3 ms·
Obviously don’t spend $1000 on a normal passive HDMI cable, but I’ve found that increasingly the all-or-nothing argument doesn’t work for some reason. I recentl
by baddox 8y ago
Obviously don’t spend $1000 on a normal passive HDMI cable, but I’ve found that increasingly the all-or-nothing argument doesn’t work for some reason. I recently had to upgrade all my HDMI cables to get 4k HDR video working reliably. Before upgrading, the video would work, but I would occasionally see white “sparkles” on the video output. Googling this problem led me to many people recommending upgrading HDMI cables if you have very old cables.
- sopooneo 8y agoI don't know this world. But could it be because the HDMI protocol doesn't require correcting all errors? And newer cables produced fewer corrupt packets which might have resulted in "sparkle"?
- lmilcin 8y agoDifferent HDMI cables have different bandwidth which is a result of their physical construction, same way as you have different bandwidth ethernet cables. Sending signal on the edge of cable's capability may be causing intermittent problems.
- kalleboo 8y agoCertainly there are bad cables, and sparkles are clear signal dropouts. The description of that cable though, says Perfect-Surface Technology applied to extreme-purity silver provides unprecedented clarity and dynamic contrast. An HDMI cable can not affect the "clarity" or contrast of the image or audio it carries. It can just succeed or fail (and failure results in obvious pixel noise, not some overall lowering of contrast or clarity like in analog)
- jmalicki 8y agoAll cables have some probabilistic failure of corruption, it isn't binary. It's the same as what going from 5 9s in your application to 7 9s, which involves a huge cost with distributed databases multiple data centers etc. etc... For most people it's a waste, but if you really value not having the occasional white speck, it could be worth a better cable, which may cost a lot more to recover design costs of making a cable very few will want to buy.