- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hello,
I want to check if the NUC8i7HVK will support a custom display monitor (I don't have it right now, it is being manufactured) that have a pixel definition of 5760x1080. I have a few tables with numbers about that screen but I can't match them exactly with the specs provided from the NUC. I am particularly interested in the pixel clock value, the minimum I need to be supported by the NUC would be 350 MHz.
I suspect the NUC is more than able to support this requirement, based on others bandwidth values or clocks, but I need to have some official table from Intel (or AMD in this case) confirming this, so I can validate the choice of a NUC8i7HVK.
Does anyone know where I can get the pixel clock supported by this computer ? Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Francois
Link Copied
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi fpoepnp,
This is not a direct answer to your question, but a side question.
How are you planning on connecting to the custom monitor? DP, USB-C (TB3), HDMI?
If using DP, please consider
DisplayPort has a number of fixed rates at which data can travel on the cable. When a video mode is selected that doesn't need the amount of bandwidth of a particular physical clock, empty data words are inserted instead.
Each of the physical clock speeds has its own name.
- RBR: Reduced Bit Rate. 1.64 Gbps.
- HBR1: High Bit Rate 1. 2.7 Gbps.
- HBR2: High Bit Rate 2. 5.4 Gbps. (Introduced with DP 1.2)
- HBR3: High Bit Rate 3: 8.1 Gbps. (Introduced with DP 1.3)
I'm not sure about USB-C 40Gbps (TB3)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi MikeLevine.
Indeed, it will be DP, and according to the numbers you mention, DP 1.2 which is supported by this NUC seems to be sufficient for my needs. The way I understand this is that I need to consider the fixed rate that covers the needs, instead of a simple bandwidth calculation. But anyway, it seems to fit in this case too.
Thanks for your comment!
Regards
Francois

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page