http://www.pcworld.com/article/2017340/sharp-to-launch-worlds-thinnest-4k-monitor-for-about-5-500.html
I would say lets shoot for 4096 x 2560, which puts us at 16:10. Sharp has to start busting moves hard and get sales of it's IGZO tech moving, or it will go out of business. For that matter, we should really consider mini display port out and multi-monitor output. If we do the multi monitor out, then the resolutions we need to drive goes up considerably. I would say PCI-e 3 and probably 8 lanes if you want future proofing. Can we somehow manage multi card co-operation similar to CrossFire or SLI? If not, would it be better to put something like (4) LGA 1155 sockets on a board and let users just populate them as they need to? I know LGA1155 is intel CPU not GPU but if it could be used it is common and therefor probably about the cheapest well proven way to go. What about memory sockets? http://www.nexustechnology.com/sites/default/files/datasheets/GDDR5COMPINTR-DS-XXX.pdf Just putting out ideas. On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's funny because it's almost... like the OGD1 > http://wiki.opengraphics.org/**tiki-index.php?page=OGD1<http://wiki.opengraphics.org/tiki-index.php?page=OGD1> > but with only slightly lower specs. > > Le 2012-12-08 04:27, Jack Carroll a écrit : > >> In principle, this sounds reasonable. Modular construction breaks >> through a lot of bottlenecks. However, not all machines have PCIe >> slots. My newest one has AGP; the rest have only PCI. How hard would >> it be to offer the same frame buffer and analog back end on more than >> one base board? >> >> We might find that the cost of DACs and cable drivers explodes above >> 2560x1600, if available at all. Better connectors and cables might >> also be required at such high pixel rates; it might even be necessary >> to move the DACs off the board and onto a plug mounted on the monitor >> itself to avoid physical problems in signal transmission. But nothing >> says there has to be only one model of OGC base board. >> >> If the GPU is conceived as a piggyback board, rather than a socketed >> IC, the base board would be a lot more future-proof. The important >> thing is to select a board-to-board connector pair that can support >> very fast digital signals, probably as LVDS. >> >> One thing I'd like to see is a jumper header or DIP switch that can >> lock it into any of the oldest and most generic VGA modes and block >> all software mode commands, for bootstrapping a system up from bare >> iron with a generic monitor. That would also be good for debugging >> drivers and config files. One possible use for the socket would be a >> fixed-frequency jumper plug module in place of the GPU >> >> Jack Carroll >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Dieter BSD" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 8:15:42 PM >> Subject: [Open-graphics] Open Framebuffer board >> >> Here is a summary of what I think we want in an open framebuffer board: >> >> PCIe Number of lanes to be determined >> At least 2 heads How much would extra heads increase price? >> I think 3 heads should cover most users' needs. >> At least 2560x1600 Is 4096*2160 unreasonable? >> At least 24 bit color >> Support for VGA, component, s-video, composite (others?) >> Support for DVI, HDMI, Displayport (others?) >> Support for use as console >> >> Support for adding an optional OGP-GPU (Open Graphics Project GPU): >> >> Option 1) Socket for FPGA / DSP / other? >> use the same pinout for OGP-GPU chip >> >> Option 2) a mini-PCIe slot or 2 >> put OGP-GPU on mini-PCIe card >> (allows adding an optional Broadcom Crystal HD video decoder, >> or any other Mini-PCIe card) >> >> Option 2 is probably less expensive. Would it create a bottleneck >> or other problem? >> >> Bracket connectors: >> Option 1) DVI, s-video, HDMI, and (mini?) Displayport (if they all fit) >> Option 2) LFH connector(s) [1] plus breakout cables >> >> Option 2 might allow having any combination of ports the user needs, >> without adapters to convert one type of port to another. It isn't >> always possible to convert a port to the type needed. This would require >> the output drivers to have sufficient versatility. Is this doable, >> oh analog gurus? >> >> There are existing video cards that use LFH connectors, so it might >> be possible to use the existing off-the-shelf breakout cables. >> >> [1] >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Low-force_helix<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-force_helix> >> >> People that don't need a gpu can immediately use the board as is. >> Once the OGP-GPU is available, users that want/need a gpu can just >> plug it in. Depending on what socket(s)/slot(s) we include, users >> can add FPGA, DSP, video decoder, etc. Some of these parts may not >> be as open as we would like, but they are optional. It should be >> possible for the board itself to be completely documented. >> >> The idea is that we only need to design and build one board that >> is versatile enough to serve a wide range of uses, and to remain >> useful for a long time. (That's why I'm hoping we can support 4K >> displays. 4K displays are rare and expensive today, but are likely >> to become less expensive, as consumer electronics usually does.) >> And it should be possible to keep the card relatively inexpensive. >> I'm sure that price was a major reason that there wasn't a lot >> of demand for the OGD1. The power consumption should be quite low. >> No extra power cables, no "jet engine" fans, no heatsinks. >> >> So, who can fill in some of the details that I'm not sure about? >> Have I left out anything? >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Open-graphics mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.duskglow.com/**mailman/listinfo/open-graphics<http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics> >> List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com) >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Open-graphics mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.duskglow.com/**mailman/listinfo/open-graphics<http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics> >> List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com) >> > > ______________________________**_________________ > Open-graphics mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.duskglow.com/**mailman/listinfo/open-graphics<http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics> > List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
