5 ms·

Hm interesting that the quoted text argues in terms of bandwidth. A 4K resolution has 16x as many pixels as a 1K resolution. So if you can run two 4K monitors t

by eis 4y ago

Hm interesting that the quoted text argues in terms of bandwidth. A 4K resolution has 16x as many pixels as a 1K resolution. So if you can run two 4K monitors then shouldn't the bandwidth allow you to run 32 1k monitors at equal Hz? Same for the 2x 4K at 120Hz vs 8K at 30Hz. 8K is four times the pixels than 4K. At a fourth of the refresh rate, shouldn't it be also two 8K monitors? I am not very knowledgable when it comes to display protocols.

Dunedan 4y ago
I guess with "1K" they mean 1080p, because then it'd suddenly make sense. I'd be really curious who made the mistake of calling it "1K".
- eis 4y ago
  FHD has about 4x the amount of pixels than 1K. They'd be still off by a factor of two (32/4 = 8 vs 4).
  - dang 4y ago
    Sorry for the offtopicness, but I want to make sure you see these moderation comments from over a week ago, and this is the most recent post I can hang a reply on. The flamewar from 8 days ago was bad enough that this is still important, so please take a look: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724351 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724351
- dont__panic 4y ago
  I think I have a decent understanding of the bandwith provided by various TB/USB standards, but this article was all over the place and actually made me doubt the information I've researched in the past for my home desk setup. And this article somehow misses the most interesting aspect of the USB 4.0 Version 2 announcement: retroactive bandwidth upgrades to existing cables. (https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/1/23332838/usb-4-version-2-80-gbps-thunderbolt https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/1/23332838/usb-4-version-2-8...) That might just be a misunderstanding as well, though. I get the impression that the USB folks aren't very discerning about their terminology in press releases. They could really use an editor to avoid this kind of confusion.
  - CharlesW 4y ago
    > And this article somehow misses the most interesting aspect of the USB 4.0 Version 2 announcement: retroactive bandwidth upgrades to existing cables. This is noted in the “USB4 Version 2.0” section. “…it's supposed to enable up to 80Gbps over USB-C through a new physical layer architecture that uses ‘newly defined’, as the USB Promoter Group put it, 80Gbps USB-C active cables and the 40Gbps USB-C passive cables that already exist today.”
    - dont__panic 4y ago
      Nice catch. I feel like this deserves way more discussion, though -- how are they doubling the throughput of existing cables?!?! I wonder if software updates could also upgrade existing USB4 interfaces, too.
      - CharlesW 4y ago
        > I feel like this deserves way more discussion, though -- how are they doubling the throughput of existing cables?!?! Going back to the press release¹, I'm wondering how much weight "up to" carries. That is, I'm guessing that reliable 80 Gbps operation will require new, active USB-C cables, even though existing cables may realize some benefit. "Up to 80 Gbps operation, based on a new physical layer architecture, using existing 40 Gbps USB Type-C passive cables and newly-defined 80 Gbps USB Type-C active cables." ¹ https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220901005211/en/USB-Promoter-Group-Announces-USB4%C2%AE-Version-2.0 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220901005211/en/USB...
      - t-3 4y ago
        Probably the encode/decode ASIC can be upgraded due to process improvements (this is why wifi an ethernet improvements see such steady improvements - Moore's Law). Drivers and firmware probably improve incrementally as well.
- RegnisGnaw 4y ago
  The problem is that 2K is already taken. So we have 1K --> FHD (1920x1080) 2K --> QHD (2560x1440) 4K --> UHD (3840×2160
  - mminer237 4y ago
    > QHD (2560x1440) That should be 2.5K or something if they want to downscale that silly naming system. 2K means 1920x1080.
    - RegnisGnaw 4y ago
      Should, but in the market place its called 2K. Check Amazon, BestBuy, NewEgg, etc. The marketplace terms are now like: Full HD --> 1920x1080 2K --> 2560x1440 4K --> 3840x20160 https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C85&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_5 https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C8...
      - mminer237 4y ago
        That's messed up. Both sites' filters even call 1080p "2K", but most manufacturers are using the term for 1440p.
        RegnisGnaw 4y ago
        I don't think they call 1920x1080 2K, I think they call 2560x1080 2K which is a odd resolution as well.
  - eis 4y ago
    Isn't the K relating to the horizontal axis? 1K being close to FHD doesn't seem to make sense. 1K (1024x540) ~= qHD (960x540) 2K (2048x1080) ~= FHD (1920x1080) 4K (4096x2160) ~= UHD (3840x2160) 8K (8192x4320) ~= QUHD (7680x4320) Vertical axis is the same, just different aspect ratio and horizontal axis.
- dylan604 4y ago
  Since when has the "K" designation referred to the vertical? 2K = 2048 horizontal. 4k = 4096 horizontal. I have personally never seen 1080p referred to as 1K
- mortenjorck 4y ago
  "1K" must be a typo; it would refer to the legacy XGA resolution of 1024x768. "2K" has its origins in digital cinema (where it actually was 2000 pixels wide), but it has since become used interchangeably with 1080p (1920px wide) alongside "4K" becoming the common term for 2160p (3840px wide). (Further confusing things, I've also seen some usage of "2K" to indicate 1440p, although it would be more accurately termed "2.5K".)
  - RegnisGnaw 4y ago
    Unfortunately the marketplace has pretty much standardize on 2K being 1440p (see links below) https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C85&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_5 https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C8... https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=&cat=&Ntt=2K+monitor&searchButton=search https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=&ca... https://www.benq.com/en-ca/monitor/gaming/ex2780q.html https://www.benq.com/en-ca/monitor/gaming/ex2780q.html https://www.viewsonic.com/us/vg2756-2k-27-1440p-ergonomic-ips-docking-monitor-with-90w-usb-c-rj45-and-daisy-chain.html https://www.viewsonic.com/us/vg2756-2k-27-1440p-ergonomic-ip...
- jlarocco 4y ago
  I honestly don't know why people bother with the "K" names and the "UHD", "QHD", etc. No two people seem to agree exactly what they all mean. It's far easier to just use the the numeric resolution, "1920x1080", "3840x2160", etc.
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    Because marketing.

by eis 4y ago

Dunedan 4y ago

I guess with "1K" they mean 1080p, because then it'd suddenly make sense. I'd be really curious who made the mistake of calling it "1K".

eis 4y ago
FHD has about 4x the amount of pixels than 1K. They'd be still off by a factor of two (32/4 = 8 vs 4).
- dang 4y ago
  Sorry for the offtopicness, but I want to make sure you see these moderation comments from over a week ago, and this is the most recent post I can hang a reply on. The flamewar from 8 days ago was bad enough that this is still important, so please take a look: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724351 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32724351
dont__panic 4y ago
I think I have a decent understanding of the bandwith provided by various TB/USB standards, but this article was all over the place and actually made me doubt the information I've researched in the past for my home desk setup. And this article somehow misses the most interesting aspect of the USB 4.0 Version 2 announcement: retroactive bandwidth upgrades to existing cables. (https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/1/23332838/usb-4-version-2-80-gbps-thunderbolt https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/1/23332838/usb-4-version-2-8...) That might just be a misunderstanding as well, though. I get the impression that the USB folks aren't very discerning about their terminology in press releases. They could really use an editor to avoid this kind of confusion.
- CharlesW 4y ago
  > And this article somehow misses the most interesting aspect of the USB 4.0 Version 2 announcement: retroactive bandwidth upgrades to existing cables. This is noted in the “USB4 Version 2.0” section. “…it's supposed to enable up to 80Gbps over USB-C through a new physical layer architecture that uses ‘newly defined’, as the USB Promoter Group put it, 80Gbps USB-C active cables and the 40Gbps USB-C passive cables that already exist today.”
  - dont__panic 4y ago
    Nice catch. I feel like this deserves way more discussion, though -- how are they doubling the throughput of existing cables?!?! I wonder if software updates could also upgrade existing USB4 interfaces, too.
    - CharlesW 4y ago
      > I feel like this deserves way more discussion, though -- how are they doubling the throughput of existing cables?!?! Going back to the press release¹, I'm wondering how much weight "up to" carries. That is, I'm guessing that reliable 80 Gbps operation will require new, active USB-C cables, even though existing cables may realize some benefit. "Up to 80 Gbps operation, based on a new physical layer architecture, using existing 40 Gbps USB Type-C passive cables and newly-defined 80 Gbps USB Type-C active cables." ¹ https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220901005211/en/USB-Promoter-Group-Announces-USB4%C2%AE-Version-2.0 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220901005211/en/USB...
    - t-3 4y ago
      Probably the encode/decode ASIC can be upgraded due to process improvements (this is why wifi an ethernet improvements see such steady improvements - Moore's Law). Drivers and firmware probably improve incrementally as well.
RegnisGnaw 4y ago
The problem is that 2K is already taken. So we have 1K --> FHD (1920x1080) 2K --> QHD (2560x1440) 4K --> UHD (3840×2160
- mminer237 4y ago
  > QHD (2560x1440) That should be 2.5K or something if they want to downscale that silly naming system. 2K means 1920x1080.
  - RegnisGnaw 4y ago
    Should, but in the market place its called 2K. Check Amazon, BestBuy, NewEgg, etc. The marketplace terms are now like: Full HD --> 1920x1080 2K --> 2560x1440 4K --> 3840x20160 https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C85&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_5 https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C8...
    - mminer237 4y ago
      That's messed up. Both sites' filters even call 1080p "2K", but most manufacturers are using the term for 1440p.
      - RegnisGnaw 4y ago
        I don't think they call 1920x1080 2K, I think they call 2560x1080 2K which is a odd resolution as well.
- eis 4y ago
  Isn't the K relating to the horizontal axis? 1K being close to FHD doesn't seem to make sense. 1K (1024x540) ~= qHD (960x540) 2K (2048x1080) ~= FHD (1920x1080) 4K (4096x2160) ~= UHD (3840x2160) 8K (8192x4320) ~= QUHD (7680x4320) Vertical axis is the same, just different aspect ratio and horizontal axis.
dylan604 4y ago
Since when has the "K" designation referred to the vertical? 2K = 2048 horizontal. 4k = 4096 horizontal. I have personally never seen 1080p referred to as 1K
mortenjorck 4y ago
"1K" must be a typo; it would refer to the legacy XGA resolution of 1024x768. "2K" has its origins in digital cinema (where it actually was 2000 pixels wide), but it has since become used interchangeably with 1080p (1920px wide) alongside "4K" becoming the common term for 2160p (3840px wide). (Further confusing things, I've also seen some usage of "2K" to indicate 1440p, although it would be more accurately termed "2.5K".)
- RegnisGnaw 4y ago
  Unfortunately the marketplace has pretty much standardize on 2K being 1440p (see links below) https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=2K+monitor https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C85&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_5 https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=2k+monitor&sprefix=2k+mo%2Caps%2C8... https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=&cat=&Ntt=2K+monitor&searchButton=search https://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?N=&ca... https://www.benq.com/en-ca/monitor/gaming/ex2780q.html https://www.benq.com/en-ca/monitor/gaming/ex2780q.html https://www.viewsonic.com/us/vg2756-2k-27-1440p-ergonomic-ips-docking-monitor-with-90w-usb-c-rj45-and-daisy-chain.html https://www.viewsonic.com/us/vg2756-2k-27-1440p-ergonomic-ip...
jlarocco 4y ago
I honestly don't know why people bother with the "K" names and the "UHD", "QHD", etc. No two people seem to agree exactly what they all mean. It's far easier to just use the the numeric resolution, "1920x1080", "3840x2160", etc.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Because marketing.