Re: dvi vs vga etc and monitors.....
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 08:49:36AM -0500, Stephen Olander-Waters wrote:
> I cannot speak from experience, but the Wikipedia page says:
>
> ---
> The maximum length of DVI cables is not included in the specification
> since it is dependent on bandwidth requirements (the resolution of the
> image being transmitted). In general, cable lengths from 1-15 feet
> (4.5m) will work for displays at resolutions of 1920x1200. Cable lengths
> up to 50 feet (15m) can be used with displays at resolutions up to
> 1280x1024. For longer distances, to eliminate the video degradation, the
> use of a DVI booster is recommended. DVI boosters may or may not use an
> external power supply.
> ---
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface
>
>
> Having said that, I agree with Lennart that if money is no object, go
> for DVI for a clean, digital signal. However, Simon has a good point
> that, where possible, put the computer[s] as near to the display device
> as possible and control it remotely.
Long cable runs are a bad idea in general unless the signal was designed
for it (like ethernet).
Given the choice between DVI and VGA though, always pick DVI. There
should be no cost difference there. For long cable runs there might be
but neither cable type works without some kind of repeater for that.
I know for VGA, anything over 2m caused ghosting at 1600x1200@75Hz, so
that was no good. Older displays that had the seperate BNC connectors
and adjustable termination resistance could often do longer runs with
the correct impedence cables.
--
LeN Sorensen
Reply to: