3 ms·

>Also, HDMI seems to lag DisplayPort capabilities when it comes to higher resolutions and refresh rates. I think that one very much depends on when you chose t

>Also, HDMI seems to lag DisplayPort capabilities when it comes to higher resolutions and refresh rates. I think that one very much depends on when you chose to look at it. HDMI 2.1 has more bandwidth than DisplayPort 1.4, enough to do 4k@120 which DP1.4 wouldn't be able to do it without dropping color down to 4:2:0. DisplayPort 2.0 devices are starting to come out, but even Nvidia's RTX 4000 series still do not have DisplayPort 2.0 (but do have HDMI 2.1). While TV started supporting HDMI 2.1 around 2019, with the PS5 and Xbox Series X having HDMI 2.1 ports. So while DisplayPort may be ahead now with DisplayPort 2.0, HDMI was ahead for at least 4 years with HDMI 2.1

vladvasiliu 3y ago
That's a fair point. I admit I was judging by the availability on the PC side (I don't follow the console market). Although, if I'm not mistaken, my particular PC monitor initially didn't support HDMI 2.0, even though it's a 4k panel. There was a further revision which included it. I have that revision, but support is still somewhat wonky, in that it can't seem to switch on its own from 2.0 to 1.4b.
- ThatPlayer 3y ago
  Display support is always last in this chicken-and-egg problem. As far as I know, there's still no DisplayPort 2.0 supporting displays, so any of the higher end monitors require display stream compression. I can't even get a DisplayPort 2.0 MST hub so I can chain multiple 1440p@144 monitors. Which is definitely something that HDMI can't do.