R9 290 DVI doesnt work

[Flashie]

I bought a MSI R9 290 recently, and i had cleaned out its PCB tracts using alcohol and replaced its thermal paste as well as doing a general cleaning of the card (because i had been told the card "may have died due to overheating, but it never showed up on my TV again.". To test it for myself - i plugged it into my PC, plugged in my HDMI cable (because i use DVI I to VGA converter on my GTX 970, but this card takes DVI D, which i didnt have a converter for.). 

 

It worked fine with the HDMI, but it didnt work with DVI D (using a converter). I maybe thought it was my converter, so i decided to go and buy a brand new one today - and when i tried to use it plus the R9 290 on my test PC today, still no image comes though - but it does with HDMI though...

 

How do i fix this? (Without using HDMI). Please keep in mind i have full access to the card as well as its internals. I also have the tools necessary to do any internal work if given the solution

 

 

[Naeaes]

Wait, what? You're not trying to use a DVI-D -> VGA adapter are you? They don't work. You can't convert digital signal to analog with a dumb adapter.

[Flashie]

Just now, Naeaes said:

Wait, what? You're not trying to use a DVI-D -> VGA adapter are you? They don't work. You can't convert digital signal to analog with a dumb adapter.

Working fine with my DVI-I to VGA adapter

 

[Sakkura]

6 minutes ago, Flashie said:

Working fine with my DVI-I to VGA adapter

 

What adapter is that? Would have to be an expensive active adapter to convert the digital signal to analog.

 

If it is an active adapter, the DVI port may just be broken.

[Naeaes]

4 minutes ago, Flashie said:

Working fine with my DVI-I to VGA adapter

 

Yeah. DVI-I has both, analog and digital. DVI-D is digital only and DVI-A is analog only. Here's a list to help you tell which is which. 

HDMI is digital only and VGA is analog only.

So. DVI-I converts fine to both HDMI and VGA

DVI-D only to HDMI

DVI-A only to VGA

[Flashie]

1 minute ago, Naeaes said:

Yeah. DVI-I has both, analog and digital. DVI-D is digital only and DVI-A is analog only. Here's a list to help you tell which is which. 

HDMI is digital only and VGA is analog only.

So. DVI-I converts fine to both HDMI and VGA

DVI-D only to HDMI

DVI-A only to VGA

So what would be the best option to get the DVI-D working to my VGA monitor? The monitor unfortunately only has VGA. Am busy going through the list right now anyways. Thanks for the reply

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, Flashie said:

So what would be the best option to get the DVI-D working to my VGA monitor? The monitor unfortunately only has VGA. Am busy going through the list right now anyways. Thanks for the reply

Something like this.

[Oshino Shinobu]

1 minute ago, Flashie said:

So what would be the best option to get the DVI-D working to my VGA monitor? The monitor unfortunately only has VGA. Am busy going through the list right now anyways. Thanks for the reply

You'd need an active adapter from DVI to VGA (make sure it is DVI to VGA, not VGA to DVI, they can be one-directional). They typically require a source of power, such as USB. 

[Naeaes]

Just now, Flashie said:

So what would be the best option to get the DVI-D working to my VGA monitor? The monitor unfortunately only has VGA. Am busy going through the list right now anyways. Thanks for the reply

An active signal converter would work but they're expensive and often don't work. Your best bet would be to use DisplayPort. DP converts just fine to VGA. Something like this. 

[Sakkura]

3 minutes ago, Naeaes said:

An active signal converter would work but they're expensive and often don't work. Your best bet would be to use DisplayPort. DP converts just fine to VGA. Something like this. 

Displayport requires an active adapter too.

[Flashie]

4 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Something like this.

 

3 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

You'd need an active adapter from DVI to VGA (make sure it is DVI to VGA, not VGA to DVI, they can be one-directional). They typically require a source of power, such as USB. 

 

1 minute ago, Naeaes said:

An active signal converter would work but they're expensive and often don't work. Your best bet would be to use DisplayPort. DP converts just fine to VGA. Something like this. 

So this adapter would not work then?

 

The packaging on it says "AD-DDV-MF DVI-D 24 + 1 Male to SVGA Female Nickel Plated Adapter"

Because if thats the case that it is impossible for it to work, I'll be speaking to my boss at the shop i bought it from, to get rid of them immediately.

[Oshino Shinobu]

2 minutes ago, Flashie said:

 

 

So this adapter would not work then?

 

The packaging on it says "AD-DDV-MF DVI-D 24 + 1 Male to SVGA Female Nickel Plated Adapter"

Because if thats the case that it is impossible for it to work, I'll be speaking to my boss at the shop i bought it from, to get rid of them immediately.

That will do nothing. If it were going from digital to digital or analogue to analogue, it could work, but for digital to analogue or vice versa, the signal needs to be converted, which that adapter does not do. 

[Flashie]

4 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

That will do nothing. If it were going from digital to digital or analogue to analogue, it could work, but for digital to analogue or vice versa, the signal needs to be converted, which that adapter does not do. 

What is the point in a company making such an adapter then? To confuse the consumer and technically steal their money?
 

[Naeaes]

13 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Displayport requires an active adapter too.

Yeah. You're right. But unlike DVI, DP provides power which the adapters can utilize.

[Flashie]

1 minute ago, Naeaes said:

Yeah. You're right. But unlike DVI, DP provides power which the adapters can utilize.

Just a pity that all the R9 290 has is the DVI and HDMI. Theres no other option for me now i guess except HDMI? (or the active adapter
 

[Flashie]

3 minutes ago, Naeaes said:

Yeah. You're right. But unlike DVI, DP provides power which the adapters can utilize.

Oh, i apologize. Didnt notice you quoted the other reply till after the message went through

[Naeaes]

14 minutes ago, Flashie said:

 

 

So this adapter would not work then?

 

The packaging on it says "AD-DDV-MF DVI-D 24 + 1 Male to SVGA Female Nickel Plated Adapter"

Because if thats the case that it is impossible for it to work, I'll be speaking to my boss at the shop i bought it from, to get rid of them immediately.

Yeah. You got ripped off.

Albeit, since that thing is not supposed to work in a computer, I've always wondered if it worked by plugging two of those at both ends of a VGA cable and using that as a kind of DVI-D cable. 

[Flashie]

1 minute ago, Naeaes said:

Yeah. You got ripped off.

Albeit, since that thing is not supposed to work in a computer, I've always wondered if it worked by plugging two of those at both ends of a VGA cable and using that as a kind of DVI-D cable. 

I actually have 2 of those, and wouldnt mind at all to test such a thing. Would be interesting to see the results - I'd need to find a monitor with DVI-D Input though then i wouldnt mind testing it

 

[Naeaes]

Just now, Flashie said:

I actually have 2 of those, and wouldnt mind at all to test such a thing. Would be interesting to see the results - I'd need to find a monitor with DVI-D Input though then i wouldnt mind testing it

 

If you can mange it, please let me know.  It'd really be pushing the limits of my personal motto: "If it looks stupid but works, it's not stupid."

[Oshino Shinobu]

13 minutes ago, Flashie said:

What is the point in a company making such an adapter then? To confuse the consumer and technically steal their money?
 

Have you not seen $1000 HDMI cables that offer "amazing visual clarity"? It's very common for companies to sell products that rips off people who don't know better. 

[Flashie]

15 hours ago, Naeaes said:

If you can mange it, please let me know.  It'd really be pushing the limits of my personal motto: "If it looks stupid but works, it's not stupid."

If I can ask, why isn't it possible for digital to be converted to analogue without the active adapter?  I wanna get some reason before I talk too my boss to remove them 

[Naeaes]

On 4/30/2016 at 10:17 AM, Flashie said:

If I can ask, why isn't it possible for digital to be converted to analogue without the active adapter?  I wanna get some reason before I talk too my boss to remove them 

I'll explain four concepts to get to the root of this. Passive and active conversion and digital and analog signals. It's a bit too elaborate but will help you with a lot of other stuff in the long run.

 

Passive conversion is just two connectors soldered together. You can have, say, RCA at one end and a 3.5mm plug at the other and a wire connecting the two. It does nothing to the signal but you'll be able to plug it into different connectors. There's nothing smart abot a wire like that. And since a wire like that doesn't do anything at all but physically connect the two together, you can technically have any wire you can imagine with any connectors in the world. Want a DVI to 3.5mm audio? Fine. Want HDMI to Sata? Sure. Want friggin' left-front stereo channel from a 2012 Toyota Hilux into 240VAC Scuco? Why the hell not, just solder the two together. None of these do anything but convert one connector to the other and do not comment if it will or technically even imply if it will work. That's entirely up to the two devices. Both all digital and all analog devices can use passive conversion but not mix and match. DVI-A to VGA works, Mini-HDMI to HDMI works, DVI-A to HDMI doesn't work. 
Unless you don't use it for the implied purpose but for something entirely different. Solder an HDMI jack on your headset, and a DVI-A instead of the headphone connectors on your computer and use a DVI-A to HDMI cable to connect the two. 

 

Active conversion actually does something. It's more than just connectors. You might say, the active part of the conversion is entirely separate from the passive connectors. There's a chip or something that listens to the signal coming in, perhaps de-compresses it, converts it onto something else and then transmits it onward to the other connector. Think of it like a translator. You speak English into it and Spanish comes out. 
BTW, that's not to say that if you speak Spanish into the other end, English will come out from the first one. Active conversion isn't always two-way. But with active conversion, it's possible to go from VGA (Analog) to HDMI (Digital) or for instance PCI-E (Digital) to Sata-III (Also digital). Did you see that? The signal stays digital but still needs active conversion. And also, the connectors can stay the same but the signal can change. A HDMI splitter would have HDMI-in and several HDMI-out and only mess with the signal to trick the sending device into thinking there's only one device plugged in.

 

Analog signal is generated by varying the intensity of the voltage according to the intensity of the signal. For example, a black color might be 0 Volts, bright blue could be 5 Volts and a mellow mid-way gray-ish blue would be 2,5 Volts. Do the same for red and green channels and you basically have VGA on your hands. 
Also going below the 0 Volts is possible in analog signaling. Sound does that. Going far above 0 Volts pushes the cone of a speaker far ahead and going far below 0 Volts pulls it far back and varying different voltages in between very quickly and precisely, moves the cone very quickly and precisely generating sound like music. 

 

Digital signal on the other hand is kind of all or nothing. Either there is electricity or not and it's not so much about how much there is. Hope you know about binary and bits a bit.
In digital signal you'd put 5 Volts into the wire to generate a 1-bit and 0 Volts generate a 0-bit. There's never 4 Volts or 2 Volts or anything but either 0 or 5 Volts. Well, there shouldn't be or there should be as little of them as possible. So, combining with the example from the analog signal, since you only have 0 Volts and 5 Volts available, this digital signal could only ever generate full black or full blue and nothing in between. But digital signals don't work like that. Instead you combine those ones and zeroes together and create numbers. And the receiving device interprets the numbers, not the voltages. For instance there might a signal of 00000000, 00000000, 11111111 representing #0000ff (that's bright blue in html) and 00-00-255 in plain decimal.

As I explained earlier, it's entirely possible to connect a digital source to an analog input. You can for instance pull apart the cable leading to your modem, solder a jack on it and plug that to the mic input in your stereo. Every 1-bit would push the cone far forward and every 0-bit would pull it back in the middle. It'd generate noise too. If you ever heard the noise from a Dial-up modem, that's an analog representation of a digital signal. 

 

So to recap, passive converters exist and can work but it's not the converter making it work, it's the devices. Active converters do something to the signal itself and usually also include a passive part that converts the connectors too. Analog signal is about how much electricity there is and digital is about if there is or not.