HDMI and 4K

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,839
Location
Brisbane, Oz
It's pretty clear that first TVs, and now monitors, are standardizing on the 4K format, even though it's pointless or even a negative for >90% of cases. You can see that almost nothing else will be available in a couple of years time.

TVs use the HDMI connector and most PCs also have an HDMI output. So I was startled to realize that the HDMI output on most PCs is still HDMI 1.4, which doesn't support 4K. You need HDMI 2.0 for that.

4K is supported through a DisplayPort connector, no problem. But you don't see that interface on TVs, and only on a small percentage of PCs.

Nvidia claims 4K support for their GT710-730 chips, but that's essentially a lie because AFAIK no available implementation has a Display Port. They do have HDMI, but AFAIK it's always HDMI 1.4. You need at least GT1030 for 4K (if you can find one).

Both AMD and Intel CPUs with IGP support 4K. The problem is, very few motherboards have Display Port and hardly any have HDMI 2.0.

This can be a fatal shortcoming because some PCs just won't accommodate more expensive graphics cards that do support HDMI 2.0 (size and power consumption). For example, the InWin Chopin is strictly limited to a 150W power supply and there is no room to add a graphics card anyway. If the motherboard has a DisplayPort, you could at least buy a pricey adaptor for HDMI 2.0 - otherwise, there's just no way you can drive a 4K monitor.

For IGP, the only motherboard series that I found to support HDMI 2.0 is Gigabyte Aorus, and I think even that is not 100% universal.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,540
Location
Michigan
You can drive a "4k" (UHD more likely) monitor just fine from a HDMI 1.4 port. You won't get a 60Hz refresh, but it does work.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,839
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Sorry, that's what I meant. :(

24-30Hz is OK for video, but not so much for everything else - or so I've read. Has anyone here tried it?
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,028
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
I just had a quick look as well, and it really does appear to be bit of a sh*t show when using the IGP.

From what I can gather, Intel and motherboard manufacturers simple skimped on their HDMI implementations, relying on add-in GPUs to provide 4K@60Hz support... The only saving grace on the Intel side of things, is that most Intel NUCs support HDMI 2.0. (Unsure about other OEMs though).

For AMD, things are a little better, all RavenRidge based APUs (RyzenG) support HDMI 2.0 (4K@60Hz) when coupled with a 300 series or newer chipset, however unfortunately most motherboard manufacturers are skimping on HDMI 2.0 certification, despite the CPU and chipset supporting it.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,234
Location
USA
I'm not seeing many 4K displays for typical workers. A few people have them for specific purposes, but they have desktops or laptops that probably have a video card. Is it the standard that people have 4K displays in your business?
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,028
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
I think the point is, that 4K displays are now an option for most users, but the lack of support for them (esp when using HDMI) is disappointing.

(Prices are now becoming reasonable for 4K, multiple options for under AU$400, or 4K TVs for less than AU$600 in the 50-60" size).
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,540
Location
Michigan
24-30Hz is OK for video, but not so much for everything else - or so I've read. Has anyone here tried it?
I doubt most people would really notice. They wonder why the mouse seems a tad sluggish / not smooth, but I doubt they'd figure out why.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,234
Location
USA
I think the point is, that 4K displays are now an option for most users, but the lack of support for them (esp when using HDMI) is disappointing.

(Prices are now becoming reasonable for 4K, multiple options for under AU$400, or 4K TVs for less than AU$600 in the 50-60" size).
Are you saying that the video cards also don't output 4K HDMI?
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,028
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
Are you saying that the video cards also don't output 4K HDMI?
Not at all, just the situation is not very clear for the consumer.

As @time pointed out, a lot of motherboards and cheap video cards lack HDMI 2.0 needed for 4K@60Hz. To get 4K@60Hz working via HDMI, you need to pay close attention to exactly what is being offered on the motherboard and video card...
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,234
Location
USA
I am familiar with such limitations, e.g., when I upgraded the display on a mATX Z270 to 2560, but it had DP in addition to HDMI and DVI ports.
It would not be surprising that cheap people often underbuy and have unrealistic expectations.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,839
Location
Brisbane, Oz
By "cheap people", do you mean anyone with a budget, meaning 95% of purchases?

Pretend you're accountable for buying PCs for your own company. What are the chances that you could indulge yourself by limiting all purchases to motherboards and monitors with DisplayPort?

The reality, as well demonstrated by TVs, is that manufacturers chase what they perceive to be the most in-demand configuration. That's HDMI, for better or worse. HDMI was enhanced enough back in 2006 with version 1.3 to include 2560x1600/1440 resolution at 60Hz (QHD or WQHD), but 3840x2160 (UHD) requires the relatively recent (2013) 2.0 version - there's nothing useful in between.

It's becoming obvious that monitor manufacturers are also intent on pushing 4K resolution, while abandoning 2560x1440. So in the the not too distant future, YOU will probably struggle to buy a monitor with the resolution you take for granted.

So when buying new PCs, either for yourself or for a business, 4K support is actually a big deal that I suspect not many people have yet woken up to.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,839
Location
Brisbane, Oz
I doubt most people would really notice. They wonder why the mouse seems a tad sluggish / not smooth, but I doubt they'd figure out why.
Does that mean you've actually tried it at 24Hz? I figured you were the most likely person here to have done so.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,540
Location
Michigan
Does that mean you've actually tried it at 24Hz? I figured you were the most likely person here to have done so.
Well, they will support 30Hz also (I think). Yes, I've intentionally tried 24Hz on my UHD TV from my HDMI 2.0 video card. This is mostly for video playback but the system is usable.

I don't see this as a huge issue. Anyone too cheap to buy a proper HDMI 2.0 setup or something with a adequate DisplayPort output isn't paying the premium for a UHD monitor. They'll just get a FHD one.
 
Top