13 ms·

HDMI Forum rejects AMD's HDMI 2.1 open-source driver

344 points by FleetAdmiralJa 2y ago

Sakos 2y ago
Feels like it's time for governments to get involved. It's not reasonable for a ubiquitous format like HDMI to be restricted like this.
- wmf 2y ago
  Between patents, trade secrets, and DMCA, the government is the source of the problem here. Arguably the FTC could step in here but I think they have bigger problems to tackle.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >Between patents, trade secrets, and DMCA, the government is the source of the problem here. The government created the playing field. The only entity that can fix the situation is the government: they created a bad playing field, and they need to fix it.
    - wmf 2y ago
      That's true but I think the US's overall IP regime is not going to change and they also aren't going to carve out many exceptions.
  - anordal 2y ago
    But not all governments, thankfully. Remember DVD-Jon? He won the trial for breaking DVD crypto, because consumer rights stood above trade secrets.
- kelnos 2y ago
  I agree. It should be illegal to restrict people from making open source implementations of industry standards like this. I don't expect that to ever happen, of course. But I can dream...
  - jakeogh 2y ago
    I'm with you in principal, but cleanroom reverse engineering is legal. The issue here is AMD signed the NDA's to read the secret spec and write the code, hence they cant release it. The solution is to not buy proprietary standards[0], in this case, I'm looking for DisplayPort when I buy... and a big + to AMD for trying. Hey Intel! Come back! [0] Pile of comments here pretending it's sooo difficult.
    - account42 2y ago
      > in this case, I'm looking for DisplayPort when I buy That's an option if what you are looking for is a normal computer monitor. If you want a big TV then good luck finding one with DP, especially if you have other requirements (emissive pixels with real blacks, HDR, etc) that further limit your options.
      - jakeogh 2y ago
        Are you saying it's a lost cause? If so i'm totally switching back to Windows 2033 so I can play Simnpc in full res and buying one of those smart cars.
- anal_reactor 2y ago
  Seriously, we managed to standardize charging ports by law, maybe we can also agree on using an open standard for displays.
  - jakeogh 2y ago
    That is the real issue, because ultimately, this is about the memory hole. A re-upload of a camcorder copy of a VHS is no threat; it will be degraded (again) when the digital archivist who saved it's re-encoded copy[1] (from whatever video platform deleted it) posts it again. Intercepting a exact bitstream circumvents this modern camcorder copy deliberate problem, and would ultimately obliterate the non-arguments to keep the original file unavailable. On the other hand, a signed sha3-256 digest along with the original[0] file before YT re-encoded it (and stripped it's metadata) is unobtanium for the plebs. It is the _most_ important data for the host. It's the first thing they backup. As far as I know, they (YT/Rumble/Tora3) never talk about it. Some would love to only serve hallucinated (when convenient) upscaled derivatives. Power is threatened by persistent lossless public memory. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20427179 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20427179 [1]: (Mr. Bean, 2024) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUezfuy8Qpc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUezfuy8Qpc
- jeroenhd 2y ago
  I wonder if the HDMI forum can be considered a gatekeeper in terms of the EU's DMA. Their influence on the market is rather indirect, but I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of the EU uses HDMI every single day.
- elihu 2y ago
  I think it's actually pretty typical for important electrical interfaces to not be public or royalty-free, as much as I wish that wasn't the case. That's not to say the government shouldn't get involved. I think the bigger thing here is that if an industry group is specifically setting things up so that Linux is shut out of having high-end video support, then it looks an awful lot like cartel behavior -- industry incumbents are working together to lock out a competitor. Maybe it could be the basis of an anti-trust lawsuit? Presumably Apple and Microsoft would have the most to gain. Microsoft is a member of the forum. Apple doesn't appear to be, but an Apple guy is on their board of directors. I'm not a lawyer and I don't know how such a lawsuit would work. Who represents Linux in this case, since it's not owned by any one company. Linus Torvalds? AMD? And would all the companies involved in the HDMI forum be liable for the behavior of the forum (which would include AMD)? Does intentionality matter? I.e. if Linux was excluded accidentally rather than deliberately? https://hdmiforum.org/about/hdmi-forum-board-directors/ https://hdmiforum.org/about/hdmi-forum-board-directors/ https://hdmiforum.org/members/ https://hdmiforum.org/members/
xxpor 2y ago
Note this is from February
broodbucket 2y ago
>On the one hand, this move ensures the quality and consistency of HDMI experience. Does it though? Does it really? I don't understand this move from HDMI Forum. They're handing a win to DisplayPort.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >They're handing a win to DisplayPort. Is this useful, if all the relevant devices only have HDMI ports and not DP?
  - adrian_b 2y ago
    What I find very annoying is that a very large number of small computers and laptops have both DisplayPort and HDMI, but they have full-size HDMI connectors and only USB Type C DisplayPort. Using Type C for DisplayPort instead of the good full-size DisplayPort connectors is less reliable (easy to disconnect accidentally) and it permits only shorter video cables. More importantly, this blocks the Type C connector, which I need for other purposes, e.g. an external SSD. I do not want to carry a Type C dock, so I end using HDMI, even if I do not need HDMI and I do not want HDMI and even if in almost all cases the devices had enough free space for a full-size DisplayPort connector. Even replacing the HDMI connector with a DisplayPort connector (so that the devices would have only full-size and Type C DisplayPort) is always a better solution, because there are a lot of cheap adapters from DisplayPort to HDMI, which do not need a separate power supply and they can even be incorporated inside the video cable. The reverse adapters, from HDMI to DisplayPort, are much more expensive and much bulkier, so usually they are not acceptable.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      It seems the issue with this open-source driver is supporting some of the highest-performance modes of HDMI (like 4K @ 120Hz). Would that even work in a DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter?
      - adrian_b 2y ago
shmerl 2y ago
HDMI forum is a corrupt cartel which sole existence is to make sure they can continue fleecing everyone on patent fees.
gnabgib 2y ago
Discussions (290 points, 6 months ago, 164 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39559318 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39559318 (394 points, 6 months ago, 237 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291
- account42 2y ago
  And the source for all these articles: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1417 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1417
shiroiushi 2y ago
AMD should just leak the code and disclaim responsibility.
- preisschild 2y ago
  Even if they were to do that, it wouldn't really be a long term fix. Who would maintain this "unofficial" GPU driver? AMD themselves can't.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    If it has that much interest, someone will put it on GitHub and maintain it. Of course, it'd be unofficial, but so was support for MP3s in Linux distros for many years: you had to download software from outside the US to make it work.
    - taneliv 2y ago
      Incompatible licenses would mean that no distribution would have kernels that support it, though. It would be a second class citizen, compiled via DKMS or something, and often broken on a lot of hardware. The difference to broken MP3 support is that if your music file does not play, you can still browse the Internet and write emails and play games, but if your graphics driver is busted, you can do none of those things from GRUB menu. In the worst case recovery mode does not work either, and you just converted your laptop into a headless server. Troubleshooting it by browsing instructions on the mobile is no fun.
      - shiroiushi 2y ago
        Why would the licenses be incompatible? AMD owns the code, so they can release it under whatever license they want, including GPL or BSD. They could even put into the public domain if they wanted. AFAICT, the code has not been released at all, so this point about licenses is simply wrong: it doesn't have a license at all right now. As for a broken driver, that's an easy fix I think. From my reading of the article, there's already an existing driver, but it doesn't support HDMI 2.1 features. So it's simple: provide a fall-back driver, and require users to separately download the new driver (or maybe distros can package it themselves, I'm not sure about the legality). If something goes wrong with the unsupported driver, leave an option in the boot menu to boot in a "safe mode" that uses the old driver. So they won't get 4K @ 120Hz, but I'm sure they can live with that.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
0points 2y ago
Bye HDMI. You will not be missed.
- WithinReason 2y ago
  we can only hope...
Kon5ole 2y ago
Bummer - some TV's are tremendous value for money as computer monitors (Small 8K tv's that sometimes sell for sub-1000 usd) but they tend to only have HDMI. I got 8k/60 working in Linux using an nvidia card and a dp-to-hdmi adapter cable, but I have a feeling it's not meant to be supported (the same cable does not work in windows).
vzaliva 2y ago
There was a post here on HN some time ago ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36681814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36681814 ), basically explaining that HDMI is terrible and DisplayPort is a much better technical solution. So, perhaps people should favour DP instead of HDMI and gradually switch?
- ThatPlayer 2y ago
  I don't think it's quite that simple. DP is still missing HDMI features like ARC and CEC, which are important for TVs. Even on my personal computer setup, I use the HDMI 2.1 ports on my monitor/GPU over the DP 1.4 ports because the DP port just doesn't have the bandwidth for 2560x1440 @ 240hz with 10-bit colour. That requires ~30 Gbit/s, more than DP1.4's ~26 Gbit/s. Neither my monitor nor my GPU support DP2.0 which does have enough bandwidth. So until I upgrade both, I'm using HDMI. My computer is not outdated either, there's just nothing to upgrade to. None of Nvidia's consumer GPUs support DP2.0, and I can only find 2 monitors that support DP2.0. Anyone getting new hardware now will be in a similar situation to use HDMI2.1 over DP1.4 until their next upgrade.
  - eqvinox 2y ago
    I agree, but I also think your illustration of the problem is a bit off. The 90% gauss curve center part of customers doesn't need the tail end of display connector bandwidth. However, devices have a lifecycle, and a lot of this hardware will still be in use in 2-3 years, where this will have moved into the center part of the gauss curve. Higher resolutions and HDR (which may push 10bit) will trip this much more than a 240Hz display [which ain't ever gonna' be mainline, really, considering we went down to 60Hz from CRTs with faster refresh rates] CEC can be done over the DisplayPort AUX channel. I think there were attempts at an ARC equivalent but they floundered. Another interesting question though is how much A/V connections in general will still be used in the "TV world" down the line… with everything moving towards more integrated networked appliances instead. E.g. streaming service "HDMI sticks" are now apps on the TV instead…
    - ThatPlayer 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
eqvinox 2y ago
While we're here, does anyone know why professional displays [e.g. https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/27B1U7903_27/professional-monitor-4k-uhd-mini-led-thunderbolttm-4-monitor https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/27B1U7903_27/professional-mo... ] frequently have 2 HDMI ports and only 1½ DisplayPort? (½ for the Thunderbolt port) This feels like some kind of standard port combination… do the display driver ICs only have one DP port? Are they using TV silicon? I know HDMI is used in some AV production setups, but that feels like a very small niche to justify having 2 HDMI ports on a display like this? [I'd rather have 2 DP ports and only 1 HDMI… or no HDMI at all]
throwaway326616 2y ago
[dead]
pella 2y ago
Article date: February 29, 2024 Related phoronix threads - 6 months ago - 394 points https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291
kristjank 2y ago
I really hope HDMI snags hit some critical mass and it gets reliquished to the dying TV/home theatre domain where it can rot into obscurity. DisplayPort has its own issues, but they're much smaller than the constant industry fuckups HDMI produces. It's Oracle: the interface.
langsoul-com 2y ago
Isn't amd in a pretty bad position with display related tech? Hdmi rejected them, display port isn't ubiquitous enough, thunderbolt (usb c) is owned by Intel.
- Longlius 2y ago
  >thunderbolt (usb c) is owned by Intel. USB-C is distinct from Thunderbolt. And Thunderbolt itself got rolled into USB4 which is now an industry standard rather than one controlled by Intel. Even so, Intel and AMD aren't so hostile to each other to avoid cross-licensing when it's mutually beneficial. A lot of the newest generation of AM5 motherboards actually include an Intel chipset for handling Thunderbolt/USB4.
roshankhan28 2y ago
with DP cable i can get 144 hz on my benq xl2411p. but with hdmi i can go max 90hz. i cant own 2 144hz display just because there is no way i can use two DP cables on my rtx 20270 super.
- ThatPlayer 2y ago
  That's an issue with the monitor only supporting HDMI 1.4. A monitor that supports HDMI 2.0 would work with 144hz fine. I have the opposite issue where I run my 240hz monitor on HDMI 2.1 because it has more bandwidth than my RTX 4080's DisplayPort 1.4 ports. It seems a common issue enough with that that model is specifically called out sometimes: https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/how-to-connect-to-a-120-hz-display.3268285/ https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/how-to-connect-to-a-...
wvh 2y ago
If possible, they should add a hook and individual download script like for DeCSS back in the day. Let them come at each of us individually for wanting to use the ports in our own hardware.
supermatt 2y ago
What exactly does this mean? Isn't it just a case that the driver wouldn't be HDMI-certified, or are they actively prevented from distributing the driver?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- layer8 2y ago
  My reading: AMD signed a contract with the HDMI Forum in order to get access to the HDMI specification and be allowed to create HDMI products (and use the HDMI trademark), which includes an NDA regarding the specification. An open-source driver would violate that NDA.
sylware 2y ago
Everybody knew that could happen with HDMI based on their legality setup. And it did. That said, those guys usually play a "back and forth" game on the long run... so stay tuned. You should have an eye on MPEG too, because those are the same "type" of people (and ARM ISA is not far behind...) Even if I despise big tech on nearly all fronts, sometimes we can agree, and this is AV1 and DisplayPort. And this type of behaviour namely not having a DisplayPort port could be a perfect regulatory (anti-competitive) project for EU, like they did with apple...
bbsbbs 2y ago
[dead]
sgjohnson 2y ago
I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.
- xnyanta 2y ago
  So true, I picked up the Samsung G80SD "Smart Monitor" and the deciding factor was literally just that it supports eARC, allowing me to use my Sonos Beam soundbar with my computer and supporting compressed audio formats like Dolby Atmos. To make things even worse, this monitor supports sending back the ARC audio over DisplayPort, but only in stereo. If I use HDMI between the monitor and the computer, I get all of audio channels.
- nolok 2y ago
  HDMI is ruling because of momentum and ubiquity in the tv room. No device output in DP, no device accepts it, so no pressure on device to accept/output it. I guess the license price is low enough. On computers, it sort of evolved where DVI was, you get mort port, you get better feature set, it's just superior. But in the non-tech market I think the "real" fight will end up being hdmi vs usb-c, both of them are evolving to the point where they feed everything ethernet included. HDMI has ARC and waayyyy simpler cable and port compatibility (one version to check), usb-c has power output and every single pocket device and laptop/tablet/...
  - sgjohnson 2y ago
    > No device output in DP Yeah, if we exclude basically every half decent GPU and ~70% of laptop USB-C ports in existence.
    - ai_ 2y ago
      Those generally aren't in the living room
MPSimmons 2y ago
>This occurred because in 2021 the HDMI Forum restricted public access to its specifications Oh, okay. Fuck the HDMI forum, then.
Struyck363 2y ago
[dead]
anotherhue 2y ago
Submitted slightly earlier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41386037 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41386037
steelframe 2y ago
Cool. Then I suppose I'll buy my dumb DisplayPort screens from rando Chinese knockoff companies that siphon off R&D that suckers like Sony and Samsung fund.
piperswe 2y ago
Does AMDGPU PRO (the proprietary AMD userland driver) support HDMI 2.1?
mass_and_energy 2y ago
Is there a compelling reason for HDMI to exist? Why can't we use display port in every case we currently use HDMI for?

Feels like it's time for governments to get involved. It's not reasonable for a ubiquitous format like HDMI to be restricted like this.

wmf 2y ago
Between patents, trade secrets, and DMCA, the government is the source of the problem here. Arguably the FTC could step in here but I think they have bigger problems to tackle.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >Between patents, trade secrets, and DMCA, the government is the source of the problem here. The government created the playing field. The only entity that can fix the situation is the government: they created a bad playing field, and they need to fix it.
  - wmf 2y ago
    That's true but I think the US's overall IP regime is not going to change and they also aren't going to carve out many exceptions.
- anordal 2y ago
  But not all governments, thankfully. Remember DVD-Jon? He won the trial for breaking DVD crypto, because consumer rights stood above trade secrets.
kelnos 2y ago
I agree. It should be illegal to restrict people from making open source implementations of industry standards like this. I don't expect that to ever happen, of course. But I can dream...
- jakeogh 2y ago
  I'm with you in principal, but cleanroom reverse engineering is legal. The issue here is AMD signed the NDA's to read the secret spec and write the code, hence they cant release it. The solution is to not buy proprietary standards[0], in this case, I'm looking for DisplayPort when I buy... and a big + to AMD for trying. Hey Intel! Come back! [0] Pile of comments here pretending it's sooo difficult.
  - account42 2y ago
    > in this case, I'm looking for DisplayPort when I buy That's an option if what you are looking for is a normal computer monitor. If you want a big TV then good luck finding one with DP, especially if you have other requirements (emissive pixels with real blacks, HDR, etc) that further limit your options.
    - jakeogh 2y ago
      Are you saying it's a lost cause? If so i'm totally switching back to Windows 2033 so I can play Simnpc in full res and buying one of those smart cars.
anal_reactor 2y ago
Seriously, we managed to standardize charging ports by law, maybe we can also agree on using an open standard for displays.
- jakeogh 2y ago
  That is the real issue, because ultimately, this is about the memory hole. A re-upload of a camcorder copy of a VHS is no threat; it will be degraded (again) when the digital archivist who saved it's re-encoded copy[1] (from whatever video platform deleted it) posts it again. Intercepting a exact bitstream circumvents this modern camcorder copy deliberate problem, and would ultimately obliterate the non-arguments to keep the original file unavailable. On the other hand, a signed sha3-256 digest along with the original[0] file before YT re-encoded it (and stripped it's metadata) is unobtanium for the plebs. It is the _most_ important data for the host. It's the first thing they backup. As far as I know, they (YT/Rumble/Tora3) never talk about it. Some would love to only serve hallucinated (when convenient) upscaled derivatives. Power is threatened by persistent lossless public memory. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20427179 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20427179 [1]: (Mr. Bean, 2024) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUezfuy8Qpc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUezfuy8Qpc
jeroenhd 2y ago
I wonder if the HDMI forum can be considered a gatekeeper in terms of the EU's DMA. Their influence on the market is rather indirect, but I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of the EU uses HDMI every single day.
elihu 2y ago
I think it's actually pretty typical for important electrical interfaces to not be public or royalty-free, as much as I wish that wasn't the case. That's not to say the government shouldn't get involved. I think the bigger thing here is that if an industry group is specifically setting things up so that Linux is shut out of having high-end video support, then it looks an awful lot like cartel behavior -- industry incumbents are working together to lock out a competitor. Maybe it could be the basis of an anti-trust lawsuit? Presumably Apple and Microsoft would have the most to gain. Microsoft is a member of the forum. Apple doesn't appear to be, but an Apple guy is on their board of directors. I'm not a lawyer and I don't know how such a lawsuit would work. Who represents Linux in this case, since it's not owned by any one company. Linus Torvalds? AMD? And would all the companies involved in the HDMI forum be liable for the behavior of the forum (which would include AMD)? Does intentionality matter? I.e. if Linux was excluded accidentally rather than deliberately? https://hdmiforum.org/about/hdmi-forum-board-directors/ https://hdmiforum.org/about/hdmi-forum-board-directors/ https://hdmiforum.org/members/ https://hdmiforum.org/members/

xxpor 2y ago

Note this is from February

broodbucket 2y ago

>On the one hand, this move ensures the quality and consistency of HDMI experience. Does it though? Does it really? I don't understand this move from HDMI Forum. They're handing a win to DisplayPort.

shiroiushi 2y ago
>They're handing a win to DisplayPort. Is this useful, if all the relevant devices only have HDMI ports and not DP?
- adrian_b 2y ago
  What I find very annoying is that a very large number of small computers and laptops have both DisplayPort and HDMI, but they have full-size HDMI connectors and only USB Type C DisplayPort. Using Type C for DisplayPort instead of the good full-size DisplayPort connectors is less reliable (easy to disconnect accidentally) and it permits only shorter video cables. More importantly, this blocks the Type C connector, which I need for other purposes, e.g. an external SSD. I do not want to carry a Type C dock, so I end using HDMI, even if I do not need HDMI and I do not want HDMI and even if in almost all cases the devices had enough free space for a full-size DisplayPort connector. Even replacing the HDMI connector with a DisplayPort connector (so that the devices would have only full-size and Type C DisplayPort) is always a better solution, because there are a lot of cheap adapters from DisplayPort to HDMI, which do not need a separate power supply and they can even be incorporated inside the video cable. The reverse adapters, from HDMI to DisplayPort, are much more expensive and much bulkier, so usually they are not acceptable.
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    It seems the issue with this open-source driver is supporting some of the highest-performance modes of HDMI (like 4K @ 120Hz). Would that even work in a DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter?
    - adrian_b 2y ago

shmerl 2y ago

HDMI forum is a corrupt cartel which sole existence is to make sure they can continue fleecing everyone on patent fees.

gnabgib 2y ago

Discussions (290 points, 6 months ago, 164 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39559318 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39559318 (394 points, 6 months ago, 237 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291

account42 2y ago
And the source for all these articles: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1417 https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1417

shiroiushi 2y ago

AMD should just leak the code and disclaim responsibility.

preisschild 2y ago
Even if they were to do that, it wouldn't really be a long term fix. Who would maintain this "unofficial" GPU driver? AMD themselves can't.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  If it has that much interest, someone will put it on GitHub and maintain it. Of course, it'd be unofficial, but so was support for MP3s in Linux distros for many years: you had to download software from outside the US to make it work.
  - taneliv 2y ago
    Incompatible licenses would mean that no distribution would have kernels that support it, though. It would be a second class citizen, compiled via DKMS or something, and often broken on a lot of hardware. The difference to broken MP3 support is that if your music file does not play, you can still browse the Internet and write emails and play games, but if your graphics driver is busted, you can do none of those things from GRUB menu. In the worst case recovery mode does not work either, and you just converted your laptop into a headless server. Troubleshooting it by browsing instructions on the mobile is no fun.
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      Why would the licenses be incompatible? AMD owns the code, so they can release it under whatever license they want, including GPL or BSD. They could even put into the public domain if they wanted. AFAICT, the code has not been released at all, so this point about licenses is simply wrong: it doesn't have a license at all right now. As for a broken driver, that's an easy fix I think. From my reading of the article, there's already an existing driver, but it doesn't support HDMI 2.1 features. So it's simple: provide a fall-back driver, and require users to separately download the new driver (or maybe distros can package it themselves, I'm not sure about the legality). If something goes wrong with the unsupported driver, leave an option in the boot menu to boot in a "safe mode" that uses the old driver. So they won't get 4K @ 120Hz, but I'm sure they can live with that.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

0points 2y ago

Bye HDMI. You will not be missed.

WithinReason 2y ago
we can only hope...

Kon5ole 2y ago

Bummer - some TV's are tremendous value for money as computer monitors (Small 8K tv's that sometimes sell for sub-1000 usd) but they tend to only have HDMI. I got 8k/60 working in Linux using an nvidia card and a dp-to-hdmi adapter cable, but I have a feeling it's not meant to be supported (the same cable does not work in windows).

vzaliva 2y ago

There was a post here on HN some time ago ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36681814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36681814 ), basically explaining that HDMI is terrible and DisplayPort is a much better technical solution. So, perhaps people should favour DP instead of HDMI and gradually switch?

ThatPlayer 2y ago
I don't think it's quite that simple. DP is still missing HDMI features like ARC and CEC, which are important for TVs. Even on my personal computer setup, I use the HDMI 2.1 ports on my monitor/GPU over the DP 1.4 ports because the DP port just doesn't have the bandwidth for 2560x1440 @ 240hz with 10-bit colour. That requires ~30 Gbit/s, more than DP1.4's ~26 Gbit/s. Neither my monitor nor my GPU support DP2.0 which does have enough bandwidth. So until I upgrade both, I'm using HDMI. My computer is not outdated either, there's just nothing to upgrade to. None of Nvidia's consumer GPUs support DP2.0, and I can only find 2 monitors that support DP2.0. Anyone getting new hardware now will be in a similar situation to use HDMI2.1 over DP1.4 until their next upgrade.
- eqvinox 2y ago
  I agree, but I also think your illustration of the problem is a bit off. The 90% gauss curve center part of customers doesn't need the tail end of display connector bandwidth. However, devices have a lifecycle, and a lot of this hardware will still be in use in 2-3 years, where this will have moved into the center part of the gauss curve. Higher resolutions and HDR (which may push 10bit) will trip this much more than a 240Hz display [which ain't ever gonna' be mainline, really, considering we went down to 60Hz from CRTs with faster refresh rates] CEC can be done over the DisplayPort AUX channel. I think there were attempts at an ARC equivalent but they floundered. Another interesting question though is how much A/V connections in general will still be used in the "TV world" down the line… with everything moving towards more integrated networked appliances instead. E.g. streaming service "HDMI sticks" are now apps on the TV instead…
  - ThatPlayer 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

eqvinox 2y ago

While we're here, does anyone know why professional displays [e.g. https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/27B1U7903_27/professional-monitor-4k-uhd-mini-led-thunderbolttm-4-monitor https://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/27B1U7903_27/professional-mo... ] frequently have 2 HDMI ports and only 1½ DisplayPort? (½ for the Thunderbolt port) This feels like some kind of standard port combination… do the display driver ICs only have one DP port? Are they using TV silicon? I know HDMI is used in some AV production setups, but that feels like a very small niche to justify having 2 HDMI ports on a display like this? [I'd rather have 2 DP ports and only 1 HDMI… or no HDMI at all]

throwaway326616 2y ago

[dead]

pella 2y ago

Article date: February 29, 2024 Related phoronix threads - 6 months ago - 394 points https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39543291

kristjank 2y ago

I really hope HDMI snags hit some critical mass and it gets reliquished to the dying TV/home theatre domain where it can rot into obscurity. DisplayPort has its own issues, but they're much smaller than the constant industry fuckups HDMI produces. It's Oracle: the interface.

langsoul-com 2y ago

Isn't amd in a pretty bad position with display related tech? Hdmi rejected them, display port isn't ubiquitous enough, thunderbolt (usb c) is owned by Intel.

Longlius 2y ago
>thunderbolt (usb c) is owned by Intel. USB-C is distinct from Thunderbolt. And Thunderbolt itself got rolled into USB4 which is now an industry standard rather than one controlled by Intel. Even so, Intel and AMD aren't so hostile to each other to avoid cross-licensing when it's mutually beneficial. A lot of the newest generation of AM5 motherboards actually include an Intel chipset for handling Thunderbolt/USB4.

roshankhan28 2y ago

with DP cable i can get 144 hz on my benq xl2411p. but with hdmi i can go max 90hz. i cant own 2 144hz display just because there is no way i can use two DP cables on my rtx 20270 super.

ThatPlayer 2y ago
That's an issue with the monitor only supporting HDMI 1.4. A monitor that supports HDMI 2.0 would work with 144hz fine. I have the opposite issue where I run my 240hz monitor on HDMI 2.1 because it has more bandwidth than my RTX 4080's DisplayPort 1.4 ports. It seems a common issue enough with that that model is specifically called out sometimes: https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/how-to-connect-to-a-120-hz-display.3268285/ https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/how-to-connect-to-a-...

wvh 2y ago

If possible, they should add a hook and individual download script like for DeCSS back in the day. Let them come at each of us individually for wanting to use the ports in our own hardware.

supermatt 2y ago

What exactly does this mean? Isn't it just a case that the driver wouldn't be HDMI-certified, or are they actively prevented from distributing the driver?

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
layer8 2y ago
My reading: AMD signed a contract with the HDMI Forum in order to get access to the HDMI specification and be allowed to create HDMI products (and use the HDMI trademark), which includes an NDA regarding the specification. An open-source driver would violate that NDA.

sylware 2y ago

Everybody knew that could happen with HDMI based on their legality setup. And it did. That said, those guys usually play a "back and forth" game on the long run... so stay tuned. You should have an eye on MPEG too, because those are the same "type" of people (and ARM ISA is not far behind...) Even if I despise big tech on nearly all fronts, sometimes we can agree, and this is AV1 and DisplayPort. And this type of behaviour namely not having a DisplayPort port could be a perfect regulatory (anti-competitive) project for EU, like they did with apple...

bbsbbs 2y ago

[dead]

sgjohnson 2y ago

I feel like the only thing HDMI has going for itself is ARC. DisplayPort is superior in every other way imaginable. Except for the fact that almost no TV supports it. Low-end monitors also don't usually have them, but as far as computer monitors go, I'm not interested in the low-end ones. As for TVs - just give me a dumb screen with ports. I'm going to attach Apple TV to it anyway.

xnyanta 2y ago
So true, I picked up the Samsung G80SD "Smart Monitor" and the deciding factor was literally just that it supports eARC, allowing me to use my Sonos Beam soundbar with my computer and supporting compressed audio formats like Dolby Atmos. To make things even worse, this monitor supports sending back the ARC audio over DisplayPort, but only in stereo. If I use HDMI between the monitor and the computer, I get all of audio channels.
nolok 2y ago
HDMI is ruling because of momentum and ubiquity in the tv room. No device output in DP, no device accepts it, so no pressure on device to accept/output it. I guess the license price is low enough. On computers, it sort of evolved where DVI was, you get mort port, you get better feature set, it's just superior. But in the non-tech market I think the "real" fight will end up being hdmi vs usb-c, both of them are evolving to the point where they feed everything ethernet included. HDMI has ARC and waayyyy simpler cable and port compatibility (one version to check), usb-c has power output and every single pocket device and laptop/tablet/...
- sgjohnson 2y ago
  > No device output in DP Yeah, if we exclude basically every half decent GPU and ~70% of laptop USB-C ports in existence.
  - ai_ 2y ago
    Those generally aren't in the living room

MPSimmons 2y ago

>This occurred because in 2021 the HDMI Forum restricted public access to its specifications Oh, okay. Fuck the HDMI forum, then.

Struyck363 2y ago

[dead]

anotherhue 2y ago

Submitted slightly earlier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41386037 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41386037

steelframe 2y ago

Cool. Then I suppose I'll buy my dumb DisplayPort screens from rando Chinese knockoff companies that siphon off R&D that suckers like Sony and Samsung fund.

piperswe 2y ago

Does AMDGPU PRO (the proprietary AMD userland driver) support HDMI 2.1?

mass_and_energy 2y ago

Is there a compelling reason for HDMI to exist? Why can't we use display port in every case we currently use HDMI for?