Does This Connector Even Do Anything? - DisplayPort Explained
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 вер 2024
- Check out what you can fix with iFixit at www.iFixit.com...
DisplayPort has been around since 2008 and is still used in computers today, but is there a reason why we haven't fully switched over to only using HDMI?
Leave a reply with your requests for future episodes, or tweet them here: / jmart604
► GET MERCH: lttstore.com
► AFFILIATES, SPONSORS & REFERRALS: lmg.gg/tqsponsors
► PODCAST GEAR: lmg.gg/podcast...
► SUPPORT US ON FLOATPLANE: www.floatplane...
FOLLOW US ELSEWHERE
---------------------------------------------------
Twitter: / linustech
Facebook: / linustech
Instagram: / linustech
TikTok: / linustech
Twitch: / linustech
I remember when you guys tested hdmi and displayport cables using your cable tester. To see companies lie about the hdmi version they were using for the cable is absolutely ridiculous while every displayport cable passed at the rated spec.
I guess that's because HDMI is used way more by people, who aren't nearly as tech savvy as (for example) a LTT viewer. And because of that they tend to to more often fall for things like "Ultra High Performance Gold Plated Double Shielded ULTRA EXTREME HDMI Cable ONLY TODAY FOR $2". And people who use DP are generally the opposite of that.
@@schaf7716 That's why I like being a tech savvy guy: you can see through all the crap.
@@plankera yeah, and from time to time you can get a good laugh out of it
@@schaf7716 pretty much this. Since displayport is the PC gamers cable (provided you're team green), you can reliably assume that the consumer will be more educated than someone looking to plug their TV into a DVD player.
@@SEMIA123 it isn't necesarily a "gamers" or team green cable. AMD also uses Display port for some of its profesional solutions, for instance, eyefinity. some Radeon pro cards include 6 display port video outputs which can all be used simultaneously, this is extremely useful for some profesional fields like Videomapping and audiovisual reinforcement for live events in general
One currently unutilized feature of DisplayPort is the auxiliary channel, which can carry a single 480mbps USB2.0 signal, which in theory would enable things like pen/touch input displays needing a single cable to the PC.
Gotta have GPUs with USB controllers for that, which sadly not many have. DisplayLink kinda died, which was USB-C anyway... So this kinda stuck in a weird place between straight up USB-C and not having any USB at all.
@@sinni800 Thats a bummer. Seems like it would be good to use with displays that have USB ports in them as well.
@@lyianx I agree, but this is what USB-C screens fulfill nowadays. Desktop GPUs are phasing this out, sadly, but there are mainboards that have thunderbolt and such and can use an internal displayport cable to put that into the signal. Laptops have everything on usb-c anyway nowadays
FAUX (Fast AUX) got deprecated in 1.4. It was never a good idea.
This and even its own version of ARC
Huge advantages to displayport that got left out of the video:
1: Locking connection between the cable and port ( HDMI is just a light friction ).
2: Open source free license to use the port ( HDMI requires paying a license fee to use the port ).
1: is the reason why HDMI is better.
That locking feature sucks.
The locking is not part of the standard as far as I know but included for most cables anyway
Yeah I love it when people break my stuff because they pulled on a cable that they expected to just pop out
Not all DP cables come with the locking tabs. Personally, I prefer without, but if you're not the kind of person who absentmindedly yanks stuff out like I am, I can see the appeal.
@@benjaminoechsli1941 but if a person isn't the type to absent-mindedly yank on a cable then why would they even need a locking feature?
So either way it sucks. If you are a clumsy person you risk damaging your devices. And if you never pull on your cables it still sucks because every time you want to unplug the cable it's annoying.
One thing to remember about DisplayPort resolutions getting crazy high, is that daisy-chaining means you are practically running every screen together from one port. That means that 16K 60Hz support also means you should be able to chain 4 x 8K 60Hz monitors off a single connector, or for a more likely setup in the future, 3 x 4K 120Hz.
Also remember that DP daisy-chaining is used on laptop and tablet USB-C docks to connect multiple screens plus power and USB data to a device with a single cable. HDMI has nothing like that available.
the thing only 2.5% of people will ever use. DisplayPort is more focused on nerds
@@Gameplayer55055 2.5% seems like too much, make it 0.05%. 😂
@@Njazmo So Laptops+Dockingstations only make 0.05% of the total market? Every Buisness i know have switched to laptop+docking so idk man
@@philipptrebus I run a work setup which is laptop connected via USB-C to DELL U2520D (which is a monitor with built in dock, it even powers my laptop, don't have to pull the power brick from my bag), which in turn daisy-chains to another U2520D. no cables on desk to annoy, literally one cable to connect my wireless mouse and keyboard, printer, external USB speaker, two mobile phones, external drive and so on... Displayport rocks, don't mind those guys.
@@Gameplayer55055 Well, since USB-C and more importantly Thunderbolt were developed from Displayport and natively support it, I'd say you're way off. And since you can just go straight from DP to HDMI (but not the other way with expensive active converter), methinks HDMI is a shitty proposition. Even ports are kind of bad - DP standard is way better. Pulled and damaged some cables but never a port in a device, but my TV recently started sporting one collapsed inward HDMI port, because someone bumped the cable.
You did not talk about the fact that they nerfed the certification on HDMI cables.
A 2.1 HDMI cable from one manufacturer might not have the same functions as one from a different manufacturer.
Ad to that the problem with all the different versions of HDMI and the fact that makers of TV´s and other things that use the port, have no problem saving a buck by downgrading, make the Displayport the go to port in my book.
DisplayPort sadly isn't better as it too has lots of "optional" modes, though not sure if the cables differ.
None of the issue would exist if people had took it to FTC and made sure that specs (I would also like for the manufacturers to label the versions right on the cable (if not the head shield along with HDMI or DP) are up to par.
But that is wishful thinking.
Probably because it's a dead horse by now. They already did at least 4 other videos on it.
And IMO HDMI should be named something like, HDMI 6/12/24 GHz which is just as memorable as 1.4/2.0/2.1
I personally have not had any incorrectly spec'd HDMI or DP cables or adapters, and I have hundreds of cables. Though I will admit that I only buy higher quality cables which do cost a bit more. Sometimes I have noticed that the QC of high performance video cables/equipment is not very great if you cheap out (why I now buy cables on the more expensive side of the spectrum).
I will say that I have never had a faulty DP cable, and have had to replace HDMI cables many times.
At one of the last instances of WinHEC, in Los Angeles, there was a seminar on DisplayPort. The presenter was formerly an ATI (before the AMD acquisition) engineer who was now at Microsoft. As he explained it, DisplayPort got started when a bunch of video engineers at ATI were having a conversation and came to the general agreement that HDMI was a hamfisted mess that would never have come out of the PC industry. So they decided to start work on their own video transport and soon had many major companies across the industry interested.
Because the PC industry isn't interested in restricting content, and the content industry is VERY interested in blocking people on a whim.
AFAIK HDMI's extremely proprietary nature (even the spec are proprietary and aren't supposed to be available to the public) result in it having a fairly spotty support in terms of available features on some devices due to difficulty/impossibility of implementing those features in software.
+
And it doesn't tell you what version the cable is in.
@@killertruth186 Which is made more confusing by the retroactive rebranding of 2.0 as 2.1, like they did with USB.
@@TalesOfWar Exactly, this a b nonsense is not necessary. Just say hdmi 2.0 and 2.1 at the very least, then there's at least a number change
@@TalesOfWar Even DisplayPort didn't even tell you what version it is running either.
I recently got a 165hz monitor and learned it was capped at 144hz because of my hdmi cable. It seems like display port is the only option for refresh rates above that.
Yep, the dp bandwidth is much higher
Kind of a same situation here, but I'm using it on my laptop and it does not have a display port. Any idea where i can find a good hdmi to display port cable? I found lots to dp to hdmi cables but they're not backward compatible
@@junantias1575 HDMI to DisplayPort requires an active adapter. They exist but they're expensive, and they won't give you __any__ of the advantages of DisplayPort because you'll still be limited by the HDMI spec. They don't make sense to use unless you have something that only accepts DisplayPort or are using a DisplayPort KVM switch or such.
Probably because your setup doesn't support it. I have a RTX 3080 Ti and a 2560x1440 240hz display. Both support HDMI 2.1 and I can run at the full res and refresh rate without chroma subsampling, or lowering the colour depth. So it's fully supported on hdmi 2.1.
@@junantias1575 The only hope you have is if you have a Thunderbolt 3 or USB 4 port. And even then, you have to hope it supports DP and is ideally connected to the dGPU and not the CPU (unless you have MUX switch).
DisplayPort is royalty free, hence HDMI is unnecessary. Due to the licensing situaltion with HDMI (parts of the standard and optional features are proprietary), it's not possible to supprt the full featureset in opensource drivers (i.e. on Linux, *BSD).
Good thing it is royalty free and every company switched over.
thanks, I didn't know that , hate proprietary too the point I try and avoid it. plus I only use Linux.
If HDMI was truly unnecessary, then why is it way cheaper than DisplayPort?
@@killertruth186 primarily economies of scale and not paying licensing when you should in some cases.
@@blindsniper35 It is obvious that DP is much affordable now. But years ago....It really wasn't.
Another important factor are industrial applications. Companies in this area absolutely hate friction connectors. They even have USB with screws.
Yeah, go USB Type-C Locking Connector!
@@robspiess
Or how about MagSafe-like connector?
@@beezanteeum That's still going to pop out if you move it too much. Locking is the way to go
luckily DP cables usually have clicky things out of the box. not mini ones though
WHERE CAN I GET THOSE PORTS
I will also recall your video where you tested every brand off HDMI and DP cable you could get your hands on
HDMI: Hit and Miss
DP: 100% Works 100% of the time.
Or you get a pin 20(?) error with DP, like me, so your pc wont boot with your cable. I thought, that I messed up my pc while building it, but that wasnt the case... I got a vga error, for a cable error...
@@barnahalo6916 omg same, i thought it was my goddamn gpu, but it was the cable,
@@RagaGaming yeah, and here where i live, i cant get a fkin dp 1.4 cable under 40$ 😒
So true. I've had the weirdest ghost issues with HDMI over the years that has no explanation. Displayport all day.
Funny, I was coming here to find out why DP never seems to work for me. Any idea? Could it be bad cables?
DP is by far the best one. Best compatibility with analog adapters and digital adapters, while HDMI seems like it was made to give the user headaches, worse compatibility, trash cables, slower updates to revisions, not open-source...
slow update to revision...is like the overall user updating the equipment once a year lol, lame
And bs naming
@XK Stating your opinion without any arguments to back it up, means your comment is invalid.
@XK no
@XK "is has higher quality video"
.....No? Did you watch the video?
They are historically different. HDMI evolved from DVI which evolved from VGA which evolved over few stages from analog video which can be traced back well to the 1920's/1930's. It can still be seen as an digitized analog RGB signal. The requirement of a constant frame-rate persisted over all this time. Displayport on the other hand was an development more or less from scratch and instead of obeying to TV standards it was designed for computers from the very start. Its more of a block transfer of addressed data like PCIe and not a constant stream. That is why it doesn't need a constant frame rate (so this is where G-Sync comes in) and can support multiple monitors with one cable. Displayport is the better standard at least for PC's.
That is completely correct.
However, with HDMI 2.1, that has changed. Although it is only a small change in version number from 2.0 to 2.1, HDMI 2.1 is completely different from HDMI 2.0 and has much more to do with DP. Transmission is at two possible fixed data rates, there is no longer a pixel clock, meaning all 4 lanes are used for data transmission. Most new features need this fixed transmission clock and would not be possible with HDMI 2.0 transmission. The increase of the transmission speed from 6 GHz to 12 GHz is the smallest change, which by the way is also still optional (you can still transmit with 6 GHz with the same cables, but even then you already have 50% more data throughput because of the 4th lane and different coding).
A better name for HDMI 2.1 would have been HDMI 4.0 ;-)
And there was no reason to change the major version number for HDMI 2.0, here HDMI 1.5 would have been an appropriate name.
why does my DP monitor disconnect when i turn it off but not my HDMI monitor? so annoying.
@@sloth5411 that's your monitor not the display port standard. Check your settings to see if it has some sort of eco mode or something
You forgot the most killer features: Display Port can carry usb 2.0 (over aux), so you don’t need another cable. HDMI can carry ethernet at 1gbps, I still have a receiver that supports this and delivers Ethernet over HDMI to my tv, which no longer supports it. /s
Does the /s mean you don’t think either are killer features?
I guess they are both a bit out of date, usb 2.0 could be handy still
@@YogiTheBearMan they are not useful right now, nor were they when they appeared. TVs already had network ports and getting network from a receiver was expensive and complicated. And for the display port usb… I’ve never seen Nvidia nor AMD support it… so it was pretty pointless and rapidly outdated.
DRM is very restricting to things you bought yourself. Maybe companies should find other ways to monetize and remove DRM. Maybe you could do another video on that.
Just download and skip the DRM.
Maybe just don't do drm
It worked for music, so why not movies?
You must support piracy!
/s
@@z0phi3l 🤣
seems like displayport is the way to go. Even taking open standards and licensing/royalties aside, which make displayport much easier to implement, even just the specs make the only real strength of hdmi its audio management, which any computer user should have separate speakers/headphones anyways.
@Global Communications That would be genius. USB-C all the things
Maybe I'm misunderstanding but if my monitors have speakers in them, will their speakers work if I've connected the monitors to my laptop via displayport?
Air Traffic Control, Military and Avionics segments detest HDMI for varying reasons. Some even prefer to stick to DVI.
There will always be a split in the protocols, Consumer vs Industrial, until we do away with video cables... (not talking wireless).
DVI is nice. conversion to VGA or HDMI cost pennies at most.
Is this to do with the locking mechanism?
DVI got too much hate, it was really good.
@@ratonbox why was it “hated”?
@@bfapple Licensing fees, proprietary by nature, reliability of HDMI is also generally very bad and even if the cable works it does not guarantee that it will hit the spec.
DisplayPort also syncs and unsyncs to my monitor all night after my displays time out and go into power saving. It makes the new-device and disconnected -device sound each time. Big fan
Yeah, and some USB printers are displayed in USB stick eject tray icon, so you can accidentally eject your printer instead of USB stick. But is it a printer problem? Looks like a Windowz problem for me.
On a PC I prefer DisplayPort, and HDMI on TV
Plus most good PC monitors will have at least one DisplayPort
How long before USB Type C with Thunderbolt/USB 4 are the norm?
Maybe EU could go after the TV industry next by enforcing USB C display
I hope soon, USB C DP with power works so well on my laptop. Charges, provides data to the USB hub, even does video too!
I wish USB-C/TB4 cable was a standard. You could easily use one cable to deliver power, internet in, video out, USB hub upstream and possibly daisy chain a video, power and usb upstreams to other monitors and go down from 8 to 10 cables (if you had 2 displays, both USB hubs in use and 1 laptop) to 3-4 (1 power cord, 1 ethernet, 1 usb-c to laptop and 1 usb-c daisy chain for second monitor)
Yeah! I‘d love to USB C everything! Wanna charge any of your devices? Is there a AV Output you want to connect to? Do you have ungodly amounts of data to handle? Thunderbolt is the answer!
@@stonep11 which laptop?
Many years ago I got the impression that DisplayPort both lacked the per-port royalties of HDMI, and was also electrically cheaper/easier to implement. That's why you see cards with many DisplayPort connectors, and usually only one HDMI connector. You should have mentioned the MST Hub feature of DisplayPort as well. It's so much better than relying on in-monitor daisy chaining, in my experience.
MST is basically using the daisy-chaining tech... for those without monitors which have the output capability.
On the Computer, I entirely switched to Displayport, for a completely trivial reason, which was not mentioned at all. DP catches much faster. I'll plug it in and boom. With HDMI, I have to wait a long time before I see a videooutput.
Yeah that's true.
Wonder why that is. Displayport also supports Copy Protection these days, but perhaps it will start without a Handshake, while HDMI requires one to start at all?
I had tried that, and it turns out it was the same response.
DP includes a clock signal on the cable that HDMI does not. This generally makes for more reliable handshakes ("catches") as they devices can both sync to the same clock. Often with HDMI you need to do the whole switch off and on again dance to get devices to re-initiate the handshake. It will depend on the device as to how they have implemented the handshake protocols as to how long it takes to sync up.
Mh, I have it stuck in my mind that DP sometimes does not catch the signal when being hot-plugged. I can remember Linus standing next to a test-bench and having to restart it, because he forgot to turn on the monitor. Someone in the studio even said it's not hot-pluggable. I myself found myself in the same situation, because I need to switch between sources on my monitor and sometimes didn't do it quick enough. HOWEVER.. The specifications for all well-known adapters say they are hot-pluggable. So maybe nowadays it's not an issue anymore.
@@stevecreid I thought it's the other way around. Since DP uses a packet based protocol rather than using a TMDS clock signal to keep the devices in sync (and using timing to send data back and forth). For a time, GPUs only had 2 or max 3 TMDS clocks which would be used on DVI and HDMI, while Displayport was outside of that requirement
Ever wondered why mid to high end video cards usually have 3 DisplayPorts and 1 HDMI? I dunno either, but my theory is that as HDMI costs money to certify, they limit it only to 1.
Also, based from experience, it's easier to convert DisplayPort Output to HDMI monitor than the other way around. It usually needs a more expensive active connector that draws additional power through USB.
The latter is because a DisplayPort source can support an optional feature called Dual Mode, which allows it to transmit a native HDMI signal which enables the use of a passive adapter.
DP++ (dual-mode) is basically the standard for output devices, given it can drive HDMI or single-link DVI with just a level shifter (that can be powered from the DP connector) it makes sense to provide mostly this. HDMI licensing is per device rather than port so it isn't for that reason - more I think they provide a single port by consumer demand to let HDMI shmucks not need an adapter for a single device, rather than just purely provide the superior DP :)
When I got my first computer, my brother hooked the monitor up via display port. I've always used it over HDMI on every computer I've gotten after that. Good to know it's a credible choice.
Really for video and audio alone both work the same for monitors with built in speakers
hdmi is for tv/bluray, DP for PC master race.
@@SixDasher not really always as 4k 120hz oleds by LG are top tier monitors and use hdmi 2.1 but yeah it's not common
for colours... make sure hdmi is on full not limited mode...
I still much prefer DP for my systems.
Life was simpler when you had a choice between VGA, VGA, and VGA.
The main problem with HDMI 2.1 and all its features is that its really HDMI 2.0 without those features.
"the new standard is just the old standard if you remove the new features"
I mean the higher bandwidth is nice for 8K
@@svenasmussen8745 I think he meant he wanted more throughput rather than new useless gimmicky technologies that are largely unsupported or unused.
i think you forgot to mention, unless this has changed, is every device that has HDMI has to pay some kind of license fee to put that port on there. This is why on video cards you'll see only one HDMI port but many Display Ports, since DP doesn't have licensing fees.
HDMI is also thrown on there likely because of connecting to a TV or monitors without DP, I'm gonna connect my PC to a TV at some point and I'm not gonna buy a HDMI to DP cable when I already have a HDMI cable just sitting around
Also my monitor came with a HDMI cable for some reason even though it has 2 DP ports and only 1 HDMI port?
@@IsM1ku I know why HDMI is there, that wasn't my question. I asked if there's a *license fee* to PUT an HDMI port on a video card, or any device.
@@IsM1ku you will buy anything your TV and video card manufacturer will tell you to buy. You have no choice. (Or you can buy new TV or new video card, freedom is so free).
At 1:23, that tiger's name is El-Roi and I took that photo :)
Nice photo!
What resolution is the original photo?
Just a note, ARC can also be used to carry audio even when that HDMI isn't the input. Essentially, it's daisy chaining but only for audio. In my setup for example, my soundbar is connected to the ARC port on my TV and my inputs, my computer, Shield, Switch, etc, are connected directly to the TV. The TV passes the sound to the soundbar via ARC so instead of each device needing to send audio to the soundbar separately, they can just send everything to the TV and it passes through the audio. Its helpful if your soundbar or receiver doesn't have enough input ports or if the soundbar doesn't support a resolution or feature you're using. My soundbar doesn't support HDR so using ARC like this lets me have HDR on my TV and still have a clean setup with my soundbar.
I was about to say that we need a Type-C like implementation for this and then realized that it does have DisplayPort in its spec.
It does, I already use it everyday on my Dell work laptop with an USB-C to DisplayPort adapter, like many people I guess, and cables with USB-C on one side and DisplayPort on the other exist too.
USB-C connectors supporting it may simply have a DP logo next to them.
With DP 1.4, it should support « 4K @60Hz 24-bit color (without compression) with simultaneous USB 3.1, or
5K (5120 x 2880) display support without compression with simultaneous USB 2.0 ». Maybe less if the screen and cable support DP 1.3 or 1.2.
Looking to the future, DP Mode 2.0 over USB4 will be even better, allowing 4K @ 144Hz HDR…
Go USB-C !
@@ElCeceh Yeah my Asus laptop has a USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C with DisplayPort 1.4 and Power Delivery. You can not only send video but, charge the laptop from the monitor. You can set up a full single wire docking solution with just that cable it's super handy.
Thunderbolt 3.0 is a 40gbps port on usb-c used for laptop docking port to carry display/sound/usb/network connentions.
You forgot the most important part. The little engraved icon on DisplayPort is much prettier.
This video is what I needed to learn, I will change my HDMI cable for the display port in order to get the most from my GPU. I didn't know about the key difference.
As an added benefit, you can transmit DisplayPort over a cable with a USB-C connector. So if your system supports it, you can use any USB-C/Thunderbolt 4 port as a video out.
Wouldn't it add a fuck ton of latency being plugged into your MB/USB controller instead of directly into your GPU? I wasn't even aware that was possible considering video cables only work when plugged into your GPU.
@@yourwallet4219 No, because DisplayPort _has_ a direct pathway to your GPU, even when using USB-C as the cable connector.
@@yourwallet4219 there are monitors which include a USB-C dock, AND power delivery. So connect one USB-C to the monitor from a laptop to power, video out, and peripherals (KB, Mouse, LAN, speakers...). Some even can do 2nd monitor off it too.
USB-C/Thunderbolt port is way more bandwidth than you need to not have much latency... especially when it has the design bandwidth to handle a 10K@60Hz, and not using it all.
*Request:* Why do companies put misleading new names on old technology? And what can we do about it?
Examples:
• 5Ge is only slightly faster than 4G LTE
• HDMI 2.1 TMDS is the same as HDMI 2.0
• USB 3.2 Gen 2 is the same as USB 3.1
Reason: Marketing
What can *you* do about it?
Absolutely nothing.
5g is faster for me 5g goes up to 600mbps (in optimal conditions) while 4g won’t go above 150mbps, on average while testing around town 5g is 2x faster than 4g… but the battery drain… it’s another topic ;)
If I remember correctly USB 3.2 Gen 2 has the advantage of being able to transmit video data which USB 3.1 cannot.
So if you have a laptop you could plug in one monitor via HDMI and one monitor via HDMI to USB
@@tudalex Only some 5G places has that kind of speed, while other places would be barely faster than 4G LTE.
Cat 6A 💪💪🔥
One thing that you didn't mention about display port is that it's incredibly easy (and cheap!) to convert to other connections, because the host device does all the conversion. That's such a cool and interesting feature and I'm sad it doesn't get mentioned more.
This is exactly what I like about display port. Besides needing the correct cable, which usually exists for a good price, you can connect to almost any display.
LTT: Does This Connector Even Do Anything?
VGA: Am I a joke to you?
VGA does servers. Which is good, because since it's not digital, if part of the cable is fucked, you do get video (ask me how I know)
LLT: Yes?
@@joshuawaterhousify How do you know . . .😉
It's dead in the personal PC world and dying in the business world, started noticing pretty much all projectors at work are now all HDMI, even a couple DisplayPort ports too
@@savagepro9060 I work with servers, and we've got cables that the colours aren't true ;) thankfully I don't mind a purple flavoured BIOS, so I don't mind getting that one XD
HDMI also has CEC, and while not supported by most GPUs, you can get a passthrough device with a USB connector that let's you communicate back and forth with the TV, so you can navigate using the remote and turn either device on and off from the other.
DisplayPort has the fun little locking tabs which are somehow always in the most uncomfortable position to try and squeeze to remove from the port.
AFAIK these are not part of the spec. Idk why they exist. I hate them and I bought cables without those tabs.
Yep. But the cable stays in the connector when you have a motorized desk. Or just thought you had to put your feet in the cable clutter. 💪🏼
@@EvoKey a zip tie and a bit of cable management would do the same.
Well DisplayPort is not dead at all. It may be on the old big connectors, but on type-C cables is something that is supported by all the laptops. All USB-C accessories, such as monitors, docking stations and dongles use DisplayPort to carry the video signal (that then may be converted to HDMI or VGA).
Also, DisplayPort is used embedded in devices, for example in all laptops in the cable between the motherboard and the display controller. I think part of the reason is that the bare version of the protocol is easier to implement in hardware, plus is royalties free.
Daisy chain DP from monitor to monitor makes cable management so clean with 3 monitors.
What model monitors do you have that have a DP out man?
@@Cyba_IT Three Dell U2419HC.
Connectivity
1 x DP 1.4 (HDCP 1.4)
1 x DP (Out) with MST(HDCP 1.4 )
1 x HDMI1.4 (HDCP 1.4)
1 x USB Type-C (Alternate mode with DisplayPort 1.4, USB 3.1 upstream port, Power Delivery PD up to 65 W)
2 x USB 3.0 downstream port
2 x USB 3.0 with BC1.2 charging capability at 2A (max)
1 x Analog 2.0 audio line out (3.5mm jack)
Also can use just the included USB-C for power/video/data/audio/etc. For a 1 cable solution if you only need 1 monitor.
DP splitters also allow you to have multiple monitors on a single DP port
I use Display Port almost exclusively as I work with CAD software and run CAD graphics cards (they have 4 DP connectors per card mostly).
Personally I find HDMI really annoying since the cables are not captive and can work loose.
I would rather see HDMI retired in place of USB-C
Well, one reason why DisplayPort is not pointless is that it's free, but you have to pay licensing fees to put HDMI ports on your devices. It's $5k per year + some cents per device. Peanuts for a bit corp selling millions of devices per year, but it makes a difference if you're a smaller player.
I think you have to be part of VESA, which will impart some reccuring cost.
But it's probably cheaper, and crucially you don't have to pay per-device etc, which increases margins, and I imagine because of the lack of requirements to pay (and also lack of required copy protection) it's easier in terms of bureaucracy too.
Could you give an example for a device that only uses DP?
Because I can't think of a single device that uses DP but not HDMI.
DisplayPort was actually much more expensive than HDMI at the start. But now it is much more affordable (and HDMI still affordable).
@@Jehty_ The Steam Deck
@@9SMTM6 DisplayPort is an Open Standard. Anyone can use it. I believe it's only if you want to help develop it would need to join VISA but could be wrong.
For me the only significant difference between DisplayPort and HDMI is that all my PC display outputs are DisplayPort, and all my monitor display inputs are HDMI
Yep, when I upgrade my GPU I'm gonna need to buy adapters also.
USB Type C. The dream single port nightmare incarnation that does USB, PCie/ thunderbolt, HDMI, DisplayPort, audio... you got what you wished for with that Monkey's Paw!
What's the monkey's paw aspect here?
It's all USB-C ... but good luck figuring out which features are supported on which device before or even after buying said device
@@YounesLayachi It's also the weakest mechanically.
@@AmartharDrakestone better than type B micro at least
@@YounesLayachi About the same IMO.
DP good, HDMI bad. That's all that you really need to know.
As for ARC/eARC, half the time you're forced to enable crappy HDMI-CEC to get it to work, if you're lucky. And even then it's half-baked as one device typically doesn't support the codecs of the other.
never gotten arc to work with anything but stereo input. google seems to say that this is by design. no 5.1 or 7.1 on arc
Maybe my opinion is unpopular, but with all the confusion around the USB type-c connector and thunderbolt and which ports support which features, I'm kinda glad that HDMI and DP use different connectors.
4:25 'It would be nice to have 1 port that does absolutely everything'
USB-C: 100w charging, displayport, data transfer, network tethering, audio, ....
It even does a bit of pci connectors(thunderbolt)
Not long after I built my first PC in about 2009-ish, I bought a nice 27" Samsung monitor and hooked it up via HDMI - it had an odd issue where the image from the PC was scaled to only about 60% of the monitor's screen space. I messed with it for an hour or so and couldn't figure it out so I switched to DisplayPort and have never used HDMI on my PC's since
Yeah I've had similar issues with HDMI. For some reason I always seem to have issues with the video from my PCs if I use HDMI, but DisplayPort has never had an issue for me.
GPU drivers default to a ton of underscan when using HDMI because most TVs default to an underscanned picture and some don't even allow you to do 1:1 pixel mapping. I had to switch to an Nvidia GPU from AMD once because the AMD drivers wouldn't let me turn off the underscan unless I was using 720p or 1080p when 900p was the sweet spot for me at the time.
DP is also compatible with eDP which is used by almost all modern panels which lets you ditch a level of conversion.
VGA master race 💪💯
No joke, thats my second monitor right now xD VGA ftw
VGA can do HD60, what more can you want?
@@NigelMelanisticSmith I think I tried doing 1080p60 over VGA once, and it was fuzzy.
i have used 2048*1536 on VGA with a IIYAMA PROFESSIONAL CRT, that was good old days
@@dtemp132 that's true. I had a great VGA scaler once that could hand 108060 pretty well though. 72060 is still technically HD aswell
Hands down display port is the best, you won't have to worry about which version you have because they are all pretty damn good.
I just wish everything was either display port or HDMI. I hate having many different ports. Just pick 1, make it awesome and go full out on it.
Most higher end displays only use HDMI and/or DisplayPort. It tends to be older or more budget ones and sometimes lower res panels that have more connectors. My Dell UltraSharp and ViewSonic Elite only have DisplayPort and HDMI for example.
Haha... Reminds me of that "we need a new unified standard" XKCD comic...
@@TalesOfWar my aw3423dw has one displayport and two hdmi ports. My dell s2716dgr has one of each.
On both the hdmi can't do the full refresh rate. 100hz and 60hz, aw3423dw can do 175hz, s2716dgr can do 144hz.
Unfortunately, "being awesome" is somewhere below the bottom of a big corpo's list of must-haves for a product or standard. The top priorities are ensuring lock-in and protecting content like blu-ray media and stuff like that.
Customer satisfaction just isn't in their best interests.
@@danielharvison7510 True, reminds me of video games and DRM and digital only products that lock you out.
I guess we come second, the customers as you said it.
At least the European Union forced everyone to switch to USB C, so thats something.
One point in DisplayPort's favor is that a basic portion of it's functionality is usable without an NDA, which is very much _not_ true of HDMI.
I wish Techquickie wouldn't use clickbait titles. This channel is supposed to answer questions, but the questions in the titles aren't right. I get the clickbait thumbnails, I understand. But the titles on the videos of this channel should be direct, informative and the answer should be in the video.
In this case, "Does this connector even do anything?" should be, "Why does HDMI exist if DisplayPort is better?" or "Why would you need HDMI?"
Same. They seem to change the titles around but that’s just how you get on top of SEO with this audience these days. Gone is the “picture with descriptive text” format of the mid 2010s
HDMI is still good enough, and most elections devices still uses it and it is much easier to plug it and remove it than DP.
And like some people in this comment section had said, it has features when DP doesn't.
Thanks, this is a great overview of the important details between the two. I keep wondering if I'm behind the times because my 2018 G-Sync monitor only gives me the bells & whistles (& G-Sync) when I use DisplayPort - good to know that this is still the case...I'll wait longer before I upgrade so that I can keep everything standardized. And after the days of using Component video hookups, HDMI and ARC was a blessing for home theater!
The video side of HDMI was taken from DVI, and the DVI/HDMI video signal is essentially a digital version of a VGA signal, it sends the image in the form of scan lines of discrete pixels with sync pulses and can drive a CRT display without requiring the monitor to have an (at the time expensive) framebuffer. Basically it's just mimicking the line by line signal format of an analog VGA signal but in digital form. A CRT monitor could take that and decode it into the analog signals needed to drive the CRT with some basic analog to digital conversion of the pixel RGB values. To do something like Displayport on a CRT you'd need to cache the image first but with DVI/HDMI it could just convert the signal on the fly. It's not a particularly effective or sensible way to transmit video when the display is a flat panel (and in fact there never were very many DVI supporting monitors except some very high end ones) but when HDMI was created it was expected that CRT HDTVs would be around for a long while and oh hey here is this already standardized digital video signal format and off the shelf components to implement it why don't we take that and add audio instead of reinventing the wheel?
EDIT: HDMI 2.0 and beyond might be different, I'm talking about HDMI 1.0 which was basically DVI + audio + copy protection.
In the end, most displays don't have display port. So it really just comes down to "can you use display port?"
I see the Editor had fun with the Saber Plug-In for AfterEffects :D
I prefer VGA because it has screws and a nice blue color
Eww. Though oddly, out in the world when there's a shop machine with a display, it's most often VGA. Offices, receptionist stations, etc. Mostly VGA.
They also make a surprisingly effective grappling hook. Seriously, just try to get that untangled.
Display Port has always been superior. That's why I still use DVI.
I'm getting mixed signals
"It would be great if we could just use one port for everything"
USB C has entered the chat
I imagine this is because of the new HDR youtube support but your skin tones in SDR here are at least 1/2 stop down what they're supposed to be and a bit on the magenta side compared to previous videos. 👀👀
I don't know about that. I always notice that when using a tv as an output for a PC that the colours look noticeably different. Hadn't known why, I guess now it's due to the HDMI cables somehow.
@@danielharvison7510 Unless you went through and enabled HDR from Windows, that is probably just your TV colors compared to your monitor. My comment was about their color grading.
Honestly, I can't of two competing products that are this evenly matched in the industry. They both have at least two special moves👍🏾
Another difference is that HDMI is propietary while displayport isn't.
@Ben Abbott if you did you probably noticed that it was not mentioned.
as some others mentioned you didn't going to the lock on the display port connector, in environments where screens get adjusted or are mounted on arms . i can say i defiantly appreciated having locking connectors when I was working IT for a school, our most common display issue was when a hdmi or improperly screwed in vga or dvi cable would work itself loose form people adjusting / moving the screens or if it was on an arm or cart from regular movement
Working in tech... yup. many times having issues with not screwed in connectors (or screwed in, but still not tight), or HDMI which have worked their way loose.
DP > HDMI
1:02 -- lol...
Gotta say I'm *REALLY surprised* to see such an *OLD card* have HDMI already! :O
I've always had a soft spot for DP over HDMI for supporting daisy chaining monitors and being an open standard
One other thing worth noting, is that DP has an optional (but widely supported) part of the spec that allows sending HDMI over DP, allowing for passive DP->HDMI adapters. Doing so in the reverse direction requires an active adapter. This fact is part of why most modern GPUs have a more DP outputs than HDMI outputs, but most monitors with at least 3 digital inputs have more HDMI inputs than DP inputs.
One thing I loved doing when I had my Wii U was (since the Wii U GamePad has a TV control button) controlling play, pause, and volume to mess with my roommate using the GamePad and pretending to be engrossed in my game 🤣
Reminds me of when I rooted my Galaxy S2 and downloaded an app I could use to control any network I was on without the passwords for it. I lived with friends of mine at the time and would just randomly shut off the internet week to week to mess with them lmao they had the cable company come out and everything, it was hilarious. I never told them it was me lol
The WiiU used IR and not HDMI CEC to control the TV.
@@UwePieper True, but through CEC, I could control my Blu-Ray player using my Wii U GamePad since both my TV and Blu-Ray player have that feature, so if I pressed A on my Wii U GamePad while a digital video file was playing through a flash drive on my Blu-Ray player, the video would either pause or play depending on its current state.
@@linkthehero8431 nice.
I have to say I love the concept of HDMI CEC but have it mostly disabled. I use a Logitech Harmony to control my devices and HDMI CEC lead to devices turning on and off unexpectedly or switching to their channels when I turned on their smart sockets. I'd love HDMI CEC with more granular control but I guess my living room setup is a unique mess :D
@@UwePieper At least it's not James Rolfe's nerd room with a whole bunch of electronics plugged in at once.
I've been sold on DisplayPort since switching to exclusively Mini DP cabling on all my systems and monitors. Finally having a quad-port video card that can easily accommodate the ports onboard and doesn't require a proprietary breakout cable is so cool.
so sounds like displayport should be the master but isn't for some reason. It's meant to replace older ports (I am assuming that means some sort of back words compatibility) It outperforms HDMI in throughput, and lastly it has what it does directly in the name. what the heck
Popularity > Perceived Quality.
@@RippahRooJizah Plus it had a foothold longer than DisplayPort.
Riley: But what's the fun in that?!
Thunderbolt: Am I a joke to you?!
Not pointless, I remember buying an Oculus Rift 2 only to realize it uses this connector I’ve never head of, and my PC doesn’t have it. Good stuff!
TVs and more devices should start including at least 1 display port, it's far superior to HDMI and I could see it take over in the future from HDMI
I hope in the future there is only one standard video connetction. I would prefer Usb-C due to compact use of space and for the increasing compatible devices like phones
Since USB can cary a displayport and/or hdmi signal it is already possible. The problem in the future will be if the protocol is supported by both devices connected to the USB and if the cable has enough bandwith for the signal.
@@AndreVanKammen Very interesting point
I'm surprised you didn't mention USB-C. I could be misinformed, but as I understand it, monitors, laptops, phones, etc. that send or transmit video signal do so via "DP-Alt Mode" which, in practice, means a few things:
- USB-C to DisplayPort cables can be bi-directional, whereas if a simple dongle exists for converting HDMI out to USB-C (DP-Alt) in, I've yet to find it
- Some devices, like the 2018 MacBook Pro I use for work, only support higher resolutions over DisplayPort--connect it to an external screen via an HDMI adapter and say goodbye to 4K
- The fact that USB-C carries data as well means that many portable monitors can get signal and power from a single port... as long as it's a USB-C cable using DP-Alt mode
My beef with Displayport is its difficulty in differentiate between a turned off and an absent monitor. In my last job I had a laptop with an external monitor connected with Displayport and every time it was either turned off or entered rest mode, my laptop would think it was disconnected and moved all the windows to the main screen. It was very hard to keep things organized this way.
That is probably down to the powersaving feature of said monitor
Well, the last GPU generation (20 series from 2018) didn't even support hdmi 2.1. So you had to use DP if you wanted more than 144hz at 1440p or more than 60hz 4k.
My monitor does not show anything. Am I using a Non-Display Port?
Have you tried turning it off and on again?
@@Amfibios it's a joke😅🤣😂. But thanks anyway!
Through it away and get a new one
@@savagepro9060 gotcha 😆 ua-cam.com/video/nn2FB1P_Mn8/v-deo.html
To be honest I have to commend these guys for doing the work and helping us to understand the whats and whys of tech. I mean me, a Computer Science graduate still has things to understand, and all of these videos help. I don’t know if I can speak on behalf of everyone, but keep up the good work!
Well, the CS curriculum isn't about learning everything about computers, it's usually more about information theory(aka computation and algorithms). A lot of my friends who majored in CS would probably not know much, if anything, about hardware. I am sure many of my former professors don't know much about this either unless technology is a big hobby of theirs.
I use my display port over hdmi every time lol
00:16 There's the problem right there. "Let's each do our own thing so customers have to have 2 ports and 2 different cables!"
_What a great idea! I sure do love having clutter and multiple cables that do almost the same thing. I sure am a highly technical engineer who can foresee these issues._
Common sense was never a factor in the equation. All it does is lead to arguments "I like this one more!" cluttering up the comments and cables cluttering up my room. Why would anyone want that?
I learned the hard way that G-Sync only works on DP. but hey! I finally know what ARC is!
irrelevant features
@@Sven_x ?
“Hitl-”
my sleep deprived brain: “What?”
“-ike”
Me: “Oh…”
I still prefer Display Port over HDMI.
I've always wondered the differences, thank you for this!
I can't belief you guys left out the most important feature of display port. There are no display port generations, meaning there does not exist dp 1.1 cables being slower than dp 1.2. The speed completely depends on the end ports which means you never need to upgrade your cables. Cables made 10 years ago are still viable today.
Makes me question if you guys did your research only by looking up wikipedia
If HDMI cables are different in this context, then what is the difference? How can you arrange 20 wires differently from generation to generation? It's the same thing - completely depends on the end ports.
@@1loshvitalik dp cables do not have generations, HDMI cables have generations, this is the difference I'm pointing out. The point is you do not need to buy new cables when you upgrade your equipment.
You are the one not making any sense.
@@AzarathGirl123 so you mean that HDMI 1.4 cable will not work with HDMI 2.0 hardware using HDMI 2.0 capabilities, even though it's the same cable internally, just marked differently?
To be clear, I'm not talking about extra shielding, better EMI suppression, certification, etc., because it all varies independently of generations. You can easily get a cheap bad 2.0 cable that will not work with new equipment, and a good quality 1.4 cable will work absolutely fine.
And I know about differences in standard, high speed and 'with Ethernet' cables, but 1) that's not generations, this describes a variety of features and 2) most cables today are high speed with Ethernet anyway, which is just one below the highest category.
@@1loshvitalik 1.4hdmi cable will bottleneck 2.0hdmi devices, it will work but you are not getting your money's worth.
Dp cables will never bottleneck even if the cable is from 20years ago
Nuff said
@@AzarathGirl123 then why my cheap 5m 1.4 cable works with 4k/60hz? And why cables that I buy are described on the website as '2.0 spec for 0.3-3m, 1.4 spec for 3-10m', while all of them are exactly the same physically?
What's the bottleneck in video cables? They work or they don't at all. If you consider signal dropout, black screen flashing as bottleneck - well, I'm experiencing this even with 1080p/60hz (that's probably about 1.0 spec) on a bad 1m 1.4 cable.
10K resolution? Good luck finding a TV like that for a low price. I very seriously doubt that there is a good one like that which doesn't cost as much as a house!
It's like comparing SAS and SATA.
DP is the gold standard. Apart from ARC, all other metrics are better, including the ability yo carry analog video signal, absent in hdmi.
You can convert/adapt a DP to an hdmi, but you cant convert an hdmi to a DP without severely reducing its abilities
Since I game primarily on the PC, I only use displayport. Like dual link dvi, it's biggest downside is it's local store price. Walmart charges almost $30 for a 3-foot cable and that sucks
Like others have said, an important difference you forgot to mention is the difference in licensing between DisplayPort and HDMI. HDMI requires a license fee/royalty to be paid by the device manufacturer.
Also the thing about HDMI is that it is licensed and you have to pay if you are selling a product that uses it (motherboards, graphics cards, monitors etc.). As far as I know, the display port doesn't.
Well, after the HDMI 2.1 debacle and all the issues I've had with DRM over HDMI in the past it's no surprise that I've considered HDMI to be completely pointless for some time now.
The screen tearing effect when you were talking about screen tearing was a nice touch
6 Video suggestions
1. Set a stream to start on April Fool's day but you let people come comment on the stream since 2 days prior. On April 1st sometime after lunch cut the stream and blame it on Linus tripping on the camera or something.
2. Introduction to Raspberry Pi with Linus and his Kidos.
It will show that anyone can get into Pi and Linus gets Video time and a activity with his Kidos.
3. A day in the shoes of Linus.
A 5-10 minute video in 3rd person view of Linus from getting up to going to bed.
4. A Game tournament hosted by Riley and James.
Just like they do for Super Smash Bros but LTT style.
5. Bring back Pc Build off!!!!!
Linus and Jake/Anthony team up with 2 Contestants to build PC's
Winner takes the pc they build home, the looser gets a pre-built pc.
6. Ask Micro Center to host a contest where people guess the number of Jellybeans in a huge jar and wait 3 days. The Winner gets to build a PC on site with a LTT member of their choice.
HDMI is like USB Keyboards, works everywhere, plug & play,
DisplayPort is like PS/2 Keyboards. doesn't work everywhere. but when it works. Perfection.
You really have to work at 'accidentally' disconnecting a locking Display Port cable compared to a @#$% HDMI cable...
On the flip side, a lot of monitors gives you very little leverage to press the button so you can damage the socket pushing the release button.
not really since most DP cables don't have those annoying AF locking tabs
@@FhangMedia I know they exist, but in 15 years+ in IT, I've never seen a non-locking DP cable outside of a catalog. YMMV.
@@darthbonobo I've had the exact opposite experience, I've had dozens of DP cables from different brands and not 1 of them ever had locks, yet I've had multiple HDMI cables that have had locks, usually from the manufacturer of a monitor, TV, or even DVD/bluray player, those all went straight in the trash.
Display port has 4 data lanes for video. It could work with 1 lane only, at reduced performance. This is why DP can run multiple monitors.
HDMI has also 4 lanes, but they are for red, green, blue and clock, so it functions mor like analog monitor with digital signals.
3:22 I have never seen a monitor that uses DP daisy chaining.
Mostly used with the professional monitors that are stupidly priced. Other than those, I haven't either.
@@Apollo-Computers Most Dell Ultrasharp's support it like the entry model U2422H which is $350 USD right now.
"It would be nice if we could have one port for everything" - you mean like, perhaps, the USB-C DisplayPort Alternate Mode?