A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Homebuilt PC's
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 9th 18, 07:18 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)

Hello,

Right now I am computing on a very nice LCD monitor which has VGA as best connection option.

(I tried VGA to VGA cables and DVI to VGA cables both work nicely and after the monitor is told to "auto-adjust" the screen becomes crystal clear).

The monitor does have some issues displaying this page, it blinks:

http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/clock_phase.php

Not sure if it's a driver/web-browser bug or monitor issue, probably last.

My Dream PC from 2006 was updated somewhere in between then and now with an asus GT 520 which overall has some pretty awesome connection options:

It has "full" DVI support (analog and digital and dual link for max dvi resolution) which can be seen here1 and here2:

here1:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Visual_Interface

here2:

https://www.asus.com/Graphics-Cards/...ILENTDI1GD3LP/

Besides from having full DVI support it even has HDMI 1.4 and VGA !

So that's a huge ammount of possibilities of connecting monitors and even a/v receivers and possibly other audio equipment.

Now the main problem with the Asus GT 520 is it's slow, it has low bandwidth, low ammount of transistors (slightly less than 300m) low ammount of cuda cores.

ENTER GT 1030 one would say/think.

The GT 1030 is a much newer processor which is very similiar. Asus even released a new graphics card which is very familiar:

Asus GT1030 with GDDR5 2gb memory, I kinda "wanted" this card to try and play Spacehulk Deathwing Enhanced Edition on my old AMD X2 3800+ and see how that would go.

So I want over to analyze exactly what connection options it has. I still need to figure out if PCI Express 3.0 graphics card will work in older slots though.

However I noticed a problem with the Asus GT 1030 actually multiple:

1. First of all the VGA connector option is missing.

2. Second of all the DVI-A is GONE.

This means DVI-I to VGA cable is probably un-usuable cause it has 4 pins which will probably not fit into DVI-D slot and perhaps this graphics card also does not support the analog signal on the DVI-D.

So clearly VGA/ANALOG is missing from this GT 1030 which I consider a huge/big mistake by NVIDIA probably.

There are plenty of still decent VGA monitors out there which are still great for gaming.

Now what makes this even more "hurtfull" is that there do exist DVI-D to VGA CONVERTERS.

Which seems to be a special box which converts the DVI-D signal to VGA.

(I have not explored the possibility of HDMI to a/v receiver and then back to VGA monitor... this would be weird to do and electronically a bit risky, ok just explored it receiver does not have VGA out).

Another possibility is HDMI to VGA CONVERTERS.

However these converters do add to the price and transport costs.

They can be between 13 to 40 euros which is a very steep price.

The ASUS GT 1030 looks like a nice upgrade, but because of the missing ANALOG support it's not really ?!

So this is the painfull design decision ?! Why release such a card which is probably well suited for 1280x786 and 1380x1024 and whatever low end/cheap LCD monitors support but then not include VGA compatibility.

Very painfull design decision. I wonder how much production costs NVIDIA and Asus safe by leaving out VGA/ANALOG connection options ?!?!?!?

Anybody know ?!?!?!?!

I would not be surprised if lots of stock keeps lieing on the shelves cause this kinda makes it less attractive to buy.

The card itself is already 85 euros, with adapter it would be close to 100 euros...

That is a bit much for an upgrade for old monitors and such.

Also I am not sure what the quality of the image will be when using DVI-D to VGA CONVERTERS.

May have to youtube this to see if they are any good.

Would hate it if image quality would be blurry... right now it's crispy as **** yep.

I am guessing the Asus GT 1030 does not come with any convert cables or adapters or whatever.

What I can't tell is with what cables any other extra's it comes ?

Probably monitors usually come with these kinds of cables.

Well guess right now I am kindy bitching about this a little bit... hmmm let's see oh yeah and then there is the PCI Express 3.0 question...

Let's see...

Which also kinda raises the question if my old socket 939 winfast motherboard
can even handle such big bandwidth ?!

Hmm but this bandwidth is probably from GT 1030 RAM to GT 1030 processor... so that should not be an issue for the processing speed of the GT 1030.

I have been very displeased and frustrated with the slowness of the GT 520.... the GT 620 and GT 730 didn't give a big enough performance increases from looking at the numbers.

But the GT 1030 is very interesting. The speed up graphics wise will be rhougly 10x that of GT 520 which is very interesting.

I don't want a graphics card purchase to force me to buy a new monitor. I want to buy the new monitor when the time is right. I first have to decide if I will let the old monitor be repaired... which I probably will... just to see what the problem was... maybe just a bad capacitator.

In that case the DVI-D might come in handy... but only if I have the cables for it...

Will check:

Here is where it gets weird. The DVI cable of the HP L2335 1920x1200 is missing this horizontal wide pin.

Very strange... the wikipedia article does not show this pin setup ?!?!?

Clearly an omission and missing detail on this wikipedia article.

Will have to look into why this pin is missing and how important this is...

VERY WEIRD.

OH I see now. One is MALE pin connector on cable/plug and one is FEMALE... no pin...

So never mind that.

This is not clearly explained on this wikipedia article. The female connector should not be displayed with this pin... or a hollow pin. The female is clearly missing the pin and instead has a hole again not clearly displayed on wikipedia article...

Anyway back to PCI express 3.0 graphics card and winfast motherboard PCI 2.3 compliant it says hmmm...


NVIDIA's website by the way was working very badly with firefox... seems like a server side issues... could barely see there GT products... only GTX products... suxxx... totally not interested in overheating GTX/RTX crap for the moment.

GT passively cooled is were the honey is at for me for now =D

Also advise how to upgrade old systems for these new products could probably boost there sales by quite a lot... so they are clearly lacking in that regard... but I guess this is part of the fun of trying to upgrade a system cheaply =D

According to this article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express

It says under PCI Express 3.0 that it was planned to be backwards compatible ?!

My issue with this is the word "PLANNED". Is PCI Express 3.0 actually backwards compatible with PCI Express 2.0 ? or even PCI Express 1.0 ?

I am not sure if the PCI Express ports on winfast motherboard are actually 2.0 or 2.3 or something like that it says pci 2.3 complaint does that mean pci express 2.3 compliance as well ? The difference I notice here is the word "express" ? Hmmm...

Getting the details right is important... people in general suck in details.... but the details can bite you in the ass.

For now my assumption again something that can bite people in the ass is that this PCI Express 3.0 GT 1030 will work on pci 2.3 compliant motherboards ?

If so then I will check youtube videos if available for these DVI-D to VGA converters... to see image quality..

And then I will have to strike firmly over my heart... and spent 13 ****ing euros and additional shipping costs... to buy this CONVERTER -.-

But could be cool to have such a fast graphics card working with old vga stuff... just in case I ever need it Probably not... but for now I do need it for this old monitor... nice to have backup/old connection options. Still have some old vga monitors lieing around... could be whicked to play on them sometime... but for now... it's all about trying to speed up the graphics of this game and see if it will help.

This purchase would be a very interesting experiment for me to see how much of todays games is decided performance wise by graphics cards and not so much CPU.

I know the CPU is also being heavily taxed... so perhaps the frame rate will not go up much... but at least the graphics will be much better and sharper which is a good thing... and I am also slightly hoping better FPS... if not then a new PC will ofcourse be required... but will post pone that until chiplet designs become available with hopefully sub 100 nanosecond latency... and much better chip security on motherboard... cause currently this scares the **** out of me.

Hopefully 2019 will bring more secure processors and more secure motherboards/chipsets but I have great doubts about that and it will probably not happen and therefore upgrading this older system is therefore an interesting option and holding out with my cash until better/more secure systems are available.

At least then I can continue gaming a little bit better.

If issues are not fixed with CPU/motherboard/chipsets then my prediction is maybe some whacko is going to make an OS running completely inside a graphics CARD LOL.

Anyway enough drivel...

I now have to go massage my mind... if I really want to spent 85 euros on the GT 1030 which does look very juicy...

If I do get the HD 1920x1200 monitor fixed it will have a huge impacts on getting things running smoother like webbrowsers at least so I believe... this believe could be a bit wrong though... perhaps it was a bit of disk fragmentation too...

However youtube videos will be much better watchable... even 720p at 60 fps is too much for the GT 520... it could do 720p at 30 fps but youtube does not offer that option unfortunately.

With GT 1030 I expect 720p at 60 fps to run smoothly maybe even higher. This is not based on any research... that is just my expectation... though it's mostly ment for gaming... maybe I should look into this as well... just to be sure...

Cause watching 480p on a GT 1030 would kinda suck.

I would not be surprised it it can even do 1080p.

I will look into this as well... but for now stopping this post because it's getting too long

I might be interested in RT 1080 or whatever... a graphics card in GT fashion with ray trace support... but this is probably too much to ask for right now cause this technology is simply too new... but only nvidia knows if raytracing on lower resolutions and GT is possible.... haven't seen one yet.

Biggest issue is software stack... windows 10 required... not a chance in hell I am going to use windows 10 right now on old computer... but maybe in future...

In that case waiting for an RT version might have been nice... but then I can keep on waiting and waiting... replacing with RT right now does not make any sense cause I have no plans to update to windows 10.

This would only happen if new computer is up and running well... and then this could be a year from now or more.

So now one thing left to do and that is examine GT 1030 video decoding performance

If the video decoding performance is good then it's kind worth the 85 + 15 converter bucks + transport costs.

Kinda hate this price... but WTF... kinda sick of slow ass GT 520 performance.

Also people watch out for the DDR version... that one is slow and junk... definetly wanna skip that one.

Lost of GT 1030 products probably still available.

This might be your last chance to upgrade your old systems with a nice passively cooled graphics card so you never have to worry about DUST in your graphics card ever again... still need to worry about CPU though and power supply and rest of system ! But less overheat danger from GT cards... though even these can cause high temperatures if not enough case ventilation so beware !

But at least no frying if your motherboard warns or shuts down on time !

Will be interesting to see true GT 1030 temperatures... hmmm...

Bye for now,
Skybuck.
  #2  
Old December 9th 18, 09:00 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)

Some more interesting discussions and information about GT 1030:

Hardware Encode and Hardware Decode support:

1. GT 1030 Hardware Encoder NO, but DECODER YES:

https://developer.nvidia.com/video-e...support-matrix

So for now this should be sufficient to watch youtube videos well, assuming Firefox or other software uses nvidia's decoder API.

Will have to look into if Firefox uses nvidia decoder API for videos from youtube.

Youtube is ofcourse a very big and for me at least important website, and any graphics card will have to work with it well and browser too.

There are new video codecs... which GT 1030 does not support, so maybe not super-future proof... but for now it will do I think.

Firefox reports found via google:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1273902

One issue seems resolved. New VP9 codec.

Linux might be a problem though:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1210729

Some stuff about the drawing, not much related to video but still a little bit interesting:

https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/09/ha...-acceleration/

Some tip about enabling hardware acceleration, though firefox gui constantly changing:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb...e-acceleration


I should first check if hardware acceleration is on on current browser settings...

Not sure what GT 520 has for video hardware decoding will look into that too...

Just for comparison sakes.

It's mentioned:

https://www.geforce.com/hardware/des...t-520/features

But doesn't really say what video codecs...

Some more information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_PureVideo

"
PureVideo is Nvidia's hardware SIP core that performs video decoding. PureVideo is integrated into some of the Nvidia GPUs, and it supports hardware decoding of multiple video codec standards: MPEG-2, VC-1, H.264, and HEVC. PureVideo occupies a considerable amount of a GPU's die area and should not be confused with Nvidia NVENC.[1] In addition to video decoding on chip, PureVideo offers features such as edge enhancement, noise reduction, deinterlacing, dynamic contrast enhancement and color enhancement.
"

Now question is if this is already integrated into firefox hmmm also from the list above... it seems the codec youtube is using is probably not supported which could explain the poor performance.

Writing a video codec in CUDA for VP9 or whatever would make it more general purpose and can support all graphics card... hmmm...

Hmmm first must make sure which video codec youtube actually uses... hmmm would be nice if multiple codecs supported either stored that way but would be a storage problem... or realtime processing/transcoding on youtube server side... hmmm.. but will probably be cpu/gpu/power problem.

This is something interesting information from engineer from youtube:

https://youtube-eng.googleblog.com/2...e-anatomy.html

However this is for uploads only... keep be an interesting read later.

(It's from 2016 though, now it's almost 2019, so this chart probably changed by much already).

Need to know codec for download videos from youtube or "streaming video" though.

It currently has a cool 3D video on it's main blog:

Video:

https://youtu.be/G-XZhKqQAHU

Main blog:

https://youtube-eng.googleblog.com/

Nothing there though some surround sound.

Found this though:

https://9to5google.com/2018/09/14/yo...o-beta-chrome/

Again they thinking of changing video format to AV1 some open source stuff.

I hope youtube realizes that users need hardware acceleration too or a very beavy CPU or GPU... with special codec software.

If they just change codecs it gets nasty for many people without proper hardware acceleration...

Very painfull ! hope they add 30 fps for all resolutions too.

Anyway... this constant changing of video codec kinda supports my thoughts of a cuda video codec... which nvidia or others can develop and provide with their graphics drivers...

So people can just update their graphics driver.

This keeps nvidia hardware more simple and nvidia can focus more on cuda cores and tensor cores instead of adding codec hardware which will be obsolute in just a few years or so.

Making their products more valuable than obsolete codec support... I find this weird about nvidia... seems like they need more "talented cuda software developers" then video codec hardware developers... or purchase they purchase that integrated circuitry logic from other vendors and integrate it into their gpu or another reason could be that they consider their cuda software/stack/drivers immature and not stable enough to use for video and deploy on a large scale... though it does come with the graphics driver... so that's kinda weird.

I believe a video codec for cuda is possible if ptx is generated for each video card generation... so it's definetly doable.

Real question is if cuda is fast enough to actually do it on all cards.

So my search for video codecs supported by firefox is kinda useless... not entirely... but in a few years it will change again and again.

So for now I have had enough of this... might continue this search later on it's getting late

Though I kinda wanna make a purchase decision but I am getting tired...

Will post pone till later... getting a bit depressed by this youtube changing video codecs.

Bye for now,
Skybuck.
  #3  
Old December 9th 18, 10:39 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)

I just did some tests in Firefox, Opera and Windows Media Player, with Battlefield 5 movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk_t2Ijn6I8&t=527s

Main problem is FireFox is dropping basically all frames at 720p and 60 fps..

Not sure why, but it seems either a bug in Firefox or an inefficient coding or calling nvdecoder api problem.

Buying new GT 1030 would probably not improve playback in firefox until this bug is solved.

Opera on the other hand performed a little bit better and had less frames dropped, but had slow play back and still some frames dropped.

Windows Media player plays well.

Download speed is indicated to be 50.000 to 70.000 kilobits/sec which is basically in the megabyte ranges.

Seperate download from youtube downloaders also indicated download speed from youtube servers (?) is fine.

What's weird is resource monitor shows something different.

It is only showing 500 kilobytes/sec.

So perhaps this 70.000 kilobytes/sec is either a lie, a mistake or it's the ammount of decoded data.

Compression ratio is unknown for h264 can't find it, material dependent... 10 to 1 or 20 to 1 mpeg can be 200 to 1 but h264 definetly not like mpeg.

Kinda shame no compression ratio is giving in stats. It's an important metric for codec performance, even though it may be lossy.

My current hunch/estimation/insight is that Firefox might be handling buffering of tcp/ip packets inefficiently or it has some other serious bug, might be related with audio handling or timers.

Basically firefox on my computer at least is complete junk/garbage for watching high quality videos on youtube, which is kinda a shame cause it is my favorite browser menu wise and other features.

Kinda wish I had FireFox's software/source code installed so I could take a look.

Did delete quite some files on my drive recently so I have some space available to do an experiment and try to build firefox on my system...

Might I will try this tomorrow just for kicks... kinda getting sick of this poor firefox performance. As far as I know it's open source.

Kinda thinking of starting a port to Delphi project... but that probably be insane... and a waste of effort.

Will try and build it just for kicks to see what it takes... to build this "piece of crap"... at least currently... it's not truely totally a piece of crap... I think at least... maybe it just needs some bug fixing... though maybe it needs some new design for certain things.

For now it seems like a true bug... probably a multi threading bug.

The red line in task manager spikes... which is a pretty good signal that it's critical section related and locking issue related.

OH YEAH... it's definetly locking issue related.

FIREFOX almost locked up my system while typing this text... will the youtube video stats were displaying.

HOLY****.... almost never seen something like this... my mouse cursor was stuttering like crazy.

Come to think of it it might even be related to a driver bug in logitech mouse driver issueing to many lock prefixes instructions when mouse moves... I am not saying there is a bug in it but there could be...

But for now let's assume not... but it's pretty obvious... if I can't even move my mouse cursor then there is a big fat locking issue locking up the processor.

The task manager confirmed this... THE RED LINE SPIKE WAS HUGE.... almost reaching 100%.

So clearly firefox is causing a processor locking issue somehow.

These multi-threading/locking issues are hard debug.

One possibility solution is reverting back to a single-threaded version of firefox or so...

Or at least for youtubing...

Bye for now,
Skybuck.
  #4  
Old December 9th 18, 11:17 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,467
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 is painfull/mistake.(Thx to convertors still interesting though)

wrote:

Though I kinda wanna make a purchase decision but I am getting tired...

Will post pone till later... getting a bit depressed by this youtube changing video codecs.

Bye for now,
Skybuck.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_PureVideo

Feature Set
GeForce 410M,
GT 520MX, 510,
GT 520, D
GT 610, GT 620 (OEM)

Feature Set C

Supports complete acceleration for MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 Part 2
(a.k.a. MPEG-4 ASP), VC-1/WMV9 and H.264.

Global motion compensation and Data Partitioning are not supported for MPEG-4 Part 2.

Feature Set D

Similar to feature set C but added support for decoding
H.264 with a resolution of up to 4032 × 4080 and
MPEG-1/MPEG-2 with a resolution of up to 4032 × 4048 pixels.

Later feature sets support H.265/HEVC, whatever that means.

I don't think they sell the GT1030 in my city, only the 1050
is the lowest SKU for sale. And of course, no VGA support.
The GT 1030 and 1050 are Feature Set H. The Feature Set I
and Feature Set J are not documented. The 1050 is a two-slot-wide
card - on some smaller systems this could be a problem, and
knock one of your expansion cards out of the way

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series

When you're buying the 1030, be aware it comes with two
different types of memory, and the card with GDDR5 will
perform better (if you can find one). The DDR4 cards might
be more common and a few dollars cheaper.

A 1030 with DDR4 is only $70 USD. You just have to keep
your wits about you, when making a selection.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...82E16814932060

By buying Feature Set H in a 1030 card, that handles VP9.
But, that only works, if the software hooks into DXVA decoder
support for VP9. The NVidia driver has to be installed (wouldn't
work with Microsoft Basic Display Adapter), plus the software,
like Firefox, would need a known HTML5 hook for VP9-in-hardware.

And all that just to shave a few cycles off the CPU.

You'll also have to pay the "VGA tax". It cost me $25
to get a DisplayPort to VGA adapter off the rack at
my computer store. That's pretty hard to swallow
if you paid over $100 for a 1050, and then had to
lump on more money to drive a VGA monitor. They could
have put a VGA in the GPU "for free". But, it's 2018, and
both video card companies have done the same thing.
Going to AMD won't fix this. VGA tax with them, too.

NVidia only issues new drivers today for 64 bit systems.
I'm hoping your OS is 64 bits, so this won't be an issue.

*******

If you hit the video card hard enough, you can trigger the Windows
"unresponsive driver" detection, aka TDR. You might need Visual
Studio plus the 2GB NVidia CUDA SDK, to get the materials to try out
stuff like that.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/hp...xperience-777/

Paul
  #5  
Old December 10th 18, 03:06 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,467
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 is painfull/mistake.(Thx to convertors still interesting though)

wrote:
I just did some tests in Firefox, Opera and Windows Media Player, with Battlefield 5 movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk_t2Ijn6I8&t=527s

I would pull a copy using youtube-dl.

youtube-dl --list-formats https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk_t2Ijn6I8
[youtube] Gk_t2Ijn6I8: Downloading webpage
[youtube] Gk_t2Ijn6I8: Downloading video info webpage
[youtube] Gk_t2Ijn6I8: Extracting video information
[info] Available formats for Gk_t2Ijn6I8:
format code extension resolution note
140 m4a audio only DASH audio 133k , m4a_dash container, mp4a.40.2@128k, 46.60MiB
160 mp4 256x144 144p 138k , avc1.4d400c, 30fps, video only, 37.14MiB
133 mp4 426x240 240p 311k , avc1.4d4015, 30fps, video only, 83.28MiB
134 mp4 640x360 360p 807k , avc1.4d401e, 30fps, video only, 188.27MiB
135 mp4 854x480 480p 1518k , avc1.4d401f, 30fps, video only, 354.98MiB
136 mp4 1280x720 720p 3057k , avc1.4d401f, 30fps, video only, 720.34MiB
298 mp4 1280x720 720p60 4412k , avc1.4d4020, 60fps, video only, 998.88MiB
137 mp4 1920x1080 1080p 5451k , avc1.640028, 30fps, video only, 1.36GiB
299 mp4 1920x1080 1080p60 7106k , avc1.64002a, 60fps, video only, 1.77GiB
17 3gp 176x144 small , mp4v.20.3, mp4a.40.2@ 24k
36 3gp 320x180 small , mp4v.20.3, mp4a.40.2
18 mp4 640x360 medium , avc1.42001E, mp4a.40.2@ 96k
22 mp4 1280x720 hd720 , avc1.64001F, mp4a.40.2@192k (best)

Format 22 is 766.59MiB in size.

youtube-dl --format 22 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk_t2Ijn6I8

803827575 Dec 7 20:37 The Last Tiger Battlefield 5-Gk_t2Ijn6I8.mp4

I'm using the copy of youtube-dl I've installed in Mint18.1

Format 298 looks good, but then you'd have to add a sound track to it.
Probably around 1GB of downloads.

Length is 50 minutes.

codec AVC1 H.264/MPEG-4 AVC
codec mp4a: MPEG-4 AAC LC

There's no VP9 listed for that.

Download time on my crappy broadband was 8 minutes 30 seconds.

It's possible you were receiving one of the higher rate videos.
Try using the "properties" in the video window to double-check
what is being sent.

Paul
  #6  
Old December 10th 18, 03:00 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)

Yeah there is another stupidity with this graphics cards design:

The single link DVI-D can only support a resolution of 1920 x 1080 Pixels which I kinda hate.

1920x1200 is much better for development purposes.

1080 is slightly better than 1280x1024 haha.

This is kind of a deal breaker for me, which again is kinda painfull... cause internally this graphics card can handle very high resolution.

So this leaves the HDMI to VGA option perhaps.

Will have to look into this.

But again... would also need HDMI to DVI-dual link if I have my old monitor fixed.

Such a weird graphics card connection wise...

Shame really.

Bye,
Skybuck.


  #7  
Old December 10th 18, 03:24 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)

Oh I was wrong about this/confused. The HDMI to VGA converter was limited to 1920x1080 which is a non issue cause vga monitor is 1280x1024 or something like that.

HD monitor is 1920x1200 which single link DVI-D can do and card too:

https://gzhls.at/blob/ldb/1/6/4/a/c0...242661c293.pdf

So for now this is ok enough.

However E-VGA also has GT 1030 for sale with dual link DVI connectors and passive heat sinks so going to investigate the asus competition too =D

Bye for now,
Skybuck.
  #8  
Old December 10th 18, 03:33 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 ispainfull/mistake. (Thx to convertors still interesting though)

What's weird about E-VGA and their marketing department is they don't seem to get the specs correct or the reporting website is wrong:

https://techreport.com/news/31922/ev...-three-flavors

The connector definetly looks like a dual-link dvi connector.

Yet their specs say it's single dvi-link, so what is it ?

Wow... you know something is too complex if the manufacturer can't get the details right =D

Or perhaps they had some left-over dvi-dual link connectors and went with that... seems weird though.

Also no custom manual for the e-vga gt 1030 sc.... so this is a bit disappointing.

No correct spec available...

Hmmm

Not sure if their grey heatsink actually works well no experience with it.

Bye,
Skybuck.
  #9  
Old December 10th 18, 07:26 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,467
Default Dropped "Full"-DVI-I vs DVI-D-support-only for GT 1030 is painfull/mistake.(Thx to convertors still interesting though)

wrote:
Oh I was wrong about this/confused. The HDMI to VGA converter was limited to 1920x1080 which is a non issue cause vga monitor is 1280x1024 or something like that.

HD monitor is 1920x1200 which single link DVI-D can do and card too:

https://gzhls.at/blob/ldb/1/6/4/a/c0...242661c293.pdf

So for now this is ok enough.

However E-VGA also has GT 1030 for sale with dual link DVI connectors and passive heat sinks so going to investigate the asus competition too =D

Bye for now,
Skybuck.


The DVI connector has always been full of surprises on
the video card end.

+----+ +----+ | === make DVI-I looking connector
|XXXX| |XXXX| -+- where there is no VGA on those
+----+ +----+ | contacts (unlike the GT1030 connector)

+----+ +----+ | === Make connectors look like they're
|XXXX| | | -+- dual link, when they're only single
+----+ +----+ | link. "It's so the cable will mesh."

+----+ +----+
|XXXX| | | +
+----+ +----+

That's why you have to consult the specification in
print, to see what it really is.

Doing the visual check is good, if your cable has
the cross on it, and there's no hole for it. If the
cross is missing on the video card end, maybe you need
another new cable.

*******

HDMI to DVI is best converted as single link.
In such a case, the adapter is passive, and cheap.
They make those for $3.

To convert a modern standards version of HDMI to
Dual Link DVI would take an active, all digital chip
inside the dongle, which could use the +5V on the
HDMI connector.

I prefer to start with DisplayPort. It converts to
HDMI with just wires as far as I know. And there might
be more converters to choose from.

In this example, there is a DisplayPort to dual link DVI,
but the gender of the cable is male on the end. My video
card is female. Which means if I wanted to extend this
converter further, I'd need a different cable. It's really
not a good idea to have the cable integrated with the
dongle like this, as it causes problems getting the length
you need. A short dongle with female end, would work
better for me.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...9SIAFY67M22882

But at least that demonstrates that an active converter
will make Dual Link DVI.

With the HDMI equivalent, it's just too easy to be passing
the wires through and making it single-link electrically,
with a 1920x1200 limit. I trust a DisplayPort to do this
conversion, with more possibility of an "honest" outcome.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...12K-00AB-00039

If I have to do a conversion, I want a DisplayPort. And
that's what is on my video card right now, is DisplayPort
to VGA. And that's an active adapter and uses power from the
DisplayPort connector.

Some day, those adapters will no longer be for sale.
Just a warning... :-)

The year 2018 is when the active adapter business will be in
full swing, and the industry will be dead in a couple years.

Paul
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Seagate "hybrid" SSD + HD interesting RayLopez99 Homebuilt PC's 1 April 12th 14 12:25 PM
This 22" monitor support full HD 1080P abcipo General Hardware 1 July 7th 10 11:47 AM
Dropped my CPU chip "pin" side down KingOfHearts General 9 October 26th 05 05:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.