Print 49 comment(s) - last by Cunthor01.. on May 23 at 2:44 AM

Count in ATI, NVIDIA, Philips, Samsung and more

Several weeks ago DailyTech reported about all the big manufacturers joining together to support DisplayPort, the next major standard in digital display interfaces. Consumers are more than just slightly frustrated about the number of potential standards. Besides, Dell, HP and Lenovo, graphics companies are now vouching support for DisplayPort.

ATI spoke to reporters this week and confirmed that it will be developing GPUs with DisplayPort support. Graphics chips with the new standard will start to be introduced sometime in early 2007 says ATI. Currently, companies that design transmitters, such as Silicon Image are also working on DisplayPort-compliant devices.

Besides ATI, NVIDIA has also put in its support for DisplayPort. Other consumer electronics companies such Philips and Samsung are also supporting the new standard. ATI representatives say DisplayPort will become the next major standard due to its high-bandwidth and low latency capabilities. Technically, DisplayPort takes on some other features of HDMI, which is based on DVI but also has lines to carry a multi-channel audio signal. DisplayPort too will also be able to carry audio as well as a high-bandwidth signal that will be able to display an image with a higher resolution than even dual-link DVI (2560x1600).

DailyTech previously reported about the new UDI standard which is suppose to replace DVI, and several other interfaces. UDI was last reported to be the next design that would unify digital displays interfaces. So far however, it appears as though DisplayPort has the majority support from the industry.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Just as useless as HDMI
By GatorLCA on 5/21/2006 10:31:16 PM , Rating: 3
I don't get why all these companies are backing these cables that transmit Audio and Video. I mean most people who buy HDTV's typically have Home Theater systems and have to use other inputs for sound. The same goes with PC users, most use a sound card. This technology is useless to the average PC user since many have external speakers for their PC that use either Onboard sound or a sound card. Yeah it's good if the monitor has speakers on it, but most don't.

I can understand the content protection but we already have that, it's called DVI-D. I can understand hardware requirements updating but not requiring a monitor upgrade.

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By TheBaker on 5/21/2006 11:18:37 PM , Rating: 2
I agree wholeheartedly! It has baffled me since the first announcements for HDMI as to why they would include audio and video on the same cable. I mean really, who has a $2,000 - $10,000 TV and doesn't have a surround system? Does that mean I have to use HDMI solely for the video portion of the stream? And then add a toslink to my receiver? WTF? Who asked for this, and why was it ever approved? Did the RIAA and MPAA get together and decide to fark the end-users?

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By Lakku on 5/21/2006 11:38:29 PM , Rating: 2
Because it is much easier to have one cable for digital audio and video. Cable boxes and stand alone DVD, BD, and HD-DVD players are good examples. All of them do digital audio and video, but why would you want a fiber cable along with component or DVI cables, when you can have all of that plus some on a single cable? As such, newer audio standards that will be a lot less compressed or lossless are coming soon, and those require 6 to 10 times the bandwidth of current audio standards. While I am sure fiber can handle it, why not just put it all on one high bandwidth connector?

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By GatorLCA on 5/21/2006 11:40:36 PM , Rating: 2
ummm....mainly because NO home theater receivers on the market have HDMI inputs or outputs

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By Tuanies on 5/22/2006 12:19:58 AM , Rating: 2
You sure about that? I can name about a dozen home theater recievers with HDMI--Panasonic XR-57, XR-70, Pioneer Elite 74TX, 72TX, Denon 2807, 3806, 5805, Onkyo 803, and more:

And HDMI carries audio so you can get 6-channel PCM for DVD-Audio and SACD instead of having to run 6 analog RCA cables.

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By PreOmegaZero on 5/22/2006 12:22:26 AM , Rating: 2
ummm....mainly because NO home theater receivers on the market have HDMI inputs or outputs

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By CKDragon on 5/22/2006 1:18:59 AM , Rating: 2
Just as the other two have pointed out... I spent 1 minute on (of all places) and found this:

So I'm sure if a watered down place like that has an HDMI in/out receiver, the REAL tech stores have got them out the ying yang.


RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By probedb on 5/22/2006 5:04:28 AM , Rating: 2
Err they've been on high-end stuff for a while now and are available on much more mainstream receivers now! Keep up, technology advances you know!

Having both is good for those of us that connect our video sources into our amp which then does the switching between inputs. Having one cable between the source and the amp and then one between the amp and display is much better!

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By abhaxus on 5/23/2006 2:07:46 AM , Rating: 2
I can't tell you the number of people I have sold 42-50" HD plasmas to who do not own home theater systems and have no desire to get them. The number is similar to the number of people who complain about buying widescreen TVs and wish that large flat panels and microdisplays were made in 4:3 aspect ratio...

consumers are idiots. on one hand you have the ones that resist changes that are good (surround sound, widescreen TVs, which make your media experience more immersive) and on the other you have those that go off the deep end and believe everything they read about ridiculously priced bose audio and monster and honestly think that is the best on the market.

i will always have a special place in my heart for the guy that dropped 2 grand on a simple energy audio system, and asked me "well i know it isn't bose but is it close?"

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By nrb on 5/22/2006 9:22:36 AM , Rating: 3
I don't get why all these companies are backing these cables that transmit Audio and Video.
Well, they aren't, really. HDMI is important for three reasons:

1) With the advent of high-definition video, you have to have a digital video transmission standard that supports HDCP encryption, otherwise none of the movie studios would ever actually release any high-definition content. So you'd have to switch to something besides DVI, even if it's only DVI+HDCP.

2) HDMI is considerably more resilient than DVI: you can make the cables longer, for example, without messing up the signal. Single-link DVI hits its useable limit at 1920x1200, and some DVI devices aren't too happy even at 1920x1080 (as some Nvidia graphics cards owners have discovered); so, with 1080p video in the offing (even if it's only the output from games consoles) you'd have to switch to [b]something[/b] else just to make it rugged enough.

3) S/PDIF cannot handle high-definition audio formats: there simply isn't enough bandwidth. This problem already exists with DVD-Audio and SACD: you can't send the digital data from a DVD-A disc to a multi-channel audio processor over S/PDIF. You have to use something like Meridian's MHR Smartlink, or Firewire (or HDMI). The same will apply to the next-generation audio formats used for movie soundtracks on BluRay and HD-DVD discs: S/PDIF simply won't cut it any more. So you need to change to [b]some[/b] other high-bandwidth digital audio link, and preferably one that supports encryption.

So, bascially, you need a new digital video connection anyway, and you need a new digital audio connection anyway; given that you need both, is it actually a [b]bad[/b] thing to push both of them through a single connector rather than introducing two new standards instead?

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By Araemo on 5/22/2006 10:22:29 AM , Rating: 2
sorry, but I don't buy Argument 1.

That was one of the major arguments for CSS encryption on DVDs. That studios wouldn't release high quality digital copies of their movies because they could be easily copied. Hence CSS. CSS was broken YEARS ago, but that hasn't slowed down DVD releases one bit.

Encryption isn't there so that they're willing to make/release/sell the content. It's there so they can force you to buy it multiple times(Once for your TV, once for your ipod, once for your car, once for your cell phone... got it?)

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By themelon on 5/22/2006 10:55:16 AM , Rating: 2
Not only that but if you are just talking about video there is no difference between what DVI and HDMI support. They both support HDCP and they both use the same TMDS signaling and have the same distance limitations. The only difference is that HDMI can carry multi-channel audio over the same cable and it is a different connector. From what I have seen it is a pretty poor connector at that.

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By bob661 on 5/22/2006 12:42:44 PM , Rating: 2
S/PDIF cannot handle high-definition audio formats
You mean DD or DTS isn't high def audio? What's high def audio?

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By ArneBjarne on 5/22/2006 1:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm lets see,

Dolby Digital vs. Dolby Digital TrueHD

and your asking whether or not the former are considered to be high def. I can certainly see how this is a tough nut to crack.

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By bob661 on 5/22/2006 3:05:42 PM , Rating: 2
Dolby Digital TrueHD
Looks like I need to do some reading. Thanks for the info.

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By bob661 on 5/22/2006 3:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
Dolby Digital TrueHD
Looks like I need to do some reading. Thanks for the info.

RE: Just as useless as HDMI
By brystmar on 5/22/2006 4:17:01 PM , Rating: 2
interesting fact: DD5.1 actually samples at a lower rate per channel (and doesn't sound as good) as CDs (16/44.1), even though DD is about 10 years newer than the redbook CD standard!

real HD audio is high-res SACD or DVD-Audio, which samples at 24/96 or 24/192. and i really hate how alot of new audio chips are calling themselves "HD Audio" when they actually aren't. they're just drawing on the success and popularity of HDTV to market their new products (along with the technical ignorance of the average consumer).

"HD" is the new buzzword
By Cunthor01 on 5/23/2006 2:44:13 AM , Rating: 2
... for this year. Last year it was anything with an "X" before the name, or somewhere in the sentance, and year before was the little 'i' (iPeed, or mac anything for that matter). Wonder what other stupid word will surface next...? Any takers?

people shouldn't change port standards
By Missing Ghost on 5/21/2006 11:27:57 PM , Rating: 2
I don't understand why they want this.
I still use rca jacks and vga ports!

RE: people shouldn't change port standards
By SteelyKen on 5/21/2006 11:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
Content "protection", I imagine.

RE: people shouldn't change port standards
By Burning Bridges on 5/22/2006 7:11:09 AM , Rating: 2
BS - HDMI has that already.

RE: people shouldn't change port standards
By Nobody Else on 5/22/2006 11:18:13 AM , Rating: 2
"DisplayPort", says ATI, "will become the next major standard due to its high-bandwidth and low latency capabilities."

By Nobody Else on 5/22/2006 11:19:32 AM , Rating: 2
Oops. That was supposed to go under the "Question" post below.

More proof that mistakes can be made.

By Wwhat on 5/22/2006 9:26:26 AM , Rating: 2
HDMI is a trick of the HDMI-group to cash in on a new connector, displayport is the actual manufacturers making their own more practical version without license fees and permission from the HDMI-group idiots, it's a good thing for it will make devices cheaper by have a standard that isn't designed to make money for the HDMI group.

As for audio, yes it will prevent a mess of cables and even if a displaydevice doesn't have 6.1 audio it could simply loop out the audio to a audiosystem nearby, plus using the audiopart is optional so if it doesn't harm but in the future benefits you why complain?

As for why a new cable: time is moving on, HDTV is taking over the world and you want an established connector that's small and easy and consumerfriendly (also a reason why it has audio) and can handle high resolutions, in the end your mom and grandad should be able to hook things up themselves by plugging in one connector and a powercable you see.

Stop the madness!!!
By zombiexl on 5/21/2006 9:49:16 PM , Rating: 3
I would have to buy a new TV every freakin 3 years just so I can keep up. I thik if they are going for the next standard that they better make it the last for a while.

Consumer electronics shouldn't need to be replaced as often as PC's.

RE: Stop the madness!!!
By dhei on 5/21/2006 10:04:30 PM , Rating: 2
The Singularity is coming.

RE: Stop the madness!!!
By zombiexl on 5/22/2006 11:14:34 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah that nice.. Too f%$@@# bad many of us already have expensive tv's and equipent thats nit close to the end of its life, but is obsolete.

Again, I expect this in computers but its complete BS in consumer electronics.

RE: Stop the madness!!!
By zombiexl on 5/22/2006 11:20:11 AM , Rating: 2
Speaking of new technology.. Can we get some of that new technology here.
I think its called umm.. a spell checker or something like that :).

What is wrong with HDMI?
By Cunthor01 on 5/22/2006 1:33:02 AM , Rating: 2
I thought the new and cool standard to be is HDMI?? What the hell is the difference between this and HDMI?

And also, couldn't high end stereo speakers use Firewire as their audio carrying connections?

By Dev17 on 5/22/2006 1:35:14 AM , Rating: 1
frutrated? frustrated perhaps?

RE: What is wrong with HDMI?
By jkresh on 5/22/2006 1:44:28 AM , Rating: 2
I think they may feel that they borked hdm, too many versions that aren’t necessarily compatible with each other and displayport may turn into what hdmi was supposed to be (or it may be that display port will be more for pc's and hdmi will stay on the CE side). HDMI through 1.1 (most current sets) cant handle 1080p, 1.3 is supposed to fix this, but there are some questions (or at least were) if a 1.3hdmi device could properly connect with a 1.1...

RE: What is wrong with HDMI?
By DigitalFreak on 5/22/2006 8:49:52 AM , Rating: 2
"HDMI through 1.1 (most current sets) cant handle 1080p"

Since the sets that have v1.1 can't display a 1080p image, I'm not sure this matters. The native 1080p sets on the market now have HDMI 1.2, which supports 1080p.

I think the biggest reason that Display Port is being pushed is that there is a $0.15 royalty on each HDMI device sold.

I would rather prefer...
By Xavian on 5/22/2006 7:31:50 AM , Rating: 2
I would rather prefer a standard thats supported by all major graphics card vendors and large consumer electronics companies. Then a standard thats supported by the content (read: MPAA/RIAA) industry, the consumer electronics and graphics industries know what they are doing, the content providers do not (especially when it comes to complex electronic standards).

So displayPort gets my support and i would like HDMI AND HDCP grounded into dust within the next few years, never to be heard of again :p imho HDCP should never have been allowed to developer because it seriously destroys any form of choice the consumer gets (buy our HDMI and HDCP TV or you will get a crappy/no picture on your shiny new HD-DVD/Blu-ray player!)

i wondered why nvidia and ATI were so slow to support HDMI.. i guess we now know why ;)

RE: I would rather prefer...
By Xavian on 5/22/2006 7:32:30 AM , Rating: 2
developer = develop, whoops

RE: I would rather prefer...
By Wwhat on 5/22/2006 9:28:29 AM , Rating: 2

Difficult to understand....
By Trisped on 5/22/2006 12:20:09 PM , Rating: 2
DisplayPort, says ATI, will become the next major standard due to its high-bandwidth and low latency capabilities.
When I first read it I thought DisplayPort was talking about ATI. If quote markes were used or the sentence was phrased differently it would be easier to read.

"DisplayPort," says ATI, "will become the next major standard due to its high-bandwidth and low latency capabilities."

By KristopherKubicki on 5/22/2006 12:24:15 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Difficult to understand....
By glennpratt on 5/22/2006 1:58:18 PM , Rating: 2
Of course that would have been incorrect since the comma's take care of possesion. Also, quotes would only work if this were an actual quote and not a paraphrase.

What interests me more
By KHysiek on 5/22/2006 2:09:16 AM , Rating: 2
if AT/NVidia will integrate sound capabilities to their graphics chips. This should be quite easy and require very low number of additional transistors comparing to graphics functionality in current chips.

RE: What interests me more
By probedb on 5/22/2006 5:05:14 AM , Rating: 2
The only HDMI card that does this just has an internal s/pdif connector to pass sound through from the sound card/onboard sound as far as I'm aware.

By Xorp on 5/22/2006 2:10:38 AM , Rating: 2
This is a terrible idea. I was hoping all industries would combine under HDMI so to reduce customer confusion. Ha, what was I thinking…

RE: bad
By fungry on 5/22/2006 5:33:55 AM , Rating: 2
haha i can't agree anymore... there are so many ports and lines these days that even some tech sites are putting up Plugs and Wires 101 lolz... i mean seroiusly, it would be great if everyone just changes into one standardized format. makes life easier BUT it does cost a hella load of money :(

In regards to HDCP
By Wwhat on 5/22/2006 7:17:21 PM , Rating: 2
I came across this article:
Studios won't downgrade HD video... for now
Posted May 22nd 2006 10:46AM by Marc Perton

If you've been holding off on ordering (or pre-ordering) an HD DVD or Blu-ray player because you're worried about Hollywood studios potentially using the Image
Constraint Token to downgrade video quality displayed via analog outputs, you can cross that concern
off of your list -- at least for the next four years.
Though there's no official word, the major studios have apparently cut a backroom deal to keep their HD discs ICT-free until at least 2010.
The move would allow owners of analog HD sets -- not to mention gamers who pick up Microsoft's Xbox 360 HD DVD drive
or Sony's non-HDMI junior Playstation 3 -- to watch their discs in full HD format, rather than being forced to endure downgrades to 540p.
Of course, even if the unconfirmed agreement exists, after 2010 all bets are off.

brilliantly evil
By Eris23007 on 5/22/2006 8:50:44 PM , Rating: 2

Wow, how Machiavellian... give the customers just long enough to ensure your format has time to catch on due to all the new devices out in the wild, then once they've bought enough discs to make things self-sustaining, turn on the ICT and make them buy all new equipment.

By wackypete on 5/21/2006 11:23:31 PM , Rating: 2
should i wait?

So whats to become of hdmi?
By shabby on 5/21/2006 11:25:21 PM , Rating: 2
Will you be able to watch hdcp content through display port?

All about the $$$$$$
By squeezee on 5/22/2006 7:04:21 AM , Rating: 2
I should point out that the PRIMARY reason companies are interested in DisplayPort is that there are no royalties involved. DVI, HDMI and likely UDI all require royalties to be paid to implement them in a product.

Another "supported" interface?
By Tanclearas on 5/22/2006 9:18:22 AM , Rating: 2
ATI and Nvidia "support" HDCP too, right? Their support is pretty meaningless I would think.

By CrossFusion on 5/21/2006 11:57:30 PM , Rating: 1
From the aricle: "DisplayPort, says ATI will become the next major standard due to its high-bandwidth and low latency capabilities."

Name mix-up? or some death wish on nVidia =o

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins
Related Articles

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki