Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Need Opinion: Is HDMI 1.3 faster than Displayport 1.1a?


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 26 December 2015 - 03:34 AM

Have been frustrated over this system ever since adding a new GPU in April of this year, a nVidia GTX 960 that has DP 1.2 & HDMI 2. 

 

Purchased an Accell certified DP 1.2 cable at a cost of $20 & it's no faster than the Nippon branded one that was purchased with the PC, 1.62Gbps x4 lanes = 6.48Mbps, which is slower than the very first DP 1.0 speeds (8.64Mbps) close to 10 years back. DP 1.2 speeds are 17.28Gbps total & has been a standard since December 2009, which only pours gas on the fire at me being ticked off. ASUS had all of the needed time to adjust & didn't, will never purchase their monitors again. In fact, with 4K UHD, will never consider a lesser standard, as prices are now dropping since more are hopping on the train.  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Overview

 

In fact, DP 1.3 has been approved, and will likely be in devices by the next holiday season. While many may not realize this DP is said to be better than HDMI, which only recently caught up with DP 2.0 speeds & other specs, meaning in reality that 4K was available years ago, as far as the speeds goes, it's the other hardware (graphics cards, monitors & the price of TV's) that's held back the standard more than anything. 

 

Come to find the monitor was the weak link, an ASUS VE248Q purchased about 3 months after the PC. While it does have great response time (2ms) & is & has been a decent monitor, feel kind of cheated 2 years later to find out it was only compliant with DP 1.1a, which isn't in Newegg's link & neither on ASUS's at the time. Today, 'Full HD 1080p' tells me nothing within itself, other than the screen resolution. Actually wasn't sure what to look for, even if I had been doing so, other than I wanted a gaming capable monitor & $300 was within my budget. I broke that by $9 because it was $200 off the retail price. Needless to say by now, this was my first major monitor purchase, had been running those given to me for doing computer work. :)

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G1XA6594

 

ASUS's spec sheet, which I read pre-purchase, kind of misleading by not publishing neither which DP or HDMI spec used. Will never make this mistake again. 

 

https://www.asus.com/us/Commercial-Monitors/VE248Q/specifications/

 

All of this said, would I be better using a high speed HDMI cable (which I have), which runs at a max of 10.2Mbps? It's not a lot, yet as many of us enthusiasts says, 'every little bit counts'. What that may translate to be could be different. Current speeds posted below, don't know where to find this on Windows, and since I'm a 95% Linux Mint to 5% Windows user, it would matter if it shows, yet it doesn't, though does on my main OS. Maybe nVidia supports Linux users a little more than some of us thinks. :)

 

Screenshot-NVIDIA%20X%20Server%20Setting

 

The reason I'm asking prior to doing is that there's a lot of things that will need rearranging, like at least 3 computers & cable arrangement, because I have no other one that runs DP, unlike other technologies, there's no adapter that will attach onto a DP cable to plug into a monitor, meaning another one will have to go to DVI-D or VGA. I also have so much hardware crammed in what was once a large area, yet not any longer, the printer is now sitting on the very top of the computer desk, which has storage area, and there's a table beside it with 2 more PC's.

 

Bottom line, is the roughly 3.72Mbps speed (about half of what I'm running) worth the effort? If so, I can try & see, and then make other adjustments if there's a noticeable difference. I just need some opinions as to the difference I'll see, would like to think that adding half again the speed, the monitor would be faster. 

 

Though I know deep down that only 4K UHD will be my next step, it's a matter of when pricing drops, hopefully there'll be a price war come next holiday season, along with DP 1.3, though the latter will require a lot of changes on the hardware end. Still, my GPU has nVidia certified HDMI 2 in the specs along with 3 DP 1.2 ports, of which both are enough for that. 

 

Is that enough to force the monitor to use the 10.2Mbps from the HDMI? This is nearly 2016 & these are speeds of the 1.3 spec (including overhead), which will be 10 years old come June 22 (second link). These cards are in PC's that many sits to the road for anyone in need to freely pick up or drops off at donation centers. ASUS should have been doing at least that good just two holiday seasons back.

 

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-960/specifications

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_1.3

 

All feedback is welcome & appreciated. :)

 

Cat


Edited by hamluis, 08 January 2016 - 01:23 PM.
Moved from System Building to Internal Hardware - Hamluis.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,503 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:47 AM

Posted 26 December 2015 - 04:10 AM

As long as connector and cable is fast enough (can provide high enough resolution and refresh rate), connector and cable "speed" will not make visible difference.



#3 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 26 December 2015 - 04:21 AM

Have finally found the HDMI spec, it's 1.3, under the 'Specs' tab. 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/818907-REG/ASUS_VE248Q_VE248Q_24_LED_Backlit.html

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#4 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 26 December 2015 - 06:49 AM

As long as connector and cable is fast enough (can provide high enough resolution and refresh rate), connector and cable "speed" will not make visible difference.

 

So to understand your answer more clearly, are you saying that a HDMI 1.3 connection that provides 3.72Mbps more speed won't be noticeable? 

 

Monitors aren't among my knowledge base as much as other hardware (mostly internal) are, though with these, usually faster hardware is more desirable. Would that not apply to monitors? Graphics are also scored on Windows 7's WEI, the one in the CPU (Intel HD 4600) gave a 6.7 WEI & the Dell OEM AMD Radeon 7570 gave me only a 6.9 score. When I upgraded to my first card, which has since been upgraded, I could tell a difference at a 7.4 WEI, the newer one boosted both to 7.9. Though I could tell more so with the first than the 2nd & current card during daily use, as both used the same cable, which I feel may be a bottleneck. Yet when running benchmarks (Heaven's Benchmark), could tell a difference between the two cards in performance, though this was likely more about the cards themselves, rather than the externally attached monitor. 

 

I bet if I were to connect a cable that would lose 3.72Gbps, I could surely see & feel a difference. 

 

The main reason why I want more speed, is that I run virtual machines, and the faster, the better. I'm not looking for speed that's visible when browsing the Internet, rather when doing some work. After all, I have to lend some graphic power to these also. 

 

Cat


Edited by cat1092, 26 December 2015 - 02:44 PM.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#5 Captain_Chicken

Captain_Chicken

  • BC Advisor
  • 1,369 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:47 AM

Posted 26 December 2015 - 04:28 PM

A "faster" dp cable should not have noticably better image quality, just be able to support higher resolution and refresh rate monitors.

Computer Collection:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

#6 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 27 December 2015 - 03:05 AM

A "faster" dp cable should not have noticably better image quality, just be able to support higher resolution and refresh rate monitors.

 

That's correct, as in a DP 1.2 cable should be capable of running brilliant 4K UHD, it's not going to make one of a 1.1a spec faster. 

 

Yet the thing still is, the monitor wasn't showing all of the DP 1.1a cable's specs, which is the same as the monitor (10.8Gbps), which is why I chose that connection over the HDMI (10.2Mbps), before I had a desktop full of other computers, and others on a table using HDMI. One will have to be downgraded to DVI-D or VGA to get the max out of my high speed HDMI cable, that is, if the monitor will use it's entire bandwidth. 

 

Looks like I'm going to have to get in touch with ASUS support to find out what's going on here. Am well outside of any return for refund, yet have another year of warranty, cross-shipped at no extra charge to me. Though with no dead pixels after 2 years of usage, am lerry of trading for a refurbished model that'll likely do the same. 

 

Have learned a major lesson here, and that's to ensure that the graphics card, monitor & cable are all on the same page before purchasing anything. I know that my card is already 4K UHD capable, as is the cable, though will get another of these (yet not at $20) for a spare. Didn't know that Monoprice had the same cable for two-thirds less, guaranteed for life. 

 

http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=102&cp_id=10246&cs_id=1024601&p_id=10582&seq=1&format=2

 

This is what placed Monoprice on the map, delivering HDMI cables of equal or better quality than $50 name brand ones of over 10+ years ago for less than $10 w/Lifetime warranty. The tradition continues, and inventory has expanded big time. Was able to find a 270 degree HDMI adapter to lessen the strain that a thick HDMI cable which shipped with a Sony Blu-Ray player was placing on my smart TV for less than $3 shipped. While I like extra thick jackets on the cables, some TV's doesn't allow enough install space. 

 

Maybe ASUS can tell me why the monitor isn't performing up to their specs for DP 1.1a. 10.8Gbps divided by 4 lanes should be 2.7Gbps, at it's current stage, is leaving a lot off of the table & causing me to question choosing the brand again. Samsung's specs tends to be on the money. Will update my original review of the monitor to reflect this. I'm not asking for it to perform beyond specs, just to run continually at maximum for the standard supported, what I paid for & certainly will be considering this when dropping another $300+ for what may have been outdated technology at the time. What good is 2ms (if that's correct, given the issue at hand) when the rest is not there? 

 

No wonder why many has left negative feedback across the ASUS brand as a whole. The brand is not what it once was, others are stepping up & delivering what's promised, even my lower cost HP monitors (one of which is also a 24") can auto choose which port to engage when the connected devices are powered on. With this model, one has to press a button to en/disengage HDMI. Unfortunately, neither HP has a DP connection, otherwise may not have created this Topic. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#7 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,503 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:47 AM

Posted 27 December 2015 - 12:46 PM

I still don't understand what is real problem here. Speedwise, there is no difference between D-Sub ("VGA", monitor does not support that but anyway), DVI, HDMI or Displayport connectors when using that monitor.



#8 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 28 December 2015 - 04:19 AM

Then why are the DP & HDMI cables for that standard 10.8Gbps & 10.2Mbps in the same order? 

 

While I know that this will never be solved in full until I get a new monitor, a third of the speed, 3.72Gbps is being left somewhere & have the latest spec cable on the market at DP 1.2. The monitor's DP 1.1a spec of 10.8Gbps = 2.7Gbps x4 lanes, not the 1.62Gbps x4 I'm getting. 

 

What I'm not going to do, is waste more cash by purchasing an active DP to HDMI cable. Am awaiting an answer from ASUS, since it's their product, they should be able (I hope) to provide an answer. 

 

Now I understand why DP has been over the years, primarily a business standard, rather than a consumer one. They're trying to cram this down our throats, yet what good would it be to purchase a DP 1.2 monitor, if they can't deliver the advertised spec of the previous gen (mine)? Since I'm planning on purchase another PC to replace another that can use the DP 1.1a spec, maybe it'll have more luck at reaching the proper speed, since all components will be matched. That's the only thing that I can come up with, everything in the chain has to be equal for best results. 

 

And to think, DP is what many imaging centers uses in their labs to read everything from X-Rays to MRI's. No wonder so many health issues goes unseen until it's very obvious (or too late) for some patients. 

 

I did try the HDMI 1.3 port, though unlike DP, the speeds weren't shown, only TDMS & that it was a single link, which didn't tell me a lot. Couldn't see any difference in the image either. Though I have another monitor of the same size, which I'll try tomorrow. 

 

Yet I have learned, and will stick with monitor brands who keeps up with the current technologies, rather than distributing those 5 years after a new spec is released. Being that it takes maybe a year for the spec to be approved before final release to consumers, still a good 3 to 3.5 years is a good cushion for OEM's to get their offerings to current specs. DP 1.2 was approved in December 2009 & I purchased the monitor 4 years later. Like many others, I took the ASUS brand for granted, yet it won't happen again. Samsung is more aggressive when it comes to details, placing nearly everything they do on the fast track. 

 

Whether or not I can squeeze the most speed out of this monitor remains to be seen, I won't take this laying down. Will go up the ASUS chain as far as I can reach in search for answers & let them know I'm disappointed in dropping $309 for what's supposed to be a 'premium' monitor & not making specs more readily available to consumers. 

 

Furthermore, I don't understand why nVidia's latest GTX GPU's has three DP ports & only one HDMI 2.0, should be the other way around. :P

 

Cat


Edited by cat1092, 28 December 2015 - 04:25 AM.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#9 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,503 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:47 AM

Posted 28 December 2015 - 04:39 AM

Hopefully Asus will solve that problem.

 

HDMI came before Displayport and gained much attention on consumer hardware and so it was considered standard. Displayport is coming to consumer hardware also but it takes time.

 

Reason why new standards are not adopted on monitors are same as always: old technology is good enough and it costs less. Price difference is minimal but every cent counts.

 

 

Furthermore, I don't understand why nVidia's latest GTX GPU's has three DP ports & only one HDMI 2.0, should be the other way around. :P

 

This is simple. HDMI has licensing fees so every added HDMI port cost Nvidia/card manufacturer some money. Displayport is free standard and also offers much better compatibility with other connectors.


Edited by Drillingmachine, 28 December 2015 - 04:39 AM.


#10 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 28 December 2015 - 05:34 AM

I agree about the concept of every cent counts, this is with any mid to large scale corporation. Hopefully ASUS will respond in a timely manner. Though I fully expect them to somehow place the blame on me (another penny pincher), or want me to go through an extended amount of troubleshooting steps. It's rather tricky to navigate through the menu to perform the simplest of tasks. Have to press one key, then another in a short timespan to access/save settings. I believe a remote would have been ideal for the price. 

 

At the same time, demand for 4K UHD has increased, which is showing with prices dropping, which is what my next monitor purchase will be. I figure maybe another year out of this one, around or after Black Friday 2016, one of the ones I want will be on promo. This one may perform as advertised on a PC where everything in the chain is of the same spec & my eyes are set on one, just waiting for the promo & have two SSD's & a GPU awaiting a new home. 

 

The only consistent complaint I'm reading on some of the lower cost (& size) 4K UHD models are the stands, some of these are replaceable, if in a tight spot, may pose no issues. Monoprice has one 28" that made the Tom's Hardware list as a recommended buy for $399.99 shipped with a 4.25 star rating. Samsung will certainly not be left out of the competition. 2016-17 will be the breakout years for 4K UHD, just as 2011-12 were for the SSD industry, pouncing on a HDD 'shortage' that never existed & never looked back. Many already has 4K UHD TV's, though a lot of content is still in 1080p, yet demand is rising & that will dictate the market. There will also be demand for PC monitors in the 28'-32' range, not everyone has a desk to place a 40' or larger model. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#11 jonuk76

jonuk76

  • Members
  • 2,182 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales, UK
  • Local time:07:47 AM

Posted 29 December 2015 - 04:59 PM

What is the resolution, refresh rate and colour depth of this monitor?

 

Assuming it's 1920x1080 @ 60 Hz, 24 bit colour (16.7 million colours), then the required bit rate is 4.46 Gbps (over HDMI).  Anything more than that won't make any difference at all :)


Edited by jonuk76, 29 December 2015 - 05:05 PM.

7sbvuf-6.png


#12 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:03:47 AM

Posted 30 December 2015 - 03:38 AM

What is the resolution, refresh rate and colour depth of this monitor?

 

Assuming it's 1920x1080 @ 60 Hz, 24 bit colour (16.7 million colours), then the required bit rate is 4.46 Gbps (over HDMI).  Anything more than that won't make any difference at all :)

 

1920x1080 (1080p Full HD), 60Hz, 16.7 Million Colors. Taken separately from the 2nd & 3rd links in my OP. Neither Newegg nor ASUS was clear about the DP speed, only listed as a feature. Though they have a related model in the VG248QE that was released about 11 months before I pulled the trigger on this one & would have paid around the same. It does have DP 2.0 & HDMI 1.4 (read in another article that got me to looking this one over) & 1ms response time, in addition to running at 144Hz, rather than 60. Some owners reported 'washed out' colors after awhile, though it would seem that the ASUS 3 year rapid replacement would have taken care of any issues. Some has told me though, at just a hand's length at being an arm away, may have been too bright, yet there should be a control for this & may have prevented any washing out of colors. I'd liked to have known personally & decided on my own. Our smart TV (32" 1080p) runs at 120Hz & I have no issues with it, though it's only about 2 months old. 

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236313

 

And ASUS evidently doesn't like to return emails from it's customers. OK, lets assume you're right, that it won't make a difference. Then why not make this more transparent, or do they assume every customer knows these things? Or worse yet, as long as their new one looks better than the older at first glance, sweep the details under the rug & forget it (which is really what happened). The one I have beat out a 20" HD 1600x900 resolution monitor manufactured years ago, though the speakers on the old were much better than what ASUS provided for probably a third of the price. 

 

http://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c02022661

 

I suppose this places monitors in the same light as SATA-3, USB 3.0, and other hardware, that the 10.8Mbps is the ceiling (for DP 1.1a), not what it'll achieve in real world use. We know the deal on the first two, especially USB 3.0, and many of the best SATA-3 SSD's cannot sustain 500MB/sec for a long period, some well below 400MB/sec, so forget 600MB/sec. It's likely the same with USB 3.1, if USB 3 cannot reach 5Gbps, the newer standard likely won't double it. Probably will reach the max spec for USB 3.0 for many. 

 

At least I'll now know some of what to be looking out for in a 4K UHD monitor, one of which all components are equal from the monitor all the way back to the GPU, including cable, hopefully there'll be more pure HDMI 2 cables on the market by then. Kind of surprising for me at how many more colors that even a 28" in 4K can provide over 1020x1080p at any size. Plus I'll have a year or maybe two to research, so that when the time comes, will know what specs to be looking for on the purchase site, and if the spec is not shown, ask before purchase by email, so there's a recorded conversation to fall back on for refund, if needed. And to be sure to check out all of these things as soon as I purchase to ensure accuracy, not 2 years later after reading an article over a similar model, as linked above.

 

Thanks for all of the responses to my inquiry, I believe that for now, everything that I'm asking for has been provided. :)

 

It's kind of hard to squeeze water out of a rock. :P

 

Cat


Edited by cat1092, 30 December 2015 - 03:47 AM.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users