The Big Debate

what the fuck is display port

>>55285976
>>>/out/

>>55285970
.. HDMI for tv, DP for pc.

>>55285970
Doesn't fucking matter. Not much of a difference between the two.

Display Port wins simply because it's open and not Jewish.
If only TVs supported it.

File: 1466980188943.png (2MB, 1753x866px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1753x866px

>>55285970
DP for my 144Hz monitor

Whatever ports your monitor have you autists. If you have both then use DP.

>>55286046
>If you have both then use DP.
but why?

>>55285970
Hdmi is worthless above 60hz, there's nothing to debate.

>>55286150
>>55286046
/thread

File: 1466996865553.png (167KB, 344x315px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 344x315px

>>55286281
The only correct answer.

It's been here since 1987. Why discard it now :) ?

>>55286281
This nigga gets it

DisplayPort support 144Hz monitors, HDMI doesn't

>he fell for the 144Hz meme

File: Untitled.jpg (180KB, 1763x1104px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 1763x1104px

SDI

>>55286281
I'm using this on my r9 290x and it runs great!

>>55286373
Your whole life seems to be a meme

>>55286373
>doubling the refresh rate of your monitor is a meme
nope

>>55285970
THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN

>>55286403
>for no other reasons but for muh frame in gaying
Yes, meme

>>55286394
>x
lmao you fell for the AMD meme

>>55285970
I love DP baby. Oh yes.

Now, on the topic at hand, HDMI is the way to go. Why? simply because it's the most widely used.

>>55286448
Fuck off nVidia tard AMD has a much better price/quality!

>>55285970
HDMI, bc it enables ethernet overlay and is more widely used (in Europe atleast)

>>55286435
I know right? Why make something you love doing better? Why buy more RAM when I can use my SSD as cache? Oh wait, why even have an SSD when I could keep my HDD? It all works after all, doesn't it?

You're so dumb I just want to punch your teeth out

No, I think I'm dumb, because I allowed myself to be trolled by you... Right? Please tell me stupid like this doesn't exist on planet earth? Right? I got trolled right? right???

>>55286480
AMDs high end isn't comparable to Nvidia, but other than that it's less overpriced and runs great, despite the heat/wattage issue on older models.

HDMI. It has been far more reliable than DP for me and has more features.

And because no one on /g/ has a monitor that requires DP 1.3 bandwidth which is the only thing it has over HDMI. HDMI 2.0 will do everything that DP 1.2 can.

Kek, Im actually in the market for a motherboard and i have to choose between z170a m5 and m7.

m5 has some shit like HDMI, but the other one had displayport, which has like 1 TV in the whole world that can connect to it.

What a waste of space, you basically pay more for less.

>>55286009
this

>>55286009
But why?

>>55286593
Most devices you plug into your TV, cable boxes, consoles, media boxes, etc only have HDMI available.

>>55286533
>has more features.
Not 144Hz

>HDMI 2.0 will do everything that DP 1.2 can.
Except 144Hz

>>55286566
>Relying on Intel HD

>tfw have a vive and two monitors
>don't have a second displayport cable and no shops/decent post in my country
>have to put second monitor on integrated gpu while vive and primary monitor are on my 970
>little green pixels randomly appear on second monitor and only occur when using iGPU

>>55286651
>using resolutions over 1080p

Wow faggot, pretty much nobody uses that, so DP is still inferior

>>55286505
>being this much of a faggot

Holy fuck. Yeah, meme alright. The length /v/irgins would go

>>55286533
That's bullshit, DP has more features, including the ability to be adapted to HDMI AND VGA, at higher resolutions/refresh rates than HDMI supports

im using hdmi@60fps on my 1080p@144hz monitor

>>55286850
same, i can't git my display port to work

I prefer display port but you must disable DDC/DI on Windows. Otherwise your windows may resize when the monitor turns off.

See https://sites.google.com/site/ebobster/stuff/displayportblanking

File: dvi.jpg (17KB, 432x186px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 432x186px

>>55285970

>>55286884
>NVIDIA will warn you that you cause damage to your screens if the EDID information is wrong for your monitor.
What a great feature.

>>55286435
>>55286715

>being this much of a retard

Let's not even bother with HDMI, let's just keep using VGA for everything.

I prefer HDMI for compatibility with nearly every display currently made. I wear glasses as is and super high refresh rates and any definition above 2k makes 0 difference to my perspective. Is 4k and 144hz superior technically? Yes. But practically with my eyes, no. Same as mp3 vs FLAC. I worked in a shop with loud pneumatic equipment and cannot tell the difference at all due to light hearing damage. To those that can, great, do what you want. But for me it makes little difference beyond compatibility.

>>55286908
This, desu.

>>55286908
The only true successor to DE15. Everything else is muh shekels

>>55286922
>u retard
Nice argument

File: how to hang yourself in 9 steps.jpg (353KB, 608x1070px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 608x1070px

>>55287036
>le meme

Nice argument.

File: 1452476486455.jpg (51KB, 250x322px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 250x322px

>>55287069
>weeb shit with no input but repeating meme
I see I don't have to put much effort

File: how to tie a noose.jpg (72KB, 600x422px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 600x422px

>>55287103
The only one repeating "meme" is you.

You literally provided no reason why HDMI is better than DP.

>>55287135
It's actually you.

If you read my post I wasn't talking about HDMI nor DP, dip shit

File: stop shitposting and do it.jpg (74KB, 530x800px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 530x800px

>>55287150
Troll confirmed, this argument is pointless, thanks for wasting my time.

File: smug manga boy.jpg (18KB, 142x173px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 142x173px

>>55287176
You are an idiot for not reading.

Enjoy your sucide

>>55286757
I already said DP 1.3 supports higher resolutions but who cares when no one here has a 5k monitor? You're just playing a stupid spec war. HDMI 2.2 will likely support 5k or 8k once it's popular. What are these extra features besides adapting to more popular platforms?

The features was mainly talking about are HDMI-CEC and bitstream audio.

>>55286651
That's wrong. HDMI 2.0 can support 144hz. Hell, I even run my 2560 x 1440hz monitor at 72hz with HDMI 1.4

File: MAXIMUM RUSTLEDRIVE.jpg (96KB, 680x507px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 680x507px

>>55287210
>goalpost moving
>continues ad hominem with no argument in sight

File: can't contain it.jpg (180KB, 755x696px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 755x696px

>>55286922
>>55287036
>>55287069
>>55287103
>>55287135
>>55287150
>>55287176
>>55287210

>mfw this whole chain of retardation

>>55287223
It can only do 144 at 1080p. It can't do 144hz for 1440p

>>55287276
1.4 has that limitation, not 2.0

>>55287247
>>55287266
samefagging/proxyfagging.


How about you read my posts?

>>55285970
>turn monitor off
>resolution resets to 640x480
displayport everyone

File: nice meme.png (5KB, 371x157px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 371x157px

>>55287303
>le samefag meme
>there are only 2 people on the internet

displayport is better, but it's ok to use HDMI for tv anyway

>>55287343
nice proxy, m80

>>55287307
doesn't the same happen with HDMI?

Display port has better specs, while hdmi has a much better adoption rate.

>>55287407
>there is only one person who thinks I'm retarded

The evidence says otherwise.

>>55285986
Meme answers welcome

just bought a 144 hz monitor for my new pc, but i've never actually seen what 144 hz looks like. Is it as big a step up as say 30 to 60 fps in gaming?

>>55287441
Yeah, the photoshop.

It's ok weeb man. You can keep posting the suicide picture

>>55287417
even if it does at least you can tape over pin 19 on hdmi

good luck taping pin 18 on dp

>>55287454
Yes, it's a huge deal. Don't listen to eyesight-lets that can't see the difference.

>>55287456
It's ok mentally deficient man. You can keep denying the reality.

>>55286533
>no one on /g/ has a monitor that requires DP 1.3 bandwidth
4k @ 60Hz is only possible with the latest DisplayPort.

>>55287454
It's placebo but you'll find people defending it religiously because they've invested so much into it.

>>55287454
I didn't believe the meme...

But playing overwatch at 144 hz... is amazing. Go from 144 to 60 and 60 looks like it is laggy.

>>55287476
cool. And do you think I should shell out extra for a 1070 so all my games can hit 1080/144fps or do you think that's overkill and I should just get a 480. This is my first time building a pc and i'm new on /g/ so sorry if that's stupid to ask

>>55287486
or HDMI 2.0 (but which GPUs support that?)

>>55287479
It's ok you can join me, delusional man.

I believe in you, not-assblasted weeb man

>>55287486
Wrong. HDMI 2.0 has 4k 60hz support.

Displayport has a locking mechanism, it has more features and its open-source so what the hell is the argument here

>>55287500
Nvidia since Maxwell and AMD since Polaris.

>>55287454
It's something that's felt more than seen, you suddenly realize how much input lag there was at 60fps, try something like Quake or CS GO to really feel the difference

>>55287512
It's not open source. It's an open standard but you still need to pay royalty of $0.20 per unit.

>>55287454
Only if you actually get 144 frames.

>>55287537
Isn't it still the lesser evil of the 2?

You're getting more out of your money with DP, right?

>>55287553
i should probably get a 1070 then. Fuck guess I need to not eat for a month LOL

>>55287567
>2016
>eating food
fuck off fatty

>>55287537
>you still need to pay royalty of $0.20 per unit
According to VESA (the organization behind DP) that's a false claim

File: breaking benches.jpg (35KB, 552x624px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 552x624px

>>55287580
>tfw I'm actually a fatty

I recently got a LG 4k monitor and I swear DP is just way more finicky. I had the same issues when I swapped from DVI to DP at 2560x1440 but needed a 35ft cable. Half of them didn't work. Now I'm finding the same issues with shorter cables at 4k. Nothing will give me the full 4k @ 60hz at 35ft.

HDMI and DVI I can go 50ft with no issues and they fully support their spec.

>>55287627
which monitor btw?

>>55287640
LG 31MU97

Biggest pain is getting support for the full 4096 x 2160 but even getting a 3840 x 2160 signal is somewhat of a pain. Everything I plug it into seems to want to operate differently from only running at 57hz or 30hz to needing to stretch a supposed 3840 x 2160 signal to a 17:9 aspect ratio.

File: REEEEE! NORMIES GET OUT OF MY BOARD.jpg (65KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 900x900px

>>55287506
>calling someone a weeb
>on an anime imageboard

just plugged in my display port, hope it is better than HDMI

File: g (2).jpg (49KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x480px

>>55286649
You're a moron. Pretty much all display port cables I've seen are HDMI-out on the other end. Display and HDMI are 100% compatible.

File: 108249102x.png (25KB, 370x320px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 370x320px

>>55285970
>YFW thunderbolt was supposed to revitalize mini display port...

>>55286009
What a rational answer. Am I on Reddit?

>>55286281
I bet you work in an office and make lots of money, only to come home and fuck your hot wife. Loser.

>>55286706
You're a complete idiot, a very large number of CAD and CGI applications benefit greatly from higher resolutions and larger screens, and for 4k, DP is the only way to get 60hz

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (23KB, 500x359px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x359px

>>55286150
My 9000 dollar cables beg to differ.

>>55287664
Have the same monitor. I'm using a R9 270X with a 6 foot dp1.2 from monoprice. DisplayPort isn't really meant for lengths over 10 feet.

>>55286501
I never used it and I always wondered how was it possible to gain a real advantage with it. Can someone explain, please?

>>55288702
Have a 6ft Monoprice cable as well. Works on a 290x I have but not a 290. If I use the 6ft DP to miniDP cable that came with it, it at least gives me a picture on the 290 but it loses picture once in a while. It's odd inconsistent things like that which I have only gotten using Displayport.

File: 23-pin-monitor-video-cable.jpg (30KB, 400x382px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 400x382px

>>55285970
>>55286281
>>55286908
Hey guys, can I still be relevant?

>>55287725
I'm talking about TVs though retard. Most TVs don't have more than one display port while they have multiple HDMI ports. Many people plug multiple devices onto their TVs.

>>55286533
>No one on /g/ has a monitor that required DP 1.3 bandwidth
But I do. My resolution is 2560x1440 progressive scan and the refresh rate is 144hz.
HDMI simply CANNOT output that much information due to bandwidth limitations.
Therefore, your argument is invalid.

>>55289901
HDMI 2.0 can do 144hz at 2560x1440. I said DP 1.3 spec specifically which can do 4k 120hz or 5k 60hz over HDMI 2.0. Learn to read friendo.

>>55286023
This. The concept of hdmi couplers being like 15 bucks is ridiculous.

>>55287496
you should get the 480 unless you intend buying 1440p monitor. make sure to get one with freesync because, well it's free so why not.

>>55286100
larger bandwidth

>>55285970
I use DVI, it just werks.
But Display Port is obviously superior.

Why do people act like hdmi can't do high framerates? I get 144fps in games no problem. Fuck display port and its hard as fuck to plug and unplug self.

>>55287486
retard

>>55288646
>and for 4k, DP is the only way to get 60hz

get with the times grampa. hdmi has been able to do this for a while

>>55285970
the only thing that anoys me about hdmi is the lack of a lock besides that meh they seem like they do the same dp just seems to be faster in improving

/sqt/

For new standards, like HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.3, does this mean buying a HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.3 cable? Or is it just ports?

>>55291061
just ports

>>55286281
This

>>55287454
it's noticeable, but anything above 60hz gives you diminishing returns so it's not as big of a jump as 30 to 60hz

File: eyeye.jpg (2KB, 120x125px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 120x125px

>>55285976
>bends over
>looks at box

USB C fags. 10gbps can easily handle high bandwidth video

>>55285970
I use HDMI for the sound because I use my TV as a monitor. It also lets me use less cables.

Am I the only one that has never got HDMI to work properly?

The resolution is always fucked, and the picture stretched outside the display. Even after fucking with the Nvidia tools, I'm just squeezing the stretched picture inside the screen boundaries.

It's supposed to be the VGA killer, but it can't even display pixel perfect.

>>55292750
are you using a tv

>>55292761
How else would I be able to shitpost in bed?

>DVI cable to the monitor
>10M VGA cable to the TV

>>55292750
Turn off overscan on your TV, dummy.

>>55292797
I've never even seen a TV with this option. What manufacturers support this?

>>55286281
gonna be honest, this is what I use at work with my laptop.

>>55292825
I've seen it on Sony, Samsung and LG TVs. It's rarely been by default though.

>>55292825
It's not always called over/underscan adjustment but I'm reasonably confident that the majority of manufacturers allow you to adjust the input to disable it.

File: 1456525845882.jpg (23KB, 240x251px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 240x251px

>>55286505
>he fell for the SSD meme
oh wow!

>>55292868
You'll never get it pixel perfect. Try drawing a 1px line in paint and check how much it's squashed into adjacent pixels. It's a garbage technology

>>55286281

Pretty much this.

>implying you need anything beyond VGA

>>55292908
I'm not sure why VGA would look any better other than an input setting on the TV. Check it out, hombre.

>>55285970
Any combination of GPUs and screens I've used HDMI always looks like a blurry jpeg. Even disabling over/underscan. So DP all the way. Also easily converts to VGA with cheap adaptors for legacy devices. HDMI passes sound I guess so point for it there but who cares, would rather run to speakers than shitty monitor sound anyways