Forget DVI, HDMI; USB Displays Coming

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What about using USB to connect a PC to a Dolby Digital receiver? In other words, what if the receiver contained a sound module? Hardware encoding schemes like Dolby Digital Live or DTS Connect would be unnessary in this case. It would be great to forget about cheap sounding PC speakers and use a real sound system.
 
The device manager is showing a 9900GTX, yum! Someone knows something the rest of us do not. I hope the GT200 preview/review is coming soon.
 
It eats up entirely too much CPU cycles as is the usual downfall with USB.

And what about audio? HDMI and DisplayPort send audio down the cable, I see no mention of that in this article?

If audio is not included, what will the additional CPU loss be when that is added?
 
So far USB Display Units have been given Poor rating. For Kyle: its GTX280, remember X. (New Slogan?)

Anyway I doubt if I want my entire USB system hocked up with some Poor technology, Even USB3.
One quick note. Nanotubes of Carbon are coming back in news with Korean co making unit soon. Also Copper Nanotubes seem to have promise, as crystal of copper has pointed end to its penta shape, thus field is enhanced by smallness of point energy radiates from.

Signed😛hysician thomas stewart von drashek m.d.
 
The faster USB 3.0 may come with even higher cpu load also does this work with sli / cross fire?

How much work is the video card doing?

Dose the bios screens show up over the usb link?

Can you use this as your only screen?
 
yep ... im sure, at last for me, that after ppl discover that the pc with this usb display got a 9900GTX .. who care about usb lolol we want review 😛
 

Actually, we're both right. 'GT200' is akin to 'G92' and the retail names are '9900GTX/GTX280' (I'm just reading from the screenshot) and '8800GT', respectively. But, yes, you're right the name on the retail boxes should say GTX280.
 
i agree, the 9900GTX is much more interesting than this cpu-cycle munching lame duck of a usb screen technology....9900GTX article please
 
Thanks Dr. Kyle. Also Computer already have active display port So NOT only do you increase your cpu load by tonne; Joe d' dragon really goes thru some of weaknesses. Of course all you have to do is uninstall software. Some homes might like multi display option of being upstairs.

Signed😛HYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART VON DRASHEK M.D.

ps HERES URL i PICKED OFF IT.EXAMINER:http://www.worldwidetelescope.org/experienceIt/ExperienceIt.aspx?exp=true

iTS REALLY COOL. rEMINDS ME OF SOLAR SYSTEM OF mONITORS.
 
And how many PPL that have 2 monitors have some card with only 1 vga/hdmi output ? I bet anyone even interested in this has a card with 2 outputs already, or a crusty pentium 133 which wouldn't even run this !
 
in this day and age who cares about a couple of processor cycles? this technology is all about form over function and you'll prolly pay a premium for using it (wireless usb driven displays sound mighty good to me). You might as well fork out a few more $$ on getting a better processor (or just live with a bir of degraded performance.
 
It is nice to see that someone is utilizing an old tech for a base to start with. I would like to see the next step and utilizing HDMI in the same manner we use USB. That would be 10-20 times faster (480Mb/s to 10.2Gb/s) and for the video side we wouldn't need to worry about the encryption process for Blu-ray.
 
1920 x 1080 x 3(24bit RGB) = 6220800 ~6MB for 1 frame of 1080p.
This is roughly 67 frames/second with the USB2.0 interface.

The patchwork updating is good but compression would improve performance further (at the cost of CPU usage).

 
Math> How did you come to those 67fps? Is it not more like 10fps (480Mbit/s divided by those 6MB).
 
I agree with quintinkhan, why using usb?? As HDMI is faster, and should not give heavy CPU load as USB. And now that HDMI is integrated on most high end video cards... This would give a strong new standard that should stick for a while.
 
Problem is, HDMI cables are extremely expensive and the connectors are somewhat delicate, and the cable itself is fragile due to the tiny diameter of the many strands of wire contained and insulated therein. The result is also a relatively inflexible cable that is hard to route through really tight nooks and crannies. In addition, if you wanted to separate the audio signal to go elsewhere (as is likely the case for a computer connected directly to a separate monitor and speakers), then the extra wires devoted to audio that run trough the cable are just added bulk and contribute to the fragility and inflexibility of the cable. Plus, the connectors (both male and female) are more complex and thus more expensive to manufacture.

USB is proven to be cheap to manufacture and implement, durable, long-lasting, easy-to-maneuver, and reliable (I have never come across a defective name-brand USB cable, but I have come across several name-brand HDMI cables). All that really has to be done is to transition graphics cards to use the new interface directly instead of wasting CPU cycles sending video from a graphics card back to the CPU and MoBo chipset to be tossed out of the USB port. It uses too much bandwidth to go from A to B back to A then to C to D (4 steps A-B-A-C-D) than to go straight from A to B to D (2 steps, one-way A-B-D). Using a devoted USB processor would take all of the strain off of the CPU, and combining it with the graphics card would free up system-wide bandwidth.

That's the solution. A USB-PU. That will make USB 3.0 viable.
 
[citation][nom]waffle911[/nom][/citation]

I agree with you that the cables are extremely expensive. But so where USB when they first went mainstream. When things become more mainstream the price tends to drop. On the issue of their durability I haven't heard anything on that but I will keep it in mind from now on. Mainly cause I constantly have to switch one of my home devices back and forth, to date with no problems.
 
What about multiple USB connections on the same display? Daisy chaining displays (dividing the available bandwidth) or multiplying the bandwidth when necessary with 2 or more usb connections starting from the computer. I hope these are open options for a rework of the hardware and software when USB3 comes along.
 
waffle is right. usb has proven to be a great cable interface standard. ive never had a cable or jack break from use, it's just well designed. until they come up with something better, i don't see why it shouldnt be used for as many applications as possible.

i hope video cards do adopt a USB output standard, the cables are so cheap and work perfectly.

the wireless display also sounds good, but sacrificing 60% of your CPU is not viable....
 
in an ideal world there should be a single interface, full duplex LVD
one pair Rx one pair Tx with standardized signals
like PCIe ( 1x ), sas, sata, usb3.0, ....
all standards converge to this
BTW link to monitor should be ... optical. LC connector .... et c. . nothing to change for decades.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.