HDMI 2.2 cranks the bandwidth to 96Gbps and aims to eliminate audio sync issues forever
HDMI 2.2 cranks the bandwidth to 96Gbps and aims to eliminate audio sync issues forever
But you shouldn’t worry about upgrading anytime soon.
The HDMI Forum is using CES — the annual showcase of all things home theater — to announce the new HDMI 2.2 specification. In a press release this morning, the trade association confirmed that the new spec will up total bandwidth significantly to a new high of 96Gbps. And yes, that means the introduction of an “Ultra96” HDMI cable that “enables all the HDMI 2.2 specification features.”
“Higher resolutions and refresh rates will be supported and more high-quality options will be provided,” the HDMI Forum said in its release. An example of an HDMI 2.2 cable (below) calls out some of those, including 4K at up to 480Hz, 8K at up to 240Hz, and 10K at 120Hz. Current HDMI cables can already pass 4K at 120Hz, so I doubt most people will feel any temptation to upgrade for years to come. And you’ll need content for any of these higher resolutions to be worthwhile, and there’s still a dearth of native 8K entertainment out there.
But with many TVs now offering 4K at up to 144Hz, and as consumers gravitate towards larger screens, the HDMI Forum sees ample reason to keep pushing forward.
There is at least a more helpful aspect of this spec for everyone: HDMI 2.2 includes a “Latency Indication Protocol (LIP) for improving audio and video synchronization, especially for multiple-hop system configurations such as those with an audio video receiver or soundbar.” In my experience, HDMI 2.1 and eARC have mostly resolved frustrating audio / video sync issues, but they can still pop up as a frustration depending on your setup. Apparently HDMI 2.2 will go further in keeping everything lined up and keeping this headache in the past.
Interestingly, the HDMI Forum is already anticipating tariff issues and has implemented an extensive certification program that includes anti-counterfeit labeling on packaging. You certainly can’t miss the Ultra96 badging.
HDMI 2.2 will be released in the first half of this year and be widely available “to all HDMI 2.x adopters.” Your TV and external devices will need to support the specification in order to unlock that new level of bandwidth, so we’re just starting down what’s inevitably going to be a long road.
DisplayPort better
Can we just completely drop HDCP so I can make things work together without having to burn incense and make a sacrifice to the Tech gods?!
Sorry, best we can do is one more streaming app on your smart TV.
Us: please increase the audio on dialogue
Them: 96gbps hdmi max infinity audio sync!!!!!
This isn't really a cable issue though. The inaudible dialogue is due to bad masterinf of the sounds for home systems (i.e.: the slunds were originally mastered for 5.1, 7.1,or for fucking cinemas with 128 channels)
Or it is just the choice of the director, because he likes it that way (Cough Christopher Nolan Cough)
Can anyone ELI5 how we are able to release new standards all the time? Are there technological advances that allow more bandwidth? If not, why not start with higher bandwidth?
Going for higher bandwidth tends to increase signal interference. There are various ways to deal with that, most of which cost money. For example, most high speed data cables use twisted pairs that help cancel out interference. To go faster, the twists need to be tighter, and that's more expensive to make.
If there is no customer demand for those use cases, then there's no reason to force a more expensive cable, connector, or signalling electronics just so you can meet specs.
Makes sense, thanks!
Can someone force cable manufacturers to print the bandwidth or at least the version on the fucking cable already?!
Why do that when you can just make the same cable you've been selling all along and change the description to "Full HD 1080p 4K 8K 16K 48GBPS 96GPS PlayStation 4 5 6 Switch 2 Xbox Series X S One 360 Male Female HDMI 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 Cable" on Amazon.
Yeah, that's why I said somebody needs to force them. Like how food can't say chocolate if it doesn't actually have chocolate.
Half of them will print the highest bandwidth regardless of the actual cable's capabilities so that won't help.
Sounds like "burdensome regulation" to me.
Communist.
/s
They do but probably not in a way that you understand. Instead of the bandwidth which to be honest most people won't know what that means either, they use
STANDARD HDMI CABLE
STANDARD HDMI CABLE WITH ETHERNEiT
HIGH SPEED HDMI CABLE
HIGH SPEED HDMI CABLE WITH ETHERNET
ULTRA HIGH SPEED HDMI CABLE
Each one specifies the standard and is almost always printed on the cable. I can't think of any off the top of my head that wasn't labeled but I'm sure there are and if you don't see it printed on the cable then throw it out.
You can read more about this naming convention here. https://www.cablematters.com/Blog/HDMI/HDMI-cable-types-the-ultimate-guide
High Speed is the second slowest cable and the slowest one still being sold. Last time I bought an HDMI cable, I didn't even know there was anything slower than 1080p@60hz so I just assumed that was "Standard" and, by buying "High Speed", I was getting something better. Yes, I should have done more research before buying but the point is that calling the slowest cable still being sold "High Speed" is confusing and deceptive. That's why I want them to be forced to label the cables with the bandwidth or version.
At this point we should just swing to 10 gbps sfp+ ports, it's faster, it's lower latency, it's upgradable to 100gbps, it travels over fiber, but most importantly, it is a network protocol and we can use it for our Internet.
Instead, they're trying to force everything to USB with DP Alt mode which has a ton of the same annoyances...but at least USB C is flippable I guess.
HDMI 2.1 cables have 19 wires and USB 3.2 has 13 or 14 (can't remember) so they're really finicky and fragile. Fiber has 1 or 2 and is VERY rugged in comparison...you can literally tie a knot in a fiber cable and it'll still work.
Plus with fiber, if your AVR blows up, it can't take the other equipment out with it since it's electrically isolated.
Fiber is also cheap cheap cheap!
Fiber is thin and easy to route.
Fiber can ALSO be shortened, extended, etc. in the field.
The only downside is the cost of the splicing tools (and the cleanliness required)
And I guess SFP connectors are pretty gnarly. But if it was aimed at consumers, they could slap a nice rubberized coat on it...
Man, I love fiber.
Fiber has 1 or 2 and is VERY rugged in comparison...you can literally tie a knot in a fiber cable and it'll still work.
Emm, not with glass fibers. My friend uses it between router and switch, and the one of the fiber breaks. So, traffic can be sent to router but nothing the other way around. He said he didn't even touch or put significant stress on the cable. Yet, it breaks in a weird way, and hard to troubleshot without proper equipment.
That would be awesome, but the fucking corpo bullshit cunts need proprietary bullshit cause "piracy"
I'm still pissed at the HDMI forum for banning Linux from using HDMI 2.1
If a fiber transceiver supports 100 GbE it's not really sensible to refer to it as 10 GbE.
Also, is it cheaper? I highly doubt it..
100gbit DAC cables are widely available for $30, mch cheaper than these 96gbit cables will be. Optical cables are $120 due to the transceivers, but also reasonable. You can also use off the shelf fiber so your length is infinite with the optical cables.
At this point we should just swing to 10 gbps sfp+ ports
That's not enough bandwidth unless you want compressed video.
Imagine how large those 10k resolution games are gonna be.
Not all that much larger. It's going to be upscalled 1440p textures that look like a smeared mess. But people will eat up the 10k claims.
Make it work on Linux please
The hacker known as Linux has used HDMI to illegally steal movies. It will never be supported. You will never have HDMI 2.1, let alone 2.2
What's the real world application of 98Gbps? Based on a quick Google search, 8K doesn't even hit 10Gbps at 480fps.
8K doesn't even hit 10Gbps at 480fps.
That would have to be compressed. 4K@60 is 18Gbps.
That’s probably compressed, raw sounds impossible to do those
Correct. Wikipedia has a complete breakdown of resolutions and speeds with and without compression.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
See the section Versions -> Refresh frequency limits for standard video.
Then throw in multi displays, either on your desk or in VR. And VR wants very high refresh rates, too. Oh, and 10 bpp encoding for HDR.
HDMI 2.2 will be released in the first half of this year and be widely available “to all HDMI 2.x adopters.” Your TV and external devices will need to support the specification
Will this solve eARC sync issues on existing devices that support 2.1? Like I could just get a new cable and it would work?
No, the cable isn't going to implement the protocol. You need endpoints that are able to talk that protocol. That might be done with a firmware update or require new hardware.
Let me know when we have cables that can hit 1000Hz at 8K, so I can finally own a blur-free OLED. Until then, I'm perfectly content with 4K120.
I'm picturing cables in my head like the ones they deploy on seabeds to accommodate this 😄
Which is just silly. Displayport is 80 Gbps already.
Was there any doubt this was serious?
For TVs there's little to nowhere to go beyond 4k 120hz. Same for monitors - I have 4k 144hz display over displayport 1.4a and pushing resolution and refresh rate further has no purpose anymore.