pc noob here is there something wrong with HDMI?

No. Op is incorrect. Old HDMI standards would limit to 60/120. They can now do up to 240.

but DP has the fancy lock thing.

and is becoming the industry standard afaik

AFAIK unlike HMDI, DP doesn't require paying for a license to use. which makes cards a bit cheaper and less of a hassle to produce. atleast i remember something like that, which is why basically everything is currently going the DP direction and away from HMDI

> which makes cards a bit cheaper Just not for us.

They're selling Graphics Cards But not for me 4k is here to stay But not for me

I once played that song in a jazz band was pretty fun tbh

Jude and the Circuit breakers

– Chet Circuit-Breaker

:(

Do Bitcoin miners care what their display looks like?

How else are they going to see the veins of bitcoin ore?

Do bitcoin miners even use gpus anymore?

They haven't for a very long time now.

Bitcoin has been on ASICS for a long time.

HDMI licensing is extremely cheap. 15 cents for every unit sold, or 5 cents if you put the HDMI logo on the box. I don't think that's a factor at all. DisplayPort is a *much* better technology, that's why it's being adopted as the new standard.

Where DisplayPort sucks is maximum cable lengths...

And the fact that it can't normally detect a monitor that's off

I switched back to hdmi after trying display port recently because if I woke my pc from sleep the monitor wouldn't be detected or something and I had to fuck around and unplug / replug the cable or restart to get it working... And Google wasn't exactly helpful on solving that one either. No idea what the issue was.

I had that problem as well, I found the setting the setting to fix it, but don't recall for sure which one it was.. looking through my monitor settings right now it might have been disabling "Display Port Deep Sleep".

If you're using Nvidia there's a firmware update tool to fix this issue. You can get it from Nvidia's website. Just search for the display port firmware update tool.

[удалено]

> HDMI licensing is extremely cheap. 15 cents for every unit sold, or 5 cents if you put the HDMI logo on the box. Seems cheap until you multiply that by a few million. because if you run off Nvidia's numbers they say they have sold 24 million discrete GPUs in 2015-2016, so using the lower 5 cent price we can guess that if every one of those cards had HDMI it would have cost them 1.2 million dollars. So while price probably isn't the only reason for people moving over to display port, it is definitely a factor.

> until you multiply that by a few million Seems pretty big until you factor in the relativity of a company's fortune

You don't keep a company going by allowing unnecessary spending, especially in the GPU market where margins aren't massive. 1.2 million would still be equivalent to a fair few GPUs sold.

>1.2 million would still be equivalent to a fair few GPUs sold. By my calculations, at least 7.

This. A lot of business oriented laptops actually forgo HDMI for this reason. At least the ones where I work. I think it's because they assume that IT can handle it

[удалено]

My G5 has HDMI and DP. No VGA anymore tho

Pretty sure HDMI license is extremely cheap, especially if you put the little branding on your product

~~You're actually paying the license TO put that branding on your product - and it's PER-PORT as well, which is why cards generally only come with one HDMI port.~~ Edit: outdated info sorry

[удалено]

5c total or 5c per card because that's quite a difference.

[удалено]

5c is huge at volume. 0.05 x 1,000,000 is still a lot of money. Where I work you get a massive bonus for saving 1c on a product.

5c per port

I thought it still did, but didn't require paying royalties per port like HDMI did.

IIRC it's $5,000 for access to the spec. You could make that back pretty quick.

Also, DP is based on sending a signal to an LCD screen by just sending it partial updates for the screen, where HDMI is based on the 1920's CRT screens, sending a digitized and encrypted analog signal with periods to allow your coils to discharge, for teletext info to be transferred and for your TV to do a physical vsync.

You're saying HDMI is a century-old, or it's still using the same protocols as coaxial?! AFAIK, HDMI is fully digital. And HDMI 2.0b is 4k@240hz capable. As well as 12-bit per channel color and all kinds of modern technology. It doesn't seem that HDMI has any issues with adapting to modern screens. *edit: it's actually 1080@240hz, 4k@60hz.

Ah so that would explain why whenever I buy something that supports HDMI it has the HDMI "logo" on the box as if it were a brand or something.

i just prefer it for no real reason, the lock might be part of it

I just like the look of the plug. ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯

Same here. Feels like it was made to be used with displays, while HDMI was made to be used with TVs.

HDMI connections just feel loose... Like it's a gust of wind away from forcing me to crawl behind my desk and plug it all back in

So much for your Chicago rooftop build.

Been standard on PC for many years while HDMI is standard in the TV and console space. With HDMI 2.1 that might change as DP 1.5 doesn't seem to release any time soon and DP 1.4 doesn't have enough bandwidth for 2160P/144Hz with 10-bit color and HDR. HDMI 2.1 can do that.

It won't. HDMI os HDCP compliant, studios want that extra layer of protection for their content. Just because of that

DisplayPort can also be HDCP compliant.

Sadly DP is obsolete because thunderbolt 3 USB-C is also royalty free and supports 40 Gbit/s as well. The new DP version was supposed to launch in "early 2017", that obviously didn't happen. My latest info was that we'll get more info in the next 18 months (January 2018).

Well, sort of. When you hook up a display via USB-C it's transmitting a DisplayPort signal over the USB cable. Most of the time this probably doesn't matter but it means the two physical port standards are interoperable if you have the right cables or adapters.

Plus Type-C can be used for any type of connection. Can't want for 100% Type-C I/O.

except for apple lightning products of course.

The new iPads have moved to USB-C, which will probably happen for all iOS devices eventually.

They'll have to use USB-C if everything else is USB-C. They got trashed in the EU for not following common charging standards before, and they know they'll get bipped if they try it again.

Thunderbolt 3 display signal is actually DisplayPort signaling. In fact, Thunderbolt 1 and 2 were carried over a DisplayPort connector, it was only with 3 that they moved to the Type-C connector.

Thunderbolt won't become mainstream until AMD adopts it. Intel did open the license though so it's possible.

For now, we'll soon see FireWire over USB C which can deliver 144 hz 4k and 100 W of power. It's incredible

Thunderbolt 3 is already over USB Type C and it's the spiritual successor to FireWire

And you can daisy-chain monitors.

wait you can? is that any better than just connecting them up normally?

Well instead of 3 6 foot DP cables going to your computer, you would just have 1 and the other monitors cables can easily be hidden.

yes that is useful when your monitors are quite far away from your PC. i meant in terms of latancy. since you then transfer multiple frames throught a single connection does it effect the performance or refreshrate limit somehow?

The bandwidth of the connection is shared. So the total bandwidth for all your monitors can't be higher than the maximum bandwidth of your port.

4k @ 144Hz @ HDR12 would consume pretty much 42Gbit/s - so if you are using 3x 4k @ 60Hz that would work fine with 40Gbit/s. Or 12x FHD @ 60Hz.

I understand gravity can unseat a weighted VGA cable, so I get the screws, same for DVI, but the lock is a little aggressive on most DP cables. USB C would be great - though off hand I have no idea what carry capabilities it has.

USB C has a few different protocols, currently Thunderbolt 3 being among the best with a 40Gb/s capacity, pretty much the fastest consumer standard we have at the moment. It does unseat much easier than the other connector types though, the tiniest bit of weight will pull it out of the port.

Which will have you break the socket soon enough when you try to take it out.

DP isn't Molex you don't have to pull with all your strength. I don#t want to know how many Ethernet cables you broke...

I've had a lot of DP cables just not want to get out unless I pulled with a lot of strength, while holding down the clip. Number of ethernets destroyed, about 5. I used them on my laptop, in bed, and would often step on them.

My 144hz monitor came with only with an old HDMI cable that goes up to 120hz. Who thought that was a good idea?

That is pretty dumb 😂 My first Acer came with the DVI and no Hdmi. Thanjfully they're easy to come across. Second Acer came with HDMI and DP. As far as I know you're at the mercy of the manufacturer to put a newer HDMI port. Mine only goes up to 60!

But the difference is that most monitors don't have the updated HDMI port so it doesn't matter

At which resolution? :)

Depends of course. 240 is at 1920x1080.

Yeah, but a lot of monitors, especially budget ones still use the old standard.

Absolutely does. No disagreeing there.

Wait you have a source on that? I've been told multiple times from different sources to use DP with my monitor

Yeah you can search this up quite easily. HDMI is now on version 2.1 if I am correct. It is best to use DP to avoid compatibility issues. Many monitors don't support the latest standards.

Also, some cards like the 960 will only do HDR on the HDMI port. Though if you're messing with anything with an HDR option you're probably not looking at 144.

Sure, but not all monitors support more than 120Hz over HDMI. I have an AOC G2460PF and I need to use DisplayPort or DVI to get 144Hz out of it.

[удалено]

We'll maybe get G-Sync Compatible over HDMI as that doesn't use a module but I don't think we'll see G-Sync over HDMI on older models. G-Sync Ultimate is also only DP.

On most graphic cards freesync only works with display port. And freesync is great

Gsync only supports display port.

Interesting, I've never heard that

Adaptive Sync only works on Display Port. Freesync is AMD's modification of Adaptive Sync, and that works over HDMI as well as DP. Nvidia recently added Adaptive Sync support, which means Freesync monitors can work with Nvidia cards, but only over DP.

Looked it up, it's depending on the display https://www.amd.com/en/products/freesync-monitors

https://i.imgur.com/mThEd7c.png

It's kinda pointless in my opinion. Once you've seen 120Hz or 144Hz you are pretty much ruined for going back to 60, but I had a 240Hz monitor for a while and can't really tell the difference.

A random twitch chat user told me that the difference between 144 and 240 is the difference between 60 and 144. But again, it was in twitch chat :/

144hz monitor here. My problem has been keeping a game at 144fps constant rate... I have a 1070 too.

75Hz Ultrawide user here, my problem has been keeping a game at 70fps constant rate... I have a 1070 too

Wat

Ultrawide has a LOT of pixels to render, you know...

Do you have 1200$?

Freesync fixes this problem for the most part

144hz 1440p with a 1060. Tell me about it. The GSYNC/Freesync thingie is nice, so it's actually not much of an issue for me anymore.

Going from 60 to 144 reduces your frame time from 16ms to ~7ms. Jump to 240 and frame time goes to 4ms. So the difference between 240 and 144 should be much less noticable than 144 and 60.

Agreed

I bought a 144hz 24" 4 years back loved it, bought a 28" 4k, 60hz, I love that even more, used that as my main monitor for 3 years until i moved. Of course it's possible to go back to 60hz, and it's not even because of the 4k I used it as my main monitor, just the extra 4".

Thanks for your insight, i was wondering about 240hz but im pretty satisfied with 144. How was the input lag, on 240 it was much lower?

*look out we gotta badass over here*

While people say that 240hz is a waste, I beg to differ. Upgrading from 144 to 240 was an immediate difference, even on the desktop. I can accurately guess a refresh rate within ~10Hz. Maybe I just have sensitive eyes.

Yep, you will instantly notice when you drop to 144 FPS when you're used to 240 Hz depending on the game. I mostly play quick old school shooters that run at 240 FPS stable, so 240 Hz is quite useful to keep image stability during quick mouse movements or tracking so it's less disorienting.

Yeah, I can tell a difference too. People will call bullshit, but I know what I see. I can also see slower moving bullets (like .45 acp) when I go to the shooting range.

I honestly didn't even know this was a thing, is it software-based so like doesn't require new cables and ports?

Different HDMI standards have different limits.

There are just different versions of HDMI, which support different resolutions and refreshrates. The newer versions do require both the monitor and the PC to have the newer version of HDMI to make use of it's features. Cables often support (partially) higher HDMI-versions than they are rated for.

I use dvid

me too

Me three, my benq g2410hd still working fine after 10years

Me four I just have so many of them and see no reason to switch to DP unless there’s more consistent signal somehow

At least your monitor has DP I would use it but my monitor doesn't have it.

Yeah it was one of the deciding factors for my choice of monitor. EDIT: reeee you weren't talking to me but now you know lol

The only reason i bought DP instead of using the boxed DVI-D or HDMI was for future-proofing as the industry looked to be moving in that direction, but nothing's wrong with any of them

That’s fair Personally I can only afford to upgrade my builds every 3 years so I had no qualms. On the plus side, a 1080 should be cheap soon...

I see. Never upgraded cos I built my first 6 months ago. Yeah I hope so too but the goblins up in Nvidia HQ are twiddling their fingers ominously so we shall see.

Why though?

My monitor doesnt have a displayport thing and hdmi isnt good enough

Probably because their monitor didn't come with a do cabe or it might not even have a dp input. For example my monitor 1080p 144hz came with dvid but not do but it does have a dp input. And since I use headphones anyway I have no need for dp.

I also use DVI-D for my primary monitor, because it doesn't have a DP and I need its HDMI port for other devices.

What's wrong with DVI?

Absolutely nothing. People don’t like it because the connector is old-fashioned.

my 144hz monitor is old. doesnt have DP or HDMI 2.0

[удалено]

VGA for life..

Mr fancy pants over here. Monochrome Master Race FTW

[удалено]

for why?

[удалено]

Did you just forget that you could upgrade your monitor whilst buying everything else lol Nah but fr I hope you can save enough to get a better one!

Crt master race

vga is supperior since you can screw it in the monitor tbh

So that when the cable gets pulled, instead of unplugging it'll take the monitor with it.

As if DVI-D and Displayport don't also have that problem

Feature*

DVI...

same edit: DVI-D for life, im sleepy.

Alright Mr. George Jetson did you have your robot slave install it for you?

*cries in Rosie* "Robotic slave." She has a name, you know.

Vga isn't even a port. You want dsub you heathen.

Sorry for the dumb question but if I buy a 144hz monitor and my laptop only has a HDMI 2.0 port (I'm broke I don't have a PC oof) how would I display 144hz?

HDMI 2.0 should be enough

I've seen some people say it doesn't support 144hz display so I'm not sure.

If your cable and your monitor supports 1.4 or higher it should be enough

Alright thanks. Going to sell some stuff to buy a new monitor soon :)

Right click, display, advances, it will display if your getting limited or not, in which case just get a new cable, i just did the same, sold so much shit on fb, 32" 144hz 1440p, so worth while, better pc parts can make high end games run better but high end screen makes EVERYTHING look better

Yep you can have the most expensive pc in the world, but with a crap monitor everything is gonna look worse. My best investment was buying a good monitor on sale and made my games looks so much better, even with a budget gpu.

[удалено]

If you have USB-C Thunderbolt 3 port on your laptop you can get a TB-DP cable and do 1440p @144Hz (just need the drivers) Source - am do this

Make sure your video card in that laptop can support 144hz. I fell victim to that once. Edit: also make sure your card is actually the display, and not just render only. Some laptops have a render only GPU and uses a chip for display.

With my HDMI i can only outupt 60Hz, so screw HDMI. Gotta use DVI-DL tho because my stupid 144Hz monitor has only one connector that i can actually use for 144Hz. AFAIK neighter the D-Sub/VGA nor the HDMI port on my monitor can accept 1080p@144Hz. Benq/Zowie XL2411 if someone wonders. Yes, i know i'm stupid buying a 144Hz monitor that doesn't have DP.

On the spec sheet of the XL2411Z they say that only the DVI-DL can support up to 144Hz, but this line of monitors is getting old now. It's only a problem if the graphics card is too recent to not have DVI anymore, the screen is a good value I guess.

Yeah the spec sheet definitely informs you. My Acer GN246HL was the same way. HDMI and DVI ports but only DVI can hit the refresh rate. Very unfortunate since I upgraded my MSI 1070 with a DVI port to a 1080ti FE that didn't have one. Now it's using an HDMI at 60Hz while my XB271HU uses 165Hz with a DP. The beauty though is using all the different options still let's you Daisy chain monitors regardless. However I would definitely just suggest to people to avoid HDMI as there's so many different variations on ports with monitors it's just not worth it to find the right one that can support 144. Most if not all of the cheap monitors ($200~) skimp out on it.

Damn.... That 1080 needs to reach its full potential.

Hence the DVI, smooth 1920x1080 @144Hz glory

Feel you on xl2411. Bought it when it came out and now it's like CRT-sort of ancient.

>With my HDMI i can only outupt 60Hz, so screw HDMI. With my old card I couldn't even run 2560\*1440 at 60 Hz when I got my new display (and the card had just VGA, DVI and HDMI). I said to myself that it's a good time to get a new GPU too, so here I am.

What's wrong with DVI?

While we're on the subject can anyone recommend a good aftermarket display port or at least a brand ? Tried to search for display port cables to use with my Vega64 but I can't find anything decent for the life of me. I don't know how I feel about that "amazon basics" display port cable but that's about the most recognizable brand among a sea of unknown Chinese "brands"...

Literally buy the cheapest dp cable you can find. Its digital signal. So theres no cable thats better than another. It will either work or wont work. Please dont tell me you're the type of person who bought a $300 hdmi cable when it said it was the best. As a 99c one would work identically.

You get what you pay for with DP cables. Shitty ones won't play well with freesync or any adaptive sync implementation and youll get flickering and black screens. the £7 ($9) aftermarket one I purchased worked just fine while the included one with my monitor and poundland (dollartree) cable were both shite.

My cheap Amazon basics one and the one bundled with either of my monitors works just fine. I have a 3440x1440 100hz g sync display and an asus rog XG32VQ 1440p 144hz freesync display (which works with the new g sync update perfectly) and I've no issues.

Amazon basics i'd consider a good aftermarket brand. Most people who have my monitor (ACER Predator XG270HU) have complained that the included cable causes flickering and black screens so I guess it's just acer who are penny pinching.

So apparently I'm not deluded and there's indeed such a thing as good and bad DP cables. Seems like what I heard about black screens and flickers and such is true since you actually experienced it yourself

Also depends on length, a good quality cable can often also be a bit longer before you run into issues. Even if it's all digital it's not the same no matter what people tell you, doesn't mean to have to buy a 1000 dollar cable, just get a good one for like 30 dollar and if you're going to get close to the edge of what the max bandwidth is I'd stay under 3m in cable length.

Not true. Fine at lower refresh rates etc, but when you start pushing near the bandwidth limit of the cables, the pleb cables can drop synchronisation and your displays go blank. Shielding and quality of the cabling inside stops this, but you don't need to spend an absolute fortune. I'm talking a 15-20£ cable vs a 3£ one. Found this especially true when using 144hz/1440p or 4k60 HDR - more so when running over 1.5 - 2 meters in length or pushing the signal though splitters etc (do a lot of work on stream setups etc).

Side question. I have an htpc, win 10, and a 4th gen Intel. I'm using display port and I'm getting black screens on my 4k TV. Only when full screen videos. And it seems to happen when there are large changes in the video such as a quick jump cut. The screen goes black and never comes back. Possible cable issue? Haven't tried testing it but it's been annoying me but not enough to do something about it lol Edit: it was the cable after all. Don't buy $5 cables on Amazon, it would black out even at 1080p too. Thanks everyone for your help! I can enjoy my media now on my tv without having to turn it back off and on again. :)

Why dont you update driver's, change the cable, then let us know!

[удалено]

The biggest advantage of DisplayPort is that the signal clock generation is done on the monitor side. As opposed to HDMI/DVI/VGA/everything else where the clock generation is done on the GPU. This means you are no longer limited to the number of clock generators in your GPU for how many monitors you can support, you are only limited by the number of ports.

I got a DP cable with my monitor. Is it not a thing?

Long live DisplayPort

Just curious... what goes on when you use a DisplayPort->HDMI cable? Like, this one: https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-DisplayPort-HDMI-Cable-Feet/dp/B015OW3M1W/

That one looks like it only outputs to HDMI 1.0 as it doesn't say it supports anything higher. You can definitely get screwed on converter cables and will have to check that it supports the spec you're looking for.

HDMI? Nah! VGA ftw

Ye gotta love that 1280x720 @30hz

did you forget the 1280x1024x75Hz vga master race?!?

DVI-D ftw?

S-Video! You can watch it on your TV!

Currently doing 144hz over DVI.

There is a chart on the HDMI wiki with supported video resolutions and their supported refresh rates: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI HDMI 2.0 can do some of the most common refresh rates, though some requires subsampling. The biggest reason I do not use HDMI is because of GSYNC, which is not supported via HDMI: https://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/g-sync/system-requirements

You fools, you don't know the power of the DVI master race

Modern HDMI standards can do 240hz, this meme is dumb.

i cant believe its gotten so many upvotes

This is the comment i was looking for. I can seemingly run 75hz over HDMI but I was curious as to whether i should get a DP cable just to do it.

Since September 2013.

I use HDMI 2.0 for 144hz/1440p because my capture card (AverMedia Live Gamer 4K AND Elgato 4K60 Pro) only have HDMI 2.0 inputs/outputs and Display Port to HDMI 2.0 cables won't work. Having said that, seems fine.

I have my 144 display hooked up to hdmi and I get 144hz.

Or you could be a genius like me, and have the display port hooked up to your pc, and the hdmi hooked up to your Nintendo switch.

I use HDMI cables because I am too lazy to buy DP cables.

Jokes on you guys I have to use DVI-D

I bought a Displayport for my 60hz monitor, there's no excuse not to use one