Fri May 15, 2015 7:31 am
It would be far easier, simpler, higher quality and cheaper to get a longer HDMI cable.
The reason for this is that wireless display technologies have all sorts of compromises. First off, you'd need a wireless transmitter as well as a receiver for the monitor. The receiver will need to plug into the HDMI port on the monitor. Then be prepared to a reduction in picture quality if you get a picture at all. The 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz wireless display technologies don't have enough bandwidth to transmit a 1080p@60 Hz so compression is involved. The 2.4 Ghz spectrum is unregulated so expect plenty of dropped packets if you live in a suburban or urban environment. Things are a bit better with 5 Ghz display adapters as it is reserved for wi-fi and similar technologies in the US. Wireless displays using 5 Ghz are designed to work with wi-fi networks but this could still mean a reduction in usable bandwdith and force the transmitter to use a more aggressive compression algorithm. Then there are a few 60 Ghz wireless display adapters. The 60 Ghz spectrum is relatively open but it has its own unique compromise: it requires line of sight of work. Anything thicker and/or more dense than a cardboard box can block a 60 Ghz signal.
Dual Opteron 6376, 96 GB DDR3, Asus KGPE-D16, GTX 970
Mac Pro Dual Xeon E5645, 48 GB DDR3, GTX 770
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 32 GB DDR3, GA-X79-UP5-Wifi
Core i7 [email protected] Ghz, 16 GB DDR3, GTX 970, GA-X68XP-UD4