Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

My monitor supports full-resolution display (2560x1440) only when connected to through either the DVI-D dual link port, or the DisplayPort.

My laptop, though, has neither of these two kinds of output. Instead, all it's got is a HDMI port (which is version 1.3, and I also read that the laptop's graphics chipset supports 2560x1440 at 60Hz).

So I'm wondering whether anyone has ever seen an HDMI-to-DVI dual link adapter, which will carry my ultra-highres signal to the monitor I just bought. So far I haven't seen any, and don't even know whether such an adapter (which I understand would have to be active, USB-powered and expensive (but I don't care)) exists.

share|improve this question
    
You're new to this site. Please read the faqs Shopping questions are not allowed. – wizlog Sep 5 '11 at 14:35
    
I am. Thanks for pointing me to the faqs. – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 14:38
    
Did you Google it, I got several hits...encrypted.google.com/… – Moab Sep 5 '11 at 14:53
6  
Those adapters are all "dumb", i.e. they claim to be "dual link" because they've got all the pins on the DVI side to look like a dual link cable, yet they only pass the entire HDMI signal through one of the two links of the DVI part. Hence they only support resolutions of up to 1920x1080 (and they all say so, I've never seen such an adapter claim to support 2560x1440 or higher), and won't work with the full resolution of my monitor (at least not higher than 35Hz refresh rate) – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 15:48
    
What I need is an adapter that's "active", i.e. will split the HDMI signal to both links of the dual link DVI port. I don't expect such an adapter/cable to come cheap. – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 15:49

I normally shy away from shopping recommendations, but this is not your run of the mill requirement and requires a bit of specialist insight. These are the guys to talk to about standards conversion:

Kramer Electronics

They have a distribution amp that takes HDMI and sends it out on HDMI + displayport at resolutions up to 2560x1600 but it states hdmi 1.4: http://www.kramerus.com/products/model.asp?pid=1213

As I understand it, there are technical issues converting hdmi to true DVD-D, but these are the guys to advise you.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you very much. I sent them an e-mail, let's see what they suggest. – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 19:56
5  
They said they have nothing for my case. :-( – alex k Sep 11 '11 at 13:31
    
Downvoting because this solution is not helpful (and wasn't for anyone so far). I needed to solve similar problem before I read this Q/A and the only thing that was possible to find (and which works, although with its limitations) was device similar to one mentioned in other answer. (In my case it was USB3 to DisplayPort.) I'm also staying away from shopping recommendations – view this Q/A primarily as a way of achieving results. – miroxlav Jun 27 '15 at 8:28

I'm writing this on a 2560x1600 Dual Link DVI monitor connected to a computer using HDMI 1.4.

Stop searching for HDMI to DVI-DL adapters. All adapters that you'll find are passive single-link adapters, even though they may be advertised as dual-link.

Although a HDMI 1.4 to Dual Link DVI adapter is possible to implement using an Analog Devices ADV7619 297 MHz HDMI 1.4 receiver that does automatically split high pixel clock links into odd and even pixels and two ADV7513 165 MHz HDMI 1.4 transmitters to transmit the pixels over two separate links, no manufacturer is making such a device.

You need a device that generates Dual Link DVI output from a single link input. And the only one that's widely available is a DisplayPort to Dual Link DVI adapter, sold under several different brands.

Dual link to DVI adapter

With that, we've reduced the problem to converting HDMI 1.4 to DisplayPort 1.1. There were no solutions for this until recently, when the STMicroelectronics chip STDP2600 became available. Several brands sell adapters based on this chip. In case your monitor takes a DP input at full resolution, using only this adapter is enough - no need to convert to DVI-DL.

enter image description here

Connecting those two together should provide a HDMI 1.4 to Dual-Link-DVI solution. However, the Linux Radeon driver (xf86-video-ati) was still not happy with it, and ignored the 2560x1600 videomode in the list of valid modes in EDID. The reason was that the Linux Radeon driver would enable pixel clocks above 165 MHz only in case a monitor has a HDMI Vendor Specific Data Block in the Consumer Electronic Association extended block of EDID.

Obviously, a pure DVI monitor will not have a HDMI VSDB in CEA EB of EDID. I solved that by adding a S/PDIF audio de-embbedder for HDMI that I got off eBay into the chain that adds the CEA EB to add audio descriptors to EDID. A proper solution would be to provide a modified EDID file directly to the driver.

This works for Linux, on Windows you may not need the EDID change, or you may need a more extensive one. I don't have a Windows machine to test.

enter image description here

String all three together, make sure all are powered up via their USB connectors and voilà, beautiful full resolution 2560x1600 picture at 60 Hz refresh rate on my Dual Link DVI monitor.

share|improve this answer
    
0_0. Nice answer. Not quite a product recommendation, explains the process. Mr Goldburg would be proud however. Three usb ports? – Journeyman Geek Nov 7 '15 at 23:50
    
Would these also work with Apple 30" cinema display? I need to connect a Chromecast to it. – Nimbuz Dec 24 '15 at 7:33
    
Yes, it should work. – Vojtech Apr 23 at 21:43

For 2560x1440 you need an active adapter but it also have to explicitly support the resolution and dual links. This requires an additional power source.

This is the only adapter i found that really supports this resolution and even a bit higher (2560x1600).

http://eu.startech.com/AV/Displayport-Converters/Mini-DisplayPort-to-DVI-Dual-Link-Active-Adapter%E2%80%93USB-Powered~MDP2DVID

share|improve this answer
    
The link provided is for Mini-DisplayPort not HDMI... – Lucas Mar 6 '14 at 21:33
    
HDMI doesn't support dual-link to dual-link conversion, only displayport and dvi does. At least in the current spec, that's why you can't find a converter on the market in this high resolution. – t.mikael.d Mar 7 '14 at 14:38
    
I follow that, just confusing to have a link to a Mini-DisplayPort adapter when the question is specifically about HDMI. This is not really a solution to the OP. – Lucas Mar 7 '14 at 16:31
1  
It's a solution because it's the only alternative that currently works. I shall edit and add this, thanks for pointing it out. – t.mikael.d Mar 11 '14 at 7:58

http://www.ldlc-pro.com/fiche/PB00034665.html or similar; price < $10. It's usually provided with new laptops anyway, I didn't even have to buy one. Such adapters really work (tested yesterday), but of course you need a dual-DVI-D cable. And a female HDMI to female HDMI adapter.

If like me you can't get a higher res that 1080p, this is most likely due to the HDMI component of the motherboard; but there is a neat workaround for this : simply go in the drivers settings, and create a new custom resolution.

At least NVIDIA has such an option; I don't know about AMD. It will display a "we take no responsability for this !" warning, btw. Some users report that using 60Hz work fine at first, but crashes at restart. Use 35Hz instead.

For information, I have a Dell laptop with NVIDIA Optimus ( GTX 525M and Intel GMA 3000 at the same time ) and a Dell U3011 monitor. This solution works at 2560x1600 @ 35Hz

The follwing is an edit by user joevt. I'm not sure I agree with it.
Note that the adapters listed are single link only even though they may say dual link DVI. 2560x1600 @ 35Hz works because it's slow enough for single link DVI (pixel clock is less than 165 MHz). Anything faster for DVI such as 2560x1600 @ 60Hz requires dual link DVI which these HDMI adapters do not support. HDMI is single link but allows for pixel clocks up to 340 MHz (HDMI 1.3 or greater). To convert dual link (e.g. 2 pixels @ 134 MHz) to single link (e.g. 1 pixel @ 268 MHz) requires additional circuitry in the adapter.

share|improve this answer
    
Care to explain the downvote ? This really saved a big presentation for us. – Calvin1602 Mar 15 '13 at 22:28

I used to have one of these to play a PS3 on my computer monitor. I think I got mine from Best Buy. They also appear to sell them on Newegg though.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks, but those only support resolutions up to 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. I need something that can do 2560x1440 or 2560x1600. See my comments above for more. – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 15:50
    
I looked at all the HDMI cables & adapters (with both displayport output or DVI output), and none claim to reach resolutions above 1920x1200. Thank, anyway. – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 20:10
    
Oh, okay. Good luck finding the right one then. – Robert Sep 5 '11 at 20:15

It does exist. Search DVI-D to HDMI in Google

DVI-D Dual Link Male to HDMI Female Adapter - Adapts DVI to HDMI - Vice Versa

You want it to look like this, right?

share|improve this answer
5  
If you look at the DVI part of the photo you attached, it's got teeth missing, which is what a single-link DVI cable looks like. Besides I need a HDMI-to-DVI cable, not the opposite, since I need to convert my laptop's HDMI signal to a DVI port. – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 15:53
    
@alex: I have a dual-link version of the above cable. I got it from eBay. – paradroid Sep 5 '11 at 16:38
5  
Most of these cheap cables have "fake teeth" that make them look dual-link, when in reality the entire HDMI signal goes through one of the two links of the "dual-link" cable. Until someone tries and sees that they can get 2560x1440 resolution (which is highly unlikely) they should all be considered plain HD (1920x1200). – alex k Sep 5 '11 at 17:35
    
AFAIK missing pins in the centre = single link DVI. – Al Kepp Jan 25 '13 at 16:55

protected by Community Jun 25 '12 at 8:05

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site.

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.