HDMI 1.4a specification - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 07:17 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
miasmaofplasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Do any AV veterans know whether this standard will support higher frequency transmissions in the near future if ever?

It can support 4K, then it should support FHD 3D @60Hz per eye in some way. Right? Is it a waiting game, are HDMI lobbied by TV corporations etc?

Thanks.
miasmaofplasma is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 07:58 AM
 
alk3997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by miasmaofplasma View Post

Do any AV veterans know whether this standard will support higher frequency transmissions in the near future if ever?
It can support 4K, then it should support FHD 3D @60Hz per eye in some way. Right? Is it a waiting game, are HDMI lobbied by TV corporations etc?
Thanks.

That's actually two separate questions. Can HDMI support higher frequencies? Yes, the high speed max is 10.2 gbps. Will it support frame packed 3D at 60Hz as part of 1.4a? No, that standard is frozen (as is 1.4b).

Will it support FP 3D/60Hz (with 24-bit color) as part of another standard? Don't know. It could. You could also envision 1080p/120 as part of that, but then what would be your source material?

The HDMI Org used to control the standard and it was made up of content providers and CE manufacturers. So, when a "new thing" occurred they would get the standard into place. This has been replaced by the HDMI Forum, which requires something like $30K for membership.

Really the answer is that 3D has not caught on the way some in the CE world would have liked. 4K is seen as the next "big thing" by some. So that's two niche formats ahead of doing any expanded 3D. So, I don't think you'll see that supported in the near future *unless* the gaming industry pushes for it.'
miasmaofplasma likes this.
alk3997 is offline  
post #3 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 10:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Colm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by miasmaofplasma View Post

Do any AV veterans know whether this standard will support higher frequency transmissions in the near future if ever?
No, HDMI 1.4a will never support higher bit rates than today. You will have to wait for the next generation of HDMI for that.
Quote:
It can support 4K, then it should support FHD 3D @60Hz per eye in some way. Right?
Doesn't follow.
Quote:
Is it a waiting game, are HDMI lobbied by TV corporations etc?
Next generation HDMI is being developed by HDMI Forum which is a consortium of CE manufacturers and chip manufacturers. It was announced in January that 4K at 60 Hz is part of the next specification. That would be good enough for 4K 3D at 24 Hz. 4K at 60 Hz will require nearly doubling the bit rate currently supported. I don't think 4K 3D at 60 Hz is coming soon. That will require yet another doubling of the bit rate.

The specification was due out last quarter. Haven't heard anything about it yet. Even when it comes out, don't hold your breath. It will take a while for features to be incorporated in chip sets, CE products, etc., and there is no guarantee whether a given feature will ever be adopted by CE manufacturers (like ethernet over HDMI so far).
miasmaofplasma likes this.
Colm is offline  
post #4 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 02:05 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
miasmaofplasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thank you both for your replies.

My interest is only in games support at Full HD (1080*1920) frame sequential 3D. Essentially 2*HD, i supposed it could be packed over the 10.2Gbps rate since 4K in 2D is (apparently) which is equivalent to 4*HD, right?

But if the 1.4a/b standards won't budge it is irrelevant anyway unless i buy a special PC monitor. If 1.4a/b are frozen my £500 TV is of a much lesser value to me.
miasmaofplasma is offline  
post #5 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 03:02 PM
 
alk3997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by miasmaofplasma View Post

Thank you both for your replies.
My interest is only in games support at Full HD (1080*1920) frame sequential 3D. Essentially 2*HD, i supposed it could be packed over the 10.2Gbps rate since 4K in 2D is (apparently) which is equivalent to 4*HD, right?
But if the 1.4a/b standards won't budge it is irrelevant anyway unless i buy a special PC monitor. If 1.4a/b are frozen my £500 TV is of a much lesser value to me.

My calculations show it to be a little under 9 gbps for 1080p 3D at 60Hz per eye with 24 bit color.

But even if the 1.4b standard was changed today, your TV that you already own would not understand the new standard and so it couldn't do the new format. The only TVs that could would have to wait for multiple chipset updates and then go through design and manufacturing. It wouldn't be "just" a firmware update. That's also another reason why previous standards are not updated later.
alk3997 is offline  
post #6 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 04:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Colm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by alk3997 View Post

My calculations show it to be a little over 7 gbps for 1080p 3D at 60Hz per eye with 24 bit color..
Did you figure in the 8 to 10 encoding? The figure normally thrown around for 1080p60 is 4.45 Gbps. So, 3D would be just under 9 Gbps.
Colm is offline  
post #7 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 05:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Colm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by miasmaofplasma View Post

Thank you both for your replies.
My interest is only in games support at Full HD (1080*1920) frame sequential 3D.
Then why are we talking about 4K? 1080p60 requires 4.45 Gbps. 1080p60 3D or 1080p120 2D requires just under 9 Gbps, well within the maximum bit rate under the current HDMI specification. Your gear may or may not be able to handle that rate, though. FP 3D at that rate is a secondary (non-mandatory) format in the specification. And the chipsets capable of that bandwidth have yet to show up in the majority of CE products.
Colm is offline  
post #8 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 05:10 PM
 
alk3997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colm View Post

Did you figure in the 8 to 10 encoding? The figure normally thrown around for 1080p60 is 4.45 Gbps. So, 3D would be just under 9 Gbps.

Ah, thank you. No I did not include it. I will update my original post.
alk3997 is offline  
post #9 of 17 Old 07-23-2012, 06:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by miasmaofplasma View Post

Do any AV veterans know whether this standard will support higher frequency transmissions in the near future if ever?
It can support 4K, then it should support FHD 3D @60Hz per eye in some way. Right? Is it a waiting game, are HDMI lobbied by TV corporations etc?
Thanks.
Here is a link to a thread about this issue. The short answer is there are already graphic cards on the market that are capable of 1080p60 per eye 3D (such as the AMD Radeon 7700/7800/7900 series) but that currently there are no 3D TVs capable of it.
miasmaofplasma likes this.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #10 of 17 Old 07-24-2012, 01:50 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
miasmaofplasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
To Colm: i was simply trying to demonstrate my understanding in terms of bandwidth differential (somewhat..). This is because i haven't been able to find a TV that does this, only monitors; i was hypothesizing a firmware update for me TV allowing it's chipset can handle the frequency needed for 1080p60 instead of 1080p24.

To Richard Paul: Yes that's true. I'd need to buy computer monitors which seem to max out at 27" being LED with 1080p60 3D capable, which is too small.

I continually appreciate your inputs, everyone.
miasmaofplasma is offline  
post #11 of 17 Old 07-24-2012, 08:14 AM
 
alk3997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

Here is a link to a thread about this issue. The short answer is there are already graphic cards on the market that are capable of 1080p60 per eye 3D (such as the AMD Radeon 7700/7800/7900 series) but that currently there are no 3D TVs capable of it.

Interesting link. I read through it and basically what I got out of it was that only select AMD video cards have the capability to generate 1080p/60 3D. I saw some speculation that a NVidia card could and that maybe a monitor *might* be able to display the format. But that leaves out how the data gets from the video card to the monitor without a standard.

In terms of firmware versus chipset, the example of 1080i 3D Side-by-Side is a good lesson. As you may remember there are a number of ways of encoding 3D. One is top-and-bottom, another is side-by-side and another is frame packed. Blu-Ray of course uses 1080p/24 Frame Packed. However, to fit within broadcast space on satellite channels (and some cable), the side-by-side and top-and-bottom are used. It turns out that 720p Side-by-Side is an "optional" format for 3D. Unfortunately ESPN 3D at one time was 720p Side-By-Side on DirecTV.

This meant that some projectors and HDTVs could not display ESPN 3D when it was 720p SbS, even though these TVs were fully 3D compatible (all the manditory formats were covered). You would think that it would be a simple firmware upgrade to fix that issue, but it wasn't because the actual chipsets could not display 720p SbS. Luckily ESPN 3D on DirecTV went to a compatible format and now it works great.

The point of all that is that your entire infrastructure from source to destination (sink) has to be compatible with a signal format for it to work in the digital age. If you throw-in an AVR, then that has to be compatible as well.

So, expecting a pre-existing monitor to be compatible with a format that doesn't actually exist will almost always lead to disappointment. You really have to wait for a standard to be set before you can start looking for truly compatible equipment.
alk3997 is offline  
post #12 of 17 Old 07-24-2012, 09:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Colm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by miasmaofplasma View Post

...i was hypothesizing a firmware update for me TV allowing it's chipset can handle the frequency needed for 1080p60 instead of 1080p24.
Nope, the maximum bit rate a chipset can handle is cast in silicon. The 225 MHz chipsets currently in use in most CE gear can handle up to 6.75 Gbps, enough for 1080p60 2D with some DeepColor. The newer 300 Mhz chipsets capable of 9 Gbps, enough for 1080p60 3D, haven't shown up yet in most CE gear.
Colm is offline  
post #13 of 17 Old 08-03-2012, 09:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Richard Paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by alk3997 View Post

Interesting link. I read through it and basically what I got out of it was that only select AMD video cards have the capability to generate 1080p/60 3D. I saw some speculation that a NVidia card could and that maybe a monitor *might* be able to display the format. But that leaves out how the data gets from the video card to the monitor without a standard.
HDMI 1.3 (released in 2006) added support for up to 340 MHz HDMI chips. HDMI 1.4 (released in 2009) added support for 1080p60 Frame Packing as an optional format.

As such 1080p60 Frame Packing is part of the HDMI standard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alk3997 View Post

You really have to wait for a standard to be set before you can start looking for truly compatible equipment.
The standard for 1080p60 Frame Packing was set back in 2009 and AMD was simply the first company to start releasing consumer products with 1080p60 Frame Packing support. I would point out that 1080p60 is an optional format (supported since HDMI 1.0) and that it took years for it to become common in the CE world.
Richard Paul is offline  
post #14 of 17 Old 09-30-2012, 12:16 AM
Member
 
timescape7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a supplier quoting me a cable with this resolution 1920x1080p @ 40Hz. Does anyone knows what does this 40Hz mean?
timescape7 is offline  
post #15 of 17 Old 09-30-2012, 06:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
^^^

cables don't have resolution, so i'm not sure what he is quoting you...

besides the fact that there are no framerates of "40"...

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
post #16 of 17 Old 09-30-2012, 07:25 AM
 
alk3997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by timescape7 View Post

I have a supplier quoting me a cable with this resolution 1920x1080p @ 40Hz. Does anyone knows what does this 40Hz mean?

Sure, it means it is time to get a new supplier for the cable, particularly if they are charging more than $1 per foot (unless installation is included).

Bottom line is that (as Chris said) a standard HDMI cable is a dumb cable. It just sends digital signals from one end to the other. It doesn't alter the signals, nor does it care what the content of the signal is.

The refresh rate is what is normally specified where you have listed 40Hz. That's part of the content, so the cable doesn't have any say in that number. BTW, 50Hz would be a standard in Europe, 60Hz in North America. 24Hz is used for movies since it is the frame rate of film. But, 40Hz is not used anywhere that I know of (maybe a non-standard update rate for some LED message boards or an OLED button that don't require rapid image changes). But, the cable doesn't specify that number (or change it).
alk3997 is offline  
post #17 of 17 Old 10-02-2012, 06:18 AM
Member
 
timescape7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
thanks for the feedback!
timescape7 is offline  
Reply HDMI Q&A - The One Connector World

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off