Aaaargh!

This is the place to discuss the latest computer hardware issues and technology. Please keep the discussion ON TOPIC!
Post Reply
User avatar
FZ1
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4448
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Contact:

Aaaargh!

Post by FZ1 » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:16 pm

I have a 24" LCD that seems to be on its way out so I've been eying both the Apple 27" LCD and the Dell 27" LCD. I was shying away from the Apple as it only has a mini-display port connection and my GTX 580 doesn't have such an output (HDMI to MDP adapters are not only expensive but supposedly have scaling issues). So I saw a refurbed 30" Dell U3011 on sale for $899 which is a lot less than a new 27" I jumped on it. Upon hooking it up, I find out I can only max the res to 1900x1200 via HDMI? Apparently, from what I can find on the web (nothing on Dell's site so far) to use full res 2560x1600, you need to use the displayport connection. WHAT?!?!?
Joe

DragonFury
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 605
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:51 am

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by DragonFury » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:29 pm

hdmi has a limitation of HD resolutions. it should have a Dual DVI input if not u screwed. Even if you use a mini HDMI to Mini DP you are still limited to the HDMI's max resolution. The only way you can go with the native resolution of your monitor is to see if they make a DVI to min DP adapter. the only other way is unless you happen to have a AMD video card that already has mini DP ports on the card.
Mini ME
Is in a state of flux....

User avatar
FZ1
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4448
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by FZ1 » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:33 pm

HDMI does support up to 4096×2160 depending on which HDMI version it is. I was able to use a Dual DVI-D to get it to work full res but it's a little asinine to not equip a monitor capable of such resolutions with ports that don't support full res.
Joe

User avatar
FZ1
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4448
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by FZ1 » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:13 pm

Nice monitor though! Makes my 24" widescreen look small...
1.jpg
1.jpg (47.23 KiB) Viewed 2017 times
Joe

User avatar
Sowser
Legit Fanatic
Legit Fanatic
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 10:50 pm

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by Sowser » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:49 pm

I spent 1/2 that for a 1080P LG 32'' flatscreen tv that works great for a monitor. Of course it doesn't fit very well on the desk... :supz:
Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic.

DragonFury
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 605
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:51 am

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by DragonFury » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:43 pm

FZ1 wrote:HDMI does support up to 4096×2160 depending on which HDMI version it is. I was able to use a Dual DVI-D to get it to work full res but it's a little asinine to not equip a monitor capable of such resolutions with ports that don't support full res.

DP fully supports it, HDMI well that is probably for them console users, or for you if you choose to use that monitor as a htpc. god only knows.

yep them 30" monitors are nice, but for me I play on my 24"'s they aint big but they still know how to please ;)
Mini ME
Is in a state of flux....

User avatar
Digital Puppy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4649
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:36 pm
Location: LA LA Land, CA
Contact:

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by Digital Puppy » Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:24 pm

Sounds like that it's HDMI 1.2 or 1.3a?

I love my 24", but i need to get another to run a dual monitor set up. Can definitely see how you would want to run the HDMI cable versus the clunky DVI...
Just a little puppy trying to make it in a big digital world.

User avatar
Major_A
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 3793
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by Major_A » Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:26 pm

For the cost of that monitor you could've purchased a 46" LED TV, 3D capable, with a built in tuner for the same price. I realize that you are losing Desktop real estate but I'd rather have a giant TV as a monitor.

Sorry I know that doesn't help, just my $0.02.

User avatar
FZ1
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4448
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by FZ1 » Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:40 pm

Those TV's won't have the color accuracy I need for photo editing. I could've have found numerous LCD monitors for cheaper but less quality.
Joe

User avatar
Major_A
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
Posts: 3793
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by Major_A » Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:43 pm

I figured there was a reason you went with the 30", figured it was the resolution. Didn't think about the color accuracy.

User avatar
FZ1
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4448
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Aaaargh!

Post by FZ1 » Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:05 pm

Size isn't everything 8-[ :lol:
Joe

Post Reply