7 ms·

HDMI 2.2 will support 16K video at 60Hz

30 points by mfiguiere 1y ago

jekwoooooe 1y ago
I look forward to seeing this in consumer devices in 2040 plus the usual fiasco of defective AVR chips for the first generation. Are 90% of features still optional? You can be hdmi 2.1 compliant without VRR, QMS, etc.
skeuomorphism 1y ago
Took them long enough Besides, why bother using that, when you can use an open source alternative, like DP I know the answer is that users have used hdmi longer
- jekwoooooe 1y ago
  No the real answer is TV manufacturers are not allowed to use DP per their licensing. I’m not sure DP supports the media features hdmi does like CEC
  - simoncion 1y ago
    Last I checked, DisplayPort has an auxiliary communications channel that's at least as capable as HDMI's. As you mention, the HDMI Consortium prohibits TV manufacturers from using DisplayPort. Many of the things that CEC and friends does aren't really needed in PC land. And if the Consortium is going to prohibit TV land from using DisplayPort, why go to the trouble to implement and standardize the parts of CEC & etc. that are only really useful for TVs, home entertainment centers, and the like?
    - throw0101c 1y ago
      > As you mention, the HDMI Consortium prohibits TV manufacturers from using DisplayPort. IANAL, but this seems anti-trust-ish.
      - simoncion 1y ago
        > IANAL, but this seems anti-trust-ish. nic-cage-you-don't-say.gif US antitrust/consumer-protection people have been asleep at the wheel for decades now. I'm doing my (tiny, tiny) part by avoiding HDMI wherever it's at all reasonably possible and recommending to folks I know that they consider doing the same.
    - jekwoooooe 1y ago
      “Only” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The pc market is a tiny minority of customers. Most of the real volume is sadly just a soundbar plus a tv plus some device like Apple TV. The majority of the market by dollar is ultra high end setups which absolutely depend on hdmi. Not for cec which fails miserably with more than one device in the chain but because the AV devices only support hdmi. I wish they had DP but the anti consumer licensing does not allow it.
      - simoncion 1y ago
        > “Only” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Is it? Let's read on. > The pc market is a tiny minority of customers. Most of the real volume is sadly just a soundbar plus a tv plus some device like Apple TV. ... I wish [TVs] had DP but the anti consumer licensing does not allow it. You're aware of the fact that HDMI licensing seems to prohibit the installation of DisplayPort ports on TVs. Good. That's what I said, upthread: > [T]he HDMI Consortium prohibits TV manufacturers from using DisplayPort. Many of the things that CEC and friends does aren't really needed in PC land. So. Given that review of the previously-presented information: Why would the DisplayPort folks (and/or manufacturers of equipment using DisplayPort) go to the trouble to standardize device control protocols that are only really useful in TVs and the like? As I said, that doesn't make any sense for a port that doesn't get used on TVs and associated TV support hardware... does it?
megous 1y ago
If only they did not block opensource drivers.
snarfy 1y ago
I'm still salty about the lack of DisplayPort adoption by manufacturers. I have a new video card with DP 2.1 and new monitor (2025) with only DP 1.4. I'm forced to use hdmi if I want full bandwidth without dsc. A 2025 monitor with DP 1.4 from 2016. Shame.
- simoncion 1y ago
  > A 2025 monitor with DP 1.4 from 2016. Shame. Sure, that's fuckin stupid... if HBR3 can't handle the monitor's native resolution, refresh rate, and bit depth. But, on the gripping hand (and with the greatest of respect) why the hell did you buy the crappy thing? There are many DP 2 monitors out there. This is a little glib... but if someone's selling something that's bad, don't buy it. The dire video card and monitor situation has kicked me off of my regular upgrade cycle for at least five years. I'm not happy about it, but it's better than getting something that's not fit for purpose (and signaling to the manufacturers that it's okay to manufacture unfit products).
  - nfriedly 1y ago
    > There are many DP 2 monitors out there. That feels like a bit of a stretch. There are a handful of options now, but most were released within the past year[1] and have only recently become available for purchase, and most of these are ~$1k or higher[2]. The cheapest one I could find right now is $714, but it's only 1440p (and 480hz - Sony INZONE M10S[3]). If snarfy needed something before then, and/or didn't have a huge budget to devote to a monitor, you can't really blame them. You can get a perfectly serviceable 4k 160hz monitor with DP 1.4 for ~$300 right now[4], and that makes a lot more sense for most people. Monitor manufacturers are generally stingy with DP ports, often including more HDMI ports, even when they can't support the full resolution and refresh rate of the monitor. It is frustrating. [1]: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/table/171238 https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/table/171238 [2]: https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=601469993%20601420164%20601438011%20601423804%20101702297 https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=601469993%20601420164%20601438... [3]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0D9R7HCVG https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0D9R7HCVG [4]: https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-Monitor-3840x2160-160Hz-FreeSync-Premium/dp/B0DKTWXTW8 https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-Monitor-3840x2160-160Hz-Free...
throw0101c 1y ago
Any further word on the recently announced GPMI out of China? * "GPMI set to deliver up to 192Gbps and 480W through a single USB cable": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43607155 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43607155 * "China launches HDMI and DisplayPort alternative – GPMI up to 192 Gbps, 480W": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43602154 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43602154 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPMI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPMI
- LargoLasskhyfv 1y ago
  Interesting. In german I'd simply call that Allzweckanschluss. Or maybe UniPipe? (One connection for all things(electrical(since it does power besides media)))
voidUpdate 1y ago
Does that mean I can use the same 1080p screens I always have, but at 960Hz?
- perching_aix 1y ago
  No. Your display, graphics card / video source, and the display cable connecting these all need to support the new standard, and the first two specifically also need to support outputting at that video mode. The video source side is usually more forgiving, but if your display doesn't support 960 Hz outright, it's unlikely to work properly (though you can get lucky if the new standard is at least officially supported by it).
CollinEMac 1y ago
I've never actually looked into this so maybe this is a dumb question but how hard would it be to make a symmetrical HDMI cable with no "up" or "down"? USB-C was rightfully lauded for this but I personally have a much more frustrating history reaching around the back of tvs with an upside down HDMI cable.
- timbit42 1y ago
  The easiest to connect is the RCA connector. You can insert it at any rotation. With concentric rings it could provide more connections but it couldn't be as thin as USB-C.
  - sebazzz 1y ago
    It would probably also be a noisy connector.
    - timbit42 1y ago
      RCA plugs fit quite tightly. No noise.
- nemomarx 1y ago
  How do you do the locking mechanism? I'm guessing that's why they're oriented
  - Kirby64 1y ago
    Where have you seen an HDMI locking mechanism? DisplayPort cables have the tabs, but I've never seen one on HDMI.
    - nemomarx 1y ago
      Oh that's on me for mostly using DP, I assumed they both had it
- 83 1y ago
illamint 1y ago
Finally. All I want for Christmas is a 5K, HDR, 120Hz display. I'm managing with 4K, 120Hz, and scaling to 2560x1440 in Mac OS, but with the latter option I lose HDR. I can't give up 120Hz after getting used to it on all my devices.
- seanalltogether 1y ago
  I'm right there with you. A 27" 5K 120Hz is my endgame monitor. I would be perfectly happy spending my working hours in 5K, and then switching to my gaming pc to play in 1440p mode.
- masklinn 1y ago
  Technically you could already do that on DisplayPort (since DP2, the standard of which was released 6 years ago), manufacturers don't want to do anything other than high refresh rates. I just want a damn widescreen hidpi display (I don't care about HDR or HRR), but I've yet to see one, let alone one that seems any good.
- nyarlathotep_ 1y ago
  What are you using for displays in this range? I've been using 4K displays at home exclusively for ~5 years and it's rare to even see 4K display over 60hz. I assume they're quite pricy still?
perching_aix 1y ago
16K@60 must be some DSC enabled mode, because the math isn't mathing for me otherwise: 96 gigabits/sec should be capping out at 16K@30 (and that's at SDR, so 8 bits per channel). At least we can get some decent speed at FHD now (1920 Hz). I doubt any manufacturer will bite though sadly, even though OLEDs should be capable of maintaining refresh rate compliance. 4K@480 is still a nice improvement at least, even if a fairly incremental one. I do expect those to appear on the market.
maxlin 1y ago
At those bandwidths, resolutions seems rather silly to invest in to. Having used high-hz screens for a long time, 60 hz is starting to seem quite broken for me. 120hz+ at lower resolutions first seems a lot more useful, unless one is doing some 360 degree video thing that has relatively very low amount of pixels per degree of angle. Doubling framerate is only double the cost, while doubling width&height is quadruple the cost.
- jekwoooooe 1y ago
  The resolution is now a marketing tactic. People don’t understand how high fidelity 4k is because they get 10mbps Faux K streams on Netflix. They cannot conceptualize watching a 4k UHD rip on a 160” screen.
riobard 1y ago
I've recently got a 32" 6K (6144x3456) display for my M4 Mac mini. Turns out 10-bit RGB at 60Hz requires about 38Gbps bandwidth, which is just slightly below the theoretical limit of Thunderbolt 4 and USB 4 (40Gbps), but the actual video signal inside TB4/USB4 is DisplayPort 1.4 which can only offers a little bit less than 26Gbps after coding overhead. So it has to be compressed using DSC to work. Luckily the M4 Mac mini comes with an HDMI 2.1 port allowing 42Gbps data rate after deducting overhead, and that's the one I'm currently using to attach the 6K display. Only the M4 Pro/Max-equipped Macs offer Thunderbolt 5 with DisplayPort 2.0/2.1 (~77Gbps data rate). And people are asking if the 6K display can do high refresh rate like ProMotion at 120Hz… I just wish the TV and monitor industries could just stop fighting and get a unified ultra high bandwidth standard to work. I'm so fed up with the hard choice we're forced to make regarding DP vs HDMI.
- throw0101c 1y ago
  > I've recently got a 32" 6K (6144x3456) display for my M4 Mac mini. How are you finding the scaling on that? I currently have an aging 27" 5K iMac and want/need to upgrade. I'm not really interest in going >27" because of desk space issues, but there are a limited (though finally growing) number of 27" 5K monitors—besides the more-than-I-want-to-spend Apple Studio Display. 32" may be sufficiently not-large for my wants/tastes, so does 32" 6K work with macOS 'properly'?
  - riobard 1y ago
    At ~220PPI and 2x HiDPI mode it works as properly as Apple's Pro XDR 6K display: everything is crisply clear and the working area is vast. You basically get two and a half 4K screens seamlessly in one rectangle. Actually it has 4% more pixels than 6K Pro Display XDR (6144x3456 vs 6016x3384) and 44% more pixels than 5K Studio Display (5120x2880). It is the highest resolution computer monitor I can get at the moment. (8K and higher resolutions are mostly TV sets or cinema equipment, not optimized for computer use.) I was even trying to attach two of these 6K babies to the M4 Mac mini. According to Apple spec it should work, but no matter how I tried, the second attached display only gets max 4K signal. Maybe it needs M4 Pro.
intsunny 1y ago
Just as a reminder, the HDMI Forum is forbidding AMD from releasing an open source HDMI 2.1 driver for Linux: https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-2.1-OSS-Rejected https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-2.1-OSS-Rejected Displayport is the better technology in every way possible.

30 points by mfiguiere 1y ago

I look forward to seeing this in consumer devices in 2040 plus the usual fiasco of defective AVR chips for the first generation. Are 90% of features still optional? You can be hdmi 2.1 compliant without VRR, QMS, etc.

skeuomorphism 1y ago

Took them long enough Besides, why bother using that, when you can use an open source alternative, like DP I know the answer is that users have used hdmi longer

jekwoooooe 1y ago
No the real answer is TV manufacturers are not allowed to use DP per their licensing. I’m not sure DP supports the media features hdmi does like CEC
- simoncion 1y ago
  Last I checked, DisplayPort has an auxiliary communications channel that's at least as capable as HDMI's. As you mention, the HDMI Consortium prohibits TV manufacturers from using DisplayPort. Many of the things that CEC and friends does aren't really needed in PC land. And if the Consortium is going to prohibit TV land from using DisplayPort, why go to the trouble to implement and standardize the parts of CEC & etc. that are only really useful for TVs, home entertainment centers, and the like?
  - throw0101c 1y ago
    > As you mention, the HDMI Consortium prohibits TV manufacturers from using DisplayPort. IANAL, but this seems anti-trust-ish.
    - simoncion 1y ago
      > IANAL, but this seems anti-trust-ish. nic-cage-you-don't-say.gif US antitrust/consumer-protection people have been asleep at the wheel for decades now. I'm doing my (tiny, tiny) part by avoiding HDMI wherever it's at all reasonably possible and recommending to folks I know that they consider doing the same.
  - jekwoooooe 1y ago
    “Only” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The pc market is a tiny minority of customers. Most of the real volume is sadly just a soundbar plus a tv plus some device like Apple TV. The majority of the market by dollar is ultra high end setups which absolutely depend on hdmi. Not for cec which fails miserably with more than one device in the chain but because the AV devices only support hdmi. I wish they had DP but the anti consumer licensing does not allow it.
    - simoncion 1y ago
      > “Only” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Is it? Let's read on. > The pc market is a tiny minority of customers. Most of the real volume is sadly just a soundbar plus a tv plus some device like Apple TV. ... I wish [TVs] had DP but the anti consumer licensing does not allow it. You're aware of the fact that HDMI licensing seems to prohibit the installation of DisplayPort ports on TVs. Good. That's what I said, upthread: > [T]he HDMI Consortium prohibits TV manufacturers from using DisplayPort. Many of the things that CEC and friends does aren't really needed in PC land. So. Given that review of the previously-presented information: Why would the DisplayPort folks (and/or manufacturers of equipment using DisplayPort) go to the trouble to standardize device control protocols that are only really useful in TVs and the like? As I said, that doesn't make any sense for a port that doesn't get used on TVs and associated TV support hardware... does it?

megous 1y ago

If only they did not block opensource drivers.

snarfy 1y ago

I'm still salty about the lack of DisplayPort adoption by manufacturers. I have a new video card with DP 2.1 and new monitor (2025) with only DP 1.4. I'm forced to use hdmi if I want full bandwidth without dsc. A 2025 monitor with DP 1.4 from 2016. Shame.

simoncion 1y ago
> A 2025 monitor with DP 1.4 from 2016. Shame. Sure, that's fuckin stupid... if HBR3 can't handle the monitor's native resolution, refresh rate, and bit depth. But, on the gripping hand (and with the greatest of respect) why the hell did you buy the crappy thing? There are many DP 2 monitors out there. This is a little glib... but if someone's selling something that's bad, don't buy it. The dire video card and monitor situation has kicked me off of my regular upgrade cycle for at least five years. I'm not happy about it, but it's better than getting something that's not fit for purpose (and signaling to the manufacturers that it's okay to manufacture unfit products).
- nfriedly 1y ago
  > There are many DP 2 monitors out there. That feels like a bit of a stretch. There are a handful of options now, but most were released within the past year[1] and have only recently become available for purchase, and most of these are ~$1k or higher[2]. The cheapest one I could find right now is $714, but it's only 1440p (and 480hz - Sony INZONE M10S[3]). If snarfy needed something before then, and/or didn't have a huge budget to devote to a monitor, you can't really blame them. You can get a perfectly serviceable 4k 160hz monitor with DP 1.4 for ~$300 right now[4], and that makes a lot more sense for most people. Monitor manufacturers are generally stingy with DP ports, often including more HDMI ports, even when they can't support the full resolution and refresh rate of the monitor. It is frustrating. [1]: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/table/171238 https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/table/171238 [2]: https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=601469993%20601420164%20601438011%20601423804%20101702297 https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=601469993%20601420164%20601438... [3]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0D9R7HCVG https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0D9R7HCVG [4]: https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-Monitor-3840x2160-160Hz-FreeSync-Premium/dp/B0DKTWXTW8 https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-Monitor-3840x2160-160Hz-Free...

throw0101c 1y ago

Any further word on the recently announced GPMI out of China? * "GPMI set to deliver up to 192Gbps and 480W through a single USB cable": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43607155 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43607155 * "China launches HDMI and DisplayPort alternative – GPMI up to 192 Gbps, 480W": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43602154 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43602154 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPMI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPMI

LargoLasskhyfv 1y ago
Interesting. In german I'd simply call that Allzweckanschluss. Or maybe UniPipe? (One connection for all things(electrical(since it does power besides media)))

voidUpdate 1y ago

Does that mean I can use the same 1080p screens I always have, but at 960Hz?

perching_aix 1y ago
No. Your display, graphics card / video source, and the display cable connecting these all need to support the new standard, and the first two specifically also need to support outputting at that video mode. The video source side is usually more forgiving, but if your display doesn't support 960 Hz outright, it's unlikely to work properly (though you can get lucky if the new standard is at least officially supported by it).

CollinEMac 1y ago

I've never actually looked into this so maybe this is a dumb question but how hard would it be to make a symmetrical HDMI cable with no "up" or "down"? USB-C was rightfully lauded for this but I personally have a much more frustrating history reaching around the back of tvs with an upside down HDMI cable.

timbit42 1y ago
The easiest to connect is the RCA connector. You can insert it at any rotation. With concentric rings it could provide more connections but it couldn't be as thin as USB-C.
- sebazzz 1y ago
  It would probably also be a noisy connector.
  - timbit42 1y ago
    RCA plugs fit quite tightly. No noise.
nemomarx 1y ago
How do you do the locking mechanism? I'm guessing that's why they're oriented
- Kirby64 1y ago
  Where have you seen an HDMI locking mechanism? DisplayPort cables have the tabs, but I've never seen one on HDMI.
  - nemomarx 1y ago
    Oh that's on me for mostly using DP, I assumed they both had it
83 1y ago

illamint 1y ago

Finally. All I want for Christmas is a 5K, HDR, 120Hz display. I'm managing with 4K, 120Hz, and scaling to 2560x1440 in Mac OS, but with the latter option I lose HDR. I can't give up 120Hz after getting used to it on all my devices.

seanalltogether 1y ago
I'm right there with you. A 27" 5K 120Hz is my endgame monitor. I would be perfectly happy spending my working hours in 5K, and then switching to my gaming pc to play in 1440p mode.
masklinn 1y ago
Technically you could already do that on DisplayPort (since DP2, the standard of which was released 6 years ago), manufacturers don't want to do anything other than high refresh rates. I just want a damn widescreen hidpi display (I don't care about HDR or HRR), but I've yet to see one, let alone one that seems any good.
nyarlathotep_ 1y ago
What are you using for displays in this range? I've been using 4K displays at home exclusively for ~5 years and it's rare to even see 4K display over 60hz. I assume they're quite pricy still?

perching_aix 1y ago

16K@60 must be some DSC enabled mode, because the math isn't mathing for me otherwise: 96 gigabits/sec should be capping out at 16K@30 (and that's at SDR, so 8 bits per channel). At least we can get some decent speed at FHD now (1920 Hz). I doubt any manufacturer will bite though sadly, even though OLEDs should be capable of maintaining refresh rate compliance. 4K@480 is still a nice improvement at least, even if a fairly incremental one. I do expect those to appear on the market.

maxlin 1y ago

At those bandwidths, resolutions seems rather silly to invest in to. Having used high-hz screens for a long time, 60 hz is starting to seem quite broken for me. 120hz+ at lower resolutions first seems a lot more useful, unless one is doing some 360 degree video thing that has relatively very low amount of pixels per degree of angle. Doubling framerate is only double the cost, while doubling width&height is quadruple the cost.

jekwoooooe 1y ago
The resolution is now a marketing tactic. People don’t understand how high fidelity 4k is because they get 10mbps Faux K streams on Netflix. They cannot conceptualize watching a 4k UHD rip on a 160” screen.

riobard 1y ago

I've recently got a 32" 6K (6144x3456) display for my M4 Mac mini. Turns out 10-bit RGB at 60Hz requires about 38Gbps bandwidth, which is just slightly below the theoretical limit of Thunderbolt 4 and USB 4 (40Gbps), but the actual video signal inside TB4/USB4 is DisplayPort 1.4 which can only offers a little bit less than 26Gbps after coding overhead. So it has to be compressed using DSC to work. Luckily the M4 Mac mini comes with an HDMI 2.1 port allowing 42Gbps data rate after deducting overhead, and that's the one I'm currently using to attach the 6K display. Only the M4 Pro/Max-equipped Macs offer Thunderbolt 5 with DisplayPort 2.0/2.1 (~77Gbps data rate). And people are asking if the 6K display can do high refresh rate like ProMotion at 120Hz… I just wish the TV and monitor industries could just stop fighting and get a unified ultra high bandwidth standard to work. I'm so fed up with the hard choice we're forced to make regarding DP vs HDMI.

throw0101c 1y ago
> I've recently got a 32" 6K (6144x3456) display for my M4 Mac mini. How are you finding the scaling on that? I currently have an aging 27" 5K iMac and want/need to upgrade. I'm not really interest in going >27" because of desk space issues, but there are a limited (though finally growing) number of 27" 5K monitors—besides the more-than-I-want-to-spend Apple Studio Display. 32" may be sufficiently not-large for my wants/tastes, so does 32" 6K work with macOS 'properly'?
- riobard 1y ago
  At ~220PPI and 2x HiDPI mode it works as properly as Apple's Pro XDR 6K display: everything is crisply clear and the working area is vast. You basically get two and a half 4K screens seamlessly in one rectangle. Actually it has 4% more pixels than 6K Pro Display XDR (6144x3456 vs 6016x3384) and 44% more pixels than 5K Studio Display (5120x2880). It is the highest resolution computer monitor I can get at the moment. (8K and higher resolutions are mostly TV sets or cinema equipment, not optimized for computer use.) I was even trying to attach two of these 6K babies to the M4 Mac mini. According to Apple spec it should work, but no matter how I tried, the second attached display only gets max 4K signal. Maybe it needs M4 Pro.

intsunny 1y ago

Just as a reminder, the HDMI Forum is forbidding AMD from releasing an open source HDMI 2.1 driver for Linux: https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-2.1-OSS-Rejected https://www.phoronix.com/news/HDMI-2.1-OSS-Rejected Displayport is the better technology in every way possible.