Hdtv / pc

[greengiant71]

So does anyone have a suggestion to what type of HDTV 32 inch LED 120hz is good to use with a PC? I tried the Insignia 32 LED 1080p and it didn't work, text was all messed up and fuzzy. I did about 6 hours of trouble shooting (including customer service from insignia), needless to say I got my money back from BB.

So I'm looking for one that will work with a PC and isn't that expensive.

[N0sferatU]

go to the store with a laptop and HDMI cable and play around. That's how I found what works best. I use an LG and am very happy. Samsung look nice too but they have a massive input lag that drove me nuts. Happy shopping.

[Mufflore]

There arent any true 120Hz 32" HDTVs.
The 120Hz part is interpolation.

120Hz is available in PC Monitors up to 27", front projectors and back projector TVs.
HDMI cannot handle 1080p at 120Hz, it doesnt make the mode available.
You need either DisplayPort or Dual Link DVI (not the same as DVI-D).
If the TV doesnt have either of those, it definitely cannot take a 120Hz input at 1080p.
fyi

[greengiant71]

Originally Posted by Mufflore

There arent any true 120Hz 32" HDTVs.
The 120Hz part is interpolation.

120Hz is available in PC Monitors up to 27", front projectors and back projector TVs.
HDMI cannot handle 1080p at 120Hz, it doesnt make the mode available.
You need either DisplayPort or Dual Link DVI (not the same as DVI-D).
If the TV doesnt have either of those, it definitely cannot take a 120Hz input at 1080p.
fyi

then i am not understanding what this person is telling me

[greengiant71]

So your saying two hdmi in the PC and one into the PC ?

[Mufflore]

There is no such connection as dual HDMI.
If the TV uses HDMI only, it cannot do 120Hz input @ 1080p.

[TruMutton_200Hz]

Originally Posted by Mufflore

If the TV uses HDMI only, it cannot do 120Hz input @ 1080p.

Yes but that's all going to change very soon. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post21473092

[Mufflore]

You mean you dont understand what I am telling you, or you dont understand what someone else is telling you?

If someone else, what are they telling you, I 'm not good good at mind reading.

If you mean me you need to be more specific, again, I havent polished up on my mind reading skills.

[Mufflore]

The op will need to get one of few specific new AMD cards, nothing else incorporates the new HDMI chip yet.
Also display manufacturers need to incorporate the chip and good 120Hz panels into large designs, that might take a while longer.

What fries my noggin the most though is that even HDMI 1.3 has the bandwidth to support 1080p 120Hz 24bit or 1080p60 3D 24bit.
For example, HDMI 1.3 supports 1080p 60Hz 48bit, this takes the same bandwidth as 1080p 120Hz 24bit.

So HDMI has been capable all along since 2006 but they havent supplied the operating modes !
It looks like they were scared of dropping colour support above 24bit for fear the standard wont get adopted/will get lost.
Even though the hardware has been capable, very few media uses above 24bit anyway, the opposite scenario to 3D or 120Hz, yet what was needed wasnt supported.
Foot, shot and a big grrr.

[TruMutton_200Hz]

The HDMI chips would have consumed too much power to be built into a TV. This would have required an active cooling system and the total cost would have been higher than most people would have wanted to afford at that time.

It knocks me unconscious why there aren't any decent TVs with dual link DVI. Instead, the manufacturers deemed it necessary to ignore an entire community of PC gamers by both literally and figuratively tube feeding us DLNA support, youtube and google TV along with a whole bunch of features we don't need nor will ever care for. Is it any wonder some of us hardly want to play videogames anymore? :points finger at self:

[Mufflore]

Originally Posted by TruMutton_200Hz

The HDMI chips would have consumed too much power to be built into a TV. This would have required an active cooling system and the total cost would have been higher than most people would have wanted to afford at that time.

I cant see why.
If the clockspeed is increased, then 'maybe', but the chip has the bandwidth to clock through enough data at default speeds.

It knocks me unconscious why there aren't any decent TVs with dual link DVI.

Annoys me too, mainly because HDMI failed to address the issue for so long due to business politics.
I sort of feel sorry for hardware mfrs because they need to spend more to give us what we should already have.

[TruMutton_200Hz]

Originally Posted by Mufflore

I cant see why.
If the clockspeed is increased, then 'maybe', but the chip has the bandwidth to clock through enough data at default speeds.

See that link I posted in my first reply to this thread.

HDMI = Horrifically Deceitful Marketeering Impertinency

[Mufflore]

Are you trolling me?

[TruMutton_200Hz]

Huh? Why would I be??

[Mufflore]

Perhaps you can explain.

You said this without evidence:
"The HDMI chips would have consumed too much power to be built into a TV. This would have required an active cooling system and the total cost would have been higher than most people would have wanted to afford at that time."

I explained how at its default clock speed, HDMI 1.3 has the bandwidth to handle 120Hz at 1080p 24bit so cant see how it will get so hot it will need active cooling.

Your reply is to read your first post because
"HDMI = Horrifically Deceitful Marketeering Impertinency"
??

What would cause the chip to overheat so much that it needs active cooling?

[TruMutton_200Hz]

The DHCP and the FIFOs I guess. The older chips just don't have enough bandwidth, that's why the new ones will run at a higher clock of 300 MHz.

[Mufflore]

You seemed pretty sure earlier.
Rather than verify what I said you chose to argue the case with incorrect information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
See chart at the bottom of the page.

HDMI V1.0 has a data throughput of 3.96GBits/s and can do 1920×1200 @ 60Hz 24bit.
HDMI V1.3 has a data throughput of 8.16GBits/s so easily has the bandwidth to do 1920x1200 @ 120Hz 24bit.

We could have had 120Hz @ 1080p 6 years ago.

[TruMutton_200Hz]

Those charts are referring to the HDMI standard, yes of course. But not also referring to the actual HDMI chips that are soldered into our TVs, unfortunately.

EDIT: There's also EDID and CEA extension blocks, you know. The HDMI chip itself doesn't have to support a display mode unupported by the TV to still be fully compliant with the HDMI 1.3 standard so, like I said, we need those 300 MHz chips to arrive if we want to get to 1080p120 HDMI and then pray they won't screw us over yet again this time (which, for all we know, they very well might after all anyway BTW, for example by limiting it to 3D mode @ 60 frames per eye instead of adding true support for 2D mode @ 120 frames...).

[Mufflore]

The original HDMI 3D mode (top/bottom) for Full HD 3D (FHD3D) requires 6.75Gbit/s.
This includes a 2% overhead (45 lines) blanking period.
Newer modes have improved on this.

Lets consider your argument about the restricted HDMI chips.
HDMI chips in commercial TVs etc are limited to 6.69Gbit/s, 'just' underneath the requirement for the original FHD3D spec.
However, the chips DID NOT need to be limited to 6.69Gbit/s, it was a business decision that need not have been applied.
To get FHD3D without any modification, all that is needed is a 0.9% increase in bandwidth.
This and far more can be easily achieved without the need for extra cooling or power reserves.

Alternatively:

With a reduced blanking period of 22 lines (easily possible), the bandwidth needed now is 1.01% less than 6.75Gbit/s at 6.68Gbit/s.
This is within the maximum bandwidth of 6.69Gbit/s that commercial HDMI 1.3 chips use.
So the original FHD3D mode with reduced blanking (and other 3D modes) or 120Hz 1080p are fully realisable, even with the limited speed HDMI chips.

So it has been easily possible to have 120Hz at 1080p 24bit with HDMI 1.3.
There are at least 2 ways to achieve this, but they 'chose' not to support it.

[Redawgc187]

I was quite interested in this myself as I have just bought a new tv and hoped it supported 1920 X 1080 @ 120 hz for nvidia 3d vision so I went with a Vizio E3D420VX and of course it did not support it even though all marketing info says it does should I stick with it or is there a better alternative for me it has to be at least 40 inches 42 preffered.

[Redawgc187]

It does support 3DTV PLAY though. Is there a big difference from 3DTV PLAY and
3D Vision if how are they different.