HDMI vs Display Port


Recommended Posts

+jnelsoninjax

When it comes right down to it, how much (if any) difference is there between HDMI and DP? Is there an advantage to using one over the other? For reference, I'm running two monitors off of a 2080, one display is 4K the other is 2K, and both are connected via DP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H

as time goes on and both improve their specs there seems to be less and less difference between them as far as I can tell

 

edit: it also depends on which version of each spec we're working with. here's a good article I came across on PCMag that gives a good understanding of each

https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/hdmi-vs-displayport-which-should-i-use-for-my-pc-monitor

 

edit 2: here's another good article I found with a good conclusion paragraph that makes a good point. HDMI so far only officially supports AMD Freesync but DisplayPort supports both Freesync and G-Sync from Nvidia

https://www.cablematters.com/blog/HDMI/displayport-vs-hdmi

 

Quote

Features – another difference between DisplayPort and HDMI

 

In the DisplayPort vs. HDMI head to head, there aren't just differences in bandwidth and connector, but differences in features too. One of the key ones is ARC, and EARC technologies. Enjoyed by HDMI standards since HDMI 1.4, it enables the two-way processing of audio data, thereby allowing for a daisy chain of A/V equipment, source, and display, cutting back on cable waste and enhancing the bandwidth of the audio connection over competing standards like S/PDIF.

 

DisplayPort has found great success as an adopted standard, outside of its main connector. It's included in Thunderbolt and USB-C connections, enabling video transmission over those alternative cables and ports – all of which are available in the Cable Matters store.

 

Both HDMI and DisplayPort standards support variable refresh rates, but where DisplayPort supports both AMD's Freesync and Nvidia's G-Sync, HDMI only supports the former.

 

You can run a DisplayPort cable for longer than its HDMI counterparts too, with passive DisplayPort options maxing out around 5 meters before attenuation becomes a problem. In comparison, the latest HDMI 2.1 cables will run into problems around three meters. Active alternatives can extend that to 10 meters for both standards using fiber optic transmission techniques.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
+jnelsoninjax
20 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

as time goes on and both improve their specs there seems to be less and less difference between them as far as I can tell

 

edit: it also depends on which version of each spec we're working with. here's a good article I came across on PCMag that gives a good understanding of each

https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/hdmi-vs-displayport-which-should-i-use-for-my-pc-monitor

From reading that article, it seems that there is not much of a difference now with the two, and there also is no real standard for them either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
1 minute ago, jnelsoninjax said:

From reading that article, it seems that there is not much of a difference now with the two, and there also is no real standard for them either.

yeah pretty much what I get out of it too (Y) 

 

they were originally intended for different use cases but over time they've bled into each others areas and are nearly identical now

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason S.

a couple of years ago the news came down that users could leverage GSync on monitors that only support Freesync. My setup was exactly like this. i have a freesync-capable monitor w/ an RTX 2080. To get it working, however, i had to use a DP cable. Previously i had been using HDMI. Sure enough, i bought a DP cable and i could enable 'fake' GSync running at 75Hz instead of 60Hz.

 

i'm not currently educated on the diff protocols, but there was a point that DP had way more bandwidth than HDMI. that said, w/ the newest HDMI 2.1 standard, those lines have blurred.

Link to post
Share on other sites
xMorpheousx416

Agreed.

 

Between the two, there's not much difference. With exceptions of course being Freesync vs. GSync capable monitors. Like Jason S., I have a Freesync monitor, but a Geforce card.. so, not going to bother doing much with it, seeing as the monitor only has an HDMI plug, not Display Port.

 

I think companies wanted us all to go in the direction of Port, and leave HDMI behind.. as most newer cards, and like my own.. only have one HDMI and three Display Port ports.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H

I think the biggest difference now is ARC support on HDMI. everything else is slowing reaching feature parity with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mindovermaster

I currently use DP on my RX 580. Only reason is because DP has a locking mechanism, where HDMI does not.

 

edit: also, if I choose, I can use it for daisy chain my 2 monitors. They have that feature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
Just now, Mindovermaster said:

I currently use DP on my RX 580. Only reason is because DP has a locking mechanism, where HDMI does not.

As someone that has to frequently move parts around at his workplace I have to say I HATE locking DP cables with a passion. They're a PITA to get out of the back of the monitor sometimes without having to flip the monitor onto the screen.

The non-locking DP cables still click into place and hold plenty tight so I see no reason for the locking cables.

 

I had the same opinion with old serial/VGA cables and having to screw them in; but at least that made more sense due to being an analog signal so had to stay as still as possible on the connection.

 

/end-rant

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mindovermaster
2 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

As someone that has to frequently move parts around at his workplace I have to say I HATE locking DP cables with a passion. They're a PITA to get out of the back of the monitor sometimes without having to flip the monitor onto the screen.

The non-locking DP cables still click into place and hold plenty tight so I see no reason for the locking cables.

 

I had the same opinion with old serial/VGA cables and having to screw them in; but at least that made more sense due to being an analog signal so had to stay as still as possible on the connection.

 

/end-rant

I never had a problem with them. on my monitors, my DP (all for that matter) ports are facing down. Not out from the screen.

 

But I do feel your pain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
+warwagon
3 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

As someone that has to frequently move parts around at his workplace I have to say I HATE locking DP cables with a passion. They're a PITA to get out of the back of the monitor sometimes without having to flip the monitor onto the screen.

The non-locking DP cables still click into place and hold plenty tight so I see no reason for the locking cables.

 

I had the same opinion with old serial/VGA cables and having to screw them in; but at least that made more sense due to being an analog signal so had to stay as still as possible on the connection.

 

/end-rant

Just as bad as the no snag little hard little plastic peice on the of an ethernet cable. They need to  burn those with fire.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
Just now, warwagon said:

Just as bad as the no snag little hard little plastic peice on the of an ethernet cable. They need to  burn those with fire.

hey if those covers are done right then they're nice to have; i've seen good and bad implementations.

 

I prefer them because I'm frequently plugging in and taking out a few ethernet cords when I'm testing terminals and such at my job and i'd rather deal with that no-snag cover than have to frequently re-crimp new heads

Link to post
Share on other sites
+warwagon
Just now, Brandon H said:

hey if those covers are done right then they're nice to have; i've seen good and bad implementations.

 

I prefer them because I'm frequently plugging in and taking out a few ethernet cords when I'm testing terminals and such at my job and i'd rather deal with that no-snag cover than have to frequently re-crimp new heads

The one's i've seen the rubber is so stiff you can't push it down to unplug it from the ethernet jack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
Just now, warwagon said:

The one's i've seen the rubber is so stiff you can't push it down to unplug it from the ethernet jack.

eek yeah that'd be one of the bad ones

Link to post
Share on other sites
Steven P.

A major difference with Display Port, and what I hate about it is that if you turn the screen off it acts as if it is disconnected entirely so it can mess with your window positions. It is even worse with a multi monitor setup because then the 2nd monitor makes itself the primary one. HDMI does not do this.

 

Also I hate that most display manufactures still make the ports hard to work with, especially USB ports that are almost impossible to use bottom flat against the back of the display, do they think we only need to use them once? I have CRG49 that includes a USB hub (that is only useful once my PC has booted) since the connectors are so hard to get to I don't even bother using it.

 

At least my old Dell s2716dg screen has the foresight to put a USB3 port on the side of the screen, you know in a really handy place to use!!

 

2003046670.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
Just now, Steven P. said:

A major difference with Display Port, and what I hate about it is that if you turn the screen off it acts as if it is disconnected entirely so it can mess with your window positions. It is even worse with a multi monitor setup because then the 2nd monitor makes itself the primary one. HDMI does not do this.

I've heard this isn't DPs fault so much as manufacturers implementing the standard incorrectly; but all the same it's annoying as all get out.

 

was facing this issue last week actually; kept bumping the power cord for the monitor with my foot and it had a short so it would cause windows to freak out when it would power off and right back on. A couple of times it caused my taskbar to stop responding and wouldn't recover till I rebooted; but that could partially be because I'm using a 3rd party 2nd taskbar app. luckily got the power cord swapped now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Steven P.
1 minute ago, Brandon H said:

it caused my taskbar to stop responding and wouldn't recover till I rebooted;

this is a display driver bug with Explorer.exe next time your Start menu does not work, bring up the Task Manager and restart Windows Explorer ;) It can also happen with a simple display driver update or changing the display resolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
10 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

this is a display driver bug with Explorer.exe next time your Start menu does not work, bring up the Task Manager and restart Windows Explorer ;) It can also happen with a simple display driver update or changing the display resolution.

yeah that's the thing; I did try killing and relaunching explorer from task manager but the taskbar would just come up in a frozen state again lol and it wouldn't show the windows on the taskbar in that new frozen state either :rofl:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
adrynalyne

At least on my monitor, you won’t be getting 144Hz on HDMI but can on DP or TB3. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
KiHu
55 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

yeah that's the thing; I did try killing and relaunching explorer from task manager but the taskbar would just come up in a frozen state again lol and it wouldn't show the windows on the taskbar in that new frozen state either :rofl:

Are you using Insider Preview? - there has been an issue with the taskbar in the later builds AFAIK as they are moving it to its own taskbar.dll

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon H
Just now, KiHu said:

Are you using Insider Preview? - there has been an issue with the taskbar in the later builds AFAIK as they are moving it to its own taskbar.dll

nah, I could only wish they'd keep us that up to date at work :D I'm currently on 1909 at work

Link to post
Share on other sites
KiHu
Just now, Brandon H said:

nah, I could only wish they'd keep us that up to date at work :D I'm currently on 1909 at work

Ah okay - my bad then

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mindovermaster
1 hour ago, Steven P. said:

A major difference with Display Port, and what I hate about it is that if you turn the screen off it acts as if it is disconnected entirely so it can mess with your window positions. It is even worse with a multi monitor setup because then the 2nd monitor makes itself the primary one. HDMI does not do this.

I get that sometimes. But it's not EVERY time. I'm on Arch now, and it still does it once a week or something.

 

My monitors shut down after 20 minutes of inactivity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
adrynalyne
1 hour ago, Steven P. said:

A major difference with Display Port, and what I hate about it is that if you turn the screen off it acts as if it is disconnected entirely so it can mess with your window positions. It is even worse with a multi monitor setup because then the 2nd monitor makes itself the primary one. HDMI does not do this.

 

Also I hate that most display manufactures still make the ports hard to work with, especially USB ports that are almost impossible to use bottom flat against the back of the display, do they think we only need to use them once? I have CRG49 that includes a USB hub (that is only useful once my PC has booted) since the connectors are so hard to get to I don't even bother using it.

 

At least my old Dell s2716dg screen has the foresight to put a USB3 port on the side of the screen, you know in a really handy place to use!!

 

2003046670.jpg

That doesn’t happen to me on four different monitors. I think it’s probably as @Brandon H said and the manufacturer not implementing things correctly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
+Starry

For me it's more a difference depending on version numbers.  Functionally, they're not that different if you're just doing 60hz displays except you can put an adapter on Displayport to do HDMI.

 

I'd take DP 1.3 over HDMI 2.0 anyday, and HDMI 2.1 over DP 1.4 when its available.

 

I don't think I've seen anything using DP 2.0 so it's irrelevant for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.