AMD "Fiji" Silicon Lacks HDMI 2.0 Support

[FordGT90Concept]

If the spec weren't ratified then HDMI 2.0 omission on a new video card would make perfect sense but it is ratified, HDMI 2.0 is in the wild and it is a checkmark feature that makes little sense to leave out. Especially so when you are competing with products that do support HDMI 2.0, have supported it for a while and support it on a range of price-points starting as low as ~$200.

DisplayPort 1.3 was released almost exactly a year after HDMI 2.0. If the latter wasn't adopted, the former most certainly isn't. These are probably things they're putting off for 16/14nm.

Titan X has HDMI 2.0 but DisplayPort 1.2 (not "a" for Adaptive V-Sync support). So right now we either have to go with HDMI 1.4a and DisplayPort 1.2a or HDMI 2.0 and DisplayPort 1.2. I think I'd have to go with the former because I loathe proprietary standards like G-Sync and all HDMI has to ever power for me is a 1920x1200 display via DVI adapter.

You guys are arguing two different standpoints that are mutually exclusive.
@Octavean is putting forward that HDMI 2.0 has favour with TV vendors and even if it lacks bandwidth compared with DP, will still be utilized.
@Steevo ...well you're basically arguing that DP is better than HDMI and graphics vendors should concentrate on it even though TV manufacturers aren't using it to any great extent.

One is argument about tech implementation (and a few insults), one is about practical implementation in a real market.

The argument Steevo makes, and one I agree with, is that HDMI 2.0 should be terminated and DisplayPort should be replacing it in full. DisplayPort supports HDMI packets so DisplayPort has backwards compatibility ingrained. There's no reason HDMI 2.0 exists other than, as Steevo said, "Samsung should know better, Panasonic, Toshiba, and others should know better, they are paying for a dying standard, but they are doing it for planned obsolescence IMO. " It's the TV industry trying to dictate what standard people use because they refuse to provide an affordable alternative.

 

[wiak]

hmm, why did they remove *both* DVI ports?. i believe it was because they needed more TMDS signals to support HDMI 2.0

well, the reason i love DisplayPort is that its possible to convert it to HDMI 2.0, just as it was possible doing DP>VGA, DP>DVI, DP>HDMI

 

[HumanSmoke]

The argument Steevo makes, and one I agree with, is that HDMI 2.0 should be terminated and DisplayPort should be replacing it in full. DisplayPort supports HDMI packets so DisplayPort has backwards compatibility ingrained.

Uncontested.
The point I was making is that one person is vehemently arguing what should be happening, while the other is arguing what is happening. Both viewpoints are valid - they just don't constitute sides of the same argument.

 

[xfia]

so its a honest to god like 5 or 20 buck adapter that they will stick in the box if people bug them about it that makes its backwards compatible haha
"the lack of HDMI 2.0 support hurts the chip's living room ambitions"
so its the best damn living room gpu around
nano is the fastest smallest thing around at 2x(200%) performance per watt and faster than the 290x. two will deliver very well at 4k or 1080p eyefinity in small form factors in any game and thats the baby fury with 5k 1440p eyefinity at reasonable settings. optimal support for vr headsets with split flame rendering. the 3 displayports are excellent for anyone giving the bandwidth you need to run alot of smaller resolution monitors any of latest greatest gaming experiences available that is also enabled to transfer hdmi 2.0 via adapter.

 

[ShurikN]

"the lack of HDMI 2.0 support hurts the chip's living room ambitions"

Only the Nano, Fury is not a concern imo.

 

[Octavean]

You guys are arguing two different standpoints that are mutually exclusive.
@Octavean is putting forward that HDMI 2.0 has favour with TV vendors and even if it lacks bandwidth compared with DP, will still be utilized.
@Steevo ...well you're basically arguing that DP is better than HDMI and graphics vendors should concentrate on it even though TV manufacturers aren't using it to any great extent.

One is argument about tech implementation (and a few insults), one is about practical implementation in a real market.

Exactly, thank you for seeing it for what it is.

 

[xfia]

Only the Nano, Fury is not a concern imo.

i feel like you did not read my post or watch the video. the nano is a fury that has hbm and the connectors on them are better than any others for anyone.

 

[john_]

How about this?
Google Translate

Someone posted on reddit, that there where some DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 adaptors at Computex capable of 60Hz like the one in the link. I guess if Fury is a success those adaptors will multiply and probably come down in price, a price that it is still unknown.



Of topic
At KitGuru they are baning accounts because they got way too much criticism for crying that AMD wasn't giving them a free sample of Fury X. They just banned me and I was one of the 5 top posters there. Nice. More free time.

 

[praze]

 

[R-T-B]

Saying DP is a future when not a single TV supports it is a bit blunt statement. I don't think DP will ever be supported in LCD TV's. It hasn't been so far, why would it be in the future? No device for the living room even has DP...

A select few TVs do, as posted above. Mostly just Panasonic high end ones right now.

 

[RejZoR]

Who cares about Panasonic, they sell nearly no TV's. Philips, LG and Samsung have the largest market share and until they support it, it's basically the same as "not existing".

 

[Octavean]

A select few TVs do, as posted above. Mostly just Panasonic high end ones right now.

I believe the models are the Panasonic TC-58AX800U and TC-65AX800U (~$1600 and ~$2600 respectively)

Nice to have as an option I am sure but I don't expect it to catch on as a typical feature of new UHD TV's any time soon.

 

[R-T-B]

Who cares about Panasonic, they sell nearly no TV's. Philips, LG and Samsung have the largest market share and until they support it, it's basically the same as "not existing".

Hey! I own a Panasonic! Do I not exist as well? lol

Yeah, I know, it's not really their panel or anything, but they DO exist. That was my point.

EDIT:

How did Philips/LG make the list? They are behind Panasonic, who is admitedly pretty behind:

Google may be lying to me though...

 

[john_]

 

[swirl09]

So would you mind sharing what cable you have to allow you that @60?

Sorry, just spotted this now.

Nothing special about the cables, theyre ones I got from random purchases.