fitlet maximum resolution

Post Reply
eroihn
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:11 pm

fitlet maximum resolution

Post by eroihn »

Some more questions for this thread:

(5) The comparison table says that all fitlets only support resolutions up to 1920 x 1200 pixels at 60 Hz, although HDMI 1.4a's bandwidth should allow for higher resolutions (from what I've read, HDMI's bandwidth from version 1.3 on is 8.16 Gbit/s, therefore good enough for 2560 x 1600 pixels x 24 bits x 60 frames per second, which multiplied together don't even seem to touch 5.9 Gbit/s). Since there are already monitors in the wild that support such resolutions, I wonder whether the 1920 x 1200 pixels mentioned in the comparison table are an error or a limitation of the APU's graphics core. Could you please clarify this?

(6) Furthermore, I wonder why HDMI has been chosen instead of DisplayPort outputs. From what I've read, adapters from DP to HDMI are relatively easy to build with some protocol auto-switching support from the graphics core, since after that, only signal levels have to be translated. All I've read about HDMI-to-DP adapters is, that they don't exist, while DP-to-HDMI adapters are widely available. Wouldn't DP ports have been a better choice then, since some monitors only have DP ports? Specifically, from what I've read about HP's announced 5K monitor Z27q, it only comes with 2 DP ports for signal input (which must both be connected to reach the in sum necessary bandwidth for 5K resolution). It looks like fitlet won't be able to support such displays then. Is that the case or are there solutions for this issue?

irads

Re: Hardware questions

Post by irads »

(5) 1920x1200 is tested and working. Higher resolutions are detected (even 4K) but we currently cannot confirm higher resolutions are usable.

(6) DP was considered, but HDMI was chosen because today it still exhibits easier compatibility than DP. Specifically -
1) Connecting fitlet to a TV is a common use case.
2) HDMI to DVI adapters are common and always work. The vast majority of available displays accept at least one of them, and HDMI to VGA converters are common and reliable.
3) For headless use-cases nothing beats CompuLab's HDMI fit-Headless http://www.fit-pc.com/web/products/fit-headless/
4) In dual-head use-cases having the same interface to both displays is easier from integration and logistics standpoint.

eroihn
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:11 pm

Re: Hardware questions

Post by eroihn »

Thanks for the clarification.

I would like to add though to the fourth point you make about your decision against DP, that since DP 1.2, there is Multi Stream Transport (MST) support that allows to connect multiple monitors via one DP. The way it works is, that you connect one monitor with the computer and then connect the next monitor with the previous monitor, such that you have a chain of monitors. Of course, the monitors in the chain need to have DP (MST) output ports besides the DP input ports in order to chain them together. Here is a picture of the ports on the Dell U2715H, where you can see that there is (besides some other ports) a DP input port, a mini-DP input port and a DP output port for MST: http://www.prad.de/images/monitore/dell ... ivot_1.jpg

From what I've read on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Eyefinity), AMD graphics cores support multi-monitor setups with up to 6 DP displays, while non-DP displays are called "legacy output". For future products, you should therefore consider DP, especially if you want to fit as many useful connectors as possible onto as little surface as you have on fitlet (and I expect, that you don't want to grow your computers in size in the future).

Since your answer to (5) is not entirely conclusive, I hope that you will write here again, as soon as you can confirm that higher resolutions either work or don't work. Since I've pondered on obtaining a 1440p monitor (I'm particularly looking at Dell's 25 inch U2515H with its native resolution of 2560 x 1440 pixels), I would like to know, if I could use it with fitlet. Knowing that the combination is supported would definitely inform my decision to wait for fitlet.

irads

Re: Hardware questions

Post by irads »

Thank you for the thoughtful feedback. We will test behavior with higher resolution displays and if needed will update the specs.

usenix
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: fitlet maximum resolution

Post by usenix »

Hello,
there's been 4 months of silence concerning the maximum possible resolution of the fitlet. Is there any new information available as to if the fitlet supports 2560x1440, or any variety of 4K? If so, at what refresh rates?
This would be interesting to know, as I'd like to use the fitlet not as a media player (for which 1920x1080 is enough) but as a lightweight office PC.

Best,

usenix

irads

Re: fitlet maximum resolution

Post by irads »

I tested fitlet on 2560*1440 and can confirm it works. I did not check refresh rate though. Maybe other users can share their findings.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

usenix
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: fitlet maximum resolution

Post by usenix »

That's great news, thank you!
While this will make me order a fitlet when it's available again,
I think that it's not only me who will be grateful for more detailed reports by other users.

Best,

usenix

Arwen
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:43 pm

Re: fitlet maximum resolution

Post by Arwen »

I've started a new topic in the fitlet compatible devices sub-forum, for compatible
displays. Including a reference to the above listed resolution. Here is a link;

http://www.fit-pc.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 085#p19085

If anyone has information to add, please do so. (I don't use graphics modes on my
fitlet... so I don't really have a monitor to add.)
Arwen Evenstar
Rivendale, Middle Earth

Post Reply

Return to “fitlet hardware”