what I found from Digital Display Work Group (www.ddwg.org)
Dual Link Dual Link DVI supports 2x165 MHz (2048x1536 at 60 Hz, 1920x1080 at 85 Hz). A dual link implementation utilizes all 24 of the available pins.
Single Link Single Link DVI supports a maximum bandwidth of 165 MHz (1920x1080 at 60 Hz, 1280x1024 at 85Hz). A single link implementation utilizes 12 of the 24 available pins.
Apple Dual-Link version of the nVidia 6800 is also exclusive to the PowerMac G5, so there's another $2000 or so needed to run the Apple 30"....
I'm sure this technology will come to the PC _very_ soon, and will also require serious video card muscle to run at such high resolutions. For that reason, I don't see the same requirement on a Mac as a fair basis of criticism.
#14- the Apple display requires a Dual-Link DVI connection because Single-Link DVI isn't capable of a 2560x1600 resolution.
Single-Link DVI only has 165MHz bandwidth which means a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 or 1600x1280 at a refresh-rate of 60hz. By using Dual-Link you get double the bandwidth which allows for double the resolution -- 2560x1600 is exactly double 1600x1280.
Nice review, although I would have liked a little more information in regards to component input quality vs DVI input quality. I sure it would be similar, but as the owner of an AWI 9800pro wanting one (syntax olevia 30') to use as a second monitor, it would be nice to see a comparison of the two input methods.
Anyone out there have any input as to how the component input would compare to the DVI input (or VGA, as I might buy a PCI vidcard) with relation to Powerstrip & gaming etc. let me know.
apple was saying how they are the first to bring it out but now they're not alone.
Yes the resolution is crap in comparison but it's literally half as much ($700 video card needed for the apple). For another $500, you'll be able to get a high resolution LCD soon
But shouldn't ratings be given out be comparable to other products at this exact instant in time? Going along with your logic, in 10 years or so every single product you review would get 5's and there'd be no point in doing reviews. It's just like how game sites review games -- a 9.0 5 years ago would get maybe a 5 today. You need to keep raising your standards to match the rate at which technology is progressing :p
"LCD quality has improved dramatically enough that we need to reevaluate our subjective benchmark. I am open to suggestions if anyone has them."
Have you ever considered renting a high-speed video camera(1000pps should suffice) and determining actual response times? Perhaps you could test 10-20 or so color transitions in addition to the black-white-black time they provide us with now. If the expense is too great to do this often, maybe a single article devoted to this with every lcd you can get hold of would be possible. I would definitely like to see the response times from some of the worst case scenarios on the new 12-16ms lcds. You could find some good transitions to test here: http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,3428,a=...
Zebo we used to give out 3s, 2s, and even 1s. To be honest, in the last two years LCD quality has improved dramatically enough that we need to reevaluate our subjective benchmark. I am open to suggestions if anyone has them.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
21 Comments
Back to Article
Swaid - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
K, got it...what I found from Digital Display Work Group (www.ddwg.org)
Dual Link
Dual Link DVI supports 2x165 MHz (2048x1536 at 60 Hz, 1920x1080 at 85 Hz). A dual link implementation utilizes all 24 of the available pins.
Single Link
Single Link DVI supports a maximum bandwidth of 165 MHz (1920x1080 at 60 Hz, 1280x1024 at 85Hz). A single link implementation utilizes 12 of the 24 available pins.
Souka - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
1280x768 native? Too low rez...my 19" is at that rez.TallCoolOne - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
Apple Dual-Link version of the nVidia 6800 is also exclusive to the PowerMac G5, so there's another $2000 or so needed to run the Apple 30"....I'm sure this technology will come to the PC _very_ soon, and will also require serious video card muscle to run at such high resolutions. For that reason, I don't see the same requirement on a Mac as a fair basis of criticism.
PrinceGaz - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
#14- the Apple display requires a Dual-Link DVI connection because Single-Link DVI isn't capable of a 2560x1600 resolution.Single-Link DVI only has 165MHz bandwidth which means a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 or 1600x1280 at a refresh-rate of 60hz. By using Dual-Link you get double the bandwidth which allows for double the resolution -- 2560x1600 is exactly double 1600x1280.
Neekotin - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
hey kris, is it really that good? ive been shopping for the dell 20' lately and now this.. your making my headache..Swaid - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
#15Awsome!
KristopherKubicki - Thursday, July 1, 2004 - link
Working on the Apple LCD and the Philips 1920x1080 LCD also.Kristopher
Swaid - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Has anyone seen reviews of the 30" Apple LCD display yet? The claimed 16ms response times sound very interesting for a 30" LCD...Actually it sounds like its 2 LCD panels put together since it needs a card capable of dual DVI output... Interesting!
Anandtech needs to review this ASAP! :D
WileCoyote - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Wow, it's a LCD review and the manufacturer isn't Samsung! Remember this moment, they don't come very often at Anandtech.Dagar - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Does the TV supply EDID to the PC via DVI?gbc02 - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Nice review, although I would have liked a little more information in regards to component input quality vs DVI input quality. I sure it would be similar, but as the owner of an AWI 9800pro wanting one (syntax olevia 30') to use as a second monitor, it would be nice to see a comparison of the two input methods.Anyone out there have any input as to how the component input would compare to the DVI input (or VGA, as I might buy a PCI vidcard) with relation to Powerstrip & gaming etc. let me know.
thx.
MAME - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
I meant the 30 inch lcd displayapple was saying how they are the first to bring it out but now they're not alone.
Yes the resolution is crap in comparison but it's literally half as much ($700 video card needed for the apple). For another $500, you'll be able to get a high resolution LCD soon
Dagar - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
"... screen capable of 1080p." It should be 1080i.However, how or why would you consider interlacing a signal on a digital display?
araczynski - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
still crap compared to the new apple one, half the price, but that's won't mean much when you try to use it for some gaming.not sure what they were tryign to accomplish with this monitor, maybe just the typical sheep-milking, imagine that.
Apologiliac - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Those game screenshots look tinted blue alot and the UT2k4 one looks like it has too much red :(Fr0zeN2 - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
But shouldn't ratings be given out be comparable to other products at this exact instant in time? Going along with your logic, in 10 years or so every single product you review would get 5's and there'd be no point in doing reviews. It's just like how game sites review games -- a 9.0 5 years ago would get maybe a 5 today. You need to keep raising your standards to match the rate at which technology is progressing :pklah - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
"Stealing apple's thunder"Resolution: 1280x768
Apple's Res: 2560 x 1600
------------------------
"LCD quality has improved dramatically enough that we need to reevaluate our subjective benchmark. I am open to suggestions if anyone has them."
Have you ever considered renting a high-speed video camera(1000pps should suffice) and determining actual response times? Perhaps you could test 10-20 or so color transitions in addition to the black-white-black time they provide us with now. If the expense is too great to do this often, maybe a single article devoted to this with every lcd you can get hold of would be possible. I would definitely like to see the response times from some of the worst case scenarios on the new 12-16ms lcds. You could find some good transitions to test here: http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,3428,a=...
KristopherKubicki - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Zebo we used to give out 3s, 2s, and even 1s. To be honest, in the last two years LCD quality has improved dramatically enough that we need to reevaluate our subjective benchmark. I am open to suggestions if anyone has them.Kristopher
Zebo - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
I guess it's an unwriiten rule when using a 1-5 scale never giver an average 3? 25 ms could'nt be anything else but a 2-3.I'm going to assume from now on since I've never seen below a 4 in any of these monitor reviews 4 means below average, 4.5 average, 5 good.
DerekWilson - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
This is a lower resolution part than Apple's solution ...MAME - Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - link
Stealing apple's thunder$1k cheaper and no $600 video card to drive it