Displayport vs HDMI vs DVI

[jnelsoninjax]

OK guys, thanks for the input! @IceBreakerG, that video pretty much summed it all up for me!

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

18 hours ago, xendrome said:

DVI can also support higher resolutions at higher refresh rates, HDMI cannot.

DVI maxes out at 2560x1600 @ 60Hz and [dual link] WQUXGA (3,840 × 2,400) @ 33 Hz with GTF blanking (2 × 159 MHz) as per Wikipedia

 

As for HDMI, it currently maxes out at 4k @ 60Hz and 5k @ 30Hz. The 2.1 spec will allow it go to to 8k.

 

DP, however, supposedly supports 8k with the 1.4 spec using some compression magic that i dont understand.

[DevTech]

17 hours ago, Mando said:

i actually quite like the mini-DP port, small , unobstrusive and easier to integrate on slimline devices. id ratherit  became the defacto standard over HDMI/DP, I just wish 4K Tvs had DP i could save a bunch with a 4K big TV instead of waiting for a HDR monitor and keep my 1080p 27" for windows work. Heck chuck in G-sync onto a Tv unit and im sold BIG time.

If the tech universe wanted to evolve in any sensible order it would go like this:

 

1. Every input and output is Thunderbolt.

 

2. Everything else dies.

 

 

VGA is actually starting to die, but I fear that HDMI will just freakin refuse to die at some point and we will have to live with all the "standards" variations that make connecting HDMI the new VooDoo Mystery Magic of the wired world which might end up being the driving force for the average Joe to insist on Wireless everywhere. For some reason the Hodge-Podge of HDMI is a well liked connector, perhaps due to legions of Best Buy salesmen in TV Showrooms insisting that "HDMI is the Future"

 

A. The HDMI cable is just a cable. Or is it? There are situations where the HDMI Version of the cable might mess a connection. Look at your cable. What version is it? Yeah, I don't know either...

 

B. That HDMI input is just a standard HDMI connector. Or is it? It connects to an internal HDMI chipset that implements a HDMI Version.

 

C. That HDMI output on your laptop is just a standard HDMI connector (or Mini-HDMI) Or is it?  It connects to an internal HDMI chipset that implements a HDMI Version. Connected to that, is internal Video and Audio that may or may not even meet the HDMI Version specs so that you effectively have an incomplete partial HDMI spec implementation.

 

Oh please HDMI, just die fast somehow...

 

Unfortunately, Thunderbolt also has versioning nightmares but not as bad and the worst combinations are still great from a Video Display perspective.

 

For most situations DP to DP is painless, easy, always works and delivers the best Video Signal in today's world of 2017. Get the marketplace to pay attention with your dollars! Don't buy a monitor that does not have a DP Input and ask the sales person or manufacturer for a Thunderbolt Input so they are motivated to move things along faster.

 

 

 

[Gotenks98]

21 hours ago, Astra.Xtreme said:

Yikes, VGA? Curious why those old technology links don't just die off.  Same idea as when I see many modern motherboards still have the PS/2 port.  I guess there must be a benefit somewhere, right?

I remember on an previous system I could not get into the bios unless I used a keyboard that had PS/2 on it. It would not work with USB. I keep that old keyboard around just for issues like this. Crazy thing is this system would not let me install Windows 7 on it without a bios update. So I actually had to install Windows 2000 just to upgrade the bios then format and install Windows 7.

[DevTech]

6 hours ago, Gotenks98 said:

I remember on an previous system I could not get into the bios unless I used a keyboard that had PS/2 on it. It would not work with USB. I keep that old keyboard around just for issues like this. Crazy thing is this system would not let me install Windows 7 on it without a bios update. So I actually had to install Windows 2000 just to upgrade the bios then format and install Windows 7.

Your anecdote is an enjoyable tale but I wouldn't want to add additional impetus to  the "Thought Virus" that there is usefulness to PS/2 

 

Your mobo was probably just at the transition period before all mobos could recognize USB from cold start.

 

The problem is the circuitry to implement PS/2 costs almost nothing so the advantage of eliminating it is freeing connector space. There was a brief period when mobos without PS/2 started to become common and just DID NOT SELL.

 

Due to essentially zero cost difference, Consumers Who Buy Motherboards (that would be all of us here) always selected the same cost mobo equivalent that had a PS/2 port presumably due to "Why Not Just In Case Might Need It In Some Weird Scenario" kind of buying logic that led to an overall disadvantage to consumers. It was a case of consumers "Voting With Their Dollars" which cumulatively has a powerful effect with manufacturers when they crunch sales numbers.

 

That was a quite a few years back but as you can see, had a powerful effect on manufacturers and to this day in 2017, you get a "free" PS/2 port.

 

In the context of this thread if we can start a movement to Only Buy Monitors with DP Inputs, it will in fact get noticed by monitor manufacturers.

 

[Danielx64]

Something that comes to mind, does it take more work for a graphic card to use one display connection type than another connection type?

[Mindovermaster Moderator]

4 minutes ago, Danielx64 said:

Something that comes to mind, does it take more work for a graphic card to use one display connection type than another connection type?

I was wondering that as well. I think it being a smaller connection, it would use less power. Could be wrong...

[DevTech]

1 hour ago, Danielx64 said:

Something that comes to mind, does it take more work for a graphic card to use one display connection type than another connection type?

No.

 

Other than the obvious pixel pushing and triangle generation if the other connection happens to allow setting a higher 3D surface/gaming resolution.

 

 

[PGHammer]

On 10/27/2017 at 11:36 AM, DevTech said:

If the tech universe wanted to evolve in any sensible order it would go like this:

 

1. Every input and output is Thunderbolt.

 

2. Everything else dies.

 

 

VGA is actually starting to die, but I fear that HDMI will just freakin refuse to die at some point and we will have to live with all the "standards" variations that make connecting HDMI the new VooDoo Mystery Magic of the wired world which might end up being the driving force for the average Joe to insist on Wireless everywhere. For some reason the Hodge-Podge of HDMI is a well liked connector, perhaps due to legions of Best Buy salesmen in TV Showrooms insisting that "HDMI is the Future"

 

A. The HDMI cable is just a cable. Or is it? There are situations where the HDMI Version of the cable might mess a connection. Look at your cable. What version is it? Yeah, I don't know either...

 

B. That HDMI input is just a standard HDMI connector. Or is it? It connects to an internal HDMI chipset that implements a HDMI Version.

 

C. That HDMI output on your laptop is just a standard HDMI connector (or Mini-HDMI) Or is it?  It connects to an internal HDMI chipset that implements a HDMI Version. Connected to that, is internal Video and Audio that may or may not even meet the HDMI Version specs so that you effectively have an incomplete partial HDMI spec implementation.

 

Oh please HDMI, just die fast somehow...

 

Unfortunately, Thunderbolt also has versioning nightmares but not as bad and the worst combinations are still great from a Video Display perspective.

 

For most situations DP to DP is painless, easy, always works and delivers the best Video Signal in today's world of 2017. Get the marketplace to pay attention with your dollars! Don't buy a monitor that does not have a DP Input and ask the sales person or manufacturer for a Thunderbolt Input so they are motivated to move things along faster.

 

 

 

There is a reason that HDMI isn't going anywhere - non-computer displays and devices.  STBs (set-top boxes, gaming consoles, etc.,) all support HDMI - very few support DisplayPort.  (Remember, the XBOX ONE X supports both HDMI-out and HDMI-in - as does the preceding XBOX ONE S; the TiVo Bolt+ also supports HDMI-out and HDMI-in.  Thunderbolt is expensive on a per-port basis (though it also supports daisy-chaining, like HDMI) - that is the fatal flaw in Thunderbolt - the per-port cost. HDMI, on the other hand, is cheap - in fact, it is cheaper than even DisplayPort.

[DevTech]

1 hour ago, PGHammer said:

There is a reason that HDMI isn't going anywhere - non-computer displays and devices.  STBs (set-top boxes, gaming consoles, etc.,) all support HDMI - very few support DisplayPort.  (Remember, the XBOX ONE X supports both HDMI-out and HDMI-in - as does the preceding XBOX ONE S; the TiVo Bolt+ also supports HDMI-out and HDMI-in.  Thunderbolt is expensive on a per-port basis (though it also supports daisy-chaining, like HDMI) - that is the fatal flaw in Thunderbolt - the per-port cost. HDMI, on the other hand, is cheap - in fact, it is cheaper than even DisplayPort.

Oh yeah, I didn't expect to ever get my wish, not even from Santa Claus in 2020, or 2030, or come to think of it, whatever happened to Pan Am flights to the moon in 2001?

 

[DaveLegg Developer]

VGA is still pretty much the standard display connector for servers, so I don't expect it to die out any time soon. For similar reasons, lower resolution monitors are going to keep being made with VGA connectors because people need them to manage servers if they don't have some kind of built in remote console (iLO, iDRAC etc) or that's not responding for whatever reason.