Widescreen Gaming Forum

Well, if finally comes out, you need to have an ACTIVE adapter, which really isn't a $20 device, it's more like $100+.

We messaged to reviewers from the outset that passive adapters will not operate. This has been clear in the communication that we've given.

So basically, as I understand it, it comes down to a couple things:
-HDMI is less capable than DP
-HDMI is more expensive than DP to implement
-DP has a much brighter future in computer displays than HDMI

More or less this is essentially correct. There is a bigger general, industry, argument over DP and HDMI but as far as I'm concerned that aregument is a little pointless - do we have the same argument over DVI and HDMI? No. Simple fact is that DP is taking up from where DVI left off and PC's will continue to evolve with this; likelyhood is that we will still include HDMI for a long time to come and follow the features that are relevant to PC's as well; for PC focused features (like Eyefinity), though, DP will be the way to go.

Dave, is there a limitation to the resolution that one single DP port can push? I can't help but believe that at some point in the future, a very large, wrap around panel is going to emerge, and we'll look back at multi-display systems and chuckle. Will DP be able to handle this kind of resolution with just one port?

Dave, is there a limitation to the resolution that one single DP port can push? I can't help but believe that at some point in the future, a very large, wrap around panel is going to emerge, and we'll look back at multi-display systems and chuckle. Will DP be able to handle this kind of resolution with just one port?

Yes, there is an upper bound, and that will always be the case. Currently the link bandwidth is 2.7Gbps/s per lane an there are four lanes. IIRC this is sufficient to drive higher than the current panels do; I think this is able to drive 2560x1600 at 10-bit color (I may need to confirm that).

However, as we've said a few times DP is a technology with a future so the current bandwidths will not necessarily stay the upper cap. VESA have already disclosed some of the specifications for DP1.2 (we are currently at v1.1) and its worthwhile taking a look at slides 18-21 here:

http://www.displayport.org/cms/sites/default/files/DP_CES_v3_09.pdf

Basically the DP1.2 spec doubles the upper bound of bandwidth and adds multi-stream capabilities. So, either very large resolution / bit depth displays can be supported or multiple smaller ones (two 2560x1600 or four 1920x1200) can be supported off a single physical output. So, yes, this makes the feasibility of what you talk about very high. If a panel vendor can find a way of removing the side bezels then it would acutally lower the cost to support a single very wide display by making the displays in 3 or 4 smaller panel sections and then driving them all via multi-stream.

If a panel vendor can find a way of removing the side bezels then it would acutally lower the cost to support a single very wide display by making the displays in 3 or 4 smaller panel sections and then driving them all via multi-stream.

Now this I can see being the future of not just Eyefinity, but everything, including TV's....

_________________
Professional... well I'll figure that out.



"I sense something, a presence I've not felt since......."

Dave, is there a limitation to the resolution that one single DP port can push? I can't help but believe that at some point in the future, a very large, wrap around panel is going to emerge, and we'll look back at multi-display systems and chuckle. Will DP be able to handle this kind of resolution with just one port?

The math is pretty straightforward (using DP1.1's 8.64Gb/s data rate):

[list][*]Assuming 8bit per sub-pixel for RGB (24b/p), (8.64Gb/s) / (24b/p) = 360Mp/s[/*:m]
[*]Assuming 60Hz (a typical panel refresh rate), (360Mp/s) / (60/s) = 6Mp/frame[/*:m][/list:u]

Assuming a 16:9 aspect ratio that works out to something on the order of 3264H 1836V. You can play around and figure out other resolutions and refresh rates. DP1.1 won't drive an IBM T221 DG5 at the 48Hz refresh rate.

This is completely theoretical and doesn't deal with instantaneous pixel rates, buffering, blanking periods, etc. all the stuff associated with refreshing a display, thus the usable resolution in today's displays is less than theoretical. In theory (again) a DP monitor could be designed to use virtually all of the bits...

DP1.2 will blow all this away since it doubles the data rate.

If anyone knows of a good wrap-around display, I'd like to hear about.

Meanwhile for interesting stuff take a look at http://web.media.mit.edu/~mhirsch/bidi/