Same. While I initially held off upgrading my B6 due to not being able to get a new GPU, at this point I'm holding off until at least CES. I'm still cautiously optimistic that Samsung might release a 55" MicroLED (though I suspect we're still a year or two away from that.)
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
OLED MONITORS!!!!!
- Thread starter you2
- Start date
Because there's no reason to. PC users are still in the minority for sales, and no one outside the PC segment bothers with Displayport. Nevermind HDMI 2.1 offers higher bandwidth and connects to more devices.
Agree. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if DisplayPort ends up going the way of DVI in a few years. Desktop PCs are basically the only devices using them (and almost all video cards have HDMI too now), and desktop PCs are themselves are kind of dying out. Apparently, Generation Z doesn't even use them. I have heard reports of college professors complaining that Gen Z students literally have so little desktop exposure that the concept of a filesystem confuses them. i.e. they don't understand the concept of folders/directories and saving/opening files.
Apparently millennials/gen X are the only generations that have serious experience using desktop computers at home, and the only generation that still buy them.....
With regards to display port I believe the original motivation seemed to have been increase bw required by desktop but these days hdmi is sufficient for 4k at 240hz. Not sure why display port was required in the first place but i suspect it was competing markets (tvs vs monitors) and the different standard groups had different objectives. Of course the same can be seen with usb and competing standards. These days usb has sufficient bw that most of the other standards are more or less obsolete. Now the question is how long till usb forces hdmi to be obsolete (if ever). Hum seems the key advantage of the hdmi over usb4 is copy protection; well we don't need copy protection... do we....
DP has no licensing costs and outside of this narrow HDMI 2.x+ window has generally been ahead of HDMI in resolution/bandwidth capabilities. DP 2.x has been long delayed but is closer to release now. It can be implemented as an embedded technology for laptops. It is the embedded format in USB 3.x/USB-C/Thunderbolt. Its probably not going away any time soon.
DP has been slightly ahead of HDMI historically, but the only time I really mattered was right before HDMI 2.1 came out, as HDMI 2.0 couldn't do 4k60 without resorting to reducing chroma. Now we're at the point where it doesn't really matter anymore.DP has no licensing costs and outside of this narrow HDMI 2.x+ window has generally been ahead of HDMI in resolution/bandwidth capabilities. DP 2.x has been long delayed but is closer to release now. It can be implemented as an embedded technology for laptops. It is the embedded format in USB 3.x/USB-C/Thunderbolt. Its probably not going away any time soon.
But yes, the issue is you have two different standards bodies doing basically the same thing. HDMI was a replacement for Component. DP was a replacement for DVI.
This is a bit of an over simplification as HDMI objective is copy protection. You could argue that they were replacing components on tv but I think it is a bit deeper than that. Of course the copy protection is completely broken which beg the question of why they persist. I often wonder if it violates fair-use; but of course the manage to get a clause in the law written to deal with that issue.But yes, the issue is you have two different standards bodies doing basically the same thing. HDMI was a replacement for Component. DP was a replacement for DVI.
The existence of embedded DisplayPort means that DisplayPort should continue being used at least internally regardless of external display support. It's my impression that pretty much all modern consumer electronics with an embedded screen of sufficiently high resolution and/or refresh rate use the eDP protocol. In fact, it's my understanding that this embedded function was one of the primary driving forces behind the development of DisplayPort in the first place so as to replace the aging LVDS connector and the like which was becoming troublesome as demands for video bandwidth and power efficiency increased over the last decade, particularly once you get above 1080p and the like (and especially once it's above 60Hz).
And of course, embedded DisplayPort is largely why variable refresh on internal displays is even a thing - in fact, VRR on eDP was supported before external DisplayPort as it was originally developed as a power-saving function that allowed the panel to refresh at a lower rate when at idle or the like.
Also it's my impression that DisplayPort alt-mode over USB type-C is much more commonly supported than HDMI alt-mode (presumably because it takes much less effort to support DisplayPort alt-mode when you're already using embedded DisplayPort to drive an integrated display).
And of course, embedded DisplayPort is largely why variable refresh on internal displays is even a thing - in fact, VRR on eDP was supported before external DisplayPort as it was originally developed as a power-saving function that allowed the panel to refresh at a lower rate when at idle or the like.
Also it's my impression that DisplayPort alt-mode over USB type-C is much more commonly supported than HDMI alt-mode (presumably because it takes much less effort to support DisplayPort alt-mode when you're already using embedded DisplayPort to drive an integrated display).
Last edited: