HDMI 2.0 released – nearly doubles bandwidth, 4k at 60 fps support

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: HDMI 2.0 released – nearly doubles bandwidth, 4k at 60 fps support[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2011/10/HDMILogo.jpg[/newsimage]

The HDMI forum today announced version 2.0 of the HDMI standard which nearly doubles the available bandwidth and makes 4K content at 60 frames per second possible.

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/hdmi-2-0-released-nearly-doubles-bandwidth-4k-at-60-fps-support-68639/](http://www.myce.com/news/hdmi-2-0-released-nearly-doubles-bandwidth-4k-at-60-fps-support-68639/)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Excellent. It’s all falling into place.

Ok everyone. Time to buy all new gear :wink:


#3

Ha ! Debro I was about to say the same thing. I was just discussing the notion of how to support 4K 60 fps over cables with a friend who works in the industry as I do too (broadcast and HD codecs etc). We talked about pro level where there will likely be 6G or 12G SDI but right now its done via multi-channel method.
But what about consumers ? Now we have the answer.

So what about these new 4K TV’s already available that cost more than a nice sports car ? They won’t support HDMI 2.0 will they ? Early adopters are getting screwed ?

Also, no need for new cables ? I bet Monster won’t agree and will sell expensive cables that are HDMI 2.0 certified but really no different from 1.4 cables !


#4

60 fps! Holy Subliminals, Batman!


#5

[QUOTE=debro;2698444]Excellent. It’s all falling into place.

Ok everyone. Time to buy all new gear ;)[/QUOTE]

New gear? :disagree:
Very happy with the current 720p TV, plus most of the free to air channels only show 576i content, so no new gear for me.
If someone is willing to jump into the latest tech, it’s fine with me, but i am staying away from all this 4K madness for now.


#6

“So what about these new 4K TV’s already available that cost more than a nice sports car ? They won’t support HDMI 2.0 will they ? Early adopters are getting screwed ?”

HDMI 2 is the only way to get 4k into the new TVs.
Have a new XBR65X900 hanging on the wall and the only way to get 4k to it is via HDMI and the pre production Media Player that Sony provided to select Dealers.
Is 4k worth the extra $? You better beilieve it! The Dual Core Processor in the XBR makes even ugly cheap American Cable (360p on a good day) look good.


#7

[QUOTE=ivid;2698495]Ha ! Debro I was about to say the same thing. I was just discussing the notion of how to support 4K 60 fps over cables with a friend who works in the industry as I do too (broadcast and HD codecs etc). We talked about pro level where there will likely be 6G or 12G SDI but right now its done via multi-channel method.
But what about consumers ? Now we have the answer.

So what about these new 4K TV’s already available that cost more than a nice sports car ? They won’t support HDMI 2.0 will they ? Early adopters are getting screwed ?

Also, no need for new cables ? I bet Monster won’t agree and will sell expensive cables that are HDMI 2.0 certified but really no different from 1.4 cables ![/QUOTE]

I thought we all knew there was at least one 4K TV that cost just a little over US$1,000. A “nice sports car” should cost at least US$50K though I am not quite familiar with specific “nice sports car” prices in the US market. A 4K TV tends to be very large, and heavy. It costs far more to transport a 50-inch TV set to homes and offices than a 14-inch one. It wasn’t just about resolution. There’s no 19-inch or 27-inch 4K monitors and TV sets under mass production yet as far as I know. Considering the viewable area and screen quality plus a lot of connectors and ease of use, currently available 4K TVs and 4K monitors are good enough. Expecting electronics manufacturers to sell a 50-inch 4K TV for US$200 is not reasonable. That’s like expecting the early-generation car makers to sell a Ford or a Volkswagen at the price of bicycles.

HDMI 2.0 cables will cost certainly more than HDMI 1.4 cables. HDMI 1.4 cables cost a little more than HDMI 1.3 and earlier specification cables, but that was the same with DVI, USB, DP, and so on. Remember the cost of the 5-hole cables for some of the high-end CRT monitors? That was more expensive than what many of the first HDMI 2.0 cables would likely cost. But the prices of HDMI 2.0 cables will fall much faster. Such things have always been clear and a lot of information is available to the public via easily accessible channels. Nobody screwed early adopters other than themselves.


#8

I think I’m going to need Stormy and his 14Tb drives pretty quick. “A baker’s dozen, please!”


#9

[QUOTE=olddancer;2698538]HDMI 2 is the only way to get 4k into the new TVs.
Have a new XBR65X900 hanging on the wall and the only way to get 4k to it is via HDMI and the pre production Media Player that Sony provided to select Dealers.
Is 4k worth the extra $? You better beilieve it! The Dual Core Processor in the XBR makes even ugly cheap American Cable (360p on a good day) look good.[/QUOTE]Thanks for letting us know we should discount your opinion. When you can’t get basic facts right, your opinion carries very little weight. You’re wrong on many accounts. First, the XBR65X900 TV doesn’t have HDMI 2. Second HDMI 2 isn’t needed to get 4K into a TV or monitor. HDMI 1.x can do 4k just not at 60Hz. Further, DisplayPort can do 4k at 60Hz.


#10

4k won’t be mainstreamed for nearly a decade… primarily because of the dysfunctional deployment of bandwidth around the country (by catv providers and telcos) is also dismal. like it or not, there is a growing demand for access to video programming via the internet, so until that is developed more… video will stall in it’s evolution. BTW, consumers are STILL waiting for affordable 10 GIgabit (ETHERNET) routers/adapter cards which don’t cost an arm and a leg in the residential consumer market. The power requirements will likely be higher for 4K./UHDTV with near 20 gigabit hdmi similar to what you have today in 10-40 gigabit Ethernet controllers. Early adopters always get screwed… look at display port… it had a good run, but it’s not been adopted by major HDTV mfg as a standard-- therefore, HDMI FTW.

I like HDMI, but more likely wireless HD streaming via 802.11AC and its successor will be what most people use in Smart HDTVs. Even after 8-10 years, you will STILL likely find COAX and analog RCA cables as connectors for those with analog VCRs still working in 2020-2025.

I can just see somebody using an old TUBE tv watching Back To the Future on a VCR… LOL!