HDMI 2.1 is here with 10K and Dynamic HDR support

[silberdrachi]

https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/28/hdmi-2-1-specification-is-now-available-with-10k/

 

Quote

Back in January, the HDMI Forum unveiled its new specifications for the HDMI connector, called HDMI 2.1. Now, that HDMI specification is available to all HDMI 2.0 adopters. It's backwards compatible with all previous HDMI specifications.

 

Quote

This new version of the HDMI specification also introduces an enhanced refresh rate that gamers will appreciate. VRR, or Variable Refresh Rate, reduces, or in some cases eliminates, lag for smoother gameplay, while Quick Frame Transport (QFT) reduces latency.

 

List of features and which HDMI version supports it:

Spoiler

 

Seems like a pretty nice list of new technology. Especially interested in VRR over HDMI and how that will change gsync/freesync. HDMI implementations tend to be far more common than display port and that might help it get into more markets and reduce prices.

 

Update with a new picture showing the bitdepths at each resolution/fps:

Spoiler

 

[LDShadowLord]

Is VRR just the Adaptive-Sync that AMD got working over HDMI? Or have they built their own from the ground up?

[The Benjamins]

I hate how HDMI has such a strangle hold over the TV living room space. they took their sweet time to get to the speeds DP has had for years.

[silberdrachi]

3 minutes ago, LDShadowLord said:

Is VRR just the Adaptive-Sync that AMD got working over HDMI? Or have they built their own from the ground up?

in this article and a few others i have found, it sounds much more like AMD's implementation of Adaptive Sync, rather than anything they designed themselves. It also does require that the tv/monitor supports it just like Adaptive Sync.

 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-hdmi-2-1-specifications-revealed

[Trixanity]

24 minutes ago, LDShadowLord said:

Is VRR just the Adaptive-Sync that AMD got working over HDMI? Or have they built their own from the ground up?

Probably just adopting the VESA Adaptive Sync which was indeed spearheaded by AMD.

 

Interesting that HDMI has leapfrogged DP so immensely and out of nowhere. 

24 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I hate how HDMI has such a strangle hold over the TV living room space. they took their sweet time to get to the speeds DP has had for years.

HDMI just curb-stomped DP. This more than makes up for the tardiness.

[The Benjamins]

16 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

Probably just adopting the VESA Adaptive Sync which was indeed spearheaded by AMD.

 

Interesting that HDMI has leapfrogged DP so immensely and out of nowhere. 

HDMI just curb-stomped DP. This more than makes up for the tardiness.

not really, they passed them by a bit. but 8k has yet to hit the major display market so its not like HDMI can take away market share in 8k+.

 

DP still has features HDMI does not have.

[sof006]

Oooh... This has me interested.

[Matu20]

Can't wait to see it in 3 years.

[bcguru9384]

29 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

not really, they passed them by a bit. but 8k has yet to hit the major display market so its not like HDMI can take away market share in 8k+.

 

DP still has features HDMI does not have.

what dp do that hdmi does not

curious as i know hdmi has internet and audio and CEC and its video

[Doobeedoo]

Great it supports VRR though. Also, the new DP probably 1.5 will support 4K@144Hz and HDR so that will be amazing to see.

[suicidalfranco]

remember when it took decades to release a new standard?

 

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

DP still has features HDMI does not have.

 

1 hour ago, bcguru9384 said:

what dp do that hdmi does not

curious as i know hdmi has internet and audio and CEC and its video

 

DP works on data or device streams so can transmit multiple different sources and data types if you want to, which also means you can daisy chain devices and they are all separate and addressable individually which you cannot do with HDMI.

 

DP and HDMI seem similar in terms of feature support but technology wise DP has always been better but came second, after the Hi-Fi market adopted HDMI so it never really mattered how much better it was because it was too late.

[WMGroomAK]

While I appreciate the HDR aspects, this brings to mind one of the things that I absolutely abhor about the modern TV industry, which is the constant push of increasing the resolution for minimal gains...  How large of a screen would you seriously need for 10K resolution to make any sort of meaningful difference over 4K?  Do you really need to be able to count the facial pores on the weather reporter?  I would just prefer if they would focus more on improving HDR and pixel brightness and response...

[bcguru9384]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

 

 

DP works on data or device streams so can transmit multiple different sources and data types if you want to, which also means you can daisy chain devices and they are all separate and addressable individually which you cannot do with HDMI.

 

DP and HDMI seem similar in terms of feature support but technology wise DP has always been better but came second, after the Hi-Fi market adopted HDMI so it never really mattered how much better it was because it was too late.

oh like the bluray vs hd war years ago

well i guess atleast my hdmi won(limits=greater security)

 

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, bcguru9384 said:

well i guess atleast my hdmi won(limits=greater security)

Not really, DP is or was better. Both coming out at the same time HDMI would have not been chosen. For the AV world being able to have multiple audio streams would have been extremely useful.

 

Security doesn't even come in to play.

[Trixanity]

2 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

not really, they passed them by a bit. but 8k has yet to hit the major display market so its not like HDMI can take away market share in 8k+.

 

DP still has features HDMI does not have.

Just looking at bandwidth alone:

HDMI 48 gbit/s

DP 32 gbit/s

 

That's not a bit. That's a lot.

Yes, DP tries to compensate by implementing compression but it appears HDMI does not need to - not yet. I'd consider that a big win for HDMI. DP was always ahead. Being upstaged like that is not only surprising but might also make the consortium look shortsighted and unprepared.

It doesn't really matter that the tech can't be utilized yet. It's about perception and being able to rely on a spec. DP consortium needs to act.

 

However they have mostly partitioned the market between them so it's not so much about competition (except that HDMI has a foothold in the PC market meaning they could attempt to push out DP).

[bobhays]

21 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

Just looking at bandwidth alone:

HDMI 48 gbit/s

DP 32 gbit/s

 

That's not a bit. That's a lot.

Yes, DP tries to compensate by implementing compression but it appears HDMI does not need to - not yet. I'd consider that a big win for HDMI. DP was always ahead. Being upstaged like that is not only surprising but might also make the consortium look shortsighted and unprepared.

It doesn't really matter that the tech can't be utilized yet. It's about perception and being able to rely on a spec. DP consortium needs to act.

 

However they have mostly partitioned the market between them so it's not so much about competition (except that HDMI has a foothold in the PC market meaning they could attempt to push out DP).

But DP 1.4 came out in 2016. At that point it had almost 2x HDMI 2.0's bandwidth. I'm sure they weren't sitting on their butts since then and will have something to show for it by the time HDMI 2.1 is actually implemented.

[MoonSpot]

58 minutes ago, WMGroomAK said:

Do you really need to be able to count the facial pores on the weather reporter?

psssst... naked news is a thing.  So yea, maybe not facial pores.

*slinks back into the shadows*

 

OT:  At least its not a minor iterative step but a note worthy leap.  If the industry is going to invalidate the interoperability of living room devices, at least do it when it is worth a damn to do for the mainstream.  Could you imagine regular joe and grandma having to deal with HDMI 1.4a & 1.4b?  Or even giving a shit to?

[captain_to_fire]

Meanwhile, I’m still happy with my 1080p TV. 

[The Benjamins]

14 hours ago, bcguru9384 said:

what dp do that hdmi does not

curious as i know hdmi has internet and audio and CEC and its video

 

12 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Just looking at bandwidth alone:

HDMI 48 gbit/s

DP 32 gbit/s

 

That's not a bit. That's a lot.

Yes, DP tries to compensate by implementing compression but it appears HDMI does not need to - not yet. I'd consider that a big win for HDMI. DP was always ahead. Being upstaged like that is not only surprising but might also make the consortium look shortsighted and unprepared.

It doesn't really matter that the tech can't be utilized yet. It's about perception and being able to rely on a spec. DP consortium needs to act.

 

However they have mostly partitioned the market between them so it's not so much about competition (except that HDMI has a foothold in the PC market meaning they could attempt to push out DP).

 

The sources has this pic which shows HDMI use compression too, which is for 10k. both use lossless compression. DP had 8k before HDMI you would expect the second person to one up.

 

EDIT: Videocardz has more information.

https://videocardz.com/press-release/hdmi-2-1-final-specs-released-dynamic-hdr-variable-refresh-rate-low-latency-mode

 

[Mitchell 3]

8 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

 

 

The sources has this pic which shows HDMI use compression too, which is for 10k. both use lossless compression. DP had 8k before HDMI you would expect the second person to one up.

I get what you're are saying dp sounds like it could be the superior technology , the only reason I use hdmi is because my tv doesn't have a display port and that's what i hooked my pc to input lag hasn't been too much of an issue thus far

[William Payne]

Wow, the DisplayPort vs HDMI thing gets personal haha. 

 

The reality is that both standards are run by different people. HDMI was founded by Hitachi, Panasonic, Philips, Silicon Image, Sony, Thomson, RCA and Toshiba. While DisplayPort is ran and controlled by VESA, and falls under VESA standards. 

 

I personally am a DisplayPort user but I don't really have a choice, my GPU only has DisplayPort 1.4 sockets. 

[JediFragger]

This is really close but I'm hoping that the next gen of TV's has this!! The XB One X can support it with a firmware update apparantly...

[Trixanity]

5 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

 

 

The sources has this pic which shows HDMI use compression too, which is for 10k. both use lossless compression. DP had 8k before HDMI you would expect the second person to one up.

Good catch. Didn't see they implemented DSC too. I'm aware it's supposed to be lossless. 

 

However my point still stands unless HDMI and DP calculate bandwidth differently (eg raw vs effective). One upping is one thing, another is leapfrogging. I'd have expected HDMI to settle for something like maybe 36 or 40 gbps especially considering their main market being tv/consumer therefore not needing to support odd resolutions or refresh rates. I'm guessing this is a major push to be PC/prosumer/workstation friendly and to oust DP.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Good catch. Didn't see they implemented DSC too. I'm aware it's supposed to be lossless. 

 

However my point still stands unless HDMI and DP calculate bandwidth differently (eg raw vs effective). One upping is one thing, another is leapfrogging. I'd have expected HDMI to settle for something like maybe 36 or 40 gbps especially considering their main market being tv/consumer therefore not needing to support odd resolutions or refresh rates. I'm guessing this is a major push to be PC/prosumer/workstation friendly and to oust DP.

DP and HDMI had two different markets in mind originally, I'm not sure how much either wants to push the other out.

 

HDMI has things like HDMI-CEC and ARC because it's aimed at home TV/AV where as DP doesn't really want to replace that and isn't ever likely to implement a feature like HDMI-CEC because of that.

 

DP was really only aimed at PC and professional (non broadcast) so has some really nice features like multi-stream transport (MST) meaning it can be daisy chained or connected to a hub, less cables to running back to a PC for multiple monitors is always nice. DP can also directly drive a display panel (Laptops).

 

Lastly and one really interesting thing about DP is that it also supports optical cabling meaning it can be run up to 100m, maximum res and refresh rate reduce over distance but only at the extreme lengths and not that limiting. Optical DP 1.4 over 100m supports 4k/60Hz which is really good.

http://www.dvigear.com/cables-dp-aoc.html

 

HDMI can never support multi-streaming, limitation in how data is transmitted, can't support direct drive and has no native capability for optical/fibre transmission (more complex active converters required than DP needs).