Valve tells Ars its "trying to unblock" limits caused by open source driver issues.
See full article...
See full article...
Why won’t Steam Machine support HDMI 2.1? Digging in on the display standard drama.
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Frustrating that an issue like this is cropping up in 2025 but sounds like it should eventually get resolved? Maybe?
Gotta say though, this graphic is one of the least-informative I've ever seen:
Gotta say though, this graphic is one of the least-informative I've ever seen:
Upvote
354
(356
/
-2)
Surprise surprise, I thought that anything could be listed is as HDMI2.1 since much of the standard is optional. If valve decides to go to the darkside, I wonder if they can LEGALLY say it's HDMI2.1 without consequences 
Last edited:
Upvote
80
(81
/
-1)
lol, not the part where they get their moneySurprise surprise, I thought that anything could be listed is as HDMI2.1 since much of the standard is optional. If valve was a blackhat I wonder if they could still LEGALLY say it's HDMI2.1
That is mandatory.
Upvote
112
(112
/
0)
The sooner protectionist groups like the HDMI forum go the way of the dodo the better.
Upvote
311
(314
/
-3)
- Add bookmark
- Featured
- #7
Not supporting HDMI-VRR is also an issue for running through an AVR, like my Denon X1700 doesn’t support FreeSync (though my TV does).
Upvote
81
(81
/
0)
I wonder how exactly the HDMI Forum exerts their authority. Are they saying Valve cannot advertise 2.1 support if they're using the open-source drivers? Could Valve just do the implementation and not advertise it? Has AMD signed some agreement with the Forum and they'd violate it with an open source implementation? Is it a patent issue?
Upvote
176
(177
/
-1)
Upvote
145
(147
/
-2)
They control the use of the logo, branding, and IP rights to the HDMI standard, and are the ones to certify compliance.
They take it seriously apparently.
Upvote
174
(174
/
0)
Just guessing, but HDMI Forum probably has a patent pool that can only be licensed under certain conditions (not open-sourcing NDA'd inner workings). Do it anyway, and you're violating not only the NDAs you signed to get access to the spec, but also violating the license agreement and thereby opening yourself up to patent suits.
Upvote
126
(126
/
0)
Unless you're manufacturing your stuff in the US, they may also intercept and smash up your devices on entry to the country as counterfeit goods.
This is their literal business, and suffice it to say it's not in Valve's interest to get caught up in fighting that racket.
Upvote
153
(154
/
-1)
There are patents and licenses tied to the actual implementation of features such as HDMI-VRR. So it's not just that they can't advertise it or even advertise it with a wink under a different term, but they can't legally implement or enable something like HDMI-VRR without approval.
So while HDMI 2.1 might have optional features that don't have to be implemented to call it 2.1 instead of 2.0, they also can't call it 2.0 while offering VRR. And I'm not sure an HDMI display would accept HDMI-VRR if the computer negotiates the connection as a 2.0 device
Upvote
46
(48
/
-2)
Gosh, who could have predicted that making part of an international "standard" pay-to-play would have introduced difficulties down the road? You know, I'm starting to think this whole "HDMI" thing is a scam, especially when superior standards like DisplayPort exist.
Upvote
229
(235
/
-6)
This got me wondering if Valve could get away with "one little trick" and just make it internally a DP port (as far as the driver is concerned) and wire it to an external port that is just an HDMI 2.1 dongle in disguise?
To the user, it just looks like an HDMI port on the back of the case. . .
Although that probably means that in OS management tools, you have 2 DisplayPort ports show up, and zero HDMI, which might be a technical support issue as users get confused.
Although it's probably also too late in the product development cycle to make such a change. If it's even theoretically possible.
Last edited:
Upvote
123
(124
/
-1)
https://meincmagazine.com/gadgets/202...ems-with-8gb-gpus-but-valve-is-working-on-it/
From the tests of similar GPUs, this machine isn't going to be doing 120FPS while playing at 4K, so it's probably a non issue.
Upvote
88
(96
/
-8)
Steam Machine is essentially a custom PC in a 6inch cube form.
It uses AMD GPU on Linux, which are open source drives. Valve is a big supporter of Open Source Software, just look at how they help Arch Linux, FEX, and have open sourced Proton.
It's the HDMI Forum who disallow HDMI 2.1 Software from being in Open Source drivers. If AMD had a closed source driver for Linux, then it wouldn't be a problem.
Ironically, I think that would mean Steam Machine running Windows would be able to use HDMI 2.1, since the drivers on Windows aren't open source for AMD hardware.
Upvote
112
(112
/
0)
Depends on the game, doesn't it? An older game that isn't as visually demanding might run at 120FPS at 4K just fine, no? It's not like you can only play the latest greatest games on Steam. . . they have a back catalog stretching what, 20 years?
A lot of the back catalog might not support 4k at all, but I bet some will, like maybe things published approx 2010 to 2020, say?
Upvote
54
(56
/
-2)
I wish there was a solution like this for the Switch 2 that has a similar issue because of the USB-C connection. The HDMI stranglehold on the industry is bad for everyone except for the people making money off it.
Upvote
74
(74
/
0)
Upvote
168
(168
/
0)
The whole original justification for creating "Intellectual Property" (copyright, patents) laws was they were supposed to promote progress & innovation to benefit all.
But it's become mostly an extortion racket that hobbles progress & innovation. Instead of supporting creators, they reward gatekeepers.
But it's become mostly an extortion racket that hobbles progress & innovation. Instead of supporting creators, they reward gatekeepers.
Upvote
111
(116
/
-5)
I'm confused. In the world of patented media formats, AFAIK there's nothing stopping a company that has and is paying for a license to use the codec from using an open source implementation of said codec in their products. Does HDMI Forum think they have some special sauce that just can't possibly be released in an open fashion, even with the license requirement? It sounds like AMD and Valve have both paid their licensing for HDMI, why wouldn't the Forum be able to sue anyone using the implementation without paying for a license regardless?
If we have to live in this dumb software patent world, I don't see why the Forum should be able to have these restrictions if they're not writing and supplying the relevant software themselves to their licensees.
If we have to live in this dumb software patent world, I don't see why the Forum should be able to have these restrictions if they're not writing and supplying the relevant software themselves to their licensees.
Upvote
-11
(8
/
-19)
Patents can both help progress and innovation in the big picture and long term while also hobbling it in the short term. I'm curious what economists would have to report on the history of that, but I'm sure even they have plenty of different conclusions and arguments about it too. Either way, it stinks in the short term
Upvote
28
(36
/
-8)
If we're willing to play semantics, my AORUS FO48U monitor is basically just a rebadged LG C2 but with a DisplayPort and KVM instead of a tuner. There was also the Philips 558M1RY, which was a 55" monitor, but similarly had no TV functionality.
Ultimately no, there are no TVs on the market with native DisplayPort, and it's largely a function of HDMI gatekeeping CEC functionality and most home theater hardware not supporting it either.
Upvote
92
(92
/
0)
It's not any better on the Nvidia side for Linux sadly. On Displayport if I turn off my monitor I can't get it back, a very common issue. I tried every workaround on earth. On HDMI if I do the same I'm okay but I have to reset the audio stack to get sound back at least 50% of the time. Tons of distros, wayland and xorg, different DEs, all have issues on nvidia, at least with my monitor.
I'm so close to buying a cheap Intel Arc as a display adaptor so I don't lose all my hair.
I'm so close to buying a cheap Intel Arc as a display adaptor so I don't lose all my hair.
Upvote
22
(23
/
-1)
If you check out the other Ars article linked above, AMD literally wrote the driver to support it and the HDMI mafia barred them from releasing it.
Upvote
188
(188
/
0)
Is something really a legitimate standard if it doesn't have an open source implementation? I fall squarely on the side of no.
Upvote
69
(75
/
-6)
What if someone wants to play Silksong on their expensive valvecube at 4k/120? Should they just have bought a console?
Upvote
28
(31
/
-3)
As mentioned in the article, there's a DisplayPort 1.4 port if the user really cares that much.
Upvote
54
(54
/
0)
Just the opposite - if it could maintain 4K120 then it wouldn't need VRR. But since it can't, that makes VRR an even more useful feature to have.
Upvote
55
(55
/
0)
My TV supports Freesync, so that's not an issue. Needing to use chroma subsampling to achieve 120Hz is a bit of a bummer though. I'm curious: when using a dongle to go from Displayport to HDMI, is there any issue with VRR/freesync support that way or should it work just fine?
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
It's not really a Linux issue, but an HDMI forum issue.
HDMI doesn't want to open-source it. If they weren't so dead-set against it, it'd already be available to Linux.
Fortunately, for most gaming uses DP 1.4 is adequate and available. It's only living room gamers who'll have to worry about it, and they'll kinda just have to deal with a--from a quick glance at Amazon--$20 dongle or cable.
Upvote
65
(65
/
0)
They could (assuming they could write the code or license it from AMD), but using the same driver everybody else uses is a lot easier and leads to fewer bugs. Given that HDMI 2.1 features are of marginal utility for a computer of such modest power and you can just use DisplayPort anyway, Valve probably figures this is the HDMI Forum's problem to fix.
Upvote
23
(24
/
-1)
AMD has developed full HDMI 2.1 capability, but have decided not to release it as a proprietary driver after the HDMI Forum rejected their request to release it as open source. I don't know their reasoning, or if Valve could change their minds. One issue is that AMD doesn't hold the copyright on the entirety of the open source Linux driver. Since they have upstreamed it into the Linux kernel, there have been contributions from people outside of AMD, and those developers retain the copyright for their contributions. So they would need to audit and rewrite any portions that they didn't hold the copyright on in order to release a modified proprietary driver. Or find some way to have proprietary binary blobs that the open source driver uses, in a manner that satisfies both the HDMI forum, the GPL, and their driver architecture.
Upvote
77
(77
/
0)