DisplayPort 2.0 Published For 3x Increase In Data Bandwidth Performance

[ms178]

Oh please. Can't we just have one transmission protocol for everything now please?
I know of the attempts, but it is still very much divergent.
Each contemporary generation of all these protocols all use the same base SerDes available on the ASIC market for transmission anyway.

Just the protocol or also the connector? And I agree, two competing standards for the same (basic) functionality is making the lives of everyone harder (to a certain extent, maybe not to such much with displays, but not warrented by a vastly different feature set here anyway). I guess the whole consumer electronic industry might need a way to work better together on standards at least for such common functionality across different sectors.

[starshipeleven]

Then DVI got support for sound.

DVI never got support for sound. That was a hack where the card was piping HDMI signal over DVI, since HDMI and DVI use the same electrical protocol and contacts.

[M@GOid]

AFAIK, DisplayPort is the technically superior standard. Unfortunately, HDMI got a head-start and is only used because to support DP only on a consumer equipment would be almost suicidal.

This is not new, however, since the 80s PCs used to have different connectors, because high quality image TVs was not a thing. The exceptions was cheap 8 bit PCs like the Commodore 64, that used antenna or composite RCA connectors to plug on consumer TVs.

There is no way HDMI to be replaced by DP. The only solution is it to become royalty free and be merged with DP, but even them the connector would remain, since is WAY more common than DP. The better they can do is adopt USB C connector like there is no tomorrow and that could regain market on the consumer products, maybe.

[willmore]

This is not new, however, since the 80s PCs used to have different connectors, because high quality image TVs was not a thing. The exceptions was cheap 8 bit PCs like the Commodore 64, that used antenna or composite RCA connectors to plug on consumer TVs.

I agree with most of what you say, but I'll take issue with the part about the C64. It did have the ability to output a composite video signal, but it also had split chroma/luma signalling for improved video quality. Even then video quality was more important on computers than it was on consumer video gear.

Now, I think the Atari 400/800 might have had composite only. The Timex/Sinclair TX81 had composite only.

[M@GOid]

I agree with most of what you say, but I'll take issue with the part about the C64. It did have the ability to output a composite video signal, but it also had split chroma/luma signalling for improved video quality. Even then video quality was more important on computers than it was on consumer video gear.

Now, I think the Atari 400/800 might have had composite only. The Timex/Sinclair TX81 had composite only.

You are right. Commodore even had its own monitors that you can hook a C64 and get better image. Probably other cheap 8bit PCs of the era may have options for a better image. If my memory not fails me, the AMSTRAD computers also had better connection to use with their own monitors. (jump to 7:20min).

[torsionbar28]

It's possible to use a DVI-HDMI cable and get audio that way, at least on nVidia cards.

If that's true, then it isn't DVI. DVI is a published standard, and it doesn't include audio, period. What you're describing is some proprietary nVidia thing that just happens to utilize the DVI connector.

To make an analogy, if I hack together a way to attach a printer to my PC, using USB protocol, over an HDMI cable, that doesn't mean "HDMI supports printers".

[torsionbar28]

Just the protocol or also the connector? And I agree, two competing standards for the same (basic) functionality is making the lives of everyone harder (to a certain extent, maybe not to such much with displays, but not warrented by a vastly different feature set here anyway). I guess the whole consumer electronic industry might need a way to work better together on standards at least for such common functionality across different sectors.

Well said brother, I propose the industry standardize on a single connector for all digital communications, regardless of type or purpose. The one connector to rule them all, shall be the 50 pin Centronics. WHO'S WITH ME?!

[milkylainen]

Just the protocol or also the connector? And I agree, two competing standards for the same (basic) functionality is making the lives of everyone harder (to a certain extent, maybe not to such much with displays, but not warrented by a vastly different feature set here anyway). I guess the whole consumer electronic industry might need a way to work better together on standards at least for such common functionality across different sectors.

Modular connectors could work. Much like 1x PCIe is to the 16x slot the compact slow-speed device could use a smaller key'd connector in the host end (that supports larger keys) and a small typed connector at the client end. Like PCIe. 1x, 4x, 8x and 16x diff cables. Albeit with a uniform protocol for all USB, Thunderbolt, HDMI, Displayport, PCIe etc needs.

[Guest]

Is DP also encumbered with the crappy licensing/costs that HDMI has?

The fact that you don't need to pay royalties for every DisplayPort port and logo is the biggest differentiator between the ports.

[dragorth]

The fact that you don't need to pay royalties for every DisplayPort port and logo is the biggest differentiator between the ports.

That and the form factor of DP makes it the port Nvidia uses on its professional GPUs, so it can fit 4 DP ports per slot. DP sets the standards, and HDMI usually follows on their heels, so DP had 4K 60P for a year or so before HDMI could do it. HDMI just got 8K support, and DP is now talking about greater than 8K support. DP is really about the Professional market, which is ironic it comes from AMD.