5 ms·

What cable transfers 4k 120-144hz? What are the benefits of DisplayPort 1.4 over something like Dual Link DVI or the newest HDMI?

neverminder 10y ago
Displayport 1.4 is a standard for socket and cable, so it will transfer 4K 120Hz. Advantages over other standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Advantages_over_DVI.2C_VGA_and_FPD-Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Advantages_over_DV... Also, another major advantage - USB Type-C compatibility (http://www.displayport.org/what-is-displayport-over-usb-c/ http://www.displayport.org/what-is-displayport-over-usb-c/)
- bawana 10y ago
  Why didn't video cables go optical? Like toslink did w audio?
  - tormeh 10y ago
    Latency and cost, probably.
    - Dylan16807 10y ago
      What latency?
      - brianwawok 10y ago
        Electric to light to electric would add latency perhaps? Random guess
        Dylan16807 10y ago
        It wouldn't, not at the scale of inter-device cables.
  - nl 10y ago
    No advantage. It's still all wires inside the computer and the monitor.
    - chillydawg 10y ago
      Yes, but inside the computer you have the luxury of static, pre-calculated track layouts that optimise for latency, noise and general integrity. A general purpose, variable length, high bandwidth cable and connectors is a much harder problem, thus the kind of issues we see here sending raw video signals of extremely high fidelity between card and monitor.
  - stevep98 10y ago
    Thunderbolt was supposed to go optical. You can read about it here, under "Copper vs. optical": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
    - seanp2k2 10y ago
      USB3 was also supposed to have fiber components. Really hard to find references for this online since at CES 2008 they showed the connectors without any optical stuff, but I found this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ Anyone know why they didn't end up going optical + copper for USB3?
  - Matthias247 10y ago
    There are lots of options for optical cabling (e.g. cheap plastic fibers vs. glass fibers) and all have different tradeoffs, e.g. available bandwidth vs. cost. However from what I've seen basically all options are more expensive then equivalent electrical connections (we use both optical and electrical networks in cars). A major advantage of optical is that there are no EMV problems and that you are electrically decoupled (e.g. no hum loops). This might be one of the reasons why toslink is optical. For displays ground loops are typically no problem compared to amplifiers/speakers.
Ductapemaster 10y ago
I don't have access to the spec for 1.4, but from what I can understand it's still a single cable that will do 4K 120hz HDR. Obviously it'll have to be a supported 1.4 capable cable, but that's the same as CAT 5 vs CAT 6 Dual link DVI is significantly old-hat compared to the newer DisplayPort and HDMI standards. A single dual link DVI cable can carry either half a 4K frame (1920x2160) at 8 bits per color, 60hz, OR a single 1080p frame at 10 bits per color, 60hz. To get a 4K 60hz display running you need to use two dual link DVI cables, which is insanely bulky. Plus you at best get 8 bit color out of it, and no audio. The latest HDMI standard can do 4096x2160 60Hz in deep color (12 bits per color). DisplayPort 1.4 has a higher maximum bandwidth than HDMI 2.0 (31.4 Gbps vs 18Gbps). This allows it to do 120Hz, deep color/HDR or carry multiple 4K streams (multiple monitors or 3D) on one cable. It's by far the most advanced standard out there for consumer video transmission. Source: I'm an engineer working with video systems, and Wikipedia
the8472 10y ago
I wouldn't call it an advantage, but DP1.4 can cheat on the bandwidth department by using lossy compression. Their press statements it's visually transparent, but the technical overview[1] says this: > All of the analyses showed that the DSC algorithm outperformed five other proprietary algorithms on these picture quality tests, and was either visually lossless or very nearly so for all tested images at 8 bits/pixel. [1] http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/VESA_DSC-ETP200.pdf http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/VESA_DSC-ETP2...
- untog 10y ago
  Ugh, I can see this getting very annoying - having to work out whether something is "true" DisplayPort 1.4.

neverminder 10y ago

Displayport 1.4 is a standard for socket and cable, so it will transfer 4K 120Hz. Advantages over other standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Advantages_over_DVI.2C_VGA_and_FPD-Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Advantages_over_DV... Also, another major advantage - USB Type-C compatibility (http://www.displayport.org/what-is-displayport-over-usb-c/ http://www.displayport.org/what-is-displayport-over-usb-c/)

bawana 10y ago
Why didn't video cables go optical? Like toslink did w audio?
- tormeh 10y ago
  Latency and cost, probably.
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    What latency?
    - brianwawok 10y ago
      Electric to light to electric would add latency perhaps? Random guess
      - Dylan16807 10y ago
        It wouldn't, not at the scale of inter-device cables.
- nl 10y ago
  No advantage. It's still all wires inside the computer and the monitor.
  - chillydawg 10y ago
    Yes, but inside the computer you have the luxury of static, pre-calculated track layouts that optimise for latency, noise and general integrity. A general purpose, variable length, high bandwidth cable and connectors is a much harder problem, thus the kind of issues we see here sending raw video signals of extremely high fidelity between card and monitor.
- stevep98 10y ago
  Thunderbolt was supposed to go optical. You can read about it here, under "Copper vs. optical": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
  - seanp2k2 10y ago
    USB3 was also supposed to have fiber components. Really hard to find references for this online since at CES 2008 they showed the connectors without any optical stuff, but I found this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ Anyone know why they didn't end up going optical + copper for USB3?
- Matthias247 10y ago
  There are lots of options for optical cabling (e.g. cheap plastic fibers vs. glass fibers) and all have different tradeoffs, e.g. available bandwidth vs. cost. However from what I've seen basically all options are more expensive then equivalent electrical connections (we use both optical and electrical networks in cars). A major advantage of optical is that there are no EMV problems and that you are electrically decoupled (e.g. no hum loops). This might be one of the reasons why toslink is optical. For displays ground loops are typically no problem compared to amplifiers/speakers.

Ductapemaster 10y ago

I don't have access to the spec for 1.4, but from what I can understand it's still a single cable that will do 4K 120hz HDR. Obviously it'll have to be a supported 1.4 capable cable, but that's the same as CAT 5 vs CAT 6 Dual link DVI is significantly old-hat compared to the newer DisplayPort and HDMI standards. A single dual link DVI cable can carry either half a 4K frame (1920x2160) at 8 bits per color, 60hz, OR a single 1080p frame at 10 bits per color, 60hz. To get a 4K 60hz display running you need to use two dual link DVI cables, which is insanely bulky. Plus you at best get 8 bit color out of it, and no audio. The latest HDMI standard can do 4096x2160 60Hz in deep color (12 bits per color). DisplayPort 1.4 has a higher maximum bandwidth than HDMI 2.0 (31.4 Gbps vs 18Gbps). This allows it to do 120Hz, deep color/HDR or carry multiple 4K streams (multiple monitors or 3D) on one cable. It's by far the most advanced standard out there for consumer video transmission. Source: I'm an engineer working with video systems, and Wikipedia

the8472 10y ago

I wouldn't call it an advantage, but DP1.4 can cheat on the bandwidth department by using lossy compression. Their press statements it's visually transparent, but the technical overview[1] says this: > All of the analyses showed that the DSC algorithm outperformed five other proprietary algorithms on these picture quality tests, and was either visually lossless or very nearly so for all tested images at 8 bits/pixel. [1] http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/VESA_DSC-ETP200.pdf http://www.vesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/VESA_DSC-ETP2...

untog 10y ago
Ugh, I can see this getting very annoying - having to work out whether something is "true" DisplayPort 1.4.