In a move that might snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, information has been revealed that the new R9 Fury GPU will not support HDMI 2.0 nor DP 1.3. This comes from a forum post on Overclockers.co.uk by what appears to be an AMD representative. Asked to confirm if the card would support HDMI 2.0, this was the answer given by AMDMatt:
If this post is accurate, the Fury will not only not be supporting HDMI 2.0. HDMI 2.0 is critical as the industry moves to 4K, something AMD has been pushing heavily. HDMI 2.0 allows for 4K @60Hz, something currently impossible with HDMI 1.4. DisplayPort 1.3, also not supported enables 2 4K @60Hz screens to be driven or 5K and 8K in certain modes at 60Hz. Both are also required for HDCP 2.2 which allows BluRay 4K discs to play with copyright protection. While DisplayPort 1.2a does allow for 4K@60Hz, users with HDMI 4K TVs, which have become quite prevalent, will be left at a console level 30Hz. Fury Nano, if also similarly handicapped will have it’s HTPC ambitions hurt as well.
For now, there is no need to get riled up just yet. This is just one post so far and AMDMatt might be misinformed. It will be best to save any pitchforks till official word comes out from AMD on their HDMI and DP support. The flexibility of DP also means that an active adapter can convert the DP 1.2a signal to HDMI 2.0, but HDCP 2.2 will be lost. If this report is true though, it makes AMD’s other mistakes this time seem trivial. Missing one of HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.3 is serious enough I tend to believe that one of the two is supported until I get official confirmation from AMD. Either way, AMD best act fast before the internet rumour mill goes out of control.
If you were hoping for high frame rates on your new 4KTV for living room gaming, HDMI 2.0 is vital.
Who cares really, it can do 4K60 via DP and all 4K60 compatible monitors have DP. It’s not like the are that many people who have their PC connected to a 4K60 television anyway, it was probably too much of a niche to spend R&D time on.
But is all 4k TVs have DP? This will hurt R9 Nano…
One Panasonic model has DP. The 100s of other 4K TVs on the market around the world? None have DP. This is a monumental fuck up by AMD.
Because there is no such thing as DP to HDMI adapter, right?
Yes, you are right, there is no such thing as a DP to HDMI 2.0 adapter which would be capable of supporting 4K60. I game on a TV so I don’t have to have a separate screen for my consoles and PC so the AMD cards are now ruled out if this is true.
What stupidity and I have seen this idiocy by multiple people.
Probably too niche to spend R&D time on. Yeah, Nvidia has hdmi 2.0 in their 900 range cards so apparently too hard to implement.
There are more gamers every week who are connecting their PC to their TV to game since a bigger screen is far better for 4k gaming and IMO, gaming in general.
Furthermore, what the hell is the point of trying to push small form factor PCs (as they are doing with their project quantum) that are CLEARLY marketed for the tv/”living room” crowd if you don’t even support hdmi 2.0?
AMD really screwed the pooch if this info is indeed true but hey, the AMD fanboys and those who only game on their monitors will keep saying “who cares” ignoring that many DO care.
I also like people saying you can just use an adapter…so assuming there are adapters that will make this work (I am under the impression there are only ones that will output at 4k/30hz), I now have to go and drop 30+ dollars on an adapter because AMD is too incompetent to make a fully functioning product? Wow.
Then if they didn’t include dp 1.3 as well as hdmi 2.0, you don’t have the copyright standard for upcoming UHD blu-ray so there goes any ability someone may have in using this card for a pc uhd blu-ray build…but “who cares” about that as well since those people will be niche and apparently the minority don’t matter to the AMD fanboys.
May as well say “who cares” to 4k gaming since the amount of people who do 4k gaming is small, correct?
Maybe that’s something that AMD relays on the GPU vendors, like Asus, Sapphire, MSI, XFX…. Maybe their own custom cooled versions will have different I/O, possibly the ones you need. 🙂
This is nothing that dangerous as you described, I think.
I guess it’s in our nature to try to find flows to something new, always.
Was AMDMatt’s comment verified accurate?