Which kind of video cable is best for which statistical reasons?

[iNeedy]

Ive always wondered if ports like DVI-Digital and VGA are still competitive. Is displayport better than HDMI?

[AbydosOne]

11 minutes ago, iNeedy said:

Ive always wondered if ports like DVI-Digital and VGA are still competitive. Is displayport better than HDMI?

VGA is analog and ergo inherently inferior in terms of signal integrity/accuracy compared to digital.

DVI-D is essentially HDMI 1.0 in a different connector. Functionally obsolete as well.

 

DP vs HDMI is an interesting one. IMO, DP has consistently been better than HDMI technically. It's packet (vs stream) based, so you can have multiple displays over one cable (MST). It has higher throughput per generation than HDMI. It has side channels that (in theory at least) could have supported a USB 2.0 link for integrated hubs (or "ethernet", that feature in HDMI I've never seen used). I don't think I've had anyone present a deficiency of DP (vs HDMI) that wasn't just a standards/marketing thing (HDMI has broader adoption in consumer electronics because industry connections, I guess?). Heck, IIRC, DP is free to implement while HDMI has a licensing cost.

[RONOTHAN##]

14 minutes ago, AbydosOne said:

I don't think I've had anyone present a deficiency of DP (vs HDMI) that wasn't just a standards/marketing thing

DP can have some weird issues with hot plug on occasion (at least in the past, haven't experienced that in a while), so for an application where you'd be expecting to plug in and unplug the display somewhat frequently (say a conference room projector) I'd prefer to have HDMI, though overall DP I agree is just the more versatile and fully featured standard and the one I'd want in basically every other situation. 

[LapsedMemory]

The one you have in your mountain of spare cables in the basement when you buy new equipment, and it didn't come with the correct cable for your other stuff. 

[cmndr]

For most people in most situations, it doesn't really matter. 

If you want the lowest possible latency, you're going analog and using a CRT (good luck finding one that works). 

If you want something modern that will support high resolutions and refresh rates the newest HDMI and Display Port standards are more or less at feature parity. 

This is kind of like asking if the air at one spot is better than the air 10 feet away when both locations are unpolluted. It's the same. 

 

52 minutes ago, AbydosOne said:

VGA is analog and ergo inherently inferior in terms of signal integrity/accuracy compared to digital.

DVI-D is essentially HDMI 1.0 in a different connector. Functionally obsolete as well.

 

DP vs HDMI is an interesting one. IMO, DP has consistently been better than HDMI technically. It's packet (vs stream) based, so you can have multiple displays over one cable (MST). It has higher throughput per generation than HDMI. It has side channels that (in theory at least) could have supported a USB 2.0 link for integrated hubs (or "ethernet", that feature in HDMI I've never seen used). I don't think I've had anyone present a deficiency of DP (vs HDMI) that wasn't just a standards/marketing thing (HDMI has broader adoption in consumer electronics because industry connections, I guess?). Heck, IIRC, DP is free to implement while HDMI has a licensing cost.

DP can do display daisy chaining (nice but not super important in most use cases). HDMI can do stuff with ARC/eARC which allows for volume and source control across multiple devices. As someone who has used a 4K 120Hz TV as a monitor, I do like being able to just use my TV remote or an app to a change the volume across the entire chain. 

[iNeedy]

3 hours ago, LapsedMemory said:

The one you have in your mountain of spare cables in the basement when you buy new equipment, and it didn't come with the correct cable for your other stuff. 

fr fr. I have a treasure trove of ancient tech in my laundry room and its like the wayback machine back there

[iNeedy]

3 hours ago, cmndr said:

For most people in most situations, it doesn't really matter. 

If you want the lowest possible latency, you're going analog and using a CRT (good luck finding one that works). 

If you want something modern that will support high resolutions and refresh rates the newest HDMI and Display Port standards are more or less at feature parity. 

This is kind of like asking if the air at one spot is better than the air 10 feet away when both locations are unpolluted. It's the same. 

 

DP can do display daisy chaining (nice but not super important in most use cases). HDMI can do stuff with ARC/eARC which allows for volume and source control across multiple devices. As someone who has used a 4K 120Hz TV as a monitor, I do like being able to just use my TV remote or an app to a change the volume across the entire chain. 

Yeah, but I do value having a VGA port on modern desktops. For instance, my Dell Inspiron 3670 had its HDMI port bent and damaged, but Dell did the only good thing in any of their desktops recently and had a VGA slot, so I whipped out my older monitor and I was able to use my desktop and I honestly can't tell a difference.

[cmndr]

18 minutes ago, iNeedy said:

Yeah, but I do value having a VGA port on modern desktops. For instance, my Dell Inspiron 3670 had its HDMI port bent and damaged, but Dell did the only good thing in any of their desktops recently and had a VGA slot, so I whipped out my older monitor and I was able to use my desktop and I honestly can't tell a difference.

They could've also included another display port. 

At this point most of my monitors don't have VGA or DVI. This includes the stuff people in my extended family have. 

[TetraSky]

DP has been ahead of HDMI is terms of features for a long time. 

But it has its own issues. Like taking a while for the monitor to pick up the signal or even requiring you to close/open the monitor for it to work... Sometimes it doesn't work at all like when I enter the BIOS, I have to plug the HDMI cable to even change my bios settings. It's weird, man.

 

Overall, I'd say DP is "best" feature wise, but HDMI provides a compelling user experience that "just works" when you're within the specs.

 

As for VGA and DVI... Well DVI is "ok" if you stick to 1080p 60. But that's it. As for VGA... No. I have to use it at school and it just hurts my eyes. It also doesn't get the right resolution/scale to the whole monitor properly a lot of the time.

[Stahlmann]

I'd say HDMI has the most complete feature set. 2.1 also brings enough bandwidth to fuel any display on the market. And overall it's just included in most devices.

 

DisplayPort is a close 2nd, only limited by it's "PC only" mentality.

[Doobeedoo]

Latest fully featured DP for sure.