Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: AVAccess HDBaseT extender

  1. #1
    Moderator VJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Belgium/Poland
    Posts
    9,598

    Default AVAccess HDBaseT extender

    I tried to use Miracast to broadcast the image from a pc to a TV in the bedroom, but there were too many issues. A big part of that can probably be attributed to the 30cm thick concrete/granite/steelframe wall that separates the rooms (the joys of living in an old communist prestige-project building).

    So I decided to get a HD-Base-T extender, to transfer hdmi over Ethernet cable. I got a more expensive model from AV Access, which supports HMDI 2.0, HDCP 2.2, 4K@60H, 4:4:4, ... ( http://avaccess.com/c251.html ). The cabling - due to better lack of cables - are in order from transmitter to receiver
    1. hdmi v1.3 cable from pc to transmitter
    2. Cat 5e ethernet to wall box
    3. Cat 6e ethernet in wall (to patch panel)
    4. Cat 6e ethernet (patchcable)
    5. Cat 6e ethernet in wall to wallbox
    6. Cat 6e ethernet to receiver
    7. hdmi 1.3 cable to tv

    The total length of ethernet is an estimated 15-25 meters. With the presence of v1.3 hdmi cables and cat 5e cables, as well as the numerous connection points (2 wallboxes, patch panel), I was expecting the devices not to be able to do better than 1080. According to the specifications, cable types affect what can go, so I was prepared for this. Despite this, it actually manages very stably to send a 4K signal. No delays, no interruptions, just perfect!

    Nice thing is that only one power supply is needed (sender or receiver side), and that powers the other unit over the ethernet cable.

    One downside I saw is that switching off the TV does not register in the computer as disconnecting the monitor, but that is about the only thing I've noticed so far... And that can probably be forced with software. O, and the receiver side gets quite hot (still touchable, but hot).

    So if anyone wondering about HD Base T: it does work well.
    Last edited by VJ; 14th May 2020 at 02:22.
    pixar
    Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow. (James Dean)

  2. #2
    Moderator dZeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    over there
    Posts
    4,585

    Default

    is there a particular reason to go for HDMI over ethernet vs. just hooking up a media player that supports 4K in the bedroom?

  3. #3
    Moderator VJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Belgium/Poland
    Posts
    9,598

    Default

    We also want to use it for games. It worked to some extent using Miracast, but it was quite bad. The game we used it with (Sherlock Crimes and Punishment) uses the Unreal Engine, at while it worked at times, we lost connection on several occasions and for sure there is too much lag for more active games.

    It is also the reason why I would have been ok with just 1080 resolution, as the computer has a GTX 1070, so 4K gaming will be quite a bit of a stretch anyway. I tested it though with Close to the sun (from 2019), and as long as there is not too much action, the card manages 4K in full detail (which I did not expect). But 1080 suffices for us, just nice to know that the extender manages more than what is required.

    Rather then getting a second game-capable computer, I thought the extender thing could be the easiest: both sender and receiver are very small boxes, the transmitter is sitting on a shelf near the computer (out of sight), the receiver can be mounted behind the TV. The reason to consider the bedroom as alternative location is that in the living room, we only have a projector, which limits what you can do during daytime (we don't have fully darkening blinds and the windows face south, so only after 19.00 or so we have the possibility for darkening sufficiently).
    Last edited by VJ; 14th May 2020 at 04:25.
    pixar
    Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow. (James Dean)

  4. #4
    Moderator dZeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    over there
    Posts
    4,585

    Default

    What about encoding the screen output to H264 in real-time, and streaming it through DLNA/UPNP to the bedroom? Most network media players support these protocols.
    You'd probably get a bit of lag (maybe 100-300ms?), so not great for FPS gaming.

  5. #5
    Moderator VJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Belgium/Poland
    Posts
    9,598

    Default

    I did not really think of that, mainly as I don't have a suitable media player (TV is "Smart", but has its limitations).

    I did think about this option: https://moonlight-stream.org/ , but thought it too much fuss to set up. I would have a raspberry pi I could use for it though, and a simple pc-on-a-stick costs about the same as the extender. I may still try this streaming thing, but as I wanted something to work fast and out-of-the-box, I somehow got stuck on the extender. I could still try the moonlight streaming (the HD-BaseT extender can be repurposed, so no loss there), but just don't have enough energy to mess up with such things (dealing too much with networks and configurations as it is ).
    pixar
    Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow. (James Dean)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •