GNOME's Mutter Working On Variable Refresh Rate Support (VRR / Adaptive-Sync / FreeSync)

[Volta]

That cool. I am assuming those features are only for Linux guests, right?

Yes, there's no switch to enable 3D acceleration for Windows 7 and it seems drag&drop of files doesn't work.

[ehansin]

Wow, I see Sway got this first! Makes sense, being the one true Linux desktop! Yay for Sway!!

[Britoid]

Yes, there's no switch to enable 3D acceleration for Windows 7 and it seems drag&drop of files doesn't work.

It won't be possible till VirGL supports DirectX guests. I imagine though once some sort of Vulkan acceleration is done they can reuse DXVK to create a driver.

[gamerk2]

Simple explanation:
HDMI was designed as an interface between consumer electronics (DVD players, television sets, laserdisc players etc.) as a physical cable with a proprietary connector that is pin compatible with DVI and an underlying protocol that offers copy protected signal transmission from one device to one other device (one to one). It was meant to replace the SCART connector. It is a consumer electronics standard.

DP is a Physical cable, designed to connect multiple devices to computers (one to many). DP offers possibilities for video, audio, networking and other data transmission to multiple devices without a dedicated protocol, but making use of multiple protocols depending on the type of data that is being transmitted. It does not offer copy protection as a standard. It is a computer technology standard

It also has to do with legal matters, copy protection is very much a thing in consumer electronics. HDMI is also relatively old (introduced in the eighties) and was never conceived as a computer interface. Only very recently has it begun to offer high resolution with relatively high frequencies. DP is much newer, but already succeeded by Thunderbolt.

Basically, different groups pushed different standards that otherwise do mostly the same thing.

I note DP didn't really gain traction until it had a bandwidth advantage over HDMI; HDMI 2.0 can't handle 4k120, where DP 1.4 can, for example.

My feeling has always been once HDMI 2.1 hits, you'll see Displays go back to being mostly HDMI due to the wide range of supported resolutions. The fact consumer electronics are HDMI by default is also another reason the spec isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Also FYI, Thunderbolt doesn't really replace everything. It's like Firewire: Apples attempt at vendor lock in.

[ehansin]

Wow, I see Sway got this first! Makes sense, being the one true Linux desktop! Yay for Sway!!

Btw, I am just being silly. It probably wasn't called for, has been a decent discussion here on this thread. That said, this post coming to you via a Sway session, just saying...

[Girolamo_Cavazzoni]

Also FYI, Thunderbolt doesn't really replace everything. It's like Firewire: Apples attempt at vendor lock in.

Err... No. Thunderbolt has become USB 4. Intel has opened its spec. HDMI on the other side remains proprietary crap with licence fees.

[You-]

DP is much newer, but already succeeded by Thunderbolt.

AFAIK Thunderbolt uses DIsplayport (though with a different connector). DisplayPort is still active and in development.

Thunderbolt is succeeded by USB4

[mppix]

AFAIK Thunderbolt uses DIsplayport (though with a different connector). DisplayPort is still active and in development.
Thunderbolt is succeeded by USB4

Exactly. We will probably see displays shift to usb 4 (how would you otherwise connect your laptop) and hopefully TVs will also offer an interface. Either way you can always get an adapter (with all the drawbacks).

[ssokolow]

My feeling has always been once HDMI 2.1 hits, you'll see Displays go back to being mostly HDMI due to the wide range of supported resolutions. The fact consumer electronics are HDMI by default is also another reason the spec isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

DP is a packetized protocol like USB, Ethernet, or PCI-Express, which is why, from the beginning, you've seen people offering things like active hubs which split DP out into three DVI ports. The number of native-DP devices you can network up to a single DisplayPort is limited only by bandwidth.

HDMI, on the other hand, is a timing-centric stream protocol, like DVI and VGA before it. I've never seen a hub which divides HDMI into multiple outputs and, if such a thing exists, it'd be very particular about only working with a set of monitors that can all sync to the same clock.

It's also the reason why, for a while, your GPU might have had three or four connectors, but couldn't drive that many different displays. It had only two or three CRTCs and each HDMI, DVI, or VGA output with a distinct image needed its own CRTC.

With DP, in essence, the CRTC is inside the monitor.

It's also why DP got VRR first. It's a lot easier to implement VRR on top of a protocol that has no intrinsic timing requirements to adjust on the fly.

I suspect the need for that extra circuitry for processing DP packets is why, without any consoles using it, TVs don't do DP. They're all about cost-cutting.

[intelfx]

DP is a packetized protocol like USB, Ethernet, or PCI-Express, which is why, from the beginning, you've seen people offering things like active hubs which split DP out into three DVI ports. The number of native-DP devices you can network up to a single DisplayPort is limited only by bandwidth.

HDMI, on the other hand, is a timing-centric stream protocol, like DVI and VGA before it. I've never seen a hub which divides HDMI into multiple outputs and, if such a thing exists, it'd be very particular about only working with a set of monitors that can all sync to the same clock.

It's also the reason why, for a while, your GPU might have had three or four connectors, but couldn't drive that many different displays. It had only two or three CRTCs and each HDMI, DVI, or VGA output with a distinct image needed its own CRTC.

With DP, in essence, the CRTC is inside the monitor.

It's also why DP got VRR first. It's a lot easier to implement VRR on top of a protocol that has no intrinsic timing requirements to adjust on the fly.

I suspect the need for that extra circuitry for processing DP packets is why, without any consoles using it, TVs don't do DP. They're all about cost-cutting.

Thanks for that explanation. That difference between DP and HDMI didn't really register with me until now.