HDMI/Dport?

[Arwanell]

What's the difference between these two?

 

why do all the GPU's have so many display ports, if HDMI's are so popular?

[Sir Asvald]

What's the difference between these two?

 

why do all the GPU's have so many display ports, if HDMI's are so popular?

DisplayPort can go up to 4K 60hz, HDMI can only do 4K at 30hz. Also, DisplayPort can be use for g-sync and free-sync

[Enderman]

they are both digital

just different types of ports and stream code

HDMI is more popular on tv and HT while DP is more commonly on PC/monitors

[Enderman]

DisplayPort can go up to 4K 60hz, HDMI can only do 4K at 30hz. Also, DisplayPort can be use for g-sync and free-sync

HDMI can do 4k 60Hz

[TacticlTwinkie]

Hdmi may be the most common interface, but DisplayPort is superior in nearly every way. More bandwidth.

[Sir Asvald]

HDMI can do 4k 60Hz

Oh. Okay, thanks for letting me know.

[TacticlTwinkie]

HDMI can do 4k 60Hz

Hdmi 2.0 can, which isn't very common yet. DP has been able to do it for a while.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

HDMI can do 4k 60Hz

Only HDMI 2.0 can do 4K 60HZ and hardly any gpus have HDMI 2.0 support where as they all have DP support which also supports 4K 60HZ.

[Glenwing]

What's the difference between these two?

 

why do all the GPU's have so many display ports, if HDMI's are so popular?

 

DisplayPort supports higher resolutions and frequencies than HDMI, and PC-specific features such as daisy-chaining, G-SYNC, and FreeSync. HDMI is designed for home theater, so has juuuust enough bandwidth for home theater standards such as 1080p 60Hz (in the HDMI 1.2 days) or 4K 60Hz (HDMI 2.0), and nothing more. DisplayPort has been capable of up to 4K 75Hz since 2009 and the latest version goes up to 4K 120Hz. It also has less issues in general than HDMI since it's actually designed for computers and not TVs.

[OAcesync]

What's the difference between these two?

 

why do all the GPU's have so many display ports, if HDMI's are so popular?

HDMI is only popular for TVs, apart from that DVI/DP are usually the go to nowadays since HDMI can't do higher refresh rates compared to DVI and DP at 1440p or 1080p and DP can be used for Gsync or freesync

 

DP is just more advanced

[Snickerzz]

Oh. Okay, thanks for letting me know.

 

 

HDMI can do 4k 60Hz

only HDMI 2.0^^

[Enderman]

Hdmi 2.0 can, which isn't very common yet. DP has been able to do it for a while.

Only HDMI 2.0 can do 4K 60HZ and hardly any gpus have HDMI 2.0 support where as they all have DP support which also supports 4K 60HZ.

only HDMI 2.0^^

yeah DP can do 8k too now

but HDMI 2.0 is pretty common, all 900 series GPUs have it and so do most high end 4k tvs

 

The person I replied to said "HDMI" cant do 4k 60Hz, he didnt say "HDMI 1.4" cant do 4k 40Hz which is why I replied with "HDMI can do 4k 60Hz" rather than "HDMI 2.0" can

basically I'm just generalizing HDMI, just like the first guy did

I'm not saying all HDMI versions can

 

Its common practice in English to respond using the same generalizations as the person you are responding to

#learn2english

[Peter Vaughan Truslow]

What's the difference between these two?

 

why do all the GPU's have so many display ports, if HDMI's are so popular?

displayport can be easily adapted to other standards, and has capabilities that the other standards don't have

[TacticlTwinkie]

yeah DP can do 8k too now

but HDMI 2.0 is pretty common, all 900 series GPUs have it and so do most high end 4k tvs

I'm willing to bet money that the vast majority of users out there don't have 900 series gpus or 4K tv's. It is rising in common-ness (if that is even a word), but it is not as ubiquitous as DP is on the PC space. You are much more likely to find a DisplayPort on the back of a PC than hdmi 2.0. Most home theatre setups don't have hdmi 2.0 yet. The new huge 4K tv's will more likely have hdmi 2.0.

[GoodBytes]

To add, HDMI has a hefty royalty fee cost (newer the version, higher the cost than if you go with the older version). Only company that join the HDMI group gets a huge discount (possibly free, in exchange of donating money for HDMI development). Royalty fee are all hidden/private from the consumer eye. We only from leaks requirements and restrictions.

In a competitive TV environment space, TV prices is a decision factor for many buyers. So, it forces TV manufactures to join the HDMI group in order to be able to sale a TV for less or have more HDMI ports than the competitor TV. Brilliant move by Sony to get funding.

The movie industry are strong supporters of HDMI. First of all, Sony is a big player, as HDMI is their invention essentially, as well as Blu-ray (so they pushed HDMI that way to consumers), and well they are making movie as well, and studio equipment (all pushing HDMI). They are huge. The movie industry likes HDMI because it was the only digital connector with a DRM system on it. While DisplayPort does have its own (and support HDMI one), and DVI later put it for Blu-ray playback compatibility due to pressure from consumers wanting a Blu-ray drive in their PC. HDMI DRM system is a complete failure. It is completely insecure since day 1. It was poorly thought out. But the movie industry still thinks it is the best solution, and does a good job at blocking piracy. Well good for us, I guess. So, that is how HDMI came to be in the TV space. But if DVI group accepted to put Sony DRM lame system, we would probably be using DVI on TV's.. at least until 4K days, as that resolution is way over DVI abilities.

Graphics card manufactures, laptop manufacture, and many monitor manufactures aren't part of the HDMI group. So, it cost A LOT of money for them (which the cost is passed down to you), to put HDMI 2.0, let alone HDMI 1.4.

DisplayPort is royalty free, easy to implement, has no downsides compared to HDMI. Also, DisplayPort has interesting 'variation' of the standard of the connector which were developed by the same group. Like for example a super low powered version (but distance is very short), which is used in laptop and tablets these days to help increase battery life and drive higher resolution displays than the older solution. You also have another one which doesn't need a controller per say, allowing dropping cost, and allowing thinner and longer battery life tablets and laptops.

In addition, DisplayPort has a latch system, so that you have a perfect solid, and reliable connection every time. Your screen won't flicker, or loose connection because you move the projector, monitor or computer (unless you use mini-DisplayPort, then you have the same problem as HDMI due to the lack of the latch system). The connector is also more durable than HDMI with more plug-ins and outs before breakage. Great for business environment.

So, you can see how DisplayPort is really focused on the PC space, and not going anywhere.

As HDMI is highly advertised, consumers are looking for 'HDMI'. They want it, this prevents change by TV manufactures. And professional equipment for movie industry, and broadcasting and all that, all uses HDMI now, despite DisplayPort being better. That is also why most business class laptops have DisplayPort connectors, while most consumer laptops have HDMI. Despite the fact that they can get a few dollars adapter (which cost pennies to make in reality. So manufactures can include it in the box if they really wanted) to pass DisplayPort to HDMI for TV connectivity. Consumers don't know what DisplayPort is so they don't look for it, or demand it.

While HDMI is really focused on TV/Home Theater space, and penetrated and entrenched itself in anything related to TV/Movie sector, where it isn't going anywhere, Display Port is also entrenched and supported in the PC world sector, by being good for the consumer, good for enterprise environment, more powerful, seeks to benefit the PC market by allowing higher and higher resolutions and/or refresh rate and/or colors.

[Enderman]

I'm willing to bet money that the vast majority of users out there don't have 900 series gpus or 4K tv's. It is rising in common-ness (if that is even a word), but it is not as ubiquitous as DP is on the PC space. You are much more likely to find a DisplayPort on the back of a PC than hdmi 2.0. Most home theatre setups don't have hdmi 2.0 yet. The new huge 4K tv's will more likely have hdmi 2.0.

yeah but no tvs have displayport