Display port to HDMI 2.0

Glaith · December 15, 2016

G'day guys,

Just need to know what cable any one can recommend for what i'm trying to do.

I have a samsung ua55ju6400w 4k TV and only has one HDMI 2.0 port, but my PC runs a R9 290x tri x and doesnt have a HDMi 2.0 out put.

Im trying to run 4k skyrim at 60hz and can only do that if I use the display port on 290x but the problem is my TV doesnt have display ports.

Is there a cable that will do Display port from my 290x to the HDMI 2.0 port in the TV? If so what can you recommend.

Enderman · December 15, 2016

No there is no cable that can go from one to another because they are different protocols.

You need to buy an active DP 1.3 to HDMI 2.0 adapter which can do 60hz.

https://www.amazon.com/Club3D-Displayport-1-2-HDMI-CAC-1070/dp/B017BQ8I54

But the best solution is to upgrade that outdated GPU.

Glaith · December 15, 2016

Unfortunately i don't have the funds for a new GPU and the 290x still packs enough punch for what I use it for.

So that adapter will have to do.

Thank you.

MoonlightSylv · December 15, 2016

3 minutes ago, Enderman said:

But the best solution is to upgrade that outdated GPU.

Outdated?

The 290X is still a very powerful card, it's aged well.

Enderman · December 15, 2016

9 minutes ago, ShadowTechXTS said:

Outdated?

The 290X is still a very powerful card, it's aged well.

The 290x produces a ton of heat, performs about the same as a 970, and doesn't even have modern features like HDMI 2.0........

I would not consider a 290x "very powerful".

MoonlightSylv · December 15, 2016

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

The 290x produces a ton of heat, performs about the same as a 970, and doesn't even have modern features like HDMI 2.0........

I would not consider a 290x "very powerful".

Powerful for it's age.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

51 minutes ago, Enderman said:

No there is no cable that can go from one to another because they are different protocols.

You need to buy an active DP 1.3 to HDMI 2.0 adapter which can do 60hz.

https://www.amazon.com/Club3D-Displayport-1-2-HDMI-CAC-1070/dp/B017BQ8I54

But the best solution is to upgrade that outdated GPU.

Why replace something that is perfectly serviceable and can readily output 4K@60hz with just a very affordable adaptor?

Right now 'm watching my HTPC on 4K TV and I'm using a DP1.2 to HMI 2.0 adaptor on a Radeon HD 7950. To spend money to replace the GPU would be, well, silly, it does it it's job fine.

Your 'Best Solution' of 'Spend a bunch of money to make Enderman happy' seems like a pretty bad solution if you ask me.

Glaith · December 15, 2016

I have decided to go with the adapter. Again I cant afford a GPU especially when there is no reason to upgrade it.

Also I have the Tri X model the temps are not that bad 80 degrees cel on a very hot day here in Australia 70 degrees cel average under load.

Any who not here to debate my Card. Just need options for 4k 60 hz with what I have.

Enderman · December 15, 2016

6 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Why replace something that is perfectly serviceable and can readily output 4K@60hz with just a very affordable adaptor?

Right now 'm watching my HTPC on 4K TV and I'm using a DP1.2 to HMI 2.0 adaptor on a Radeon HD 7950. To spend money to replace the GPU would be, well, silly, it does it it's job fine.

Your 'Best Solution' of 'Spend a bunch of money to make Enderman happy' seems like a pretty bad solution if you ask me.

Because the adapter adds latency, decreases quality, and is a workaround rather than a solution.

But you probably wouldn't be able to tell.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

1 minute ago, Glathier said:

I have decided to go with the adapter. Again I cant afford a GPU especially when there is no reason to upgrade it.

Also I have the Tri X model the temps are not that bad 80 degrees cel on a very hot day here in Australia 70 degrees cel average under load.

Any who not here to debate my Card. Just need options for 4k 60 hz with what I have.

I'm not running a 290X but I'm using an HD 7950 and this adaptor and it's working great.

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B00S0BWR2K/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

There's really nothing to it, it's plug and play, though beware, some 4K TVs need an additional setting enabled for it's EDID to advertise that it support 60hz at 4K. Since you have a Samsung like I do, it's probably the same thing. Enable 'HDMI UHD Color' on the chosen input, otherwise the TV's EDID on that port will only tell the computer that it supports 30hz max. ...I have no idea why this feature exists. It doesn't seem to change anything in the TV. In fact if I override the EDID and force 60hz output even with 'HDMI UHD Color' enabled and the TV reports that it is in that mode anyway while ingesting the 60hz signal that it is 'not configured to support'.

That's about all I can warn you off, they are basically plug and play adaptors.

NeoFrux · December 15, 2016

3 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Because the adapter adds latency, decreases quality, and is a workaround rather than a solution.

But you probably wouldn't be able to tell.

The latency such an adapter would cause is very likely to be less than a frame, and there is no loss in quality going from DisplayPort to HDMI (or DVI for that matter) or vice-versa. Shit be digital, yo.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

5 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Because the adapter adds latency, decreases quality, and is a workaround rather than a solution.

But you probably wouldn't be able to tell.

While it is true that any conversion comes with some cost of time, the conversion of DisplayPort to HDMI is negligible.

Secondly, no there is no 'decrease in quality'. DisplayPort and HDMI are both transporting RGB data, they are just transporting them in different ways an the adaptor just converts from one method of transportation to another. The actual RGB image is untouched. There is zero 'loss of quality' with an active DP to HDMI adaptor. This is just you being ignorant.

Enderman · December 15, 2016

2 minutes ago, Runefox said:

The latency such an adapter would cause is very likely to be less than a frame, and there is no loss in quality going from DisplayPort to HDMI (or DVI for that matter) or vice-versa. Shit be digital, yo.

Oh, and this adapter which is the first to be able to do 4k 60hz took like two years to release, how about you try to guess how many years it will take to get one that can do HDR, 4:4:4, 10 bit, or any of the other quality features? If you even know what these things are, that is....

NeoFrux · December 15, 2016

Just now, Enderman said:

Oh, and this adapter which is the first to be able to do 4k 60hz took like two years to release, how about you try to guess how many years it will take to get one that can do HDR, 4:4:4, 10 bit, or any of the other quality features? If you even know what these things are, that is....

... What are you even talking about? It's an active adapter that converts DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0. It doesn't do anything but convert the transport layer from DisplayPort (packet-based) to HDMI (TMDS). It doesn't give two shits what type of data is passing through as long as it can interleave the video and audio. It's hilarious that you even thought to mention this, because the Club3D adapter you yourself linked explicitly specifies support for all of the above except for HDR (but does specify support for DP 1.4, which does have HDR support).

DP 1.2 can do 4K, 4:4:4, and 10-bit, though not HDR; HDMI 2.0 is currently the only widely available standard that can do HDR 4K60. Converting from DP to HDMI does nothing to change the amount of bandwidth available on the link. You're still going to get everything DisplayPort 1.2 can do, which again includes 4K60, 4:4:4, and 10-bit. Not that much actually uses 10-bit to begin with, but there you go. Really the only thing you're missing out on versus a shiny new RX 4x0 or GeForce 10x0 is HDR. Considering not much uses that, either (certainly not Skyrim), it's not a big loss.

A note, 4:4:4 refers to the YUV colour system, not RGB. The 290X should be able to spit out both either way.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

Oh, and this adapter which is the first to be able to do 4k 60hz took like two years to release

Two years......Let's do some math.

HDMI 2.0 was initially relapsed Sept 4, 2013. Where as Pluggable's adaptor was first available on Jan. 27 2015. Well, I guess that's two years. ...If you round up from anything higher than 1 year...

Quote

how about you try to guess how many years it will take to get one that can do HDR, 4:4:4, 10 bit, or any of the other quality features?

Okay, let's go through these one by one...

4:4:4 - DisplayPort 1.2 already supports 4:4:4 so to answer your question of 'How long' the answer is 'Now'. (You don't know a lot about this stuff, do you? But I congratulate you on being really aggressive despite that!) This adaptor does full RGB or YCbCr 4:4:4. (In my experience, AMD cards only drive DisplayPort in RGB however. But that's full RGB so who cares?)

HDR: I'm not quite sure how to answer this. Frankly, HDR is basically untested as even the Windows OS does not support HDR. That said, with the recent Crimson update, AMD supposively rolled out HDR support for their older GPUs, including the RX 3XX series which only have DP 1.2 and HDMI 1.4a. Though while Window's own HDR support is still outstanding, there's no real testing that. ...Oh an the OPs TV is a JU series which doesn't support HDR so I feel like HDR is probably not a concern to the OP. So why spend money on a new GPU for HDR support when their TV doesn't support HDR?

10bit: I mean, I could point out that the JU series aren't 10bit screens but I won't. Yeah, this adaptor CAN drive up to 12bit actually, but not at 4K@60 as DP 1.2 lacks sufficient bandwidth for this. But a DP 1.3 or 1.4 base adaptor would have no problems with this.

Now, are you done trying to convince the OP to buy a new GPU just to satisfy your strange hatred of DisplayPort adaptors? The OP has a perfectly serviceable GPU that they are happy with, when a $20 adaptor can get the job done, there's no need to spend perfectly good money on a new GPU.

...In before Enderman orders the OP to buy an HDR OLED screen...

Enderman · December 15, 2016

2 minutes ago, Runefox said:

... What are you even talking about? It's an active adapter that converts DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0. It doesn't do anything but convert the transport layer from DisplayPort (packet-based) to HDMI (TMDS). It doesn't give two shits what type of data is passing through as long as it can interleave the video and audio. It's hilarious that you even thought to mention this, because the Club3D adapter you yourself linked explicitly specifies support for all of the above except for HDR (but does specify support for DP 1.4, which does have HDR support).

DP 1.2 can do 4K, 4:4:4, and 10-bit, though not HDR; HDMI 2.0 is currently the only widely available standard that can do HDR 4K60. Converting from DP to HDMI does nothing to change the amount of bandwidth available on the link. You're still going to get everything DisplayPort 1.2 can do, which again includes 4K60, 4:4:4, and 10-bit. Not that much actually uses 10-bit to begin with, but there you go. Really the only thing you're missing out on versus a shiny new RX 4x0 or GeForce 10x0 is HDR. Considering not much uses that, either (certainly not Skyrim), it's not a big loss.

A note, 4:4:4 refers to the YUV colour system, not RGB. The 290X should be able to spit out both either way.

That's not true.

There have been many other DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters before this one, and they all could not do 60hz because the adapter needs to be able to process the full bandwidth.

Just because it says DP1.2 on it or HDMI 2.0 on it does not mean that it can process 18gbps of information or whatever so a lot of the time features like 4:4:4 or HDR simply will not work.

This is not a simple "DVI-I to VGA" adapter that can do everything passively as if the adapter did not exist.

NeoFrux · December 15, 2016

Just now, Enderman said:

That's not true.

There have been many other DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters before this one, and they all could not do 60hz because the adapter needs to be able to process the full bandwidth.

Just because it says DP1.2 on it or HDMI 2.0 on it does not mean that it can process 18gbps of information or whatever so a lot of the time features like 4:4:4 or HDR simply will not work.

This is not a simple "DVI-I to VGA" adapter that can do everything passively as if the adapter did not exist.

Got any examples of DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters that do this? I mean, for that matter, the adapter you linked explicitly states that it is capable of all of the above, so the point is moot anyway and you're kind of arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

That's not true.

There have been many other DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters before this one, and they all could not do 60hz because the adapter needs to be able to process the full bandwidth.

Just because it says DP1.2 on it or HDMI 2.0 on it does not mean that it can process 18gbps of information or whatever so a lot of the time features like 4:4:4 or HDR simply will not work.

This is not a simple "DVI-I to VGA" adapter that can do everything passively as if the adapter did not exist.

I don't understand the argument you are trying to make with this post. I linked the OP a model of adaptor that does the job. I linked the OP a model of adaptor that I am literally watching on my Samsung KU6290 series TV right now.

Enderman · December 15, 2016

3 minutes ago, Runefox said:

Got any examples of DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters that do this? I mean, for that matter, the adapter you linked explicitly states that it is capable of all of the above, so the point is moot anyway and you're kind of arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.

I would suggest you go read the reviews for that adapter, or other adapters, you might learn something.

Active adapter =/= proper HDMI 2.0 to 2.0 cable with HDMI 2.0 devices.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

3 minutes ago, Enderman said:

I would suggest you go read the reviews for that adapter, or other adapters, you might learn something.

Active adapter =/= proper HDMI 2.0 to 2.0 cable with HDMI 2.0 devices.

9 minutes ago, Enderman said:

That's not true.

There have been many other DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters before this one, and they all could not do 60hz because the adapter needs to be able to process the full bandwidth.

Just because it says DP1.2 on it or HDMI 2.0 on it does not mean that it can process 18gbps of information or whatever so a lot of the time features like 4:4:4 or HDR simply will not work.

This is not a simple "DVI-I to VGA" adapter that can do everything passively as if the adapter did not exist.

One moment please...

I got your review right here.

NeoFrux · December 15, 2016

Just now, Enderman said:

I would suggest you go read the reviews for that adapter, or other adapters, you might learn something.

Active adapter =/= proper HDMI 2.0 to 2.0 cable with HDMI 2.0 devices.

You're clearly not reading anything that's being said, nor have you read the product reviews. Nearly every single review explicitly says that, yes, they got 4K60, 4:4:4. Most of the people who have issues with these adapters are the same types of people who have issues getting 4K60 4:4:4 to work via PC output at all, which is to say many UHD TVs will not allow it unless the input is labelled as PC (or other hoops have been jumped through, like @AshleyAshes' mention of the UHD Color option on Samsung).

See also: AshleyAshes using this very setup.

Glaith · December 15, 2016

12 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Two years......Let's do some math.

HDMI 2.0 was initially relapsed Sept 4, 2013. Where as Pluggable's adaptor was first available on Jan. 27 2015. Well, I guess that's two years. ...If you round up from anything higher than 1 year...

Okay, let's go through these one by one...

4:4:4 - DisplayPort 1.2 already supports 4:4:4 so to answer your question of 'How long' the answer is 'Now'. (You don't know a lot about this stuff, do you? But I congratulate you on being really aggressive despite that!) This adaptor does full RGB or YCbCr 4:4:4. (In my experience, AMD cards only drive DisplayPort in RGB however. But that's full RGB so who cares?)

HDR: I'm not quite sure how to answer this. Frankly, HDR is basically untested as even the Windows OS does not support HDR. That said, with the recent Crimson update, AMD supposively rolled out HDR support for their older GPUs, including the RX 3XX series which only have DP 1.2 and HDMI 1.4a. Though while Window's own HDR support is still outstanding, there's no real testing that. ...Oh an the OPs TV is a JU series which doesn't support HDR so I feel like HDR is probably not a concern to the OP. So why spend money on a new GPU for HDR support when their TV doesn't support HDR?

10bit: I mean, I could point out that the JU series aren't 10bit screens but I won't. Yeah, this adaptor CAN drive up to 12bit actually, but not at 4K@60 as DP 1.2 lacks sufficient bandwidth for this. But a DP 1.3 or 1.4 base adaptor would have no problems with this.

Now, are you done trying to convince the OP to buy a new GPU just to satisfy your strange hatred of DisplayPort adaptors? The OP has a perfectly serviceable GPU that they are happy with, when a $20 adaptor can get the job done, there's no need to spend perfectly good money on a new GPU.

...In before Enderman orders the OP to buy an HDR OLED screen...

It doesnt support HDR???!!!? lame my xbox one S says that it does.... sigh now i gotta finish paying it off and get another one lol

Enderman · December 15, 2016

6 minutes ago, Runefox said:

You're clearly not reading anything that's being said, nor have you read the product reviews. Nearly every single review explicitly says that, yes, they got 4K60, 4:4:4. Most of the people who have issues with these adapters are the same types of people who have issues getting 4K60 4:4:4 to work via PC output at all, which is to say many UHD TVs will not allow it unless the input is labelled as PC (or other hoops have been jumped through, like @AshleyAshes' mention of the UHD Color option on Samsung).

See also: AshleyAshes using this very setup.

But can it do 10 bit colour?

My point is that it is not the same thing as having an actual HDMI 2.0 device, like a decent graphics card.

GTX900, GTX1000, RX400, they all have HDMI 2.0 and it's better than using an adapter.

Stop trying to pretend that you can magically convert from one format to another as if all the circuitry in between doesn't exist

It is NOT a passive adapter.

AshleyAshes · December 15, 2016

8 minutes ago, Enderman said:

But can it do 10 bit colour?

My point is that it is not the same thing as having an actual HDMI 2.0 device, like a decent graphics card.

GTX900, GTX1000, RX400, they all have HDMI 2.0 and it's better than using an adapter.

Stop trying to pretend that you can magically convert from one format to another as if all the circuitry in between doesn't exist

So your solution for the OPs TV, which is an 8bit panel without HDR, is a $650 GTX 1080, a $200 RX 480 (Which is a bit slower than his existing 290X), or a GTX 9XX... An the GTX 9XX series is only capable of 4K @ 60hz is only capable of this when using Chroma Subsambling of 4:2:0. (You've been crying a LOT aobut 4:4:4 in this thread. The adaptor will do RGB and 4:4:4 and, you cry about 4:4:4 an you pitch a GPU series limited to 4:2:0 for 4K@60hz???) And ALL of this to get 10bit HDR support... For a TV that does not support 10bit or HDR...

I can't tell if you're trolling or serious...

Glaith · December 15, 2016

So i Just went onto a live chat with samsung and they said my TV does support HDR.... phew so wouldnt be able to convince the mrs for another TV haha.

Here is the convo.

Welcome to Samsung Australia Live Chat.

Jervy

Welcome to Samsung Australia Live Chat. Good day! My name is Jervy. How are you doing today?