New Monitors Coming in - VGA to DVI Question

Soniclight wrote on 1/23/2012, 8:55 AM
One of my dual-monitors, old-style (I'm talking 4:3 res 19" 2005 TFT LCDs) died, so I decided to upgrade to a couple of Samsung L2430L 23.6" babies. Still consumer or "business" class, not like most of you, but it's definitely a step up--or wide for me: going from 32" wide visual real estate to 45".

And they're Samsungs, one of if not the only companies that makes their own screens so that's usually a wise choice.
(The brand of my old ones were--don't laugh--Hyundai. Yes, like the cars :)

After much eye-burning research including some searches here, I decided to not go with the new LED backlit LCDs for it seems that the consensus is that regular LCDs may be more dramatic for viewing media, videos, etc., but not for creating or editing such. Color is a bit more true on the non-backlit LCDs.

Or maybe I'm wrong. Whatever the case, I just hit "Submit order" so a moot point - lol. That order also included a new video card,.
Nothing fancy, just a nVidia GT430 that came out late last year. I've had good luck with nVidia cards.

And now to the point of this posting...

I've been using VGA interface and cables on the old monitors (12ft total length via extensions due to my setup). Now I'll have the option to get DVI to DVI (not HDMI) if I decide to replace all the cables with DVI ones.

Note that I don't create broadcast grade stuff nor do I make 1920x1080 or 1080p DVDs. I just work in 1920x1080/960 and most of my stuff is just for the Net. I do watch some DVDs on my computer from Netflix since I can't afford cable TV and I also don't own a flat-screen TV. But this viewing is not the main use of my computer.

So...

Q:

(PS if relevant: As you know, one can't specify how much RAM one has here at Sony in one's system specs, just "more than 1 Gb". I have 16 Gb. DDR3.)

Comments

ritsmer wrote on 1/23/2012, 4:49 PM
Somebody would say: DVI rules - others would say that there is no difference.

Here is another thread about it: http://www.sevenforums.com/graphic-cards/131027-vga-vs-dvi.html

When you buy a graphic card with DVI out and monitors with DVI in you should definitely get some DVI cables too, however.

I use 8 meter DVI cables from my NVidia GTS450 to 2 Eizos (27 and 24 inches 1920 x 1200) and this gives a steady and clear image.
Btw: at first I bought some extremely cheap DVI cables - but after a couple of months the red color on one monitor failed more or less intermittently - so I changed the extremely cheap ones to some (just) cheap ones - and for the last year the colors have been perfect.
Soniclight wrote on 1/23/2012, 5:56 PM
OK, thanks for reply and link. Common sense does suggest to go DVI, I'm just trying to save some money for this upgrade purchase was a bit hefty for me -- so I'm trying to get away with VGA connections for a while :o) As you and others have alluded, the difference will be very minor.

Besides, I'm an old fart (57) with some slowly degrading eyes and so I can't have desktop resolutions that are too high anyway. Right now I'm using 1280x960 with my old remaining monitor and will probably stick with that or something similar to it.

So if I'm not going to be pushing the new, larger res monitors to their maximum resolution, my guess is that response time and such will be less of a factor, ergo less difference.
farss wrote on 1/23/2012, 8:23 PM
I'd think by the tme you buy the DVI to VGA adaptors you might as well buy the right cables.
I'd also suggest running the monitors at their native resolution. The pixel size is around the same for all monitors so a big monitor with more pixels will be as easy / hard to read as a smaller monitor all else being equal. Of course all else isn't so you can enlarge things on the screen and fit more in as the screen is bigger.

Bob.
Soniclight wrote on 1/24/2012, 12:51 AM
"I'd think by the tme you buy the DVI to VGA adaptors you might as well buy the right cables."

If I were to go with adapters, I already have two - from the card's 2x DVI out, I'd just need two more to use the new monitors' (2x) DVI in. But since they have VGA, DVI and mini-HDMI, I can just use what I have as-is and later purchase the correct all-DVI cables.

As to using the new monitors at full 1920x1080, I'll start with that but if I see no particular degrade or problem with going a bit lower, I'll probably opt tor that. Until they land on my doorstep, I set them up, all conjecture at this point :o)
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/24/2012, 11:24 AM
One aspect of going 1080 is that you get less vertical space than a good 4:3 ...

I'm thinking of going back to 1600x1400.

geoff
riredale wrote on 1/25/2012, 9:29 PM
I've been using an excellent 24" monitor for over 3 years, 1920x1200. Hooked it up with a VGA cable, and every pixel illumination is precise.

I guess I could migrate to DVI by just buying a new cable, but the current setup works perfectly, so why bother?

But do run your new monitor at native resolution. It will look significantly worse with scaling artifacts at lower settings.
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/25/2012, 9:43 PM
I guess the idea of using aTV via HDMI is to have confidence of exactly how it will likely look on an HDMI-connercted TV ....

geoff
Soniclight wrote on 1/27/2012, 11:54 PM
HA! Just got and installed my new Samsungs and wow...

I feel I've finally entered the 21st century with my wide-screen babies. Going from 2x boxy old-style 4:3 19" to 2x 24" widescreen is a trip. Especially when I've been operating on only one of my 19" for the last couple of weeks

How in the world can people actually handle life...
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/28/2012, 1:01 AM
Yeah, looks really flash for a while til the novelty runs out.

If you are like me and do anything that adds a large number of audio or video tracks , you prematurely run out of vertical space !

Maybe i'll make a bracket and tip one with the timeline vertical !

geoff
Soniclight wrote on 1/28/2012, 3:48 AM
"Yeah, looks really flash for a while til the novelty runs out."

Yup, I know. During the first minutes or so I thought I'd have to rent scooter to move the mouse across that wide wilderness of width. But a few hours in, it's like... "Well, this new size of it all is the way it is now, hun? OK.." But it's still rather nice.

As far as tracks, I'm kind of sloppy with them in both Vegas and Cubase, so tend to rack 'em up more than the real pros here. But I think I'll stick with landscape orientation and up-down scrollin' :)
John_Cline wrote on 1/28/2012, 4:22 AM
"I thought I'd have to rent scooter to move the mouse across that wide wilderness of width."

Yeah, you'll probably need to adjust the sensitivity of your mouse to adapt to the new screen resolution.
Soniclight wrote on 1/28/2012, 4:53 AM
No, it's not that, my mouse works fine.
I was just trying too hard too be phunny :o)

On nice thing about this new setup is I've got going from 1290x960 to 1920x1080 is I have about 40% more shortcuts on my Firefox toolbar (I keep their names usually at 2 characters, so lots of those up there now). And more space on Win7 toolbar and on and on.

So, indeed, the novelty will wear off, but the advantages will remain :o)
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/28/2012, 1:04 PM
At least we've now got the Track Groups !

geoff
Geoff_Wood wrote on 1/28/2012, 1:06 PM
Which makes precision more difficult, without a non-linear mouse accel curve (does that exist ?)

geoff