adapterdisplaydvigraphics card
I recently bought a 144hz / 1ms latency monitor with only a dvi connector for 144hz. My gaming laptop (hp omen 17-w201ns with gtx 1070) only have Mini Display Port connection.
I have read that you can connect both and still get 120hz 1920×1080 with this kind of adaptor –> Mini DisplayPort to DVI Dual-Link Adapter. Apple one should work?
My question is:
Will this adapter add some kind of extra latency? and if so, will it be noticeable if I do gaming with it?
Thank you.
I don't know for certain, but this is my guess.
DisplayPort is digital. VGA is analogue. DVI (DVI-I) supports both.
The DisplayPort to DVI adapter is only using the digital part of the DVI (DIV-D) standard. The DVI to VGA adapter used the analogue part (DVI-A).
The DisplayPort to VGA adapter probably does a complete conversion, hence being more expensive. It isn't just an electrical connection, but involved some processing too.
I'm writing this on a 2560x1600 Dual Link DVI monitor connected to a computer using HDMI 1.4.
Stop searching for HDMI to DVI-DL adapters. All adapters that you'll find are passive single-link adapters, even though they may be advertised as dual-link.
Although a HDMI 1.4 to Dual Link DVI adapter is possible to implement using an Analog Devices ADV7619 297 MHz HDMI 1.4 receiver that does automatically split high pixel clock links into odd and even pixels and two ADV7513 165 MHz HDMI 1.4 transmitters to transmit the pixels over two separate links, no manufacturer is making such a device.
You need a device that generates Dual Link DVI output from a single link input. And the only one that's widely available is a DisplayPort to Dual Link DVI adapter, sold under several different brands.
With that, we've reduced the problem to converting HDMI 1.4 to DisplayPort 1.1. There were no solutions for this until recently, when the STMicroelectronics chip STDP2600 became available. Several brands sell adapters based on this chip. In case your monitor takes a DP input at full resolution, using only this adapter is enough - no need to convert to DVI-DL.
Connecting those two together should provide a HDMI 1.4 to Dual-Link-DVI solution. However, the Linux Radeon driver (xf86-video-ati) was still not happy with it, and ignored the 2560x1600 videomode in the list of valid modes in EDID. The reason was that the Linux Radeon driver would enable pixel clocks above 165 MHz only in case a monitor has a HDMI Vendor Specific Data Block in the Consumer Electronic Association extended block of EDID.
Obviously, a pure DVI monitor will not have a HDMI VSDB in CEA EB of EDID. I solved that by adding a S/PDIF audio de-embbedder for HDMI that I got off eBay into the chain that adds the CEA EB to add audio descriptors to EDID. A proper solution would be to provide a modified EDID file directly to the driver.
This works for Linux, on Windows you may not need the EDID change, or you may need a more extensive one. I don't have a Windows machine to test.
String all three together, make sure all are powered up via their USB connectors and voilà, beautiful full resolution 2560x1600 picture at 60 Hz refresh rate on my Dual Link DVI monitor.
Best Answer
Mini DisplayPort (same as DisplayPort but different size) to DVI dual link adapters will work just fine, but only those really expensive active adapters ($100~).
What is a active Mini-DP to DVI dual-link adapter? (could be applied in many other adapters)
An active adapter (or powered adapter) it's a bit more complicated than a passive one. A passive one is just a cable that connects the computer to the monitor and it's limited to 60Hz only, like the HDMI. An active adapter is bigger (on the DVI port) because it have an extra chip who converts signals (can't find any better word).
Of course, the chip will need power, not provided by the Mini-DP port (supplied via AC adapter or USB connection).
Why an active adapter needs extra power?
A user on the Apple community in the official page of the adapter you reffered posted this and I'll quote:
Does the Mini-DP to DVI dual-link adapter (from Apple) works on 120Hz?
Yes, see the link above.
Will an active adapter (especifically the Apple one) add latency (aka input lag)?
Maybe, I couldn't find an official source for that question but an user from
120Hz.netposted this. I'll quote as well:The only way to know that is to try yourself. I can't be certain and many of us can't either.