DVI vs Display Port vs HDMI for best quality?

[Guest]

Hi I am thinking of getting a GTX 670/680 from EVGA. All of them have 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, and 2 DVI. I am also getting two Asus VS248H-P 24" Monitors.

My question is what is the main differences between HDMI, DVI, and Display Port. Which port should I use to get the best picture quality, frames per second, and dual-monitors. I know that VGA is obsolete and only does analog which is not as good as digital. I have never really understood the idea of the differences and quality between all of them.

I am building a custom rig this summer, so I am trying to get an idea of what cables should I be using with my dual-monitor setup. I will be using the computer for 3d modeling, digital graphics, and gaming.

 

[firo40]

There really isnt much differance between hdmi and dvi when it comes to video images none that the eye can see. The only real differance there is that hdmi can also transmit audio signals aswell. Display port is the newest form of media cabling and transfer alot more information then an hdmi cable it is primarily used for 2560x1600 moniters becuase that high of a resoloution requires a cable that can transfer more information. I would use the DVI cables for both moniters you wont be unhappy

 

[TheBigTroll]

its about the same. use the one thats most convenient

 

[Ice0verlord]

The Link Below Tells you all about it.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2030669/hdmi-vs-displayport-which-display-interface-reigns-supreme-.html


For Gaming I would use display port bc it supports 3d a lot better

 

[BSDude]

1. Colour ranges for HDMI go beyond the RGB spectrum. DVI cannot accomplish this.
As per wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface#D...

2. DVI does not carry audio signal so you have to connect an additional cable. More cables, more clutter imho.
Check with link from point 1.

3. HDMI can display the same resolutions DVI can. With the recent 2.0 firmware you can have 4k @ 60fps, which I believe DVI cannot accomplish.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/hdmi_2_0_faq....

4. DVI is being considered for deprecation by the likes of Intel and AMD in favour of DisplayPort and HDMI with DisplayPort being the tech of choice for PCs to which I disagree. HDMI is the premiere interface in electronics and PC manufacturers will be hard pressed not to use it in computers and tablets through miniHDMI.
http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog...

HDMI, I guess?!

 

[Roshy10]

another advantage of DVI and Display port over HDMI is that they have mechanisms which will prevent the cable from coming loose (Display port has a clip and DVI has screws(optional)).

 

[americanaudiophile]

Display Port allows you to daisy chain the monitors so you don't need 2 long cables. Might be more convenient.

 

[Kartexa]

1. Colour ranges for HDMI go beyond the RGB spectrum. DVI cannot accomplish this.
As per wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface#D...

2. DVI does not carry audio signal so you have to connect an additional cable. More cables, more clutter imho.
Check with link from point 1.

3. HDMI can display the same resolutions DVI can. With the recent 2.0 firmware you can have 4k @ 60fps, which I believe DVI cannot accomplish.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/hdmi_2_0_faq....

4. DVI is being considered for deprecation by the likes of Intel and AMD in favour of DisplayPort and HDMI with DisplayPort being the tech of choice for PCs to which I disagree. HDMI is the premiere interface in electronics and PC manufacturers will be hard pressed not to use it in computers and tablets through miniHDMI.
http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog...

HDMI, I guess?!

You do realize that Displayport is actually vastly superior to HDMI right? It's just that HDMI is more common, but for pro useres HDMI just doesn't cut it; it's either Dual-link DVI or Displayport for pros but tbh for an average user there really won't be a difference.

 

[Zombie615]

1. Colour ranges for HDMI go beyond the RGB spectrum. DVI cannot accomplish this.
As per wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface#D...

2. DVI does not carry audio signal so you have to connect an additional cable. More cables, more clutter imho.
Check with link from point 1.

3. HDMI can display the same resolutions DVI can. With the recent 2.0 firmware you can have 4k @ 60fps, which I believe DVI cannot accomplish.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/hdmi_2_0_faq....

4. DVI is being considered for deprecation by the likes of Intel and AMD in favour of DisplayPort and HDMI with DisplayPort being the tech of choice for PCs to which I disagree. HDMI is the premiere interface in electronics and PC manufacturers will be hard pressed not to use it in computers and tablets through miniHDMI.
http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog...

HDMI, I guess?!

You do realize that Displayport is actually vastly superior to HDMI right? It's just that HDMI is more common, but for pro useres HDMI just doesn't cut it; it's either Dual-link DVI or Displayport for pros but tbh for an average user there really won't be a difference.

Care to explain how Displayport is actually vastly superior to HDMI? because I'm confused.

 

[Kartexa]

1. Colour ranges for HDMI go beyond the RGB spectrum. DVI cannot accomplish this.
As per wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface#D...

2. DVI does not carry audio signal so you have to connect an additional cable. More cables, more clutter imho.
Check with link from point 1.

3. HDMI can display the same resolutions DVI can. With the recent 2.0 firmware you can have 4k @ 60fps, which I believe DVI cannot accomplish.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_0/hdmi_2_0_faq....

4. DVI is being considered for deprecation by the likes of Intel and AMD in favour of DisplayPort and HDMI with DisplayPort being the tech of choice for PCs to which I disagree. HDMI is the premiere interface in electronics and PC manufacturers will be hard pressed not to use it in computers and tablets through miniHDMI.
http://newsroom.intel.com/community/intel_newsroom/blog...

HDMI, I guess?!

You do realize that Displayport is actually vastly superior to HDMI right? It's just that HDMI is more common, but for pro useres HDMI just doesn't cut it; it's either Dual-link DVI or Displayport for pros but tbh for an average user there really won't be a difference.

Care to explain how Displayport is actually vastly superior to HDMI? because I'm confused.

Okay, maybe not VASTLY, but it uses higher bandwith so then it can transfer higher bitrates for colors, allows high refresh rate monitors to be usable, and is able to output higher resolutions at a higher referesh rate.

 

[Zombie615]

So like if I were to buy a monitor that had 144hz I would only see 60hz on it if I were to use HDMI?

 

[Kartexa]

So like if I were to buy a monitor that had 144hz I would only see 60hz on it if I were to use HDMI?

Correct

 

[Zombie615]

Well how do HDTV's go above 60hz refresh rate only using HDMI? Just wondering.

 

[Kartexa]

Well how do HDTV's go above 60hz refresh rate only using HDMI? Just wondering.

They don't...... Mine is at 60hz

 

[Zombie615]

Well than how come my flat screen is 60hz but the other ones that say 120hz are much smoother looking?

 

[Kartexa]

Well than how come my flat screen is 60hz but the other ones that say 120hz are much smoother looking?

Are you using cable or hdmi?

 

[Zombie615]

Well it's HDMI going from my cable box to the TV. So I don't know if that is considered cable or not.

 

[Kartexa]

Well it's HDMI going from my cable box to the TV. So I don't know if that is considered cable or not.

Well I don't know then, but since it's connected through an hdmi cable I don't know why the 120hz tv is smoother through hdmi. I'm no expert, so take what I said with a grain of salt.

 

[Zombie615]

Well from what I've read up on 120hz in a tv is actually 2x60hz not actually 120hz. I don't know how to explain that but someone with expertise would probably know how to.

 

[mathullan1905]

To answer the main question, DisplayPort is better than HDMI, but you can only use that extra performance when handling 4K and maybe 2K resolution. About the Hz, something seems quite wrong. There are monitors that say they handle 144Hz, and this would normally be connected over HDMI no? Also, if some sort of technology was used to up the Hz from 60 to 120+, then could that not be used on IPS panels too? IPS Panels suffer from this, and they still do, so I am not sure which is right as of now. But using the latest HDMI and DisplayPort connection, you can get 4K to run at 60fps with the displayport and 30fps on the HDMI. I am not too sure about the limit on the HMDI at Full HD.

 

[Zombie615]

So these new TV's coming out at places like BestBuy sporting the 4k Resolution an a hefty price tag are only going to run 30FPS? I'm assuming that since most people will connect them via an HDMI cable.

 

[mathullan1905]

So these new TV's coming out at places like BestBuy sporting the 4k Resolution an a hefty price tag are only going to run 30FPS? I'm assuming that since most people will connect them via an HDMI cable.

To run at 4K, they developed the HDMI 1.4, thats the one that runs at 30FPS. HDMI 2.0 will be released soon, which should be able to cope with 4K at higher FPS and Hz. DisplayPort will also be more common. As of now, DisplayPort is the better alternative.

 

[Zombie615]

Yeah but I could just see noob tech people looking at the salesman saying..."Displaywhat? What are you talking about I got tons of HDMI I can use" lol

 

[B6S4Owner]

I just got the same monitor last night. Asus even states hdmi will not support the 144hz refresh rate of the VG248QE. You have to use display port/DVI if you want 144hz at 1920x1080. As far as your TV the 120 is not the native refresh rate most likely. They are advertised as 120 but is really 60 bumped up. Hope this helps. I'm am at Walmart right now getting a longer dvi cable cause the one asus supplies is not long enough.