0

I have seen comments in various posts here to the effect that HDMI is to be avoided.

Can anyone explain what the problem is with HDMI, and why it's a bad thing?

More specifically, I have a 2nd monitor with three inputs: HDMI, DVI, and VGA. I'm currently using the HDMI port, connecting directly with the HDMI port on my Mac mini.

Is there any reason why I should use some sort of adaptor from one of the Thunderbolt ports to the DVI instead?

8
  • 4
    Could you perhaps give us some of the links to posts here which say "HDMI is to be avoided"? TBH, its a rather odd statement to begin with, and without some supporting posts that delineate exactly why some folks think it is to be avoided, your question is a tad meaningless.
    – IconDaemon
    Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 21:55
  • 2
    Never had a problem with HDMI, Have used it for YEARS on a Mac Mini hooked up to my TV and have another connected via HDMI to two monitors. We often use HDMI to connect PCs to monitors and TVs at work. It works great never had a problem. Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 22:05
  • 1
    If you Mac mini outputs HDMI natively, you're fine. I usually say to avoid converting from DisplayPort (native output) to HDMI. But if you must, use an active adapter.
    – Allan
    Commented Aug 1, 2020 at 22:32
  • @IconDaemon The whole point of asking was because the posts did not describe why people thought it was to be avoided. Hence the question. I've updated with 2 examples. TBH, I think most of the rest were similar remarks by Allan, who, helpfully, has detailed his stance.
    – benwiggy
    Commented Aug 13, 2020 at 13:54
  • I support >150 display devices (projectors, flat-panels, theatre-grade projection systems, etc) with HDMI and only have had problems when cables and connectors have been damaged. I also tend to use high-quality cables from Crestron and Kramer.
    – IconDaemon
    Commented Aug 13, 2020 at 18:49

1 Answer 1

7

HDMI is an AV (Audio/Visual) interface that is designed for consumer devices. DisplayPort is focused on the computer industry. As such, one functions better in a compute environment than the other.

Founders and Industry Adopters/Supporters

HDMI:

The HDMI founders were Hitachi, Panasonic, Philips, Silicon Image, Sony, Thomson, RCA, and Toshiba. Digital Content Protection, LLC provides HDCP (which was developed by Intel) for HDMI. HDMI has the support of motion picture producers Fox, Universal, Warner Bros. and Disney, along with system operators DirecTV, EchoStar (Dish Network) and CableLabs.

DisplayPort:

DisplayPort (DP) is a digital display interface developed by a consortium of PC and chip manufacturers and standardized by the Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA). The interface is primarily used to connect a video source to a display device such as a computer monitor, and it can also carry audio, USB, and other forms of data.

One was developed by consumer electroncs manufacters and supported by movie and television studios as well as cable service providers. The other was developed by PC and chip manufacturers with standardization provided for by the long standing VESA.

This is further reiterated by PC World article from 2019: HDMI vs. DisplayPort: Which display interface reigns supreme?

Though you’ll find it [DisplayPort] alongside HDMI on most late-model, high-end video cards, as well as in Macs and laptops marketed to business users, it rarely appears in Windows PCs aimed at consumers. It’s also rare as hen’s teeth in consumer electronics devices.

Empahsis mine

Your Mac

Your Mac has been using DisplayPort whether it was the native mDP (mini DisplayPort), the Thunderbolt (1, 2 or 3) port or the USB-C port in Alternate Mode. Only a few Mac computes had native HDMI ports (i.e. Mac mini).

So, going from native DP to DP is going to be the most reliable connection. There's no conversion. No conversion = higher reliability.

Converting the Signals

The signaling of HDMI and DisplayPort are very different. It's not just re-aranging the pin outs of the display signals, the voltages and the presence/absence of a clock sync all contribute to the reliability of the signal.

DisplayPort was designed to replace VGA, Digital Visual Interface (DVI), and FPD-Link. The interface is backward compatible with other interfaces, such as HDMI and DVI, through the use of either active or passive adapters.

Yes, you can convert a DisplayPort signal to HDMI, but I don't recommend it. Again, no conversion is better, but if you must use HDMI, use an active adapter because it recreates the actual HDMI signal including the clock signal. A passive adapter cannot do this.


My Opinion on HDMI

Personally, I find HDMI very flaky especially when it comes to audio. On every single HDMI interface (non-computer) in my house, regardless of how new or old the equipment is, audio will drop out. The fix is to switch to another input and switch back. Apparently, it gets out of sync and the switching of inputs "re-syncs" it.

From a computer perspective, in the office, we've had mixed results. Some computer to HDMI connections work flawlessly. Others only get a blank or blue screen. I resolved it by getting active adapters.

However, my greatest experience came when trying to convert a MacBook with a broken LCD (re-purposing a student computer) for a digital signage project. The 55" Television only had HDMI and I simply couldn't get the MacBook to talk to the TV properly. I had to get a PC with a video card with HDMI to make it work and at least twice a week, I had to reboot it because the signal became corrupt. However, the Mac that I had attached to the Dell monitor via DisplayPort ran for months without issue - the only reboots came when we had to apply updates or change the content.

6
  • I agree that DP is better than HDMI, and an active adapter is better than a passive adapter, but it is important to note that Thunderbolt 3 Macs (and maybe others) have Dual-Mode DisplayPort outputs, and those can output native HDMI (and single-link DVI) signals, including clock, which is what makes passive adapters possible. So-called "passive" adapters are more than just wires and do, in fact, do some adjustments of voltage levels and other signal cleanup, but there is no "conversion", the HDMI signal comes from the graphics card in the computer.
    – Old Pro
    Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 20:59
  • No. I believe you are confusing Alternate Mode USB which outputs a DisplayPort signal from a USB-C port. I've reviewed MacBooks with Thunderbolt 3 and all say native DisplayPort (i.e MacBook Pro 13" 2020) I have not found a single one that states it supports DP++ (DisplayPort Dual Mode or "native HDMI."
    – Allan
    Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 21:22
  • Additionally. Unavailable on USB-C – The DisplayPort Alternate Mode specification for sending DisplayPort signals over a USB-C cable does not include support for the dual-mode protocol. As a result, DP-to-DVI and DP-to-HDMI passive adapters do not function when chained from a USB-C to DP adapter. As far as my description for passive adapters goes , I don't know where you got "just wires" from, but I think you're reading something other than what I posted.
    – Allan
    Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 21:23
  • This stuff gets very confusing. Dual-Mode is part of the DisplayPort 1.1 spec. Thunderbolt 2 and 3 include at least the DP 1.2 spec. I did not realize Dual-Mode was not available over USB-C, though I believe it is available from Thunderbolt 2 Macs. Anyway, my larger point is that if the computer does not output something very close to an HDMI signal, then any cable that could be called "passive", even with a generous definition of the term, would not work at all. Conversely, if any passive adapter works, that is evidence that the host is outputting HDMI signals.
    – Old Pro
    Commented Aug 5, 2020 at 2:22
  • First DP++ is optional. Second (from the link) Limited adapter speed – Although the pinout and digital signal values transmitted by the DP port are identical to a native DVI/HDMI source, the signals are transmitted at DisplayPort's native voltage (3.3 V) instead of the 5 V used by DVI and HDMI so contrary to your statement, it’s not as native as you make them out to be meaning while a passive adapter can work, they work much better with active adapters
    – Allan
    Commented Aug 5, 2020 at 7:46

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .