GTX 780, how do I get 144hz out of HDMI or DP?

swarfega said:

lol then its rather doubtful that it'l support 144Hz. You'll need to buy a Displayport 1.2 cable. Dual-Link HDMI cables can also do 144. Don't confuse it with the normal DVI.

Attachment 69300

My other 2 monitors are running the 144hz on the dual link dvi cables now. Ill invest in a Display Port 1.2 cable and see if that makes a difference. Its sad that Tiger Direct shut down near me. I cant exactly just run out and get one anymore.

Thornton said:

My other 2 monitors are running the 144hz on the dual link dvi cables now. Ill invest in a Display Port 1.2 cable and see if that makes a difference. Its sad that Tiger Direct shut down near me. I cant exactly just run out and get one anymore.

As far as I know, there is no such thing as a "DisplayPort 1.2" cable. I think you'll be disappointed with what a new cable does for you.

Yeah, it's too bad that nVidia has forked their products so that the consumer cards aren't great for some forms of GPU computing. Perhaps a nice Quadro M6000? (Workstation equivalent of a Titan X, apparently. Merely $5k US.)

I'm a bit surprised that you can get the monitors operating at different refresh rates at the same time, but , as I said, I'm not into multiple monitors. (Single UHD monitor for me, at 60 Hz using a DP cable.)

bobkn said:

As far as I know, there is no such thing as a "DisplayPort 1.2" cable. I think you'll be disappointed with what a new cable does for you.

Yeah, it's too bad that nVidia has forked their products so that the consumer cards aren't great for some forms of GPU computing. Perhaps a nice Quadro M6000? (Workstation equivalent of a Titan X, apparently. Merely $5k US.)

I'm a bit surprised that you can get the monitors operating at different refresh rates at the same time, but , as I said, I'm not into multiple monitors. (Single UHD monitor for me, at 60 Hz using a DP cable.)

I'm actually considering an Nvidia Tesla. Actually, to be specific, two or three of them. I don't know if you know about them. They're dedicated Computing cards. They don't have any video outputs on them. Their sole purpose is to run Cuda ocl, and ogl drivers. Someecards go all the way up to 24 gigabytes of ddr5 RAM they have some for 6 and 12 gigabytes of RAM, as well, and quite few more Cuda cores than most other devices, including the workstation series.

It's important to remember, though, many rendering applications treat multiple GPUs like a distributed server cluster. Each card will handle a certain portion of the render samples. One really powerful card, in some engines, will go slower than 2 or 3 cards, each one often times being less than an 8th of the price of a Titan or ws series.

The Teslas will likely rather be an addition to my render farm.

Out of curiosity. Should DisplayPort allow 120 hertz?, in theory, and also, having only tried it for a few seconds, I wasn't really paying a whole lot of attention, but does DisplayPort have the same color Vibrance change the HDMI has? I often find the HDMI has much more saturation than the DVI ports. True color calibration only helps if all 3 are the same, or close to it.

I've heard of the Tesla cards, although I have no personal experience with them. I would have been more interested in them for desktop supercomputing rather than graphics rendering.

The Wikipedia link (post 14) gives the maximum bitrate for DP 1.2 as 17.28 Gbps. I'm running a UHD (3840 X 2160) display at 60 Hz. My graphics card supports a 10 bit color depth (per RGB channel). That works out to be about 14.56 Gbps. Naïvely, a 1920 X 1080 display using 24 bit color ought to be good for 347 Hz at the DP 1.2 bandwidth limit.

I wonder whether the color differences between HDMI and DVI are due to the graphics card or the monitor. I'd guess the latter, but I also wonder whether graphics professionals normally use HDMI interfaces. (Not my bag, as they used to say 40+ years ago.)

bobkn said:

I've heard of the Tesla cards, although I have no personal experience with them. I would have been more interested in them for desktop supercomputing rather than graphics rendering.

The Wikipedia link (post 14) gives the maximum bitrate for DP 1.2 as 17.28 Gbps. I'm running a UHD (3840 X 2160) display at 60 Hz. My graphics card supports a 10 bit color depth (per RGB channel). That works out to be about 14.56 Gbps. Naïvely, a 1920 X 1080 display using 24 bit color ought to be good for 347 Hz at the DP 1.2 bandwidth limit.

I wonder whether the color differences between HDMI and DVI are due to the graphics card or the monitor. I'd guess the latter, but I also wonder whether graphics professionals normally use HDMI interfaces. (Not my bag, as they used to say 40+ years ago.)

Normally we use DVI, but that could be just a force of habit or tradition, for lack of a better way of explaining it. We DO normally avoid HDMI in my experience because of the exact problems im having which is, it tends to exaggerate black points and white points, giving the appearance of more contrast. Thats great on a TV but it does not give an accurate example of what the actual color space is. This can of course be tweaked and its what im doing now, but the general consensus is, tweaking the color can degrade it. Not noticeably to the human eye, for the most part, but "for the most part" usually isnt good enough. Additionally, DVI-D and I tend to handle gradients better, in my experience... I could be just imagining it, but if im correct than it would explain a lot. HDMI cables, I see heavy posterizing like its running on 8bit color space while DVI-D is far smoother. Then there is the whole issue that DVI-D and I can actually get into the 200+ hz range while HDMI clearly struggles with this. High frequencies allow the monitor to play back higher frame rates. It sounds like a gimmick but when you watch the same clip a few thousand times, the frame rate quality is night and day, and its important. Not to say we might not move towards HDMI or DP in the future. This is just what I see, and use myself, for the most part.