it would be nice if the Intel Graphics driver would support overriding EDID information like described in this document from Microsoft:
Why is this needed?
In a common HTPC (multimedia PC) setup with a PC, AVR (audio video receiver) and a television, the EDID information stored in the receiver & television that is passed to the PC determines the video and audio capabilities like: supported resolutions, supported audio formats etc ..
The problem is that very often the system only "sees" the EDID information of the television, and not that of the receiver, and so you don't get support for audio formats like DTS, DTS-HD, Dolby TrueHD that are supported by the receiver ...
The latest Sandy bridge CPU and corresponding chipset support all these sound standards, but they often not useable cause of these EDID problems.
Actually it really does not matter what video card / integrated graphics you use, NVidia and AMD graphics have the same problem, but their drivers
allows people to override the EDID information like is described in the above linked document from Microsoft.
Please implement this stuff, shouldn't be that hard to do, for one of you senior driver programmers it's probably just a few hours of work ...
Have an ASUS vg248 connected via HDMI 1.4b that should be able to get 1080p 120hz, but cannot because of this. So glad I spent $60 on this cable and $300 on this monitor.
To throw some oil on the fire. Windows 8.1 Intel i7 4700EQ connected to a big Sharp 4K monitor. Latest driver when I built the image was I think , win64_153628.4332.exe
Turn it off, display disappears. start playing content, turn display on and ignore the WM_OHNOTHEMONITORHASCHANGED and foom, all memory disappears in less than 20 minutes. How about that for an awesome leak, the memory disappears *somewhere* This doesn't happen if you reboot with the monitor turned on.
EDID is a nightmare, and that is before you even mention the catastrophe that is HOT PLUG on Display Port. Yes, it may be the next best thing, No, stop going away when I change the input to something else!
And then people wonder why IBASE are building in EDID emulators...
Of course there are many more users that would like this feature--but most people know that a major corporation is not going to listen to what their users want. From Intel's perspective--why do this? There aren't people rioting outside headquarters, and you guys know that AMD (at one time your biggest competition) is largely irrelevant in this day and age. Obviously this issue has not and will not affect Intel's business in any measurable way. At this point what most people would appreciate more is an honest answer--which I can guess is, 'No, we're not going to add this feature". To continually string along people on this forum is sort of an insult to the people asking for this change. At some point a decision needs to be made.
i was new to use nuc6i5 as HTPC. After I install the custom EDID inf, I was get blank screen after switch the refresh rate every time. I need to uninstall the driver to become normal. I would like to know the reason and how to fix it? I haven't this issue in my previou PC with Raedon display.
I can't wait for AMD to release their ZEN CPUs and hopefully put a beating on Intel's market share. Simply because of this fiasco that has continued for years I am basing my next desktop build and laptop on AMD CPUs. I have had it with Intel and their BS approach to this issue for power users. My laptop display is rated at 75hz, and runs well beyond that in laptops that utilize Nvidia discrete graphics and doesn't rely on Intel graphics as a routing. You say there are very few users demanding this change or having this "issue/bug" yet there are literally hundreds of threads all over the internet about this exact issue. Your lack of concern and promptness to make the changes necessary clearly show your lack of concern. Five years to re-enable something you've purposely broken is ridiculous. Absolutely unacceptable. I hope AMD crushes you.
Just registered to bump up this thread! I really need it.
I'm considering buying laptop with intel graphic and would like to change screen. If I can't I will look for something else.
Okay, here's questions from my latest meeting with Development about this. If any of you can help provide answers it'll help with the request.
Here's what I need if you're willing to help. Please pay attention to the details of what's needed, I don't want them coming back using "incomplete information/explanation" as an excuse.
Respond to this using "Use Advanced Editor" to attach files. Get your system where it's 'failing', (meaning your panel should have a missing refresh rate or mode in CUI) and then capture the logs below.
How do customers know that their laptops can support refresh rates of 75 Hz or higher? Well, lets see. In Linux, you don't disallow EDID overrides, so you can overclock the panels to 75Hz or higher, and tones of people do exactly this. People also have laptops without Optimus/Intel HD with the EXACT SAME PANEL and can overclock them very high - some laptop panels can even go beyond 120 Hz - I've personally seen 160 Hz without errors/glitches/etc. I KNOW they are the same panels, because they are the exact same model number because Clevo is completely transparent about what panels are used in their laptops and let the customers choose, and these same panels are overclocked just fine in Linux. It is entirely your driver that disallows EDID overrides that is the issue here, nothing else.
You guys are losing customers, and you are laying off thousands of workers fairly regularly (hell, you just did a few days ago). If you don't give the customers what they want, this is what happens. We will vote with our money, and more layoffs will happen. If you give people what they want, they will reward you and you won't have to worry about that. It really is that simple.
Bryce I have a LG display in my laptop. Its model is LP156WF6 SPB1. This exact laptop display model number is being shipped in other 15.6" laptops that don't use optimus or have an option to disable it and they sell the display as G-Sync. It is G-Sync capable. Users are able to overclock the display and the manufacturer of the laptops (Sager/Clevo) overclock the display at the factory prior to shipment to 75hz. Users have reported being able to overclock much further beyond that once they receive the laptop. Intel is artificially limiting my ability to fully utilize my display to its maximum potential. Why do we want this overclock/unlocked edid overrides? We want to use our displays to their full potential and not some artificial limitation being imposed by Intel! Change it or lose customers in the future. I promise this isn't the only website/forum on this topic. Head over to Notebook Review Forums and there are literally hundreds of people asking about that at some time in the past and people recommending users avoid Optimus and any laptop that utilizes Intel graphics.
also check all the forums from hundreds of people with home theatre systems, that cannot make their setup work with a Intel graphics driver.
Note that I'm not a home theater person myself, so I have no idea about their exact problems, but I have spend quite some time on their forums to resolve my own problems with a replacement laptop screen, and I know they are dying for custom EDIDs to make it all work i.e. making the graphics card send out the right video signal to make full use of their screens, even though an AVR is in between.
So do you have a config you'd like to provide details on as I requested above, or are you just venting? I'm trying to help and comments like yours, while informative, kinda, don't serve to further my cause of moving this forward to a solution. When it comes down to it, it's about data, that's what engineering can work with. Let's get them the data so changes can happen. If you're still upset, PM me and I'll listen to all of what you have to say, I totally understand and am here for you, and yes I'm serious.
To address some of what you said, Linux drivers may be able to force resolutions not available in EDID, which means they're not truly supported by the panel but you're forcing them anyway. By unsupported that could mean the panel manufacturer didn't feel the panel could be warranted against flaws that occur at that config, or they didn't perform the QA on it needed to guarantee performance. Or, it could mean they tested it and it wasn't up to performance standards or could even harm the panel. Either way, it's not supported. Can a CPU be forced to overclock beyond its limits stated by manufacturers? SURE! But unless it's made for it, there are chances you'll burn it when running it for extended lengths. So just because you can force a panel to limits not covered under EDID, doesn't mean you should, and manufacturers who have to RMA panels set their EDID's where they are for a reason. IF there's a panel which should output at a RR that the Intel driver isn't making available, that's a bug and I want to get it fixed.
As for Optimus, I already stated above that units with third party Gfx could use different panels rated for higher res and RR, even though they're the same laptop model. Again, get me the EDID showing yours is supposed to support it and it isn't.
For those running an AVR setup where the AVR isn't passing the panel EDID correctly, again, please get me the EDID or state what your config is so I can pass it on to Developers. Thanks
Yeah it was just venting, but at the same time, I believe my information to be fully accurate. You say that it's forcing resolutions and refresh rates that are unsupported mean that they are not guaranteed which is true, but customers should at least be able to have the choice. One of the big reasons why Intel got as popular as they did is because they allowed for CPUs to be overclocked. If they did not allow for CPUs to be overclocked, and AMD was the only company that allowed for CPUs to be overclocked, AMD might have won the CPU war. You could say that overclockers are just a niche market and I suppose that's fair, but at the same time these overclockers are willing to pay a premium for better parts that overclock higher so I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up being a higher market share and more "valuable" customers to companies like Intel and AMD. Of course you could damage your panel by overclocking it, just like you could damage a CPU by overclocking it, or RAM by overclocking it, or your GPU by overclocking it. People who overclock are willing to deal with the possible repercussions in exchange for the best possible performance, and people who overclock are completely aware of the risk that they are taking. The choice should be up to the customers what they want to do with their hardware, there should not be arbitrary limits imposed.
"As for Optimus, I already stated above that units with third party Gfx could use different panels rated for higher res and RR, even though they're the same laptop model".
No, I am telling you people overclock the refresh rate of the exact same model of panel in a non-Optimus laptop versus an Optimus laptop, and also overclock the refresh rate of the exact same model of panel in Linux on the exact same Optimus laptop.
I'm merely sharing my insight. I'm not saying that my laptop panel is rated to run at higher than 60 Hz, because I'm not sure, but I've seen laptop's with panels rated at 60 Hz overclocked to 120 Hz and beyond. TN panels overclock extremely well, and IPS panels do not overclock extremely well which is why you often see 120 Hz TN panels but usually only 75 Hz IPS panels. I have no doubt that my TN panel would overclock extremely well (likely beyond 75 Hz) in my Optimus laptop if Intel HD drivers allowed me to do so via EDID overrides. AMD and Nvidia allow customers to try their luck at this, Intel does not, and both myself and everyone else here want that changed. There have been plenty of threads where people OCed panels and yet I have yet to see one mention of a brick anywhere among those panels. I don't really see any downsides for allowing this.
I agree with ipkpjersi
You Intel should give customers the choice to overcome imposed limits. You say "they are limited for a reason" and that's true but all ipkpjersi says is scientifically true too, no doubt about that.
A lot of people like me choose Intel for OC reasons, and the same applies to nvidia and AMD. They both give the opportunity to use your own hardware as you like (as EU Justice Court has already stated multiple times) letting the customer use a different resolution AND refresh rate.
Just put a disclaimer wich declines every accountability of Producer and/or seller if the Display becomes unusable, it is more than sufficient from a legal point of view (I'm a lawyer in Italy)
The matter is not only "fixing problems" as you, Bryce, correctly pointed out here, but ALSO give opportunities to make a better use of the hardware at the same time.
I personally use an Optimus Clevo P157SMA with a HUGE calculation power underwhelmed by a TN panel capped @ 60HZ and it is for warranty reasons as you say but my seller warranty is already expired and Intel has still not given me the freedom to choose to use my hardware as I want.
Thank you for your consideration, I really appreciate it.
I use the exact same laptop as you - Clevo P157SMA. I would love for Intel to allow us to use our laptops to their full potential. Hopefully they will allow this to happen.
Thanks for your insight.
This issue is not just about refresh rate overclocking.
The driver doesn't even allow lower refresh rates like 24hz.
24hz or 23.976hz is essential to viewing film without 3:2 pulldown. Every wondered why your favourite netflix show looks crap in panning shots? That's why.
The EDID standard isn't perfect, and I've seen many monitors behave clumsily due to slightly fudged settings.
On linux, or almost any non-Intel graphics card, you can just set the correct settings and use it.
I actually can't believe you guys have to persuade your own company to finish an incomplete software feature ... that almost everyone else does not have an issue with.
I cannot wait for AMD's new gear, I will avoid Intel for as long as I can then. I've had a 1440p monitor sat on my desk doing nothing just because of a minor feature that has been ignored for 5 years by a corporation making billions a year in profit.
This nonsense is class action worthy.
Bryce@Intel: I think we (users) and you (I mean You Bryce, I don't know about the devs/engineers) aren't talking about the same thing. I understand what you mean but this isn't what we want! We want override capability (that's why it's called EDID override) that all the other competitors gave us many-many years ago.
We don't talk about legal/warranty issues here.
Let's see 2 examples and if you want I will gather every info about the 2nd if you feel it will solve my problem.
@ arvest: I'm a multimedia user. As @ Replete said it's about refresh rate.
0. This ticket and this one Bryce@Intel, if you want I'll spend time to gather all info about the 2nd case, but we are not talking about recognizing correctly edid features now but to give the ability to the poor user to able to do what he wants.
I look after a Digital Signage network of 2000 Media Player PCs. There are many scenarios where the screen is not plugged in. Under Intel I am unable to Remote Access onto the PC to diagnose issues. This is because if no screen is present in Windows the displays is black. Under AMD and Nvidia I can set the EDID which means if the screen is unplugged I can still Remote Access onto the PC.
Another scenario is when the PC is used with no screen ever being present such as when the PC is used for running tracking analytic software. In this case a PC is configured in the office and sent to site with just a camera plugged in to perform analytics. Management of the PC is performed by remote access to the PC. Intel based chips do not work in this scenario.
My gripe is that Intel and or Microsoft should allow Windows to operate even with no monitor detected. I know I can buy HDMI EDID emulators for the second scenario, however, this does not help with the first scenario.