this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
36 points (86.0% liked)
Gaming
19801 readers
152 users here now
Sub for any gaming related content!
Rules:
- 1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
- 2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
- 3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
First off: cables don't have version numbers. The host and the client have ports that adhere to a certain spec and the HDMI foundation made that very unclear by incorporating 2.0b into 2.1 and now not every 2.1 port supports the same things. Cables are defined by their max bandwidth, i.e. high speed, ultra high speed or high speed with ethernet. You might see marketers saying something is a 2.1 cable, that just means it is capable of supporting some or all of the 2.1 spec.
Second: the only reason to get new HDMI cables, like you said, is if you currently have a very old one and have devices that actually make use of the bandwidth. And I'll tell you right now, most of the high speed cables will do just fine. It's when you start doing 8k120 with HDR and VRR with eARC you'll need heftier cables. The only external devices to support that, though, are either supplied with cables because their makers don't want you bottlenecking your device, or they are PCs.
Third: the only reason HDMI is even a thing is because this joint venture behind it successfully lobbied their inferior product to TV manufacturers. DisplayPort has always been and will always be the better interface for video.
Yes, and this is unironically a problem. I am frankly happy to see this push just so I don't have to find out that the video issue I've been troubleshooting for the last 2 hours was due to a cable that's marked the same as any other cable happens to have half the bandwidth as some other arbitrary one.
Fuck HDMI. All my homies hate HDMI.
DisplayPort gang rise up
I have a 4k120hz gaming monitor and I have some HDMI cables that don’t support that quality.
I also just use DisplayPort because it’s better anyway (e.g. lower latency).
While I almost completely agree with you, never underestimate the power of using the right tool for the right job. HDMI is actually far more resilient to signal corruption in my experience than display port since it implements TMDS and the cables are more commonly well shielded since they expect them to be used in device dense environments, which isn't really applicable to anyone familiar with technology (don't group up your cables next to something with significant RF noise/leaks, duh.) but does matter for the end user use case these see. The fees hdmi charge are a scam though fr and we could ask better from the industry.
What are the symptoms of an hdmi cable having too little bandwidth?
Mostly unable to make use of certain features. Say your display supports 4k @ 120Hz. If you have an improper cable you might be able to get 4k30 or 4k60, but not 4k120.