DisplayPort vs HDMI: What's Best for High Refresh Rate Gaming?

VitalyT

Posts: 6,403   +7,198
And DisplayPort 2.0 is now on the shelf for Fairy Tales, next to stories about super batteries, flux capacitors and alike.

The rumor has, RTX 4xxx won't have DP 2.0 either. Such a disgrace!
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,959   +4,543
HDMI doesn't let me run 170Hz on my monitor at 1440p, just 144Hz max. Is that some HDMI limitation or do I just need a better cable? The one I use is what I got in the package with the monitor. DisplayPort lets me run 170Hz no problem and that's what I'm using.
 

neeyik

Posts: 2,237   +2,694
Staff member
The article fails to mention that DisplayPort also supports daisy chaining for multiple monitors, which HDMI does not.
That's a good point and the only reason why I skipped multiple monitoring configurations is that it's not something that's usually associated with high refresh rate gaming. Of course, with new monitors typically supporting high refresh rates and motorsport/flight sim rigs often containing two or three monitors, it's valid that it should be in the article. I'll add it as soon as I can.

HDMI doesn't let me run 170Hz on my monitor at 1440p, just 144Hz max. Is that some HDMI limitation or do I just need a better cable? The one I use is what I got in the package with the monitor. DisplayPort lets me run 170Hz no problem and that's what I'm using.
What graphics card and monitor do you have? As noted in the article, some monitors only support their advertised refresh rate using DP.

And DisplayPort 2.0 is now on the shelf for Fairy Tales, next to stories about super batteries, flux capacitors and alike.

The rumor has, RTX 4xxx won't have DP 2.0 either. Such a disgrace!
GeForce RTX 30 series has DP 2.0 and HDMI 2.1, so there's no reason for the 40 series to not have DP 2.0 - it's monitors that don't have it.
 

BadThad

Posts: 1,223   +1,485
DP FTW! Personally, I don't like HDMI except for home audio/visual systems and just because it can eliminate the extra audio cables/connections.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,959   +4,543
That's a good point and the only reason why I skipped multiple monitoring configurations is that it's not something that's usually associated with high refresh rate gaming. Of course, with new monitors typically supporting high refresh rates and motorsport/flight sim rigs often containing two or three monitors, it's valid that it should be in the article. I'll add it as soon as I can.


What graphics card and monitor do you have? As noted in the article, some monitors only support their advertised refresh rate using DP.


GeForce RTX 30 series has DP 2.0 and HDMI 2.1, so there's no reason for the 40 series to not have DP 2.0 - it's monitors that don't have it.
Gigabyte M27Q, RX 6700 XT
 

neeyik

Posts: 2,237   +2,694
Staff member
Gigabyte M27Q, RX 6700 XT
Just checked the manual for the M27Q and 1440p 144 Hz is supported over HDMI 2.0 - interestingly, the monitor only has a DP 1.2 port, although that is good enough for that resolution and refresh rate without compression. The culprit would seem to be your cable.

Edit: sorry, misread your post. 144 Hz is the maximum the monitor supports at 1440p using HDMI. 165 or 170 Hz requires DisplayPort. That's a manufacturer's decision, as HDMI 2.0 can do 1440p at 170 Hz using 4:2:2 compression.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,082   +3,979
TechSpot Elite
60 Hz at 4K isn't really a high refresh rate anymore, though.
Well, since most displays are still 60Hz and 4K or less, it means that this cable would easily cover over 95% of the market for gaming and 100% for televisions. I'd say that's pretty damn good for something sold at a dollar store! :laughing:
 

neeyik

Posts: 2,237   +2,694
Staff member
*Coughs and points at the article title, specifically the bit that says "What's best for high refresh rate gaming" :p

Naturally if one doesn't need/desire more than 60 Hz, HDMI 2.0 is more than good enough for anything, and even el-cheapo cables will do.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,082   +3,979
TechSpot Elite
*Coughs and points at the article title, specifically the bit that says "What's best for high refresh rate gaming" :p

Naturally if one doesn't need/desire more than 60 Hz, HDMI 2.0 is more than good enough for anything, and even el-cheapo cables will do.
That's all I was saying. I was pointing it out because for most people, the expensive stuff is irrelevant and they're better off putting money towards things that will matter. Although, if you have some halo-level display, then it matters. Of course, if you have a halo-level display, money's not an issue either. :laughing:

The reason for my post is that I've seen people pay well over $50 for some fancy HDMI cable just because it has gold (maybe brass?) accents on it and looks expensive. I hate to see people fall for BS marketing and glitter.
 
Last edited:

passwordistaco

Posts: 411   +948
Until video cards and displays BOTH support it, DP 2.0 does not exist. At least until then, HDMI 2.1 > DP.

Some of the best monitors right now are TVs that only have HDMI. It would be awesome if TV manufacturers would give us a token DisplayPort. It would also be awesome if there was an affordable (or any) adapter for DP to HDMI with full feature support, I.e. 4K 120+ Hz, VRR, multichannel audio, HDR.
 

brucek

Posts: 1,292   +1,916
If you watch Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc. on Windows and want to see it in greater than 720p, you'll need to run an HDMI cable at least once (and to use Edge, and to install Microsoft's HEVC codec.) I'm not sure what this "magic handshake" that can only happen over HDMI is exactly, but once it's been accomplished between a given display and computer/gpu, you can go back to a DP cable between them if you want.

Not knowing this little tidbit cost me a couple hours one night a while back...
 

Athlonite

Posts: 389   +154
If you watch Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc. on Windows and want to see it in greater than 720p, you'll need to run an HDMI cable at least once (and to use Edge, and to install Microsoft's HEVC codec.) I'm not sure what this "magic handshake" that can only happen over HDMI is exactly, but once it's been accomplished between a given display and computer/gpu, you can go back to a DP cable between them if you want.

Not knowing this little tidbit cost me a couple hours one night a while back...

That would be the HDCP (High Definition Content Protection) handshake so if any part of the handshake does not support HDCP you'll not get the full HD/multi channel audio experience it will just be 1280x720p / stereo audio. HDCP is easy to get around nowadays as you've discovered but don't look for it to last it can request another handshake at anytime which means you'll have to do your cable switcharoo once again
 

Athlonite

Posts: 389   +154
My moto has and will always be
If in Doubt always DP if both monitor and GPU have DP ports, if not then DP>HDMI or HDMI>HDMI
 

brucek

Posts: 1,292   +1,916
That would be the HDCP (High Definition Content Protection) handshake so if any part of the handshake does not support HDCP you'll not get the full HD/multi channel audio experience it will just be 1280x720p / stereo audio. HDCP is easy to get around nowadays as you've discovered but don't look for it to last it can request another handshake at anytime which means you'll have to do your cable switcharoo once again
The thing is DP is supposed to support HDCP, and the various status checks (I.e., nvidia control panel) indicated HDCP was working. Still, Netflix would not go over 720p until I switched to HDMI, which displayed the very same HDCP working status, but this time actually worked. I suspect this may be a widevine implementation issue in terms of how it checks for HDCP vs. a fundamental limitation in the cable?