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

81–90 of 185 posts

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

#81

Post by rini17 »

account42 wrote: post #70
trilbyglens wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Works exactly as a free market is designed to. The strong and coercive win. That's what market dynamics are really about. Monopolies form easily and naturally unless regulation stops them.

Actually these monopolies are enforced by the state via IP laws. Without IP laws any upstart could reverse engineer the protocols and provide an implementation with less limitations. But of course free market enthusiasts like to ignore that part and only rant against the government when it protects consumers from companies.

Yes, if there were no IP anyone could cheaply make a single-digit-nanometer-node custom ASIC to provide the alternative 4K-capable video hardware implementation. /s

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

#82

Post by cassianoleal »

HeckFeck wrote: post #51
sitkack wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're handing a win to DisplayPort. And that would be bad how? DP is an excellent standard and royalty free.

It's like what FireWire was to USB, but hopefully it has a better fate.

Wasn't FireWire also massively encumbered in patents and very expensive licenses? I may be misremembering...

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

#83

Post by account42 »

jakeogh wrote: post #59
kelnos wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. It should be illegal to restrict people from making open source implementations of industry standards like this. I don't expect that to ever happen, of course. But I can dream...

I'm with you in principal, but cleanroom reverse engineering is legal. The issue here is AMD signed the NDA's to read the secret spec and write the code, hence they cant release it. The solution is to not buy proprietary standards[0], in this case, I'm looking for DisplayPort when I buy... and a big + to AMD for trying. Hey Intel! Come back! [0] Pile of comments here pretending it's sooo difficult.

> in this case, I'm looking for DisplayPort when I buy

That's an option if what you are looking for is a normal computer monitor. If you want a big TV then good luck finding one with DP, especially if you have other requirements (emissive pixels with real blacks, HDR, etc) that further limit your options.

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

#84

Post by gond »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #38
vzaliva wrote: post #33

There was a post here on HN some time ago ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36681814 ), basically explaining that HDMI is terrible and DisplayPort is a much better technical solution. So, perhaps people should favour DP instead of HDMI and gradually switch?

I don't think it's quite that simple. DP is still missing HDMI features like ARC and CEC, which are important for TVs. Even on my personal computer setup, I use the HDMI 2.1 ports on my monitor/GPU over the DP 1.4 ports because the DP port just doesn't have the bandwidth for 2560x1440 @ 240hz with 10-bit colour. That requires ~30 Gbit/s, more than DP1.4's ~26 Gbit/s. Neither my monitor nor my GPU support DP2.0 which…

> DP is still missing HDMI features like ARC and CEC, which are important for TVs.

ARC could also be considered as a bug, a hindrance, or both.

ARC and its various implementations would not exist if the HDMI Forum would not be so fanatically force copy protection on everything. The whole problem, or feature that ARC is or is not, would disappear with the reliance of protecting every stream. The alternative would be a full datastream, decoded, going back to the device in question. The prerequisite would be to remove the shitshow that HDCP is and allow full-blown HDMI-in and outputs, which is the exact opposite of what the Forum wants.

HDMI in its current implementation hinders technological progress in the audio segment by forcing everyone to output analogue signals after the decoding stage or not allow decoding at all.

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

#85

Post by Hendrikto »

matja wrote: post #30
kelnos wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does it though? Does it really? Of course not. It's just protectionism and rent-seeking. > I don't understand this move from HDMI Forum. They're handing a win to DisplayPort. I don't think so, at least at this point. Most people don't have hardware that requires HDMI 2.1 in order to get full use out of them, and of those who do, not all of them use Linux and/or care about open source drivers. Sure, that situation m…

> Most people don't have hardware that requires HDMI 2.1 in order to get full use out of them, and of those who do, not all of them use Linux and/or care about open source drivers. Arguably true, but I think that is changing all the time while there is a push towards open-source drivers regardless of the average user knowing/caring what that is, along with resolutions and refresh rates increasing. I was affected by H…

> off-the-shelf 4K 120Hz monitor which refused to work at that resolution/refresh rate on an HDMI cable.

I run a 4K 144Hz monitor over HDMI. Are you sure you don‘t just need a better cable?

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

#87

Post by ThatPlayer »

roshankhan28 wrote: post #76

with DP cable i can get 144 hz on my benq xl2411p. but with hdmi i can go max 90hz. i cant own 2 144hz display just because there is no way i can use two DP cables on my rtx 20270 super.

That's an issue with the monitor only supporting HDMI 1.4. A monitor that supports HDMI 2.0 would work with 144hz fine. I have the opposite issue where I run my 240hz monitor on HDMI 2.1 because it has more bandwidth than my RTX 4080's DisplayPort 1.4 ports.

It seems a common issue enough with that that model is specifically called out sometimes: https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/how-to-connect-to-a-...

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

#88

Post by squarefoot »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #39
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have fewer display port devices now than 8 years ago.

Don't forget about usb-c. Video over usb-c is almost always display port in disguise.

What about latency? Is it on par or at least in the same league compared to direct connection? Not an issue for most people, but gamers could disagree if it is too high.

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

#89

Post by roenxi »

account42 wrote: post #70
trilbyglens wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Works exactly as a free market is designed to. The strong and coercive win. That's what market dynamics are really about. Monopolies form easily and naturally unless regulation stops them.

Actually these monopolies are enforced by the state via IP laws. Without IP laws any upstart could reverse engineer the protocols and provide an implementation with less limitations. But of course free market enthusiasts like to ignore that part and only rant against the government when it protects consumers from companies.

There are a huge number of free market types who are against IP laws and they're a big part of computing culture. Names like the FSF [0] spring to mind. A market can't expose a fraction of its potential if people are banned from competing because someone else got there first. The only reason the software world did so well was because the FSF managed that inspired hack of the copyright system known as the GPL that freed up the market, in fact.

[0] https://www.fsf.org/

Post reply on HN