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

HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 185 posts

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#131

Post by nolok »

sgjohnson wrote: post #119

I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.

HDMI is ruling because of momentum and ubiquity in the tv room.

No device output in DP, no device accepts it, so no pressure on device to accept/output it. I guess the license price is low enough.

On computers, it sort of evolved where DVI was, you get mort port, you get better feature set, it's just superior.

But in the non-tech market I think the "real" fight will end up being hdmi vs usb-c, both of them are evolving to the point where they feed everything ethernet included. HDMI has ARC and waayyyy simpler cable and port compatibility (one version to check), usb-c has power output and every single pocket device and laptop/tablet/...

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#132

Post by sgjohnson »

nolok wrote: post #131
sgjohnson wrote: post #119

I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.

HDMI is ruling because of momentum and ubiquity in the tv room. No device output in DP, no device accepts it, so no pressure on device to accept/output it. I guess the license price is low enough. On computers, it sort of evolved where DVI was, you get mort port, you get better feature set, it's just superior. But in the non-tech market I think the "real" fight will end up being hdmi vs usb-c, both of them are evolvi…

> No device output in DP

Yeah, if we exclude basically every half decent GPU and ~70% of laptop USB-C ports in existence.

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#133

Post by arghwhat »

dathinab wrote: post #125
arghwhat wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At any rate, for some reason DisplayPort has just not caught on all that much. DisplayPort won everything, except not becoming the physical connector for home cinema. Heck, even within those HDMI-exposing devices, DP won. The vast majority of display drivers speak eDP. Few things actually implement HDMI, and instead rely on DisplayPort to HDMI converters - that's true whether you're looking at a Nintendo Switch or…

> The only real thing holding onto DisplayPort is eARC and some minor CEC features for AV receiver/soundbar use. Introducing some dedicated audio port would not only be a huge upgrade (some successor to toslink with more bandwidth and remote control support), but would also remove the pressure to use HDMI. USB-C I mean think about it USB-C/DP alternative mode is good enough as upstream for most use cases (including c…

> and lastly there is some trend to PCIe everything in both consumer and server hardware. In the consumer segment it had been somewhat limited to the "luxury" segment, i.e. Thunderbolt. But with USB4 it slowly ends up in more and more places. So who knows PCIe based video might just replace both of them (and go over USB-C)

Thunderbolt/USB4 is not PCIe. It's a transport layer that can run multiple applications at once, sharing bandwidth based on use. This is opposed to USB-C Alternate Mode, where pins are physically reassigned to a specific application, which uses the pins regardless of whether it needs the bandwidth.

PCIe is then one of the supported applications running on top of the transport.

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#134

Post by Dalewyn »

account42 wrote: post #66
Dalewyn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people will use the path of least resistance. Many people/organizations still use VGA and ketchup-mustard-onion cables to this day if they still do the job, let alone HDMI.

Shouldn't it be mayo if you are going with a condiment theme?

Very fair point and duly noted!

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#136

Post by dathinab »

arghwhat wrote: post #133
dathinab wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only real thing holding onto DisplayPort is eARC and some minor CEC features for AV receiver/soundbar use. Introducing some dedicated audio port would not only be a huge upgrade (some successor to toslink with more bandwidth and remote control support), but would also remove the pressure to use HDMI. USB-C I mean think about it USB-C/DP alternative mode is good enough as upstream for most use cases (including c…

> and lastly there is some trend to PCIe everything in both consumer and server hardware. In the consumer segment it had been somewhat limited to the "luxury" segment, i.e. Thunderbolt. But with USB4 it slowly ends up in more and more places. So who knows PCIe based video might just replace both of them (and go over USB-C) Thunderbolt/USB4 is not PCIe. It's a transport layer that can run multiple applications at once…

I know, but this isn't relevant for the argument, if anything it's in favor of some future protocol replacing HDMI/DP/USB-C+DP alt while using the USB-C connector.

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#137

Post by bryanlarsen »

sgjohnson wrote: post #119

I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.

> Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it.

So frustrating. I'm using a 42" LG OLED TV as a monitor right now. Very nice monitor at half the price of the same panel in a "real" monitor. I'm driving it with an AMD card at 60 Hz for exceedingly stupid reasons.

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#138

Post by macNchz »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #137
sgjohnson wrote: post #119

I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.

> Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. So frustrating. I'm using a 42" LG OLED TV as a monitor right now. Very nice monitor at half the price of the same panel in a "real" monitor. I'm driving it with an AMD card at 60 Hz for exceedingly stupid reasons.

FWIW after reading though lots and lots of posts in the original bug report thread for this issue, I bought a Cable Matters “8K DisplayPort 1.4 to HDMI 2.1 Adapter” and it works perfectly to drive my Sony TV at 4K/120 from an AMD 6900XT on Ubuntu 24.04.

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#139

Post by Pet_Ant »

ignaloidas wrote: post #121
shmerl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May be it can change if USB 4 will sneak in and supplant HDMI in those devices, since it can route both HDMI and DP.

It cannot route HDMI, partly because HDMI is built upon antiquated principles and doesn't really fit besides more modern protocol designs. USB4 would need to get entirely redesigned for tunneling native HDMI. Having a DP to HDMI converter on one end though, that's easy.

> HDMI is built upon antiquated principles

I'm interested in learn more, in what way are they antiquated?

Re: HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

#140

Post by toast0 »

nolok wrote: post #131
sgjohnson wrote: post #119

I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.

HDMI is ruling because of momentum and ubiquity in the tv room. No device output in DP, no device accepts it, so no pressure on device to accept/output it. I guess the license price is low enough. On computers, it sort of evolved where DVI was, you get mort port, you get better feature set, it's just superior. But in the non-tech market I think the "real" fight will end up being hdmi vs usb-c, both of them are evolvi…

> But in the non-tech market I think the "real" fight will end up being hdmi vs usb-c, both of them are evolving to the point where they feed everything ethernet included.

HDMI ethernet and HDMI eArc use the same pins. eArc won, HDMI ethernet is pretty much dead.

Post reply on HN