USB to HDMI Converter

Seems a HDMI switch may be a better idea? That thing has a resolution restriction and just the idea is odd...
 
You couldn't run games at all, and video playback would most likely lag. That unit would be for 2d work applications... that is it.
 
HDMI bandwidth is over twenty times that of USB 2.0.

I looked it up, USB 2.0 gets 60 megabytes/sec while HDMI 1.3 gets 1275 megabytes/sec.
 
I'd rather get that 4 DVI output ATi 4850x2...

I wonder if you can put 2 of those card together for 8 monitors?!
 
This is nice for ppl who don't have an HDMi connector in there laptop or desktop and want to watch movies on there tv.
 
$180 is sorta steep, IMHO. Interesting gadget, though. I suppose it'll sell for less when it hits the market, obviously. Just about the only use is a laptop with no DVI/HDMI. It'd be more attractive if it displayed 1080p, which is a pretty huge flaw in the device. Actually, despite the high price tag, that company would be better off making it even more expensive and having it support 1080p.
 
mobusta1 said:
This is nice for ppl who don't have an HDMi connector in there laptop or desktop and want to watch movies on there tv.
Click to expand...

Most video cards have dual DVI if no HDMI output so all you need is cable with DVI>HDMI. I have a 15ft one and it only cost me $35.00 CAD.
 
Most video cards have dual DVI if no HDMI output so all you need is cable with DVI>HDMI. I have a 15ft one and it only cost me $35.00 CAD.
Click to expand...
True enough, and it would be much cheaper (and more versatile) to just buy a video card with DVI/HDMI output on an upgradable PC. Also, there are DVI->HDMI adapters, obviously. EVGA "accidentally" put one in (I guess...) with my GTX, instead of a DVI->VGA adapter.
 
Starcrossed said:
$180 is sorta steep, IMHO. Interesting gadget, though. I suppose it'll sell for less when it hits the market, obviously. Just about the only use is a laptop with no DVI/HDMI. It'd be more attractive if it displayed 1080p, which is a pretty huge flaw in the device. Actually, despite the high price tag, that company would be better off making it even more expensive and having it support 1080p.
Click to expand...

I strongly suspect that it is limited to 720p because USB 2.0 has a limit of 60MB/sec. It is probably impossible for the converter to do 1080p.
 
I strongly suspect that it is limited to 720p because USB 2.0 has a limit of 60MB/sec. It is probably impossible for the converter to do 1080p.
Click to expand...
Good point. I suppose this hints at a use for expanding the bandwidth of USB or IEEE 1394. It seems that the fact that webcams have about the same limit with real-time video supports the argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top