HDMI through DVI cable and is HDMI really better than DVI?

[kpierce]

I just received a computer with an HDMI connection and I would like to utilize this, and I might add I like it very much. However I have my desktop in a closet and when my house was built I ran many cables from the closet to my desk(inside the walls). Such as 4 USB cables, a DVI cable, a VGA cable and several audio cables.

This might be a dumb question, but can I get a converter for both ends of a DVI cable, allowing me to plug into the HDMI outlets on the back of my desktop and the back of my monitor... Basically convert the ends of a DMI cable to HDMI. This would also need to carry audio.. So the more I write this out the more I think this is not possible.

If that is not possible I will have to figure out how to run a 15 cable across my room and still have it look nice.

One additional question. With my current cabling(in side the walls), I can still get DVI and Audio/Stereo (and that takes the need for HDMI out of the picture. My question is what are the advanages of HDMI over DVI other than being able to run audio through HDMI? Are there other advantages that would help me make a case to figure out how to get HDMI running?

thank you in advance for your help and support.
kendall

 

[highfigh]

I just received a computer with an HDMI connection and I would like to utilize this, and I might add I like it very much. However I have my desktop in a closet and when my house was built I ran many cables from the closet to my desk(inside the walls). Such as 4 USB cables, a DVI cable, a VGA cable and several audio cables.

This might be a dumb question, but can I get a converter for both ends of a DVI cable, allowing me to plug into the HDMI outlets on the back of my desktop and the back of my monitor... Basically convert the ends of a DMI cable to HDMI. This would also need to carry audio.. So the more I write this out the more I think this is not possible.

If that is not possible I will have to figure out how to run a 15 cable across my room and still have it look nice.

One additional question. With my current cabling(in side the walls), I can still get DVI and Audio/Stereo (and that takes the need for HDMI out of the picture. My question is what are the advanages of HDMI over DVI other than being able to run audio through HDMI? Are there other advantages that would help me make a case to figure out how to get HDMI running?

thank you in advance for your help and support.
kendall

No, HDMI is NOT better than DVI, but we have no choice in the matter. It's here and it has been forced on us without us or the installation community being involved in the discussion.

They're not done adding things to HDMI, so it's possible that your DVI cable won't have what HDMI needs. It's a lot easier to use an HDMI with adapters to connect to DVI. I have been trying to find a female DVI (NOT the end with pins) to female HDMI adapter and some of my suppliers have told me that they can't get them.

 

[j_garcia]

They are exactly the same thing except DVI does not carry audio.

 

[jonnythan]

No, HDMI is NOT better than DVI

Well, unless you count the fact that HDMI can carry audio (and now even ethernet).

You're not getting single-cable solutions from your BD player or receiver using DVI.

Anyway, to OP, you can't do what you want. You will need to either replace the cable or use HDMI for video only and keep using the existing audio cables for audio.

 

[highfigh]

Well, unless you count the fact that HDMI can carry audio (and now even ethernet).

You're not getting single-cable solutions from your BD player or receiver using DVI.

Anyway, to OP, you can't do what you want. You will need to either replace the cable or use HDMI for video only and keep using the existing audio cables for audio.

Which has fewer problems with continuous signal- DVI or HDMI?

Carrying audio doesn't make one better than the other. I want a bulletproof method of carrying the signal to the display and HDMI is hardly that. I use a display for one thing- video, not audio. If the TV is where all sources will be connected and the system won't include a receiver or pre-pro, fine. If the ARC will be used because the first place the cable signal goes is the TV, fine. If the system is simple enough that the rest of the equipment doesn't need to be where all of the switching occurs, also fine. However, if the system is elaborate and all switching is done by the receiver or pre-pro, I want no problems with CEC/HDCP or anything else. When a bad HDMI cable costs me money because the manufacturer doesn't put more than a short warranty on it and they don't pay for my labor to replace it, I'd much rather use component video.

 

[dnizly]

adapters?

You definitely can buy adapters if that is easier though. Sounds as if the issue is that you have the house pre-wired with DVI? You could get an HDMI - DVI adapter and then just run it all as it was before. I'm sure there are many other (and probably better) options, but here is one:

Sorry, but the system won't allow me to put a true link, just google:

HDMI male to dvi female adapter

and you will find em

 

[j_garcia]

You definitely can buy adapters if that is easier though. Sounds as if the issue is that you have the house pre-wired with DVI? You could get an HDMI - DVI adapter and then just run it all as it was before. I'm sure there are many other (and probably better) options, but here is one:

Sorry, but the system won't allow me to put a true link, just google:

HDMI male to dvi female adapter

and you will find em

I've used various DVI-HDMI adapters and they work fine. An adapter won't add audio capability though, because audio over DVI does not exist.

Anyway, to OP, you can't do what you want. You will need to either replace the cable or use DVI for video only and keep using the existing audio cables for audio.

This ^^ (with one correction )

 

[jonnythan]

Well I meant the HDMI connections over the DVI cable. So I guess my original and your correction are both correct

 

[jonnythan]

Which has fewer problems with continuous signal- DVI or HDMI?

Carrying audio doesn't make one better than the other. I want a bulletproof method of carrying the signal to the display and HDMI is hardly that. I use a display for one thing- video, not audio. If the TV is where all sources will be connected and the system won't include a receiver or pre-pro, fine. If the ARC will be used because the first place the cable signal goes is the TV, fine. If the system is simple enough that the rest of the equipment doesn't need to be where all of the switching occurs, also fine. However, if the system is elaborate and all switching is done by the receiver or pre-pro, I want no problems with CEC/HDCP or anything else. When a bad HDMI cable costs me money because the manufacturer doesn't put more than a short warranty on it and they don't pay for my labor to replace it, I'd much rather use component video.

HDMI and DVI are the same thing. They are electrically identical in terms of video signal.

Both DVI and HDMI support HDCP.