Anyone have an idea how fast ADC and DVI connectors are? I know VGA is analog and hard to measure, but DVI/ADC must have some speed. P.S. Why do I want to know? To see how practical SCSI/FireWire/USB2/Wi-Fi/Ethernet displays would be.
You can find out the minimum raw (uncompressed) bandwidth required with some simple caculations. At millions of colours on a 1600x1200 screen, that's 1600x1200x32 = 61Mbits per frame. At 40fps (a typical TFT/LCD refresh rate, but unacceptably slow for a CRT) that is more than twice the bandwidth of gigabit ethernet.
Adding compression of frames and between them would help the bandwidth problem immensely, but requires more CPU load on the host computer and more intelligent displays, making i) your machine slower and ii) the display more expensive.
The closest thing I can think of is a running X-Windows applications remotely, but high level drawCS refresh rate, but unacceptably low for a CRT) this is more that twice gigabit ethernet bandwidth. Frame and temporal (interfame) compression would help quite a lot with bandwidth problems, but would require extra CPU load at the host end and adding decompression electrotrickery to the tering instructions are sent rather than a raw bitmap of the screen. Even then it's still quite slow, especially if there are some things that have to be sent as bitmaps. You wouldn't want to edit photographs using X-Windows remotely.
Latency isn't that important for everyday use: about 2 or three frames behind the user's actions is probably acceptable.
Also, why use another connector when DVI/ADC & VGA are already designed for this purpose?
Thanks for the answers. Now I know displays require tons of data/sec. In response to "Why would you want to use another connector", here's my two (now defunct) ideas: a. Wireless displays, and b. FireWire/USB2 connections for those without DVI/ADC.
Thanks for the answers. Now I know displays require tons of data/sec. In response to "Why would you want to use another connector", here's my two (now defunct) ideas: a. Wireless displays, and b. FireWire/USB2 connections for those without DVI/ADC.
Wouldn't a wireless keyboard and mouse on a computer with an integrated display solve your problem?
The only time I've heard of a display using a connection not designed for it is way back when there were SCSI-Video adapters for those who couldn't afford a PDS video card. Apparently they were slow as molasses on a cold day.
Yes, 60Hz, but the typical LCD pixel response time is 25 ms or 40 times per second. This is what leads to ghosting and blurring. Apple's LCDs are all between 25 ms and 40 ms.
Comments
Adding compression of frames and between them would help the bandwidth problem immensely, but requires more CPU load on the host computer and more intelligent displays, making i) your machine slower and ii) the display more expensive.
The closest thing I can think of is a running X-Windows applications remotely, but high level drawCS refresh rate, but unacceptably low for a CRT) this is more that twice gigabit ethernet bandwidth. Frame and temporal (interfame) compression would help quite a lot with bandwidth problems, but would require extra CPU load at the host end and adding decompression electrotrickery to the tering instructions are sent rather than a raw bitmap of the screen. Even then it's still quite slow, especially if there are some things that have to be sent as bitmaps. You wouldn't want to edit photographs using X-Windows remotely.
Latency isn't that important for everyday use: about 2 or three frames behind the user's actions is probably acceptable.
Also, why use another connector when DVI/ADC & VGA are already designed for this purpose?
Originally posted by ryaxnb
Thanks for the answers. Now I know displays require tons of data/sec. In response to "Why would you want to use another connector", here's my two (now defunct) ideas: a. Wireless displays, and b. FireWire/USB2 connections for those without DVI/ADC.
Wouldn't a wireless keyboard and mouse on a computer with an integrated display solve your problem?
Originally posted by Stoo
At 40fps (a typical TFT/LCD refresh rate, but unacceptably slow for a CRT) that is more than twice the bandwidth of gigabit ethernet.
LCDs are 60Hz, not 40Hz.
Let's turn this question around: why not use VGA/DVI/ADC to transfer data?
The fastest I've seen is the Hitachi CML175 at 16 ms.
Originally posted by Tidris
Wouldn't a wireless keyboard and mouse on a computer with an integrated display solve your problem?
Hmmm... not perfect, but better then wired.