17 ms·

VESA Publishes DisplayPort 2.0 Video Standard

234 points by zaphoyd 7y ago

mikece 7y ago
Referring to USB-C connections as "alternate mode" makes me wonder if Thunderbolt 3 will be inferior, signal-wise, to whatever physical port is being considered (was designed?) for DisplayPort 2.
- zamadatix 7y ago
  Alt mode is a term used by USB to describe a USB port than can carry non USB signals (i.e. the alternate operating modes beyond USB). It's been around a while and has nothing to do with this announcement.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- xenadu02 7y ago
  It appears if you use USB-C only for display data you get full resolutions. If you take some of the pairs to also run USB data over the same cable it only supports the lower resolutions (no 16k or 10k).
- ihuman 7y ago
  According to the article DP 2 will use the existing DisplayPort port in addition to USB-C.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
jmull 7y ago
Here’s the headline and lede, which I thought were a pretty effective TLDR: > VESA PUBLISHES DISPLAYPORT™ 2.0 VIDEO STANDARD ENABLING SUPPORT FOR BEYOND-8K RESOLUTIONS, HIGHER REFRESH RATES FOR 4K/HDR AND VIRTUAL REALITY APPLICATIONS DisplayPort 2.0 enables up to 3X increase in video bandwidth performance (max payload of 77.37 Gbps); new built-in features enable improved user experience, greater flexibility and improved power efficiency
bcheung 7y ago
Realistically I hope they work solidly through USB-C. I'm tired of piling up expensive high quality monitors I can't use because they keep changing the connections every 3 or so years. And they really need to have larger displays 30"+ for anything 4K and beyond. There's not much point to a 27" 4K monitor if you have to double the scaling just to read anything. 8K at 27" would be a complete waste.
- zaphoyd 7y ago
  So far the earlier versions of DisplayPort have worked quite well as a USB-C alt mode so I am hopeful. I strongly disagree that higher resolutions are not interesting on smaller sized displays. I personally find 21.5 inch to be the sweet spot for 4K and welcome the better support for higher resolution so displays in the 24-30 inch range can more easily support 220+dpi, higher refresh rates, and HDR.
  - penagwin 7y ago
    4k at 21 inches? I'm using a 4k screen at I think 31" and I have to scale everything to read the screen. My dream is a 43" 4k monitor with no scaling. But 1440p at 21" I think would be great. Personally I only use 1080p screens as secondary monitors, and would never go back to 1080p for my primary display.
    - samcat116 7y ago
      43" 4k is way too low density. For sheer size its nice, but I want some retina displays, of which there are currently very few.
      - _trampeltier 7y ago
        Na, not way to low. I have one and I'm very happy with it. I do no graphic things, so thats ok .. and no scaling .. no troubles with Linux or Windows.
      - ahartmetz 7y ago
MayeulC 7y ago
On that topic, I was a bit sad to see that USB-C alternate mode wasn't picked up as the display solution for the Pi 4. I have multiple devices that work this way, and it has been a very pleasant experience.
- mbreedlove 7y ago
  I agree, mini-HDMI seems like a strange choice. I had to buy an adapter for my Pi Zero and hate having to keep track of it. I would be thrilled if USB-C became the ubiquitous connector.
  - mrmattyboy 7y ago
    HN Top Stories ============== 13:45 - Raspberry Pi 3 released 13:46 - Amazon mysteriously sees 5-year boom in sales of mini-HDMI cables and runs out in minutes.
  - anchpop 7y ago
    It's actually micro-HDMI, iirc (just pointing that out so nobody buys the wrong cable)
    - makomk 7y ago
      Yeah, for some reason they decided to use a completely different oddball HDMI connector to the one used in their other product with an oddball HDMI connector. So anyone with a Pi Zero and a Pi 4 now has two different annoying adapters to keep track of.
      - jng 7y ago
        Just ordered my Pi 4 yesterday and thought that the Zero adapter would be enough :/ not pleased!
- rsync 7y ago
  "On that topic, I was a bit sad to see that USB-C alternate mode wasn't picked up as the display solution for the Pi 4." Forgive me, but since we are talking about DP 2.0 at the same time as the new RPi4, I am wondering: - how many hi-res (4k@60hz) monitors can I drive from a single RPi 4 ? I think the answer should be 4 since there are already two (mini) HDMI ports and, additionally, two USB3 ports. The question is, can Displayport (or any display format) run at 4k@60hz over USB3 ? Thanks.
shmerl 7y ago
So, USB 4 will support alternative mode with DP 2.0?
- nrclark 7y ago
  A note on this, for anybody who's curious. USB-C is actually its own specification, so it's not part of the USB 3.0 series of specs. Presumably it won't be part of the USB 4.0 spec either. a USB type-C connector actually carries a USB-2 lane, as well as carrying a couple of USB-3 lanes (and some other miscellaneous stuff). So it's not really the same category of standard.
davidhyde 7y ago
I wish they built the following simple protocol: "Operating System: Hey monitor, are you there? Monitor: (immediately) Hey OS, I'm still here, just give me a moment to turn on. OS: Ok I'll wait and not put user's windows on one monitor. That way we won’t have this window shuffling nonsense that has plagued multi monitor setups since we started putting pcs to sleep instead of turning them off.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- teraflop 7y ago
  I've been using dual monitors for years (on Windows and Ubuntu) and I can't say I've ever had this problem. As long as the monitors are plugged into the video card, the OS recognizes both of them regardless of whether they're powered on.
  - mrchucklepants 7y ago
    I think it depends on the connection you use. If I turn off one of my monitors connected via DisplayPort, Windows 10 immediately moves everything to the monitors that are still on. My last computer, with monitors connected via DVI did not do this.
    - jjeaff 7y ago
      I actually wish my laptop did this. I constantly have issues with some windows staying open on the second monitor after unplugging them both from my laptop. Sometimes I can't get to them at all on the laptop screen without forcing it closed and reopening.
      - marcusjt 7y ago
        That's a Windows OS issue and it drives me crazy too, I raised an issue for it on the official Windows 10 feedback site, will try to find & post the link for it later, can't right now...
bhouston 7y ago
Built on Thunderbolt 3. Neat.
boyadjian 7y ago
I love DisplayPort !
pkaye 7y ago
I've been having a lot of problems with DisplayPort KVMs. I have a 4K monitor and at the time of purchase, I think DisplayPort had better specs. But there are very few KVMs at the 4K resolution. The one I got was literally a switch in the sense that it didn't emulate the video and usb on the disconnected side. There seems to be lots of problems with disconnected DisplayPort devices and drivers. For Linux I found that shutting off the monitor would result in the video not coming back on unless I manually did a "xset dpms" call through ssh. In the end I now got a cheap second monitor and a USB switch for the keyboard/mouse. It just takes up a lot more space.
- pro_zac 7y ago
  Now that you have a second monitor, might as well use Synergy for keyboard and mouse sharing! https://symless.com/synergy https://symless.com/synergy
  - pkaye 7y ago
    Yes I'm planning to do that. But I think that doesn't work on bootup so the USB switch is still useful (its pretty compact and simple anyway)
    - pro_zac 7y ago
      It works from boot on Windows 10. I only have to use a second keyboard for my bitlocker.
  - redblacktree15 7y ago
    That product is walking dead. Use https://github.com/debauchee/barrier https://github.com/debauchee/barrier which forked the last open source version.
    - pro_zac 7y ago
      Thanks! Will definitely give that a look since Synergy rolled back version 2 to beta.
chx 7y ago
This is all nice and dandy but there is not even a DP 1.3 MST hub on the market ... Of course, that might be because Intel IGP is still stuck on DP 1.2 and so an overwhelming majority of laptops are DP 1.2 only as well. But for video cards, we have been there for three years now: nVidia went full DP 1.4 with Pascal in 2016 AMD has been DisplayPort 1.4 since Polaris at least in 2016 as well. As an aside, I am unclear whether https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4674/~/graphics-firmware-update-for-displayport-1.3-and-1.4-displays https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4674/~/g... enabled them on most Maxwell cards as well? https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-950/specifications https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-95... still says DP 1.2.
- undersuit 7y ago
  Anandtech mentioned in their coverage that the previous versions of Displayport "required that the branch device be capable of decoding a DisplayPort bitstream", this new version apparently drops this requirement which should make daisy-chaining or hub devices much less complex.
ksec 7y ago
At 8K, 120hz ( Pro Motion, hopefully someday on Mac ), 10bit colour, that is roughly ~145Gbps of Raw Bandwidth requirement. At 6K, 120hz, 10bit ( Basically Pro XDR with 120Hz ), that is roughly ~88Gbps of Raw Bandwidth. The above two scenario aren't too far off. Although a 5K / 120hz / 10bit only needs ~64Gbps. I assume in two config above they will have to use 2 x DisplayPort 2.0 ? ( That is assuming Apple will gives us Pro Motion on Mac, why they haven't done so is beyond me. And Why Windows haven't done something similar? ) So the future USB4 and DisplayPort 2.0 will both be based on Thunderbolt 3. Are there any reason why TV keep sticking to HDMI? ( NIH Syndrome? ) And since DisplayPort 2.0 essentially turn TB3 into a one way connection, does that mean there will be no more USB Pass through or Charging Laptop while using it Display?
- kllrnohj 7y ago
  > ( That is assuming Apple will gives us Pro Motion on Mac, why they haven't done so is beyond me. And Why Windows haven't done something similar? ) What do you mean why Windows hasn't done something similar? It's existed on Windows for longer than Apple had it in the iPad - it's called gsync or freesync, the later now being a VESA specification called "adaptive vsync." You can go have the ProMotion experience on Windows right now, and have been able to for years. There's a ton of 120hz, 144hz, and even 240hz gsync & freesync monitors on the market at a variety of sizes, resolutions, and even panel types. You can find 120hz+ monitors in IPS, VA, and TN panels, at a variety of price points.
- kurthr 7y ago
  It's worth noting that VESA DSC compression is available for DP interfaces at 2,3,4:1 allowing all of these on the announced standard. It's visually lossless even in a large screen flicker test so I think we're pretty set, except maybe for newer and more extreme daisy chaining and VR.
  - CaptainMarvel 7y ago
    What is the quality of text with DSC?
unixhero 7y ago
The HDMI protocol works better. Period.
- mrstone 7y ago
  Curious why you think this
  - unixhero 7y ago
    Because I use both, replug 10s of times a day on different oses. HDMI is more seamless.
    - dlivingston 7y ago
      Given that DisplayPort 2.0 was literally just announced, you really can't compare the performance/usability of X to DP2.0.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
p1mrx 7y ago
I'm impressed that they're able to squeeze 77 Gbps through a USB-C connector, when Thunderbolt is 40 Gbps, and USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 is only 20 Gbps. When will this stuff run into the physical limits of copper?
- Dunedan 7y ago
  Thunderbolt 3 allows 40 Gbps in each direction using two 20 Gbps channels for each direction. As a protocol driving a display is mainly unidirectional, DisplayPort 2.0 simply uses all four channel for transmitting the data to the display, resulting in 80 Gbps. So they're not squeezing more data through the connector and the cables than Thunderbolt 3 already does, but simply do it in one direction only.
  - p1mrx 7y ago
    Ah, that makes sense. There's probably still room in the copper for more than 20 Gbps per lane, if they switch to an encoding with more than one voltage level, like PAM4.
- mrb 7y ago
  The USB-C connector physically supports 20 Gbit/s per pin in the USB4 spec (4 pins total: 2 rx + 2 tx, that's why we say it's "40 Gbit/s" per direction). DisplayPort configures all 4 pins as tx, so as expected it achieves 4 x 20 = 80 Gbit/s.
chaz6 7y ago
As far as I can tell there is still no support for touch screen displays. It is a shame that the data rate gets higher and higher but this simple feature is still missing.
- kurthr 7y ago
  There is a 1Mb reverse channel supported in DP, but there are separate drivers for Video/Touch that are required...
  - TomVDB 7y ago
    Let's not go overboard about the 1Mb claim: it's an incredibly inefficient protocol. At best, you'll be able to push 200Kbps through it, and that's for writes. Reads are much slower.
    - kurthr 7y ago
      10 fingers at 100Hz with 4bytes each is 4kBps or 32kbps so that's not really a problem for a self contained touch screen. If you want raw data... then yes, you'll need 10Mbps or so.
tracker1 7y ago
I'd really like for PCs to send a wakeup to the TV. My AVC and ShieldTV can both wake up a TV connected for display, why can't a general computer do it? Currently using a 42" 4K high refresh TV as a monitor (would prefer 36-38" 4K). I've resolved to just use a classic screen saver to keep the TV from shutting off, which causes total chaos when resuming from sleep. Aside: anyone else notice how hard it is to actually use a screensaver these days. Linux desktops have removed it from in the box mode, and windows has totally obscured it away from you.
- m463 7y ago
  I have tried to figure all this out for my raspberry pi + HDMI monitor and everything is a grey area. Monitors use DPMS: DPMS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VESA_Display_Power_Management_Signaling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VESA_Display_Power_Management_... I tried this with my Pi and could get it to sleep and wake, but waking would not seem to send an image, even though the backlight came on. Also confusing is that monitors also use HDMI, which seems to be from another standards body. It appears some TVs can do lots of stuff using HDMI-CEC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Electronics_Control https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Electronics_Control but the TVs I've bought support it poorly. Either it's hard to find if they support it, and when they do they might only support it piecemeal. It's sort of age and odel dependent. I've never seen a monitor that supports HDMI-CEC.
  - tracker1 7y ago
    I believe it may be CEC at the TV level, but doesn't seem to be a place on the computer for this... may have to dig through the BIOS again, but pretty sure I'd remember it. I know I have it on my TV/AVR/ShieldTV as the volume for any of the above works as I expect.
- pault 7y ago
  I just bought an Intel NUC and this is one of the bios options. Those are amazing little computers of you don't need a discreet GPU. It's the size of a sandwich, and I got an 8th gen i7, 16gb of DDR4, and a 500gb nvme SSD for under $600! It handles 4k HDR content flawlessly. As a computer geek of a certain age, this is mind-blowing.
__david__ 7y ago
No mention of "Variable Refresh Rate" which is now in HDMI 2.1. I'm really hoping once that's standardized it'll put an end to the Gsync/Freesync nonsense we're currently dealing with.
mrb 7y ago
Wow, DisplayPort 2.0 offers literally twice the bandwidth of the latest HDMI spec: HDMI 2.1: 16 Gbit/s per pin, 3 pins total, less efficient 8b-10b encoding: 16×3×8/10 = 38.4 Gbit/s DP 2.0: 20 Gbit/s per pin, 4 pins total, more efficient 128b-132b encoding: 20×4×128/132 = 77.576 Gbit/s The article claims "77.37 Gbit/s" but I think that's a typo+rounding error (.57 → .37)
kazinator 7y ago
> Beyond-8K Resolutions I'm also gonna need a sound system with a 200 dB dynamic range, with speakers demonstrating a flat response out to 100 kHz.
hnick 7y ago
I had an old man moment recently when I upgraded my PC and my fancy new GPU came with 1x HDMI and 3x DisplayPort adapters. My perfectly good dual monitor setup (which I'd been using with DVI cables) was suddenly obsolete. They both handle HDMI so I ended up getting an adapter for one, but I never even thought this would be something to worry about. And I'm not sure if it's DP related but when I wake the PC from sleep one of them has a frozen image for a little while until Windows realises it has to start animating again.
mrtweetyhack 7y ago
Please no more video ports
DocTomoe 7y ago
VGA worked well enough for more than a decade (and still does today) My work laptop, an HP Elitebook, has only a Displayport for political reasons (HP wanted to push Displayport adoption). Do you know what presentation infrastructure has Displayport? Absolutely nothing. The world decided upon HDMI to be the de-facto-standard. So I am stuck carrying dongles and adaptors around (which means I will never have the one I need on hand) - or, if I am very lucky, I get a meeting room with a Clickshare device (which works reasonably well, but might be unpopular with external colleagues because it means installing some piece of software onto your laptop) I know how standards work ... but for the sake of it, we do not need another option that brings virtually nothing to the table.

234 points by zaphoyd 7y ago

Referring to USB-C connections as "alternate mode" makes me wonder if Thunderbolt 3 will be inferior, signal-wise, to whatever physical port is being considered (was designed?) for DisplayPort 2.

zamadatix 7y ago
Alt mode is a term used by USB to describe a USB port than can carry non USB signals (i.e. the alternate operating modes beyond USB). It's been around a while and has nothing to do with this announcement.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
xenadu02 7y ago
It appears if you use USB-C only for display data you get full resolutions. If you take some of the pairs to also run USB data over the same cable it only supports the lower resolutions (no 16k or 10k).
ihuman 7y ago
According to the article DP 2 will use the existing DisplayPort port in addition to USB-C.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

jmull 7y ago

Here’s the headline and lede, which I thought were a pretty effective TLDR: > VESA PUBLISHES DISPLAYPORT™ 2.0 VIDEO STANDARD ENABLING SUPPORT FOR BEYOND-8K RESOLUTIONS, HIGHER REFRESH RATES FOR 4K/HDR AND VIRTUAL REALITY APPLICATIONS DisplayPort 2.0 enables up to 3X increase in video bandwidth performance (max payload of 77.37 Gbps); new built-in features enable improved user experience, greater flexibility and improved power efficiency

bcheung 7y ago

Realistically I hope they work solidly through USB-C. I'm tired of piling up expensive high quality monitors I can't use because they keep changing the connections every 3 or so years. And they really need to have larger displays 30"+ for anything 4K and beyond. There's not much point to a 27" 4K monitor if you have to double the scaling just to read anything. 8K at 27" would be a complete waste.

zaphoyd 7y ago
So far the earlier versions of DisplayPort have worked quite well as a USB-C alt mode so I am hopeful. I strongly disagree that higher resolutions are not interesting on smaller sized displays. I personally find 21.5 inch to be the sweet spot for 4K and welcome the better support for higher resolution so displays in the 24-30 inch range can more easily support 220+dpi, higher refresh rates, and HDR.
- penagwin 7y ago
  4k at 21 inches? I'm using a 4k screen at I think 31" and I have to scale everything to read the screen. My dream is a 43" 4k monitor with no scaling. But 1440p at 21" I think would be great. Personally I only use 1080p screens as secondary monitors, and would never go back to 1080p for my primary display.
  - samcat116 7y ago
    43" 4k is way too low density. For sheer size its nice, but I want some retina displays, of which there are currently very few.
    - _trampeltier 7y ago
      Na, not way to low. I have one and I'm very happy with it. I do no graphic things, so thats ok .. and no scaling .. no troubles with Linux or Windows.
    - ahartmetz 7y ago

MayeulC 7y ago

On that topic, I was a bit sad to see that USB-C alternate mode wasn't picked up as the display solution for the Pi 4. I have multiple devices that work this way, and it has been a very pleasant experience.

mbreedlove 7y ago
I agree, mini-HDMI seems like a strange choice. I had to buy an adapter for my Pi Zero and hate having to keep track of it. I would be thrilled if USB-C became the ubiquitous connector.
- mrmattyboy 7y ago
  HN Top Stories ============== 13:45 - Raspberry Pi 3 released 13:46 - Amazon mysteriously sees 5-year boom in sales of mini-HDMI cables and runs out in minutes.
- anchpop 7y ago
  It's actually micro-HDMI, iirc (just pointing that out so nobody buys the wrong cable)
  - makomk 7y ago
    Yeah, for some reason they decided to use a completely different oddball HDMI connector to the one used in their other product with an oddball HDMI connector. So anyone with a Pi Zero and a Pi 4 now has two different annoying adapters to keep track of.
    - jng 7y ago
      Just ordered my Pi 4 yesterday and thought that the Zero adapter would be enough :/ not pleased!
rsync 7y ago
"On that topic, I was a bit sad to see that USB-C alternate mode wasn't picked up as the display solution for the Pi 4." Forgive me, but since we are talking about DP 2.0 at the same time as the new RPi4, I am wondering: - how many hi-res (4k@60hz) monitors can I drive from a single RPi 4 ? I think the answer should be 4 since there are already two (mini) HDMI ports and, additionally, two USB3 ports. The question is, can Displayport (or any display format) run at 4k@60hz over USB3 ? Thanks.

shmerl 7y ago

So, USB 4 will support alternative mode with DP 2.0?

nrclark 7y ago
A note on this, for anybody who's curious. USB-C is actually its own specification, so it's not part of the USB 3.0 series of specs. Presumably it won't be part of the USB 4.0 spec either. a USB type-C connector actually carries a USB-2 lane, as well as carrying a couple of USB-3 lanes (and some other miscellaneous stuff). So it's not really the same category of standard.

davidhyde 7y ago

I wish they built the following simple protocol: "Operating System: Hey monitor, are you there? Monitor: (immediately) Hey OS, I'm still here, just give me a moment to turn on. OS: Ok I'll wait and not put user's windows on one monitor. That way we won’t have this window shuffling nonsense that has plagued multi monitor setups since we started putting pcs to sleep instead of turning them off.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
teraflop 7y ago
I've been using dual monitors for years (on Windows and Ubuntu) and I can't say I've ever had this problem. As long as the monitors are plugged into the video card, the OS recognizes both of them regardless of whether they're powered on.
- mrchucklepants 7y ago
  I think it depends on the connection you use. If I turn off one of my monitors connected via DisplayPort, Windows 10 immediately moves everything to the monitors that are still on. My last computer, with monitors connected via DVI did not do this.
  - jjeaff 7y ago
    I actually wish my laptop did this. I constantly have issues with some windows staying open on the second monitor after unplugging them both from my laptop. Sometimes I can't get to them at all on the laptop screen without forcing it closed and reopening.
    - marcusjt 7y ago
      That's a Windows OS issue and it drives me crazy too, I raised an issue for it on the official Windows 10 feedback site, will try to find & post the link for it later, can't right now...

bhouston 7y ago

Built on Thunderbolt 3. Neat.

boyadjian 7y ago

I love DisplayPort !

pkaye 7y ago

I've been having a lot of problems with DisplayPort KVMs. I have a 4K monitor and at the time of purchase, I think DisplayPort had better specs. But there are very few KVMs at the 4K resolution. The one I got was literally a switch in the sense that it didn't emulate the video and usb on the disconnected side. There seems to be lots of problems with disconnected DisplayPort devices and drivers. For Linux I found that shutting off the monitor would result in the video not coming back on unless I manually did a "xset dpms" call through ssh. In the end I now got a cheap second monitor and a USB switch for the keyboard/mouse. It just takes up a lot more space.

pro_zac 7y ago
Now that you have a second monitor, might as well use Synergy for keyboard and mouse sharing! https://symless.com/synergy https://symless.com/synergy
- pkaye 7y ago
  Yes I'm planning to do that. But I think that doesn't work on bootup so the USB switch is still useful (its pretty compact and simple anyway)
  - pro_zac 7y ago
    It works from boot on Windows 10. I only have to use a second keyboard for my bitlocker.
- redblacktree15 7y ago
  That product is walking dead. Use https://github.com/debauchee/barrier https://github.com/debauchee/barrier which forked the last open source version.
  - pro_zac 7y ago
    Thanks! Will definitely give that a look since Synergy rolled back version 2 to beta.

chx 7y ago

This is all nice and dandy but there is not even a DP 1.3 MST hub on the market ... Of course, that might be because Intel IGP is still stuck on DP 1.2 and so an overwhelming majority of laptops are DP 1.2 only as well. But for video cards, we have been there for three years now: nVidia went full DP 1.4 with Pascal in 2016 AMD has been DisplayPort 1.4 since Polaris at least in 2016 as well. As an aside, I am unclear whether https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4674/~/graphics-firmware-update-for-displayport-1.3-and-1.4-displays https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4674/~/g... enabled them on most Maxwell cards as well? https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-950/specifications https://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-95... still says DP 1.2.

undersuit 7y ago
Anandtech mentioned in their coverage that the previous versions of Displayport "required that the branch device be capable of decoding a DisplayPort bitstream", this new version apparently drops this requirement which should make daisy-chaining or hub devices much less complex.

ksec 7y ago

At 8K, 120hz ( Pro Motion, hopefully someday on Mac ), 10bit colour, that is roughly ~145Gbps of Raw Bandwidth requirement. At 6K, 120hz, 10bit ( Basically Pro XDR with 120Hz ), that is roughly ~88Gbps of Raw Bandwidth. The above two scenario aren't too far off. Although a 5K / 120hz / 10bit only needs ~64Gbps. I assume in two config above they will have to use 2 x DisplayPort 2.0 ? ( That is assuming Apple will gives us Pro Motion on Mac, why they haven't done so is beyond me. And Why Windows haven't done something similar? ) So the future USB4 and DisplayPort 2.0 will both be based on Thunderbolt 3. Are there any reason why TV keep sticking to HDMI? ( NIH Syndrome? ) And since DisplayPort 2.0 essentially turn TB3 into a one way connection, does that mean there will be no more USB Pass through or Charging Laptop while using it Display?

kllrnohj 7y ago
> ( That is assuming Apple will gives us Pro Motion on Mac, why they haven't done so is beyond me. And Why Windows haven't done something similar? ) What do you mean why Windows hasn't done something similar? It's existed on Windows for longer than Apple had it in the iPad - it's called gsync or freesync, the later now being a VESA specification called "adaptive vsync." You can go have the ProMotion experience on Windows right now, and have been able to for years. There's a ton of 120hz, 144hz, and even 240hz gsync & freesync monitors on the market at a variety of sizes, resolutions, and even panel types. You can find 120hz+ monitors in IPS, VA, and TN panels, at a variety of price points.
kurthr 7y ago
It's worth noting that VESA DSC compression is available for DP interfaces at 2,3,4:1 allowing all of these on the announced standard. It's visually lossless even in a large screen flicker test so I think we're pretty set, except maybe for newer and more extreme daisy chaining and VR.
- CaptainMarvel 7y ago
  What is the quality of text with DSC?

unixhero 7y ago

The HDMI protocol works better. Period.

mrstone 7y ago
Curious why you think this
- unixhero 7y ago
  Because I use both, replug 10s of times a day on different oses. HDMI is more seamless.
  - dlivingston 7y ago
    Given that DisplayPort 2.0 was literally just announced, you really can't compare the performance/usability of X to DP2.0.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

p1mrx 7y ago

I'm impressed that they're able to squeeze 77 Gbps through a USB-C connector, when Thunderbolt is 40 Gbps, and USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 is only 20 Gbps. When will this stuff run into the physical limits of copper?

Dunedan 7y ago
Thunderbolt 3 allows 40 Gbps in each direction using two 20 Gbps channels for each direction. As a protocol driving a display is mainly unidirectional, DisplayPort 2.0 simply uses all four channel for transmitting the data to the display, resulting in 80 Gbps. So they're not squeezing more data through the connector and the cables than Thunderbolt 3 already does, but simply do it in one direction only.
- p1mrx 7y ago
  Ah, that makes sense. There's probably still room in the copper for more than 20 Gbps per lane, if they switch to an encoding with more than one voltage level, like PAM4.
mrb 7y ago
The USB-C connector physically supports 20 Gbit/s per pin in the USB4 spec (4 pins total: 2 rx + 2 tx, that's why we say it's "40 Gbit/s" per direction). DisplayPort configures all 4 pins as tx, so as expected it achieves 4 x 20 = 80 Gbit/s.

chaz6 7y ago

As far as I can tell there is still no support for touch screen displays. It is a shame that the data rate gets higher and higher but this simple feature is still missing.

kurthr 7y ago
There is a 1Mb reverse channel supported in DP, but there are separate drivers for Video/Touch that are required...
- TomVDB 7y ago
  Let's not go overboard about the 1Mb claim: it's an incredibly inefficient protocol. At best, you'll be able to push 200Kbps through it, and that's for writes. Reads are much slower.
  - kurthr 7y ago
    10 fingers at 100Hz with 4bytes each is 4kBps or 32kbps so that's not really a problem for a self contained touch screen. If you want raw data... then yes, you'll need 10Mbps or so.

tracker1 7y ago

I'd really like for PCs to send a wakeup to the TV. My AVC and ShieldTV can both wake up a TV connected for display, why can't a general computer do it? Currently using a 42" 4K high refresh TV as a monitor (would prefer 36-38" 4K). I've resolved to just use a classic screen saver to keep the TV from shutting off, which causes total chaos when resuming from sleep. Aside: anyone else notice how hard it is to actually use a screensaver these days. Linux desktops have removed it from in the box mode, and windows has totally obscured it away from you.

m463 7y ago
I have tried to figure all this out for my raspberry pi + HDMI monitor and everything is a grey area. Monitors use DPMS: DPMS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VESA_Display_Power_Management_Signaling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VESA_Display_Power_Management_... I tried this with my Pi and could get it to sleep and wake, but waking would not seem to send an image, even though the backlight came on. Also confusing is that monitors also use HDMI, which seems to be from another standards body. It appears some TVs can do lots of stuff using HDMI-CEC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Electronics_Control https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Electronics_Control but the TVs I've bought support it poorly. Either it's hard to find if they support it, and when they do they might only support it piecemeal. It's sort of age and odel dependent. I've never seen a monitor that supports HDMI-CEC.
- tracker1 7y ago
  I believe it may be CEC at the TV level, but doesn't seem to be a place on the computer for this... may have to dig through the BIOS again, but pretty sure I'd remember it. I know I have it on my TV/AVR/ShieldTV as the volume for any of the above works as I expect.
pault 7y ago
I just bought an Intel NUC and this is one of the bios options. Those are amazing little computers of you don't need a discreet GPU. It's the size of a sandwich, and I got an 8th gen i7, 16gb of DDR4, and a 500gb nvme SSD for under $600! It handles 4k HDR content flawlessly. As a computer geek of a certain age, this is mind-blowing.

__david__ 7y ago

No mention of "Variable Refresh Rate" which is now in HDMI 2.1. I'm really hoping once that's standardized it'll put an end to the Gsync/Freesync nonsense we're currently dealing with.

mrb 7y ago

Wow, DisplayPort 2.0 offers literally twice the bandwidth of the latest HDMI spec: HDMI 2.1: 16 Gbit/s per pin, 3 pins total, less efficient 8b-10b encoding: 16×3×8/10 = 38.4 Gbit/s DP 2.0: 20 Gbit/s per pin, 4 pins total, more efficient 128b-132b encoding: 20×4×128/132 = 77.576 Gbit/s The article claims "77.37 Gbit/s" but I think that's a typo+rounding error (.57 → .37)

kazinator 7y ago

> Beyond-8K Resolutions I'm also gonna need a sound system with a 200 dB dynamic range, with speakers demonstrating a flat response out to 100 kHz.

hnick 7y ago

I had an old man moment recently when I upgraded my PC and my fancy new GPU came with 1x HDMI and 3x DisplayPort adapters. My perfectly good dual monitor setup (which I'd been using with DVI cables) was suddenly obsolete. They both handle HDMI so I ended up getting an adapter for one, but I never even thought this would be something to worry about. And I'm not sure if it's DP related but when I wake the PC from sleep one of them has a frozen image for a little while until Windows realises it has to start animating again.

mrtweetyhack 7y ago

Please no more video ports

DocTomoe 7y ago

VGA worked well enough for more than a decade (and still does today) My work laptop, an HP Elitebook, has only a Displayport for political reasons (HP wanted to push Displayport adoption). Do you know what presentation infrastructure has Displayport? Absolutely nothing. The world decided upon HDMI to be the de-facto-standard. So I am stuck carrying dongles and adaptors around (which means I will never have the one I need on hand) - or, if I am very lucky, I get a meeting room with a Clickshare device (which works reasonably well, but might be unpopular with external colleagues because it means installing some piece of software onto your laptop) I know how standards work ... but for the sake of it, we do not need another option that brings virtually nothing to the table.