DVI Type	Single-Link DVI-D / DVI-I	Dual-Link DVI-D / DVI-I
Max. Bandwidth (Max. Data Rate)	4.95 Gbit/s (3.96 Gbit/s)	9.90 Gbit/s (7.92 Gbit/s)
2K 1920 × 1080 (16:9) 1920 × 1200 (16:10)	60 Hz 60 Hz	144 Hz 120 Hz
2.5K 2560 × 1080 (≈21:9) 2560 × 1440 (16:9) 2560 × 1600 (16:10)	50 Hz 30 Hz 30 Hz	100 Hz 75 Hz 60 Hz
3.5K 3440 × 1440 (≈21:9)	30 Hz	60 Hz
4K 3840 × 1600 (≈21:9) 3840 × 2160 (16:9) 4096 × 2160 (≈19:10)	24 Hz - -	50 Hz 30 Hz 30 Hz
5K 5120 × 2160 (≈21:9) 5120 × 2880 (16:9)	- -	24 Hz -
8K 7680 × 4320 (16:9)	-	-
Only the highest common / standard frequencies are listed (24 / 30 / 50 / 60 / 75 / 85 / 100 / 120 / 144 / 180 / 200 / 240 Hz, or higher multiples of 60). This table is not meant to list the absolute limits down to the very last Hz. Uncompressed 24 bit/px RGB color and CVT-R2 timing are assumed on this table. Color depth greater than 24 bit/px, YCBCR color model, and chroma subsampling are not supported on DVI.

HDMI Version	1.0–1.2	1.3–1.4	2.0	2.1
Max. Bandwidth (Max. Data Rate)	4.95 Gbit/s (3.96 Gbit/s)	10.20 Gbit/s (8.16 Gbit/s)	18.00 Gbit/s (14.40 Gbit/s)	48.00 Gbit/s (42.67 Gbit/s)
2K 1920 × 1080 (16:9) 1920 × 1200 (16:10)	60 Hz 60 Hz	144 Hz 120 Hz	240 Hz 200 Hz	540 Hz 540 Hz
2.5K 2560 × 1080 (≈21:9) 2560 × 1440 (16:9) 2560 × 1600 (16:10)	50 Hz 30 Hz 30 Hz	100 Hz 85 Hz 75 Hz	180 Hz 144 Hz 120 Hz	480 Hz 360 Hz 300 Hz
3.5K 3440 × 1440 (≈21:9)	30 Hz	60 Hz	100 Hz	300 Hz
4K 3840 × 1600 (≈21:9) 3840 × 2160 (16:9) 4096 × 2160 (≈19:10)	24 Hz - -	50 Hz 30 Hz 30 Hz	85 Hz 60 Hz 60 Hz	240 Hz 180 Hz 180 Hz
5K 5120 × 2160 (≈21:9) 5120 × 2880 (16:9)	- -	24 Hz -	50 Hz 30 Hz	144 Hz 100 Hz
8K 7680 × 4320 (16:9)	-	-	-	50 Hz
Only the highest common / standard frequencies are listed (24 / 30 / 50 / 60 / 75 / 85 / 100 / 120 / 144 / 180 / 200 / 240 Hz, or higher multiples of 60). This table is not meant to list the absolute limits down to the very last Hz. Uncompressed 24 bit/px RGB color and CVT-R2 timing are assumed on this table. Maximum frequency may be lower than what is listed when using 30 bit/px color depth or greater. Maximum frequency may be higher than what is listed when using compression (such as DSC) or YCBCR color with chroma subsampling. HDMI 2.1 uses DSC 1.2 compression to achieve higher display modes such as 7680 × 4320 at 60 Hz with RGB or YCBCR 4:4:4 color.

DisplayPort Version	1.0–1.1	1.2	1.3–1.4
Max. Bandwidth (Max. Data Rate)	10.80 Gbit/s (8.64 Gbit/s)	21.60 Gbit/s (17.28 Gbit/s)	32.40 Gbit/s (25.92 Gbit/s)
2K 1920 × 1080 (16:9) 1920 × 1200 (16:10)	144 Hz 120 Hz	240 Hz 240 Hz	360 Hz 360 Hz
2.5K 2560 × 1080 (≈21:9) 2560 × 1440 (16:9) 2560 × 1600 (16:10)	100 Hz 85 Hz 75 Hz	200 Hz 144 Hz 144 Hz	300 Hz 240 Hz 200 Hz
3.5K 3440 × 1440 (≈21:9)	60 Hz	120 Hz	180 Hz
4K 3840 × 1600 (≈21:9) 3840 × 2160 (16:9) 4096 × 2160 (≈19:10)	50 Hz 30 Hz 30 Hz	100 Hz 75 Hz 75 Hz	144 Hz 120 Hz 100 Hz
5K 5120 × 2160 (≈21:9) 5120 × 2880 (16:9)	30 Hz -	60 Hz 30 Hz	85 Hz 60 Hz
8K 7680 × 4320 (16:9)	-	-	30 Hz
Only the highest common / standard frequencies are listed (24 / 30 / 50 / 60 / 75 / 85 / 100 / 120 / 144 / 180 / 200 / 240 Hz, or higher multiples of 60). This table is not meant to list the absolute limits down to the very last Hz. Uncompressed 24 bit/px RGB color and CVT-R2 timing are assumed on this table. Maximum frequency may be lower than what is listed when using 30 bit/px color depth or greater. Maximum frequency may be higher than what is listed when using compression (such as DSC) or YCBCR color with chroma subsampling. DisplayPort 1.4 uses DSC 1.2 compression to achieve higher display modes such as 7680 × 4320 at 60 Hz with RGB or YCBCR 4:4:4 color.

Constants:
VMIN	=	0.00055 seconds
DMIN	=	0.2 (Minimum value of D. If the D formula is less than 0.2, use 0.2 for D instead)

Input Variables:
H	=	4,096 pixels
V	=	2,560 pixels
F	=	240 Hz

Formulas:
D	=	0.3 −	3,000 • [ ( 1⁄F ) − VMIN ]	=	0.3 −	3,000 • [ ( 1⁄240 ) − 0.00055 ]	=	0.296
			V + 3			2,563

HBLANK	=	H • D	=	4,096 • 0.296	=	( 1,720.3 )↓16	=	1,712 pixels
		1 − D		1 − 0.296

VBLANK	=	(V + 3) • VMIN	+ 4	=	2,563 • 0.00055	+ 4	=	( 393.765 )↓	=	393 pixels
		( 1⁄F ) − VMIN			( 1⁄240 ) − 0.00055

HEFFECTIVE	=	H + HBLANK	=	4,096 + 1,712	=	5,808 pixels
VEFFECTIVE	=	V + VBLANK	=	2,560 + 393	=	2,953 pixels

Results can be checked against the official VESA CVT 1.2 spreadsheet, here: VESA CVT 1.2 Timing Generator.xlsx

Constants:
VMIN	=	0.00046 seconds
HBLANK	=	80 pixels

Input Variables:
H	=	4,096 pixels
V	=	2,560 pixels
F	=	240 Hz

Formulas:
VBLANK	=	V • VMIN	=	2,560 • 0.00046	=	( 317.7 )↑	=	318 pixels
		( 1⁄F ) − VMIN		( 1⁄240 ) − 0.00046

HEFFECTIVE	=	H + HBLANK	=	4,096 + 80	=	4,176 pixels
VEFFECTIVE	=	V + VBLANK	=	2,560 + 318	=	2,878 pixels

Results can be checked against the official VESA CVT 1.2 spreadsheet, here: VESA CVT 1.2 Timing Generator.xlsx

 

Mini DisplayPort (mDP) is just a different shape connector. It is functionally identical to a full-size DisplayPort connector, there is no difference in capability, feature support, or compatibility with devices or adapters (other than the difference in physical shape). DisplayPort-to-mDP passive adapters can be freely used to connect devices with a DisplayPort plug to an mDP port instead (or vice versa) without any effect on the operation or compatibility of the devices. DisplayPort and Mini DisplayPort are completely interchangeable.

The image quality of DisplayPort is identical to DVI and HDMI when set to the same image settings.

DisplayPort and HDMI do support a wider range of possible settings compared to DVI, but this does not affect anything on displays which don't take advantage of those extra capabilities. DVI supports up to 24 bit/px color depth (16.7 million colors), which is what most computer monitors and TVs run at. DisplayPort and HDMI are capable of higher color depth than 24 bit/px (like 30 bit/px or 1.07 billion colors) while DVI isn't, but this does not make them any better at displaying 24 bit/px color than DVI, so it is irrelevant on most standard displays.

Unless your display has capabilities that are beyond what DVI supports, there will be no advantage to using DP or HDMI instead of DVI.

No, DisplayPort cables do not affect image quality. DisplayPort transmits data in a digital format, which means that the electrical signals do not represent the image data directly; distortion in the signal will not lead to distortion in the image, so it does not actually matter whether the signal is protected from interference or not. The "cable quality" or "signal strength" are irrelevant to the appearance of the image. Features such as "gold-plated connectors" or "high-quality shielding" are superfluous and do not affect the image quality.

It has been known to happen with very poor quality uncertified cables, but this is uncommon. Poor quality cables may prevent high resolutions and refresh frequencies from being used, but besides that, DisplayPort cables will not limit the resolution or refresh frequency, and you do not need to worry about purchasing "DisplayPort 1.1" cables or "DisplayPort 1.2" cables. DisplayPort cables do not have "versions", there is only "the standard DisplayPort cable". Any certified DisplayPort cable, which has gone through VESA's certification process, will handle the full bandwidth of the latest DisplayPort standard (32 Gbit/s in version 1.4, at the time of writing).

No, DisplayPort cables do not have versions. While there are several different versions of the DisplayPort standard, all versions use the same cable. Only DisplayPort devices (graphics cards, monitors, etc.) have a version, which is determined by the control chip inside the device. Cables themselves do not have a version. There is only "the standard DisplayPort cable". There is no such thing as a "DisplayPort 1.2 cable" or a "DisplayPort 1.4 cable". Just be sure to purchase a certified DisplayPort cable, not an off-brand one. Please see this article on the official DisplayPort website for their statement on the topic.

No, any feature of DisplayPort will work over any DisplayPort cable. The cable does not need to "support" a certain feature for it to work.

DisplayPort Source to HDMI Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	Yes
Inline audio supported?	Yes
Image Quality:	Equivalent to HDMI
Maximum Resolution / Frequency:	Equivalent to HDMI, version dependent on source and adapter (see article below) Show HDMI Limits

 

A passive adapter can be used to connect a DisplayPort output to an HDMI input. Inline audio does work through DisplayPort to HDMI adapters.

Not all DisplayPort to HDMI passive adapters are the same, there are several types:

• A Type 1 passive adapter can output up to a 165 MHz HDMI 1.2 signal (sufficient for 1080p 60 Hz)
  
• A Type 2 passive adapter can output up to a 300 MHz HDMI 1.4 signal (sufficient for 1080p 120 Hz or 4K 30 Hz); this requires DisplayPort 1.2 for full bandwidth
  
• A Type 3* passive adapter can output up to a 600 MHz HDMI 2.0 signal (sufficient for 1080p 240 Hz or 4K 60 Hz); this requires DisplayPort 1.3 for full bandwidth
  

Adapters are generally not labeled as "Type 1" or "Type 2" etc. by retailers, so to identify them you will need to examine the product description. Type 1 adapters will usually be listed as being limited to 1920×1080 or 1920×1200, while Type 2 adapters will support up to 4K 30 Hz. Type 3 adapters should support up to 4K 60 Hz, but there are currently none available on the market yet. Type 2 adapters are generally the same price as Type 1 adapters and are compatible with all DisplayPort devices, so there is no reason to purchase a new Type 1 adapter; even if you only need an adapter for 1080p 60 Hz now, the extra capability of a Type 2 adapter may prove useful in the future.

Using a DisplayPort to HDMI passive adapter does not provide any special advantages over a straight HDMI to HDMI connection. No advantages are carried over from DisplayPort, it is no different than a straight HDMI connection.

Type 2 DisplayPort to HDMI passive adapter (option 1): Amazon US
Type 2 DisplayPort to HDMI passive adapter (option 2): Amazon US
Type 2 Mini DisplayPort to HDMI passive adapter: Amazon US

Conversion from DisplayPort 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 or from DisplayPort 1.1 to HDMI 1.4 requires an active adapter.

DisplayPort 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 active adapter (option 1): AmazonUS
DisplayPort 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 active adapter (option 2): Amazon US
Mini DisplayPort 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 active adapter (option 1): Amazon US
Mini DisplayPort 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 active adapter (option 2): Amazon US

DisplayPort Source to DVI Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	Yes
Inline audio supported?	No
Image Quality:	Equivalent to DVI
Maximum Resolution / Frequency:	Equivalent to Single-Link DVI Show DVI Limits

 

A passive adapter can be used to connect a DisplayPort output to a DVI input. This is equivalent to a Single-Link DVI-D connection. Inline audio is not supported. These adapters can still be used to connect to monitors that have Dual-Link DVI ports, but the connection will be limited to the capabilities of Single-Link DVI as outlined in the table above (click "Snow DVI Limits").

All DisplayPort to DVI passive adapters are Single-Link only. DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI passive adapters do not exist. Although most DisplayPort to DVI passive adapters are advertised as "Dual-Link" and may appear to have "Dual-Link" connectors on them, please be warned that these are fake. The extra pins on these DVI connectors are dummy pins which are not connected to anything, and the adapter will still only function as a Single-Link DVI adapter. It is physically impossible to create a passive DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI adapter due to an insufficient number of pins on the DisplayPort connector.

Inexpensive DisplayPort to Single-Link DVI active adapters exist. These are intended for multi-monitor configurations on graphics cards which do not support more than two monitors through DVI / HDMI (including DisplayPort to DVI / HDMI passive adapters). The graphics cards subject to this restriction are listed after the next section. Generally speaking, any inexpensive DisplayPort to DVI active adapter is Single-Link-only. As with passive adapters, these may appear to have "Dual-Link" connectors on them and may be advertised as "Dual-Link", so it is advised to read the description carefully to look for the maximum resolution and refresh frequency that the adapter claims to support. Single-Link DVI adapters will be limited to 1920×1200 @ 60 Hz or 2560×1600 @ 30 Hz.

DisplayPort to Single-Link DVI active adapter: Amazon US

A more complex active adapter is required to convert DisplayPort to a full Dual-Link DVI connection. Please note that DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI active adapters are expensive and generally unreliable, so these should only be considered as a last resort. Even if your monitor has a Dual-Link DVI port, it is usually not necessary to have a Dual-Link DVI connection. Passive and active DisplayPort to Single-Link DVI adapters still function in Dual-Link DVI ports. Dual-Link DVI active adapters should avoided unless the monitor's specifications exceed the limits of Single-Link DVI (listed in the table below).

DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI active adapter (option 1): Amazon US
DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI active adapter (option 2): Amazon US
Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI active adapter (option 1): Amazon US
Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI active adapter (option 2): Amazon US

DisplayPort Source to VGA Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	No

Passive DisplayPort to VGA adapters do not actually exist, but active DisplayPort to VGA adapters are inexpensive and require no additional power, so they are often mistaken as passive adapters.

DisplayPort to VGA active adapters are inexpensive and reliable, and require no additional power connectors. If your graphics card has no native VGA or DVI-I output, then DisplayPort to VGA is the preferred way of connecting to a VGA display, generally more preferred than an HDMI to VGA or DVI-D to VGA active adapter. Since DisplayPort to VGA adapters perform active conversion, they will also work in newer graphics cards without native VGA support, such as the AMD Radeon R9 290X or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 or newer.

DisplayPort to VGA active adapters are often mistaken as passive adapters because of their low cost and size and lack of external power, but all DisplayPort to VGA adapters are active adapters.

Yes, even this is an active adapter, not a passive adapter.

DisplayPort to VGA active adapter: Amazon US

HDMI Source to DisplayPort Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	No

An HDMI output CANNOT be connected to a DisplayPort input with a passive adapter. Passive DisplayPort to HDMI cables/adapters will only function from DisplayPort output to HDMI input, not the other way around.

Conversion from HDMI to DisplayPort requires an active adapter. Please note that these adapters are very unreliable and should only be considered as a last resort. Most HDMI to DisplayPort active adapters do not support the newest HDCP protocols and so they will not work with modern game consoles. I am not aware of any HDMI 2.0+ to DisplayPort 1.2+ active adapters at this time.

HDMI 1.4 to DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter (option 1): Amazon US
HDMI 1.4 to DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter (option 2): Amazon US
HDMI 1.4 to DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter (option 3): Amazon US
HDMI 1.2 to DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter (option 4; advertises HDCP support): Amazon US

 

The image quality of HDMI is identical to DisplayPort and DVI when set to the same image settings.

HDMI and DisplayPort do support a wider range of possible settings compared to DVI, but this does not affect anything on displays which don't take advantage of those extra capabilities. DVI supports up to 24 bit/px color depth (16.7 million colors), which is what most computer monitors and TVs run at. DisplayPort and HDMI are capable of higher color depth than 24 bit/px (like 30 bit/px or 1.07 billion colors) while DVI isn't, but this does not make them any better at displaying 24 bit/px color than DVI, so it is irrelevant on most standard displays.

Unless your display has capabilities that are beyond what DVI supports, there will be no advantage to using DP or HDMI instead of DVI.

No, HDMI cables do not affect image quality. HDMI transmits data in a digital format, which means that the electrical signals do not represent the image data directly; distortion in the signal will not lead to distortion in the image, so it does not actually matter whether the signal is protected from interference or not. The "cable quality" or "signal strength" are irrelevant to the appearance of the image. Features such as "gold-plated connectors" or "high-quality shielding" are superfluous and do not affect the image quality.

No, HDMI cables do not have versions. In fact, advertising a cable as an "HDMI 1.4 cable" or "HDMI 2.0 cable" or "HDMI 2.0 compliant" (etc.) has been banned by the HDMI Licensing authority since 2009 and is a violation of the licensing agreement that cable manufacturers and vendors must sign with them in order to legally use the HDMI logo and trademarks. Unfortunately HDMI Licensing does not actively enforce this, since it would involve quite a considerable legal campaign at this point. Nonetheless, the creators of the HDMI specification have specifically prohibited classifying HDMI cables by their "HDMI version", because this is not actually a property that cables have in the first place.

No. There are several different "levels" or "categories" of HDMI cables, rated by maximum bandwidth. This is not the same as an "HDMI version". HDMI version and feature support are not affected by cables. Even a Standard Speed HDMI cable can support an HDMI 2.0 or HDMI 2.1 connection between devices, and while the maximum bandwidth may be limited (the full 48.0 Gbit/s of HDMI 2.1 will not be available, for example), all other version-specific features such as HDR and VRR will still work. Using a so-called "HDMI 1.4 cable" (a High Speed HDMI cable) between two HDMI 2.0 devices will not "downgrade the connection to HDMI 1.4" and prevent all HDMI 2.0 features from working as some people believe; the only feature that is affected by the cable (besides inline Ethernet) is the maximum bandwidth, which is why cables are rated by bandwidth, and not by "HDMI version".


While it is tempting to call High Speed HDMI cables "HDMI 1.4 cables", Premium High Speed cables "HDMI 2.0 cables", and 48G cables "HDMI 2.1 cables" because the ratings of those cables match the maximum bandwidth limits set by those HDMI versions, this should be avoided for the reasons explained above. HDMI versions define more than just bandwidth limits, and calling a High Speed HDMI cable an "HDMI 1.4 cable" implies that it is necessary in order to use HDMI 1.4 features, but this is not the case. You only need it to use the 10.2 Gbit/s bandwidth introduced by HDMI 1.3/1.4, not for the other features. For this reason HDMI cables are simply rated by bandwidth, not by "HDMI version".

Also note that the certifications do not actually tell you anything about the maximum bandwidth of the cable, except that it is at least the listed amount. A High Speed certification simply means the cable was tested at 10.2 Gbit/s and functioned properly at that speed. The maximum bandwidth that the cable can handle could actually be anything above that, be it 10.3 Gbit/s, 20 Gbit/s, or 100 Gbit/s. Of course, you might think "if it could handle all the way up to the next tier of certification, it would just be rated at that tier instead!"; well, yes you'd think so, but unfortunately that isn't always the case, as explained in the next section.

Some people say that High Speed HDMI cables (rated for 10.2 Gbit/s) will still work for full HDMI 2.0 bandwidth (18.0 Gbit/s), while some say you need a Premium High Speed HDMI cable (rated for 18.0 Gbit/s). Indeed it turns out many (but not all) High Speed HDMI cables do work for full HDMI 2.0 bandwidth, so a Premium High Speed HDMI cable is not necessarily required. The story behind this is somewhat more complicated than most people realize.

When HDMI 2.0 was first released, there were only two certification levels for HDMI cables, the same ones established back in HDMI 1.3:

• Category 1 ("Standard Speed") HDMI cables, which are tested to work at up to 2.25 Gbit/s
• Category 2 ("High Speed") HDMI cables, which are tested to work at up to 10.2 Gbit/s

The Premium High Speed HDMI certification did not exist at that time. Contrary to what some people believe, the HDMI 2.0 specification does not contain any kind of "HDMI 2.0 compliance test" for cables. No changes to the cable testing procedures or the requirements for passing the certification were made compared to HDMI 1.3/1.4.

For the next two years following the release of HDMI 2.0, the HDMI Consortium insisted that cables which had passed the High Speed certification would be sufficient for the increased 18.0 Gbit/s bandwidth introduced in HDMI 2.0, and no higher levels of certification were introduced. During this time, a vast number of HDMI cables were manufactured which were capable of handling full HDMI 2.0 bandwidth (18.0 Gbit/s), but only received a High-Speed certification, the highest certification available at the time. Due to this, there are a large number of High Speed HDMI cables which do work at full 18.0 Gbit/s HDMI 2.0 bandwidth, despite not having the Premium High Speed certification. Most of these cables were never resubmitted for certification under the new certification tier once it was released, or if they were, they were sold again as a different product.

Many existing High Speed HDMI cables (manufactured long before HDMI 2.0) also worked fine with the increased data rates, but despite the HDMI Consortium's initial claims not all certified High Speed HDMI cables could handle it. Finally, after numerous complaints and reports during the two years following the release of HDMI 2.0, the HDMI Consortium revised their position on the matter and released a third cable certification tier, Premium High Speed HDMI, which actually tests cables for proper operation at 18.0 Gbit/s.


So while many High Speed HDMI cables will handle the full 18.0 Gbit/s bandwidth of HDMI 2.0, it is not guaranteed, while a "Premium High Speed" HDMI cable has been tested to definitely work.

For a more in-depth explanations, I recommend reading these articles:
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/note-about-hdmi-2.htm
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/premium-hdmi-cable.htm

No, it is not. No version of HDMI has ever been limited to 60 Hz. Even HDMI 1.0 was capable of supporting 120 Hz at lower resolutions like 720p. HDMI 1.3 added enough bandwidth to handle 144 Hz at 1080p, and HDMI 2.0 added enough to handle 144 Hz at 1440p.

Some 120+ Hz 1080p monitors will not accept signals above 60 Hz over HDMI (such as the ASUS VG248QE or BenQ XL2411Z), but that is just a limitation of those particular products, and other monitors do accept 1080p 144 Hz signals over HDMI 1.4 without any modification or overclocking such as the ViewSonic XG2401. HDMI as a whole does not, and has never had, a 60 Hz limit.

A lot of confusing language is used when discussing connection interfaces (DVI, HDMI, etc.) which leads to these misconceptions. For example, maximum limits are often expressed as "HDMI 1.0 has a maximum limit of 1080p 60 Hz". But this does not mean HDMI 1.0 can't go higher than 60 Hz, and can't go higher than 1080p. It just can't go higher with both at the same time. Connection interfaces don't have maximum resolutions or maximum refresh frequencies. They have a maximum bandwidth, which is the combination of resolution and frequency (among other things). HDMI 1.3 increased the maximum bandwidth to just over double that of HDMI 1.0–1.2, allowing for up to 144 Hz at 1080p.

Some will argue "The extra bandwidth in HDMI 1.3 is only for 3D; it can't be used for 1080p 120+ Hz; Support for 120+ Hz at 1080p wasn't added until HDMI 1.4b/2.0". This is not really correct, and is based on a misunderstanding of what the word "support" means. HDMI does not need to have special "support" for any particular resolution or refresh frequency. Any resolution/frequency combination that falls within the bandwidth limit is allowed:


A "video format" in this context is any combination of resolution, refresh frequency, etc, such as "1920 × 1080 at 120 Hz". HDMI allows any video format to be displayed, including custom formats that the monitor manufacturer may define at their discretion (within the allowed bandwidth of course).

Also note that under the "Video Format Support" heading, it does not say (as a lot of people might expect it to) "here is the master list of everything HDMI can do, if it's not listed here then HDMI can't do it" or something like that. The "video format support" section just adds supporting material for some specific formats, for standardization and compatibility purposes. This is what the HDMI specification means by the word "support"; it does not mean "capability". When the HDMI 1.4b specification "added support" for 1080p 120 Hz, it does not mean "added the capability" to run 1080p 120 Hz, as if it wasn't possible until that point. It just means it has added some supporting material to the specification for standardization purposes.

As another example, one of the features of HDMI 2.0 was that it "added support for 21:9 aspect ratio". This does not mean "added the capability to run at 21:9", and it does not mean previous versions were not capable of transmitting 21:9 images, and in fact the majority of 21:9 monitors (at the time of writing) use HDMI 1.4a. The monitor manufacturers simply defined their own "vendor-specific formats" such as 2560×1080, programmed them into the monitor, and it works just fine, and is completely by-the-book. The "21:9 support" added in HDMI 2.0 is not necessary to display 21:9 images, it's just helpful for some behind-the-scenes standardization purposes that consumers generally don't even need to worry about.

So even though "support" for 1080p 120 Hz was not added until HDMI 1.4b, manufacturers have still been free to implement 1080p 120+ Hz over HDMI since version 1.3, and indeed some manufacturers have done this (for example with the ViewSonic XG2401 mentioned earlier, or the Seiki SE50UY04, which both have HDMI 1.4a ports but accept 1080p 144/120 Hz signals).

The new HDMI 2.1 version has recently (at the time of writing anyway) been announced. It increases the maximum transmission bandwidth to 48.0 Gbit/s. New "48G" HDMI cables will be required to take advantage of the higher data rate, but other features of HDMI 2.1 that are unrelated to bandwidth (such as dynamic HDR metadata or Game Mode VRR) will not require new cables.

What can be done with 48 Gbit/s bandwidth? Some people say 8K 60 Hz 4:4:4 uncompressed is possible, based on some quick math: 60 frame/s × (7680 × 4320) px/frame × 24 bit/px = 47,775,744,000 bit/s, or 47.8 Gbit/s, which does seem to fit (barely) within 48.0 Gbit/s. However, this is incorrect as it is missing two things.

First, 48.0 Gbit/s is the transmission bandwidth of HDMI 2.1, not the data rate. The maximum data rate will be some fraction of the bandwidth, the exact numbers depending on the encoding scheme being used. Previous versions of HDMI used 8b/10b encoding, where the maximum data rate was 80% (8/10ths) of the bandwidth; for example, HDMI 2.0 with a bandwidth of 18.0 Gbit/s had a maximum data rate of 14.4 Gbit/s. HDMI 2.1 uses 16b/18b encoding, which gives it a maximum data rate of 42.66 Gbit/s.

That alone is enough to show that HDMI 2.1 isn't capable of 8K 60 Hz uncompressed, since the 47.8 Gbit/s data rate required is more than what HDMI 2.1 provides. However, that isn't all; data rate required is actually greater than 47.8 Gbit/s, because that calculation doesn't take timing format into account.

Timing format (such as CVT, CVT-RB, or CVT-R2) slightly increases the data rate required for a video signal. Displays need small pauses in the data stream between frames (known as blanking intervals), so in order to keep the framerate the same, during the time the data stream is active, it needs to be sent at a slightly higher rate than if it were being sent continuously. As such, the cabling system needs to be able to handle this slightly higher data rate. CVT-R2 is currently the most efficient standardized timing format. The overhead introduced by blanking scales with framerate since more frames means more blanking intervals. If you include overhead for CVT-R2 timing, 8K 60 Hz with 24 bit/px color would require 49.7 Gbit/s, not 47.8.

So yes HDMI 2.1 does need to use compression to achieve 8K 60 Hz with 4:4:4 color, both in theory and in practice. According to the HDMI consortium, HDMI 2.1 implements VESA's DSC 1.2 compression algorithm for display modes beyond 8K with 4:2:0 color. DSC is claimed to be "visually lossless" (meaning yes it's lossy, but very unlikely to be noticeable), with near-zero latency and low cost/complexity, although no actual implementations of DSC have been seen in the market yet so no consumer testing has been done.

HDMI Source to DVI Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	Yes
Inline audio supported?	Not usually (depends on the display)
Image Quality:	Equivalent to DVI
Maximum Resolution / Frequency:	Equivalent to Single-Link DVI Show DVI Limits

 

A passive adapter can be used to connect an HDMI output to a DVI input. This is equivalent to a native Single-Link DVI-D connection. Inline audio is not supported. These adapters can still be used to connect to monitors that have Dual-Link DVI ports, but the connection will be limited to the capabilities of Single-Link DVI as outlined in the table below.

All HDMI to DVI passive adapters are Single-Link only. HDMI to Dual-Link DVI passive adapters do not exist. Although most HDMI to DVI passive adapters are advertised as "Dual-Link" and may appear to have "Dual-Link" connectors on them, please be warned that these are fake. The extra pins on these DVI connectors are dummy pins which are not connected to anything, and the adapter will still only function as a Single-Link DVI adapter. It is physically impossible to create a passive HDMI to Dual-Link DVI adapter due to an insufficient number of pins on the HDMI connector.

Since HDMI is only capable of passively adapting to Single-Link DVI-D (and not DVI-I), this means it is not possible to make a chain of adapters from HDMI → DVI → VGA. Passive DVI to VGA adapters are not supported on all DVI ports, they only work in special DVI + VGA combo ports called DVI-I. An HDMI to DVI passive adapter only provides a standard DVI-D port, not DVI-I.

An active adapter would be required to convert HDMI output to a full Dual-Link DVI signal, but at the time of writing I am not aware of any such adapters existing.

HDMI Source to VGA Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	No

It is not possible to connect HDMI output to VGA input with a passive adapter.

It is also not possible to create a chain of adapters from HDMI → DVI → VGA. Passive DVI to VGA adapters do not work in all DVI ports. They only work in special DVI + VGA combo ports called DVI-I. HDMI only supports passive adapters to DVI-D, not to DVI-I.

Conversion from HDMI to VGA requires an active adapter. HDMI to VGA active adapters are fairly inexpensive and generally reliable.

HDMI to VGA active adapter (option 1; use with VGA cable): Amazon US
HDMI to VGA active adapter (option 2; use with HDMI cable): Amazon US

DVI Source to DisplayPort Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	No

A DVI output CANNOT be connected to a DisplayPort input with a passive adapter. Passive DisplayPort to DVI cables/adapters will only function from DisplayPort output to DVI input, not the other way around.

Conversion from DVI to DisplayPort requires an active adapter.

Single-Link DVI-D to DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter (option 1): Amazon US
Single-Link DVI-D to DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter (option 2): Amazon US
Single-Link DVI-D to Mini DisplayPort 1.1 active adapter: Amazon US

DVI Source to HDMI Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	Yes
Inline audio supported?	Yes
Image Quality:	Equivalent to HDMI
Maximum Resolution / Frequency:	Equivalent to HDMI, version dependent on source HDMI version; see article below) Show HDMI Limits

 

A passive adapter can be used to connect a DVI output to an HDMI input. It does not matter what type of DVI port is used (DVI-D, DVI-I, Single/Dual-Link, etc.), they will all function identically in this configuration.

This is equivalent to a native HDMI connection. The HDMI version is the same as whatever version is supported by the graphics card. This does mean the full feature set and bandwidth of HDMI is available in this configuration, including inline audio, YC_BC_R and chroma subsampling, and possibly even HDMI 2.0 data rates if the graphics card supports HDMI 2.0 (however, most DVI to HDMI cables/adapters will not be able to achieve this since they were not designed to handle such high data rates; most DVI to HDMI passive adapters will be limited to HDMI 1.4 bandwidth). Yes, this configuration is equivalent to using a native HDMI to HDMI connection in all respects, it is the same as if you were connecting from a built-in HDMI port on the graphics card. It is NOT strictly limited to the capabilities of Single-Link DVI or Dual-Link DVI.

However, please note that this information does not apply to the reverse configuration (HDMI output to DVI input). Adapter compatibility and rules are not symmetric. Please switch the Input/Output selections to see that configuration.

To my knowledge, there are no active adapters available for converting DVI to HDMI. However, there is almost no situation in which such an adapter would be helpful. As long as the graphics card supports HDMI 1.3 or above, a passive DVI to HDMI adapter will be equivalent to a native HDMI 1.3 connection, which provides roughly the same bandwidth as Dual-Link DVI, and if the graphics card supports HDMI 2.0 or above, then a passive DVI to HDMI adapter will provide much higher bandwidth than an active Dual-Link DVI to HDMI adapter could, with better reliability and much lower cost.

 

DVI-I is a DVI + VGA combo port. It does everything a regular DVI port (DVI-D) does, but also supports DVI-to-VGA passive adapters. DVI-D ports do not support these adapters.

Besides VGA adapter compatibility, DVI-D and DVI-I are exactly the same, so if you are not using a VGA adapter then there is no difference between them. Any other cable or device that works in a DVI-I port will also function identically in a DVI-D port, and vice versa.

Single-Link DVI only has half as many data wires, so only half as much data can be transmitted per second. This does not affect image quality, but does result in a lower maximum limit on the resolution / refresh frequency (refer to the table above).

Generally only Dual-Link DVI ports are actually used in devices in the real world, since Dual-Link DVI ports can operate in either Dual-Link or Single-Link mode for compatibility with any device. While there are some devices with Single-Link DVI ports, no one makes devices with dedicated Single-Link DVI ports (i.e. with the center pins blocked); even when Single-Link DVI ports are used (which is somewhat common on lower-end monitors, like standard 1080p 60 Hz) the center pins are left unblocked so that Dual-Link DVI cables are still compatible.

Most Single-Link DVI connections come from adapters. HDMI-to-DVI and DisplayPort-to-DVI passive adapters for example only provide Single-Link DVI connections, since HDMI and DP only have enough pins to form one DVI data link, not two. These adapters will still function in Dual-Link DVI ports, but will be limited to the bandwidth of Single-Link DVI.

If you are connecting two DVI devices together, a standard Dual-Link DVI-D cable will work between any two types of DVI ports. It doesn't matter whether they are DVI-D, DVI-I, Single-Link, or Dual-Link.

DVI lacks most of the ancillary features that HDMI and DisplayPort have (such as inline audio, HDR, or FreeSync), but picture-wise there will be no visual difference between any of these three interfaces on most displays.

DVI supports up to a maximum color depth of 24 bit/px (16.7 million colors) and enough video bandwidth for 1920×1080 at 144 Hz or 2560×1600 at 60 Hz. Most displays do not exceed these limits, and so on these displays DVI provides an identical image to HDMI or DisplayPort. HDMI and DisplayPort are only necessary for monitors which exceed those specs, such as 4K 60 Hz monitors, or monitors with 30 bit/px color depth (1.07 billion colors), in which case DVI cannot be used.

No, DVI does not have any inherent limit on resolution. Any combination of resolution and refresh frequency is allowed as long as it fits within DVI's maximum bandwidth. Refer to the table above for some valid combinations.

Sometimes, specific products (such as a certain graphics card or monitor) may be limited to 2560×1600 over DVI, but that is a limitation of that particular product, not DVI as a whole. Sometimes, this is a software restriction which may be updated over time or overridden with custom resolutions. Even more often (especially with graphics card spec sheets) the supposed "2560×1600" maximum is simply incorrect, and was written into the spec sheet because 2560×1600 was the highest resolution available at the time and the manufacturer wanted to reassure people that the graphics card would support those monitors, when in reality it can go even higher. For example, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 lists a maximum resolution of 2560×1600 over DVI, but can be used with 4K monitors at 30 Hz without issue.

DVI Source to VGA Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	Yes (DVI-I) / No (DVI-D)
Inline audio supported?	No
Image Quality:	Equivalent to VGA
Maximum Resolution / Frequency:	Equivalent to VGA

A passive adapter can be used to connect a DVI output to a VGA input. These adapters will only work in special DVI + VGA combo ports called DVI-I. They will NOT work in a standard DVI-D port.

Using a passive DVI to VGA adapter is equivalent to a native VGA connection.

DVI to VGA passive adapter: Amazon US
DVI to VGA passive adapter: Amazon US

If your computer only has a DVI-D port available (not DVI-I), then a DVI-D to VGA active adapter is required.

DVI-D to VGA active adapter: Amazon US

VGA Source to DisplayPort Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	No

It is not possible to connect VGA output to DisplayPort input with a passive adapter.

An active adapter would be required to convert VGA to DisplayPort, but at the time of writing I am not aware of any such adapters existing.

VGA Source to HDMI Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	No

It is not possible to connect VGA output to HDMI input with a passive adapter.

Conversion from VGA to HDMI requires an active adapter.

VGA to HDMI active adapter (option 1; video + audio): Amazon US
VGA to HDMI active adapter (option 2; video only): Amazon US

VGA Source to DVI Display
Possible with a passive adapter?	Yes (DVI-I) / No (DVI-D)
Inline audio supported?	No
Image Quality:	Equivalent to VGA
Maximum Resolution / Frequency:	Equivalent to VGA

A passive adapter can be used to connect VGA output to DVI input only if the DVI input is a DVI-I port (this is very uncommon). Most displays have DVI-D input ports, not DVI-I. Passive DVI to VGA adapters will not work in DVI-D ports.

Using a passive DVI to VGA adapter is equivalent to a native VGA connection from the graphics card.

DVI to VGA passive adapter: Amazon US
DVI to VGA passive adapter: Amazon US

Conversion from VGA to DVI-D would require an active adapter, but I'm not aware of any such adapters existing at the time of writing.

VGA does not have any defined limits. Its capabilities are dependent on the individual limits of the graphics device and the display, which vary by product. The last generations of VGA devices could rival the capabilities of Dual-Link DVI, with some VGA displays handling signals as high as 2304×1440 at 80 Hz (like the Sony GDM-FW900). While many graphics cards list a maximum analog resolution of 2048×1536, this is often incorrect, and they do work with higher resolutions as long as the monitor supports it.

Yes, any reasonably modern VGA device will handle 1080p 60 Hz over VGA.

No, VGA is not limited to 60 Hz. Many CRT monitors (which only took VGA input) operated at 75 Hz or 85 Hz standard. VGA has no defined limit on refresh frequency, and can (and has) been used for video formats exceeding 120 Hz or even 240 Hz on high-end CRTs, if the resolution is lowered enough.

At medium-to-high resolutions like 1920×1080 or above, 120+ Hz should not be expected since this does push the limits of what most VGA devices are capable of handling, but VGA is in no way limited to 60 Hz as a whole.

In general, the image quality of VGA is acceptable and usually difficult to distinguish from DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort, but it depends on the specific situation and equipment. VGA signals can be degraded by electromagnetic interference, so the image quality may suffer depending on the quality of shielding in the VGA cable. Damage to the cable may also lead to a color-tinted screen if one of the color channels drops out. Image artifacts such as VGA ghosting (the echo/smearing effect; not to be confused with motion trails left behind fast-moving objects, which is also called ghosting) may also appear as a result of poor quality VGA cables.

VGA also lacks some of the image handshake protocols that digital interfaces have, which can lead to the image being "off-center". Most displays have adjustment options built into their on-screen menu to align the image manually.

VGA is generally considered a fallback option for situations in which DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort are not available.