this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
539 points (99.4% liked)

Steam Hardware

20009 readers
170 users here now

A place to discuss and support all Steam Hardware, including Steam Deck, Steam Machine, Steam Frame, and SteamOS in general.

As Lemmy doesn't have flairs yet, you can use these prefixes to indicate what type of post you have made, eg:
[Flair] My post title

The following is a list of suggested flairs:
[Deck] - Steam Deck related.
[Machine] - Steam Machine related.
[Frame] - Steam Frame related.
[Discussion] - General discussion.
[Help] - A request for help or support.
[News] - News about the deck.
[PSA] - Sharing important information.
[Game] - News / info about a game on the deck.
[Update] - An update to a previous post.
[Meta] - Discussion about this community.

If your post is only relevant to one hardware device (Deck/Machine/Frame/etc) please specify which one as part of the title or by using a device flair.

These are not enforced, but they are encouraged.

Rules:

Link to our Matrix Space

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The TL;DR is that the organization that controls the HDMI standard won't allow any open source implementation of HDMI 2.1.

So the hardware is fully capable of it, but they'll get in trouble if them officially implement it.

Instead it's officially HDMI 2 (which maxes out at 4k @ 60Hz), but through a technique called chroma sub-sampling they've been able to raise that up to 4k @ 120Hz.

However there are some minor reductions in picture quality because of this, and the whole thing would be much easier if the HDMI forum would be more consumer friendly.

In the meantime, the Steam Machine also has display port as a completely issue free display option.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 days ago

We need to normalize this kind of headline:

"The HDMI Forum, whatever the fuck that means, refuses to support open source software development."

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'm not fully up-to-date with bleeding edge display technologies but is there any reason that a passive DP to HDMI adapter couldn't easily solve this issue? And would it cause Valve any strife to include one in the box?

[–] crater2150@feddit.org 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Passive DP-to-HDMI adapters only work if the device on the Displayport end supports Dual-Mode, i.e. using the Displayport to send an HDMI signal. They often do, but it would require the same driver support for HDMI 2.1. So this would require an active adapter.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 206 points 1 week ago (2 children)

With TVs starting to get USB-C inputs, which are displayport under the hood, hopefully HDMI fucks off.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 35 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Ballparking but it will likely take closer to a decade than not for that to actually happen... and I am still not optimistic. And there are actually plenty of reasons to NOT want any kind of bi-directional data transfer between your device and the TV that gets updated to push more and more ads to you every single week.

The reason HDMI is so successful is that the plug itself has not (meaningfully?) changed in closer to 20 years than not. You want to dig out that PS3 and play some Armored Core 4 on the brand new 8k TV you just bought? You can. With no need for extra converters (and that TV will gladly upscale and motion smooth everything...).

Which has added benefits because "enthusiasts" tend to have an AV receiver in between.

The only way USB C becomes a primary for televisions (since display port and usb c are arguably already the joint primary for computer monitors) is if EVERY other device migrates. Otherwise? Your new TV doesn't work with the PS5 that Jimmy is still using to watch NFL every week.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 week ago (3 children)

USB-C adapters for absolutely everything are thankfully quite common now thanks to the laptop/dock industry.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 20 points 1 week ago (5 children)

USB-C probably cannot replace either, because the unmating force is too light. A typical HDMI or DisplayPort cable is much thicker, longer and hence heavier than a typical USB-C cable (even those specced to carry high bandwidth, like a thunderbolt cable) because they need better shielding to carry high bandwidth signals long distances - it's not unusual to need to route HDMI several metres (but USB-C cables that long are unusual because of the different purposes)

For TVs and such it's useful to have the inputs connect vertically, so that they don't stick out the back of the device and cause problems pushing it against a wall. Then the weight of the end of the cable is going to be trying to pull the connector out of the TV. DisplayPort connectors can have a latch to deal with this.

Of course, there a ways around this: a new connector, for example. But it does mean that you can't just leverage the existing pool of USB-C connectors and cables to make this ubiquitous.

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 9 points 1 week ago (5 children)

To mention, this is also a problem with HDMI (but not DP).

But just have the usb-c insert top down instead of bottom up, include room for a small loop and cable retention to ensure slack doesnt put pressure on the port. This easily allows for fixed connections with usb-c.

There are also side-screw locking connectors for usb-c. With HDMI, a top-screw option was made for more fixed install scenarios. That design is ugly af and uses a massive amount more room than the usb-c screw lock approach.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] asudox@lemmy.asudox.dev 162 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] Piatro@programming.dev 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I used to find it took forever to start showing a picture compared to HDMI on my PC. Getting a new GPU so maybe that will improve things.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] clot27@lemmy.zip 108 points 1 week ago (3 children)

fuck HDMI

all my homies hate HDMI

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Luci@lemmy.ca 72 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is this why DisplayPort looks better for me on Linux???

[–] cecilkorik@piefed.ca 70 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes. DP is the right choice for civilized people.

[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yep it's pretty much better in all regards.

The only downside is no ARC support, but I suppose support for that is pretty hit or miss anyway.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 63 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 week ago

I mean the many incarnations of usbc are slowly making headway. For better and worse.

[–] klangcola@reddthat.com 49 points 1 week ago

AMD already spent a significant amount of effort implementing HDMI2.1 in their open driver in such a way that it would be compliment. The suits from HDMI consortium still said No.

https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-2.1-OSS-Rejected

AMD Linux engineers have spent months working with their legal team and evaluating all HDMI features to determine if/how they can be exposed in their open-source driver. AMD had code working internally and then the past few months were waiting on approval from the HDMI Forum... Sadly, the HDMI Forum has turned down AMD's request for open-source driver support.

AMD Linux engineer Alex Deucher commented on the ticket:

"The HDMI Forum has rejected our proposal unfortunately. At this time an open source HDMI 2.1 implementation is not possible without running afoul of the HDMI Forum requirements."
[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 48 points 1 week ago (19 children)

I hated HMDI when it came out, and I continue to hate it.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 20 points 1 week ago
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm honestly surprised TV OEMs haven't bothered to at least try throwing in DisplayPort, especially during the period of time it far exceeded the highest possible quality on HDMI.

HDMI is just the last hardware standard created from the ashes of the format wars that has no practical place anymore. It only exists to collect hostage licensing fees.

[–] barryamelton@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Tv oems are the ones that set up the hdmi club. They want the content encrypted with drm, from transit, to your pc, to your cable, to your screen. Look up the analog hole. This battle has been going on for 20 years. Share this with interested people.

HDCP (the DRM HDMI uses) is interface-agnostic though? It works over DisplayPort, heck it even works over DVI. I think that makes your argument about DRM fall apart, though TV OEMs did indeed promote the adoption of HDMI.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 13 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I don't know why they'd think I'd capture 600MB/s of uncompressed video though.

Since the torrent sites are crammed with full quality 4k Bluray remuxes and WebDLs direct from Amazon, there's clearly easier and better ways of doing this than putting encryption in a cable.

[–] nlgranger@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

I don’t know why they’d think I’d capture 600MB/s of uncompressed video though.

Pirating live streams of sport event, which is a huge business.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Capitalism is so cool dude I love having inferior transit of 1s and 0s because some group of leeches in California own the shape that those 1s and 0s pass through

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (2 children)

governments should start cracking down on codecs. tf are dipshits allowed to hold standards hostage?

[–] Natanael 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

They really just need to demand that open formats are implemented in parallel with any proprietary ones, with no artificial feature/performance disparity allowed.

That kills any incentive to keep the proprietary ones locked down because eventually the open formats will be available throughout the ecosystem and users will have devices with support in the entire pipeline. Then users will simply no longer want to deal with the locked down formats for long and nobody will want to sell them.

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 week ago

Proprietary formats should be illegal. Consumers are idiots, marketing will convince them to support proprietary, and regulatory capture will compromise any attempt to stop disparity

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It pisses me off that you gotta pay so much money to look at the official ISO 8601.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Templa@beehaw.org 28 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I really wish I could find a TV within my desired specs that had DisplayPort. We will buy a Steam Machine to use it in place of our docked Steam Deck in the living room, so being able to use DP would be amazing.

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Adapting DisplayPort to HDMI with minimal quality loss is child's play. It's the other way around that's misery.

Any cheap adapter cable that supports DisplayPort In to HDMI Out should be perfectly fine.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] demizerone@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Fuck HDMI! All my homies use DisplayPort.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago

Unfortunately my TV is not one of your homies.

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

The main feature of Hdmi has always been DRM.

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 13 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Ship a high quality DP adapter with each onr 😂

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] myfunnyaccountname@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Pfft. People using monitors or tvs. I just plug into it and play it in my head.

[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 week ago

That's what the Steam Frame is for.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›