Nouveau Supporting HDMI 2.1 Won't Hopefully Be Too Challenging Thanks To NVIDIA Firmware

[mdedetrich]

until you realize closed source code quality is usually pretty bad, because nobody needs to see it. As proven by all the Microsoft, Apple, VMware, heck even Intel and AMD CPU security vulnerabilities. Have you seen the code quality of Intel's open source thunderbolt-utils? That is what average closed source looks like. And often worse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ysBj4cRU5c

While I do advocate for open source, this reasoning is utter horshit. Plenty of open source software has vulnerabilities (have you checked linux CVE's lately) and the "source being available means more eyes are on it" doesn't really hold up if the right people aren't reading the code.

Look at heartbleed which was one of the worst most recent security vulnerabilities, even though its in an open source library no one looked at it enough to find the vulnerability. Even worse, bad actors could have known heartbleed for a while (since the source is open).

[F.Ultra]

They could make 2 DP and 2 HDMI ports (or 3 and 1) instead of 4 HDMI, no adapter problems. But maybe you're right the biggest players earn more and small ones just cave in.

Most AMD cards have only one HDMI and the rest DP but that might be due to the monitor world being more independent of those structures.

The answer is even simpler than that, with the exception of Samsung and LG, ALL of the major TV-manufacturers are founding members of HDMI IF, so they all gets to eat the cake when others are forced to use HDMI. So there are zero incentive for those others to add DP to their sets since that is a competing product.

[Anux]

The answer is even simpler than that, with the exception of Samsung and LG, ALL of the major TV-manufacturers are founding members of HDMI IF, so they all gets to eat the cake when others are forced to use HDMI. So there are zero incentive for those others to add DP to their sets since that is a competing product.

Samsung an LG are by far the biggest players in the market, far above 50% market share. So not really the most compelling argument.

[F.Ultra]

Samsung an LG are by far the biggest players in the market, far above 50% market share. So not really the most compelling argument.

AFAIK they combined is about 31% of the world wide total tv market so not far above 50%. Still they have to maintain compatibility with existing dvd-players, bluray-players, receivers, soundbars and all other existing TV-peripherals and they are all 100% HDMI (plus that CEC doesn't exist on DP, and possibly also eARC) so them removing HDMI would be no option. As to why they wouldn't also add DP is probably to avoid the cost when zero of their customers want it (yes the amount of pc enthusiasts asking for DP is ~0 when compared with their total number of buyers of tv:s).

[Anux]

AFAIK they combined is about 31% of the world wide total tv market so not far above 50%.

We both were wrong: https://www.kedglobal.com/electronic...ed202308210021 it's 47%

Still they have to maintain compatibility with existing ... TV-peripherals and they are all 100% HDMI

That would still be possible with 3 HDMI and one DP or 2/2.

plus that CEC doesn't exist on DP

I would trust wikipedia more than you on that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort it's there since 3.1

But you're probably right that HDMI was first on some essential features like CEC and then it just evolved from there.

[F.Ultra]

I would trust wikipedia more than you on that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort it's there since 3.1

I'll be damned, well great of they have CEC, I just see many, many posts from people trying to use CEC on DP with no success.

[GreenReaper]

While I do advocate for open source, this reasoning is utter horshit. Plenty of open source software has vulnerabilities (have you checked linux CVE's lately) and the "source being available means more eyes are on it" doesn't really hold up if the right people aren't reading the code.

I read some research on this once, the upshot was that neither closed nor open source has significantly different levels of defects, however open source code is fixed slightly faster once a vulnerability is identified (which might be because external parties can suggest or review a fix, including with the original report, or due to public pressure since the source is available).

[carewolf]

I would trust wikipedia more than you on that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort it's there since 3.1

But you're probably right that HDMI was first on some essential features like CEC and then it just evolved from there.

If I read that correctly it just states it can carry CEC in the HDMI mode of Dual Mode DisplayPorts, which isn't a required feature, and would still require the protocol on the cable to be HDMI.

[NomadDemon]

I just emailed samsung why no DP tv's are available

Ok i have answer [its in polish, but i translated it to english - there might be some mistakes in translation]

Looks like they dont know much about DP

bellow polish [original version] so you can translate by yourself

-----------------------------------------------
Thank you kindly for contacting Samsung's Customer Service Center.

I understand that you are contacting regarding the presence of DisplayPort on Samsung TVs.

The TV market is dominated by HDMI connectors, as they are commonly used in many multimedia devices.

We also do not have information on whether and when to expect DP integration in our TVs.

For my part, I can recommend our monitors, which are equipped with DP:

https://www.samsung.com/pl/monitors/smart/?display-port

Putting the matter in general, here are some reasons why TVs often have more HDMI ports than DisplayPort (DP):

1. the popularity of HDMI:
HDMI is a standard widely used in TVs, Blu-ray players, game consoles, computers and other devices.
It is easier for consumers to find compatible devices if they have more HDMI ports.

2 Support for multimedia content:
HDMI supports various types of content, including movies, games, sound and other multimedia.
This is important for users who want to connect various signal sources such as set-top boxes, game consoles, DVD players, etc.

3 Ease of use:
HDMI is simpler to use than DisplayPort. The connectors are single-sided and there is no need to worry about the direction of connection. This makes it easier for users to use the TV without having to go into technical details.

4 Manufacturing costs:
It can be cheaper for TV manufacturers to equip devices with HDMI ports than DisplayPort. That's why most TVs have more HDMI ports.

5. technical specifications:
DisplayPort is more technically advanced and offers more capabilities, but it is not as widely used as HDMI. Many TV manufacturers may simply see no need to equip their models with DisplayPort ports.

The bottom line is that while DisplayPort is more powerful and flexible, HDMI is more popular and widely used in TVs. If you need more DisplayPort ports, you may want to consider purchasing a monitor with TV functionality.

I hope that the information provided will meet your understanding.

Below this message is a survey to evaluate my work. With one click, you can express your opinion on the answer you received.

With best regards,

Adam Warda
-----------------------------------------------

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)



-----------------------------------------------
Uprzejmie dziękuję za kontakt z Centrum Obsługi Klienta firmy Samsung.

Rozumiem, że kontaktuje się Pan w sprawie obecności DisplayPort w telewizorach Samsung.

Rynek telewizorów jest zdominowany przez złącza HDMI, ponieważ są one powszechnie używane w wielu urządzeniach multimedialnych.

Nie posiadamy też informacji na temat tego, czy i kiedy można się spodziewać w naszych telewizorach integracji z DP.

Ze swojej strony mogę polecić nasze monitory, które są wyposażone w DP:

https://www.samsung.com/pl/monitors/smart/?display-port

Ujmując sprawę ogólnie, oto kilka powodów, dlaczego telewizory często mają więcej portów HDMI niż DisplayPort (DP):

1. Popularność HDMI:
HDMI jest standardem szeroko stosowanym w telewizorach, odtwarzaczach Blu-ray, konsolach do gier, komputerach i innych urządzeniach.
Konsumentom jest łatwiej znaleźć kompatybilne urządzenia, jeśli mają więcej portów HDMI.

2. Wsparcie dla treści multimedialnych:
HDMI obsługuje różne rodzaje treści, w tym filmy, gry, dźwięk i inne multimedia.
Jest to ważne dla użytkowników, którzy chcą podłączyć różne źródła sygnału, takie jak dekodery, konsole do gier, odtwarzacze DVD itp.


3. Prostota obsługi:
HDMI jest prostsze w użyciu niż DisplayPort. Wtyczki są jednostronne i nie ma potrzeby martwić się o kierunek podłączenia. To ułatwia użytkownikom korzystanie z telewizora bez konieczności zagłębiania się w techniczne szczegóły.

4. Koszty produkcji:
Producentom telewizorów może być tańsze wyposażenie urządzeń w porty HDMI niż DisplayPort. Dlatego większość telewizorów ma więcej portów HDMI.

5. Specyfikacje techniczne:
DisplayPort jest bardziej zaawansowany technicznie i oferuje większe możliwości, ale nie jest tak powszechnie stosowany jak HDMI. Wielu producentów telewizorów może po prostu nie widzieć potrzeby wyposażania swoich modeli w porty DisplayPort.

Podsumowując, choć DisplayPort jest wydajniejszy i elastyczniejszy, HDMI jest bardziej popularny i powszechnie stosowany w telewizorach. Jeśli potrzebuje Pan większej ilości portów DisplayPort, warto rozważyć zakup monitora z funkcją telewizora.

Wyrażam nadzieję, że udzielone informacje spotkają się z Pana zrozumieniem.

Poniżej tej wiadomości znajduje się ankieta oceniająca moją pracę. Jednym kliknięciem może Pan wyrazić swoją opinię na temat otrzymanej odpowiedzi.

Z pozdrowieniami,

Adam Warda
-----------------------------------------------

[alexvoda]

I wonder if on the AMD side the support for active adapters like this ( https://shop.caldigit.com/uk/index.p...product_id=217 ) is in any way affected by HDMI's buttheadedness ?

What about passive adapters/cables that rely on DisplayPort Dual-Mode (DP++) ? These are only relevant for desktops since laptops use USB-C and USB-C HDMI Alt Mode is dead and older laptops with DP++ ports don't support the higher resolutions/framerates/bandwidth offered by the 2.1 version of HDMI anyway.

I would guess the first is No and the latter is clearly Yes. If so I am fully in support of AMD offering only DP on their desktop graphics cards. And anyone who needs HDMI can just use an active adapter. USB-C already dominates on laptops.