Lg226wtq dvi-i input

[andsaw]

Hi all, I have a lg 226wtq monitor that has vga and dvi inputs, i tried to connect a 5 metre vga cable to the monitor and got terrible ghosting so i tried putting a vga to dvi converter adapter on each end and connected pc to moniter using a palit 9500gt super+ 1gb, when i tried to connect to the monitor it wouldnt go in, on closer inspection the dvi cable that came with the monitor has a thinner C5 pin (the widest pin in the connector), so i snipped the C5 pin down to size plus i had to cut out pins C1-4 then i managed to insert into the moniter but got no image except a check cable connection on the monitor, is it all down to the cable and why the different size C5 pin.The cable i got of ebay that strangly has got expandable cable sleeving over solid cable with chokes at both end, or is this trying to hide to cable specs thats printed on them.Any help on this will be appreciated.

 

[Andy98765]

Going Graphics card---DVI-VGA------VGA-DVI---monitor will not work. First off the DVI connection at the graphics card is basically a do all, i.e. DVI signals and VGA signals, but at the monitor end it is digital DVI ONLY and the socket is designed to try and stop you plugging something that shouldn't be.

 

[Alphathon]

Sorry to break this to you, but what you did was cut out the analogue connectors (the bits which transfer the data carried by VGA). What you essentially did was convert a DVI-I connector (Digital and analogue; essentially HDMI(video only) and VGA combined) into a DVI-D (Digital only; essentially HDMI(video only)). It would seem that your monitor doesn't have a DVI-I connection, but a DVI-D connection, therefore VGA-DVI adapters won't work. You have to connect it via DVI-D or VGA (directly). Besides, if you were to connect DVI-I > VGA > DVI-I, you would be no better of as you would essentially be using a VGA cable, albeit with different connectors.

What really confuses me is why are you using VGA to connect to the monitor? DVI-D is far superior to VGA, being digital, as it isn't susceptible to interferance in the same way as analogue connectors like VGA. I didn't notice it before I had been using DVI for a while, but when you look at VGA (using a cheapish standard cable; the kind you'd get bundled with a monitor) it is incredibly noisy.

Also, ghosting is likelly to be due the monitor itself rather than the type of connector. That is, if you actually mean ghoasting. Ghoasting is where you get a bright or dark patch which follows a moving item on screen (like a shaddow of itself from a few milliseconds ago). If that is what you are seeing, it isn't likelly to be fixed by using DVI-D as it is down to the LCD panel used in the monitor. If you are actually seeing image lag, where the image appears to remain in place, kinda like motion blur, then using DVI-D might solve it as it could be down to the analogue decoder.

If it helps, here is a diagram of what each pin does:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/65/DVI_pinout.svg

EDIT: looks like Andy98765 beat me to it

 

[andsaw]

I think i give a bit of duff info all these different connections gets abit confusing sometimes, yes you are right i do have a dvi-d and have noticed its a single link connector, so the main question is it would be better to use a 5 metre dvi-d to dvi-d single link cable also i plan to use the dvi-i on the graghics card to connect to my lg 42pg6000 im just hoping thats going to work, i would love to hear a resounding yes, cheers my friends. ps the ghosting i refered to was i got like multiple images waiting for it to all merge back sort of thing.

 

[Alphathon]

It is indeed a yes. That should work perfectly. DVI was designed so that both DVI-D (digital) and DVI-A (analogue) would fit into DVI-I (Both), but so that DVI-A and DVI-D wouldn't fit in each other. This is because both will work when connected to DVI-I, but neither will work when connected to the other. Just get a DVI-D cable and you should be good to go .