Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Displayport: A Better Video Interface

hackaday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 426 posts

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#101

Post by xienze »

aidenn0 wrote: post #90
wmf wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

25 Gigabit Ethernet costs ~100x more than 32 Gigabit Displayport.

Sounds like the real question is why don't people use DP for p2p networking links...

There’s nothing magic about DP cables, they’re just typically a short-ish length, which is why they can be high bandwidth and relatively cheap. Once you get to a decent length, the cables get really expensive because you have to put optical transceivers on either side. I have a 25 foot DP cable which cost over $100, for example.

So you could do a short length, high bandwidth Ethernet cable, I’m sure. But the reason we don’t is probably because differentiation between connectors is desired —- consumers are dumb, frankly. They’ll think any old Ethernet cable will work. Just look at what kind of a mess exists with USBC.

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#102

Post by zerkten »

mvid wrote: post #84
tivert wrote: post #77

Are there any KVM switches that do Displayport well (i.e. where switching between inputs does not look like a display disconnect to the PC)? I'm still using HDMI because I like to share my home multi-monitor setup between my personal machine and my work laptop, and the KVM switches are able to fool the PCs into thinking the monitor are always connected. Years ago I tried a Displayport switch, but it could not -- I as…

https://store.level1techs.com/?category=Hardware This is what I use. It appears to disconnect, but also doesnt seem to be an issue. My machines re-organize instantly.

I was looking at this as an upgrade pick and don't have any re-arrangement with my TESmart (TES-HDK0402A1U-USBK). What monitor(s) do you have?

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#103

Post by theandrewbailey »

remix2000 wrote: post #23

With HDMI, I have both video and audio traveling over a single cable. That is _extremely_ convenient. DP _theoretically_ supports audio too, but AFAIK that's not widely implemented.

The audio receiver industry has settled on HDMI being the only way to get uncompressed surround sound (5.1+) from an external device, like a PC. I wish they would do that over USB, too. It sucks having to configure an external display (even if duplicated) just to get good sound.

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#104

Post by bbx »

The reason why I switched to using the DisplayPort is that it’s the one port that supports higher refresh rates ont my Dell monitors. I didn’t realise it was more “friendly” than HDMI (which comes in various quality standards).

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#106

Post by spockz »

jon-wood wrote: post #97
bpye wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well except for some of the Apple Silicon machines. The M1 (and maybe M2?) only have two video output blocks, of which one is already used for the internal display. It’s honestly the biggest complaint I have about my M1 MBP. Yes DisplayLink or whatever it’s called exists but the performance is bad.

I assume you got one of the original M1 MBPs. The more recent models have more display blocks. M1 Pro can drive two external displays, and I think the M1 Max can do three or four. I’m still slightly pissed Apple ever shipped the original M1 MBPs, they were horrible machines.

Although I wished i would have gotten the 15” and a bigger hard drive, I’m still very happy with my first gen 13” mbp. Also the fact that I can just plug in usb c/Thunderbolt monitors and the screen just instantly displays and windows reconfigure without flickering is amazing.

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#107

Post by kimburgess »

leoc wrote: post #31
remix2000 wrote: post #23

With HDMI, I have both video and audio traveling over a single cable. That is _extremely_ convenient. DP _theoretically_ supports audio too, but AFAIK that's not widely implemented.

Unfortunately HDMI audio is also notorious for often having serious lag, both in absolute terms and relative to the video signal.

That's not HDMI causing that pain. In fact, HDMI includes specific functionality for lip sync correction and enabling devices to expose both audio and video latencies they add to the signal.

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#108

Post by xxpor »

tivert wrote: post #77

Are there any KVM switches that do Displayport well (i.e. where switching between inputs does not look like a display disconnect to the PC)? I'm still using HDMI because I like to share my home multi-monitor setup between my personal machine and my work laptop, and the KVM switches are able to fool the PCs into thinking the monitor are always connected. Years ago I tried a Displayport switch, but it could not -- I as…

The magic words you're looking for are "EDID emulation". The KVM will continue to send the EDID data from the monitor even after you've switched away, which will fix that issue.

It's relatively uncommon and not always implemented super well, but it's a requirement for any DP KVM to be not super annoying IMO.

There was one particular KVM brand that was supposed to do it well whose name is escaping me now :/. I was looking at buying one in ~ May 2020 for obvious reasons, but they were on super-backorder (also for obvious reasons), so I never got around to it. IIRC they were about $500 for a 4 input/2 output version, so not cheap.

Re: Displayport: A Better Video Interface

#110

Post by naikrovek »

remix2000 wrote: post #23

With HDMI, I have both video and audio traveling over a single cable. That is _extremely_ convenient. DP _theoretically_ supports audio too, but AFAIK that's not widely implemented.

are you thinking of DVI or something?

I've been using audio over DisplayPort for years and years and years without issue. every device I've ever had that supports DisplayPort supports audio over that connection.

Post reply on HN