E: I keep getting the same replies. No, TVs do not typically have DisplayPort. But they’ll run HDMI 2.0 just fine. The only reason you’d need 2.1 is for 4k/120Hz+ TVs, which are a niche of a niche (running Linux on a high Hz “TV”).
Lots of high-end but not top-end monitors have HDMI as their highest-bandwidth port, so don’t get the maximum picture quality over DP. 240Hz UHD monitors are relatively common these days.
while its not correct, a major thing about the steam machine is that its supposed to function as a console as well as a PC meaning that you would be required to use HDMI for one of the major use cases which 2.1 would be useful for
Going to currys.co.uk, the bog standard TV shop of the UK.
Filtering by 4K resolution.
There are more 120Hz TVs than 60Hz TVs.
Not only are they not rare, they’re now the norm.
120Hz panels were actually quite commonplace before HDMI 2.1 came out, they just lacked fast enough ports to get the signal in. My TV is 9 years old, and happily runs 120Hz at 1080p.
They used to be, but I’ve been browsing them recently and there is a decent selection that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg. They have VRR as well, which is the one feature that I’d like to have for couch gaming.
If the hardware specs support it, I want to be able to do it. End of fuckin story. If they sell me a thing I don’t want to be told how I cannot use it. It’s not about what you think I need it for and it’s that exact attitude that allows this shit to exist.
No, what allows this to exist is consumer complacency. If people refused to buy HDMI devices, they couldn’t sell them, and they’d stop making them. And then just everyone would use DisplayPort, which is the objectively superior standard anyway.
LG C series OLED in particular is a popular choice as a gaming display, no displayport on those puppies. I got one myself because it was actually a better deal compared to a similar OLED monitor.
I’m not sure what you mean. I think all TVs should have displayport, since regardless of what model it is, people also like plugging their pc into the living room tv for couch gaming. I just mentioned the C series as an example because they’re popular with desk gamers. Alternatively, having hdmi 2.1 support would be another solution, and seems more feasible than trying to get tv manufacturers to put displayport on their TVs, because they refuse to do it for some reason.
I mean there are very very few people using TVs like yours.
because they refuse to do it for some reason.
The reason is money (as always). The TV manufacturers all got together and formed the HDMI consortium and then decided they were only going to use these ports on their devices, and then charge any OEM a fee for the privilege of connecting to them.
Why are you so against this? Just because it’s a smaller group of people that needs this feature it’s not worth implementing, and the people that need it can just suck a fat one? Also, assuming technology keeps advancing, wanting more than 4k60 output isn’t going to be a rare request as time moves on.
Just use DisplayPort 🤷
E: I keep getting the same replies. No, TVs do not typically have DisplayPort. But they’ll run HDMI 2.0 just fine. The only reason you’d need 2.1 is for 4k/120Hz+ TVs, which are a niche of a niche (running Linux on a high Hz “TV”).
Lots of high-end but not top-end monitors have HDMI as their highest-bandwidth port, so don’t get the maximum picture quality over DP. 240Hz UHD monitors are relatively common these days.
That’s nice, but most TVs do not have DisplayPort, erm, ports.
Gross, no
Not a bad idea, but some devices that ship with Linux don’t ship with a DP port. Having options is never a bad thing.
What devices?
The upcoming Steam Machine, for starters.
That’s not correct.
while its not correct, a major thing about the steam machine is that its supposed to function as a console as well as a PC meaning that you would be required to use HDMI for one of the major use cases which 2.1 would be useful for
Almost no one will be connecting their Steam Machine to a 4k/120Hz TV.
You do realize that all modern support upscaled 4k at 120hz right and the steam machine is directly competeing with these console.
Most people don’t have a tv capable of outputting this but newer tvs do support higher frame rates for reasons like high frame rate gaming
Hdmi 2.1 will be important for future proofing
I do not understand this word salad.
Yes, very expensive high end ones that very few people are buying. And always will, because they’re niche products.
Modern Lenovo ThinkPads. My E480 has an HDMI port. While there is also a USB-C port, it’s also a charging port so I can’t use it for video feed
I doubt your E480 even supports HDMI 2.1…
You can use USBC for power and video simultaneously.
You asked for devices which can run Linux without a DisplayPort though, and a lot of modern ThinkPads don’t have DisplayPort ports
Context, my friend.
Pretty much all modern laptops have DisplayPort over USB-C.
I got a few sbc:s that only got hdmi out, but they are all older.
Have you ever heard of a television?
What Linux device are you plugging into a TV that necessitates HDMI 2.1?
HTPCs
HTPCs will do just fine with 2.0
A gaming rig that can run 4K/120?
4k/120 TVs are extremely rare.
They’re really not.
They really are
Going to currys.co.uk, the bog standard TV shop of the UK.
Filtering by 4K resolution.
There are more 120Hz TVs than 60Hz TVs.
Not only are they not rare, they’re now the norm.
120Hz panels were actually quite commonplace before HDMI 2.1 came out, they just lacked fast enough ports to get the signal in. My TV is 9 years old, and happily runs 120Hz at 1080p.
They used to be, but I’ve been browsing them recently and there is a decent selection that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg. They have VRR as well, which is the one feature that I’d like to have for couch gaming.
Can you show me?
German webshop with prices including 19 % sales tax.
https://www.alternate.de/Alle-Fernseher/Gaming-TV?t=30843&s=price_asc
At a quick glance, I believe the category includes screens with at least 100 Hz refresh rate. Plenty of options between 500 and 1000 EUR.
If the hardware specs support it, I want to be able to do it. End of fuckin story. If they sell me a thing I don’t want to be told how I cannot use it. It’s not about what you think I need it for and it’s that exact attitude that allows this shit to exist.
No, what allows this to exist is consumer complacency. If people refused to buy HDMI devices, they couldn’t sell them, and they’d stop making them. And then just everyone would use DisplayPort, which is the objectively superior standard anyway.
How many TVs these days have DisplayPort? Should steam machine owners only play on monitors?
Depends on how you define a TV. But not many. For the reasons I stipulated in the comment you replied to.
That’s really cool but what about supporting hardware that people already own is bad?
Who said it was bad?
LG C series OLED in particular is a popular choice as a gaming display, no displayport on those puppies. I got one myself because it was actually a better deal compared to a similar OLED monitor.
Okay so would you say there are a handful of “TVs” that need this?
It really just doesn’t seem important.
I’m not sure what you mean. I think all TVs should have displayport, since regardless of what model it is, people also like plugging their pc into the living room tv for couch gaming. I just mentioned the C series as an example because they’re popular with desk gamers. Alternatively, having hdmi 2.1 support would be another solution, and seems more feasible than trying to get tv manufacturers to put displayport on their TVs, because they refuse to do it for some reason.
I mean there are very very few people using TVs like yours.
The reason is money (as always). The TV manufacturers all got together and formed the HDMI consortium and then decided they were only going to use these ports on their devices, and then charge any OEM a fee for the privilege of connecting to them.
A gaming PC?
Uh-huh, and what TV are you going to plug this gaming PC into that necessitates HDMI 2.1? HDMI 2.0 runs 4k/60 just fine.
My 55" HDR 120Hz 4k OLED TV
I mean that’s just a super rare choice of TVs that very few people are actually going to be using.
Why are you so against this? Just because it’s a smaller group of people that needs this feature it’s not worth implementing, and the people that need it can just suck a fat one? Also, assuming technology keeps advancing, wanting more than 4k60 output isn’t going to be a rare request as time moves on.
I’m not against it at all. It just seems super unimportant.
When I got a “TV” I just got one with DP, personally.
Take of that what you will, but I have the same specs/requirements as that other person.
I don’t think it’s as rare as you assume: couch gaming PCs are a thing, and expecting similar compatibility as consoles is normal.
OMG there’s two of you!? I stand corrected.
Laptops and TVs don’t have those ports…
Most modern laptops actually do have that port. And TVs have already been discussed, scroll up.
Year of the Linux desktop. Any day now 🤣.
You nerds are just insufferable.
Some better bait would be appreciated
all yo comments are just whinging 🤗 seems like a fixation lol