oshyan

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page