AMD Nano running 4K 60HZ HDMI 2.0

Rizen said:
Well I sit about 6-8 feet away from my 4K TV vs about 30" for my monitor, so I am not as concerned with visuals being perfect on my TV as I would be on my PC monitor. And TVs generally have much worse input latency than a monitor, so it's a lot more noticeable if you have a slow TV. Since I use my TV primarily for gaming, that's an important consideration.

Also, the Vizio 65" M65-C1 is about 1/2 the cost of a comparable Samsung. Is the Samsung nicer? Yes. Is it worth 100% more money? No.
Click to expand...

I concur. Adding latency to get HDMI 2.0 output is bad for gaming. AMD better wise up, and give us both DP and HDMI 2.0 next year. My large (40"+) 4K display choices are hampered by their lack of HDMI 2.0 support. :mad:
 
it most likely wont happen, theve already said they want everyone to use DP.
 
The Mac said:
it most likely wont happen, theve already said they want everyone to use DP.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't accept that claim at face value. If AMD truly adhere to that claim, then why offer any HDMI port on their gpu solutions at all? The dam already has a leak... In the corporate world, I've seen made up excuses or claims until a solution is at hand. A "story" has to be in place until then... ;)
 
I'm waiting for the price to drop on the Nano before I get one. The sales here in Scandinavia have been close to zero and I see the card in stock everywhere including Newegg. I really want one, but it's just too expensive for what i get. My 65" 4K Samsung HDMI 2.0 is one of the reasons I'm holding back, the other being 14/16nm is just around the corner and will likely be able to hit 60hz 4K in many games.
 
This is great for those TVs or projectors with HDMI. It would be nice to also have strong análogo outut for those with 4K systems over BNC or componnent.
 
The Mac said:
it most likely wont happen, theve already said they want everyone to use DP.
Click to expand...

AMD will have HDMI 2.0 on their next version/revision. The are only talking up DP because they don't have HDMI 2.0 on this version. DP might be a better standard, but ignoring market realities is a good way to either head to the bottom or stay at the bottom.

Market reality, 4k displays utilize HDMI 2.0 to achieve 4k60.
 
Uhm guys... This video is still not displaying 4K @ 60Hz... its running @ 30Hz in that video.


You think this would be a bigger deal. But people seem to be more upset about the card needing a dongle (which is a legitimate concern) but in reality... even WITH the dongle: its not running @ 60Hz... Soooo... issue with the card? issue with the dongle?
 
KazeoHin said:
Uhm guys... This video is still not displaying 4K @ 60Hz... its running @ 30Hz in that video.


You think this would be a bigger deal. But people seem to be more upset about the card needing a dongle (which is a legitimate concern) but in reality... even WITH the dongle: its not running @ 60Hz... Soooo... issue with the card? issue with the dongle?
Click to expand...

Shuush with that technical talk. :) But seriously I was wondering the same thing myself. With that said I would get a large 4K FreeSync Korean monitor and use Displayport. They range up to 55" in size and have HDMI 2.0 on them for your consoles or whatever. With all the cable cutters around it seems that something like that would be more wanted than a 4K television.

My main issue with the Nano is the price. I find the 300 series to be old tech even though I'm still using a 290. So I'm going to hold out for whatever comes next year with Arctic Islands. I can only see the Fury series getting replaced by 8GB HBM models next year and the current cards taking over for the 300 series. Also at 300 series pricing.
 
cageymaru said:
Anyone think that this mystery board might be related to AMD's grand plans for domination of the living room?
http://wccftech.com/amd-magnum-fpga-prototype-dtv-shipping-manifest/
Click to expand...

You know how a once REALLY famous actor starts doing ads for like, Tylenol or Lego or something? They just simply arent in-demand and are taking whatever work they can get.


I see this link and I see AMD taking whatever work they can get. Someone must've wanted a cheap x86 chip for a DTV box.
 
AMD has several different custom x86 designs in the works including one believed to be for Nintendo, so it could definitely be one of those.
 
chithanh said:
AMD will offer HDMI 2.0 products, like this mobo from Sapphire:
http://www.sapphiretech.com/productdetial.asp?pid=8D982A28-256C-4A32-BBCE-63467829AEC3&lang=eng

I recall they said in an interview that adding HDMI 2.0 to Fiji would have delayed that chip too much. That's why they are betting on DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adapters, and hoping that it will not take as long as with the MST hubs...
Click to expand...

I don't think that board would run a Nano that well plus HDMI 2 port on it with a Nano would be virtually pointless.
 
I'm not saying that the mobo is useful in any way for a Fury.

Just the claim that AMD is generally against HDMI 2.0 and telling people to use DisplayPort is wrong. This advice concerns only Fiji and older chips, at least until adapters ship, or converter chips will be integrated on the PCB like with Sapphire Flex cards.
 
chithanh said:
I'm not saying that the mobo is useful in any way for a Fury.

Just the claim that AMD is generally against HDMI 2.0 and telling people to use DisplayPort is wrong. This advice concerns only Fiji and older chips, at least until adapters ship, or converter chips will be integrated on the PCB like with Sapphire Flex cards.
Click to expand...

Of course - AMD stance on HDMI 2.0 was pure damage control. They would be singing different tune if they had it.
 
Michaelius said:
Of course - AMD stance on HDMI 2.0 was pure damage control. They would be singing different tune if they had it.
Click to expand...

While waiting for Nvidia first HBM micro ATX based card :). I'm sure that will have HDMI 2.0 they already announced it ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top