| Soleron said: How can processors not be fast enough already? If an "HDMI chip" can't do it, but in a general purpose ARM CPU. Why do specialised coprocessors even exist today? |
I really don't know why they are not fast enough. Most likely its a financial reason. Like one of those, "too many 230 mhz HDMI chips at the warehouse, why bother buying new faster ones?"
The 1.4 HDMI cable it self can push something like 10.2 gb/s but the chips used at the moment are not fast enough to send or accept even half that.
"I knew this would happen. TV manufacturers want TV features to be on a yearly upgrade cycle (with 720p -> 1080p -> internet enabled -> 3D -> new 3D) while TV buyers only want to pay once and have it last 10 years. That conflict will come into sharp relief when people buy something saying "3D" and get told they aren't getting the best picture even with a 3DTV."
This is the 3rd time it happened with 3D. In 2007, Samsung and Mistubishi started selling "3D ready" TVs. They were Texas instruments DLP tech based and vere actually pretty good. They could do 1080p per eye@60, by hiding half of the pixels in a checkerboard pattern. Then sometime in 2009, that idea was scrapped for HDMI 1.4, which all manufacturers decided to support.
Today its widely known that HDMI 1.4 so far has been inferior in 3D quality compared to DLP checkerboard. But we will see what happens next year.
I wonder how long consumers can take constant crap like this though... every few years, something which should have been included from the get go is intoduced. To watch Avatar 2 people will need new 3D bluray players, TVs, receivers...everything.
