Joined
·
645 Posts
I thought I might as well follow up with an answer to a question I posed a while back, but never got answered... 
Can DVI-HDCP equipped HDTVs be connected directly to HTPCs w/o a transcoder?
Well, the JVC 48" RPTV I just finished testing can, even though the JVC manual and the store salespeople say otherwise.
I ran some quick tests with a GF4, an 8500, and then a G550, and they all recognized and handled the JVC - in rather different ways, but they all managed it.
I used PowerStrip to create a number of resolutions, but then neutralized it so extra software was irrelevant (DVI devices do their own timing anyway).
NVidia: The GF4 posted on the JVC, and Windows started up with a New Hardware screen, recognizing the JVC as a PnP digital monitor with a maximum resolution of 1920x540. Despite a lot of fiddling, it would not accept any vertical resolution above 540 lines, but it would accept anything below that. There was considerable over scan at all resolutions.
ATI: The 8500 wouldn't post visually and the screen remained blank until the Windows desktop appeared. At that point, Windows recognized new hardware, but unlike with the GF4, the Radeon said the there was a 1280x720 digital monitor connected, and 1280x720 actually worked - with considerable over scan, but it worked. On the down side, a lot of lower resolutions did not work at all (screen corruption).
Matrox: Like the GF4, the G550 posted visually on the JVC, but there was even more overscan than with the other two. With one exception: 1440x480 appeared with almost no under or over scan whatsoever.
So Matrox and NVidia offered the "cleanest" solutions, but ATI delivered the highest resolution. Down side to all of them: none of them would do 1920x1080i - it just wasn't possible, even with the Matrox's native interlaced support.
Can DVI-HDCP equipped HDTVs be connected directly to HTPCs w/o a transcoder?
Well, the JVC 48" RPTV I just finished testing can, even though the JVC manual and the store salespeople say otherwise.
I ran some quick tests with a GF4, an 8500, and then a G550, and they all recognized and handled the JVC - in rather different ways, but they all managed it.
I used PowerStrip to create a number of resolutions, but then neutralized it so extra software was irrelevant (DVI devices do their own timing anyway).
NVidia: The GF4 posted on the JVC, and Windows started up with a New Hardware screen, recognizing the JVC as a PnP digital monitor with a maximum resolution of 1920x540. Despite a lot of fiddling, it would not accept any vertical resolution above 540 lines, but it would accept anything below that. There was considerable over scan at all resolutions.
ATI: The 8500 wouldn't post visually and the screen remained blank until the Windows desktop appeared. At that point, Windows recognized new hardware, but unlike with the GF4, the Radeon said the there was a 1280x720 digital monitor connected, and 1280x720 actually worked - with considerable over scan, but it worked. On the down side, a lot of lower resolutions did not work at all (screen corruption).
Matrox: Like the GF4, the G550 posted visually on the JVC, but there was even more overscan than with the other two. With one exception: 1440x480 appeared with almost no under or over scan whatsoever.
So Matrox and NVidia offered the "cleanest" solutions, but ATI delivered the highest resolution. Down side to all of them: none of them would do 1920x1080i - it just wasn't possible, even with the Matrox's native interlaced support.