AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   HDMI Q&A - The One Connector World (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/168-hdmi-q-one-connector-world/)
-   -   HDMI cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1 (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/168-hdmi-q-one-connector-world/3071130-hdmi-cables-properly-reliably-support-48-gbps-hdmi-2-1-a.html)

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 05:41 AM

HDMI cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1
 
https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...MAGE%202-M.png

HDMI CABLES WHICH PROPERLY AND RELIABLY SUPPORT 48 GBPS & HDMI 2.1


HDMI version 2.0b, which is the pre-existing industry standard, requires 18 Gbps video bandwidth support.

HDMI version 2.1 is the new industry standard, and this requires 48 Gbps video bandwidth support.

The shorter length cables, as per with respect to the existing HDMI 2.0b cables, will benefit from official testing and certification (see HERE for details: https://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/premiumcable/faq.aspx)

Consequently, when purchasing shorter length HDMI 2.0b cables you want to look out for the official certifcation stamp, namely THIS:

https://www.hdmi.org/images/ccpLabel.png

Due to the existance of the official testing and certification of the shorter length cables there is no need for me to carry out additional testing with respect to these cables, and so it is only regarding the cables that fall outside of this, namely the longer length cables, wherein testing is necessary. Because, for reasons unknown there is currently no such official testing and certification with respect to the longer length cables, which use ACTIVE as opposed to PASSIVE type cable technology.

Because of the absence of reliability regarding longer length HDMI cables which properly pass the 18 Gbps necessary to support and work with HDMI 2.0b video, I previously carried out a comprehensive evaluation and analysis of which cables do and which do not in reality actually do so; which you can find HERE: TEST REPORTS | HDMI CABLES WHICH PROPERLY AND RELIABLY SUPPORT 18GBPS & HDMI 2.0b

Now that HDMI 2.1 is here, and because as per previously the expectation is that similarly the official testing and certification will apply only to the shorter length cables, it is time to focus on which HDMI cables that both offer longer length cables and claim to support 48 GBPS video bandwidth and HDMI 2.1, actually do so; and which do not.

Given the horrendous performance track record of longer length 18 Gbps HDMI v2.0b cables it will be interesting to see how many of the new longer length HDMI v2.1 cables actually deliver on their marketing claims.

As per previously, I will be compiling a list of cables that both offer longer length cables and claim to support 48 GBPS video bandwidth and HDMI 2.1, which I will subequently carry out an evaluation and testing exercise so as to confirm which cables in reality actually do and which do not. Please feel free to post cables that fit this criteria and I will add these to the list. :)

This thread is for discussing all HDMI v2.1 cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1, not just the longer length cables. However, as far as which cables I will be including within my initial evaluation and testing exercise, for the reasons that I have already explained, this will be focusing on the longer length cables. If for whatever reason there is a subset of shorter length cables that fall outside of the official certification and testing, and as such also require testing then I will test these as well.

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 05:41 AM

HDMI 2.1 OVERVIEW:

(From: https://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_2_1/index.aspx)

HDMI 2.1 Specification was developed by the HDMI Forum’s Technical Working Group. For more information about the HDMI Forum and how to become a member click here

HDMI® Specification 2.1 is the most recent update of the HDMI specification and supports a range of higher video resolutions and refresh rates including 8K60 and 4K120, and resolutions up to 10K. Dynamic HDR formats are also supported, and bandwidth capability is increased up to 48Gbps.

Supporting the 48Gbps bandwidth is the new Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable. The cable ensures high-bandwidth dependent features are delivered including uncompressed 8K video with HDR. It features exceptionally low EMI (electro-magnetic interference) which reduces interference with nearby wireless devices. The cable is backwards compatible and can be used with the existing installed base of HDMI devices.

HDMI Specification 2.1 feature highlights include:

Higher video resolutions support a range of high resolutions and faster refresh rates including 8K60Hz and 4K120Hz for immersive viewing and smooth fast-action detail. Resolutions up to 10K are also supported for commercial AV, and industrial and specialty usages.
Dynamic HDR support ensures every moment of a video is displayed at its ideal values for depth, detail, brightness, contrast and wider color gamuts—on a scene-by-scene or even a frame-by-frame basis.
The Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable supports the 48G bandwidth for uncompressed HDMI 2.1 feature support. The cable also features very low EMI emission and is backwards compatible with earlier versions of the HDMI Specification and can be used with existing HDMI devices.

eARC simplifies connectivity, provides greater ease of use, and supports the most advanced audio formats and highest audio quality. It ensures full compatibility between audio devices and upcoming HDMI 2.1 products.
Enhanced refresh rate features ensure an added level of smooth and seamless motion and transitions for gaming, movies and video. They include:
Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) reduces or eliminates lag, stutter and frame tearing for more fluid and better detailed gameplay.
Quick Media Switching (QMS) for movies and video eliminates the delay that can result in blank screens before content is displayed.
Quick Frame Transport (QFT) reduces latency for smoother no-lag gaming, and real-time interactive virtual reality.
Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM) allows the ideal latency setting to automatically be set allowing for smooth, lag-free and uninterrupted viewing and interactivity.

Version 2.1 of the HDMI Specification is backward compatible with earlier versions of the Specification and is available to all HDMI 2.0 Adopters.
SUPPORTING GRAPHICS, PHOTOS, AND MULTI-LANGUAGE OVERVIEW PRESENTATIONS

Supporitng files are available here.

General FAQS

Q: Where can I download the HDMI 2.1 Specification?
A: The HDMI 2.1 Specification can be downloaded from the HDMI Adopter Extranet.

Q: How do you license the HDMI 2.1 Specification?
A: In order to license the HDMI 2.1 Specification, you must first become an HDMI Adopter and then sign an addendum to the HDMI Adopter Agreement which provides a license to the HDMI 2.1 Specification.

Q: Can non-HDMI Adopters license only the HDMI 2.1 Specification?
A: Companies wishing to use the HDMI 2.1 specification must become an HDMI Adopter and also sign the HDMI 2 Adopter Addendum. They will have access to HDMI 1.4b and HDMI 2.1 Specifications.

Q: If I am a current HDMI 1.4b Adopter, do I have to license HDMI 2.1 Specification?
A: No, Adopters have the option to only license 1.x. HDMI Adopters can sign the HDMI 2 Adopter Addendum to gain access to the HDMI 2.1 specification.

Q: Do HDMI 2.0 Adopters automatically get access to HDMI 2.1 Specification?
A: Yes, it is licensed under the Version 2 addendum.

Q: Will current Adopters be required to pay an additional Annual Fee if they choose to adopt the HDMI 2.1 Specification?
A: No.

Q: Will there be any new royalty and/or increase in current royalties for products that implement HDMI 2.1 Specification features?
A: No, there is no additional royalty for implementing the HDMI 2.1 Specification.

Q: What is the relationship of HDMI Specification 2.1 to HDMI 2.0b and 1.4b Specifications?
A: The HDMI 2.1 Specification supersedes 2.0b and 2.1 continues to make reference to, and rely upon, HDMI 1.4b Specification.

Q: Is HDMI 2.1 Specification backwards compatible with previous versions of the specification?
A: Yes.
Testing and Certification FAQs

Q: What is the testing policy for HDMI 2.1 products?
A: All products must comply with Version 2.1 of the HDMI Specification and the HDMI 2.1 Compliance Test Specification (CTS); and until the CTS is available and a product has passed compliance testing a product cannot claim to be 2.1 compliant or market that it supports 2.1 features.

Q: When will the HDMI 2.1 Compliance Test Specification be available?
A: The HDMI 2.1 Compliance Test Specification (CTS) is being published in stages and the first release was in August 2018 including support for Enhanced Audio Return Channel (eARC). Additional features will be added in the coming months.

Q: When will ATCs start to provide 2.1 testing services?
A: Each individual ATC will decide on when to offer HDMI 2.1 testing services. Please contact your local ATC for more information.

Q: What are the HDMI 2.1 marketing feature names and their acronyms if any?
A:

Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable
Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM)
Enhanced Audio Return Channel (eARC)
Quick Frame Transport (QFT)
Quick Media Switching (QMS)
Variable Refresh Rate (VRR)

The uncompressed/compressed feature name designations include: A= uncompressed, B=compressed, AB=Both

4K100A
4K100AB
4K100B
4K120A
4K120AB
4K120B
8K50A
8K50AB
8K50B
8K60A
8K60AB
8K60B

Please note that in order to use the feature names adopters must follow the HDMI 2.1 specification requirements for those features.

Q: Can I use “HDMI 2.1” in my marketing
A: You can only use version numbers when clearly associating the version number with a feature or function as defined in that version of the HDMI Specification. You cannot use version numbers by themselves to define your product or component capabilities or the functionality of the HDMI interface. And please note that NO use of version numbers is allowed in the labeling, packaging, or promotion of any cable product. Please check the Adopted Trademark and Logo Usage Guideline for a complete explanation of the policy, available on the Adopter extranet and here.
Feature FAQS

High Video Resolutions

Q: Will [email protected] or [email protected] require a new cable?
A: Yes, in order to ensure performance and compatibility the Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable is required.

Q: What are the supported resolutions and frame rates?
A:

4K50/60
4K100/120
5K50/60
5K100/120
8K50/60
8K100/120
10K50/60
10K100/120

Q: Is compression used to achieve those resolutions and frame rates?
A: The specification supports both uncompressed and compressed modes. Manufacturers can implement either or both modes. The designations are:

4K100A – supports uncompressed mode
4K100B – supports compressed mode
4K100AB – supports both
4K120A – supports uncompressed mode
4K120B – supports compressed mode
4K120AB – supports both
8K50A – supports uncompressed mode
8K50B – supports compressed mode
8K50AB – supports both
8K60A – supports uncompressed mode
8K60B – supports compressed mode
8K60AB – supports both

Q: How do I identify which modes are supported in my products?
A: Manufacturers may use the designations indicated above (e.g. 8K60A, 8K60B, 8K60AB) in their product marketing, advertising, user guides, packaging, website, and on-product.

Q: What type of compression is supported?
A: The specification incorporates VESA DSC 1.2a link compression, which is a visually lossless compression scheme. VESA DSC 1.2a also can be used to obtain higher resolutions than 8K60/4:2:0/10-bit color, such as 8K60 RGB, 8K120 and even 10K120. VESA DSC 1.2a also supports 4Kp50/60 with the benefit of enabling operation at much lower link rates.

Q: What colorimetry is supported?
A: HDMI 2.1 Specification supports the latest color spaces including BT.2020 with 10, 12, and 16 bits per color component.

Q: What is FRL and is it necessary for the higher resolutions and faster refresh rates?
A: FRL stands for Fixed Rate Link and it’s a signaling technology supported in the HDMI 2.1 Specification. FRL is necessary to achieve the higher uncompressed resolutions such as those above 4k60 as well as the ultra high speed bandwidths up to 48Gbps. It’s also required for compressed video transport which in turn enables operation at lower data rates for example 4k60 and ultra-high pixel rate video such as 10Kp120.

Q: Does FRL replace TMDS?
A: Yes, it replaces TMDS. Note that the HDMI 2.1 specification still requires support for TMDS for backwards compatibility and still seamlessly supports the billions of HDMI devices that utilize TMDS.

Q: Can FRL be implemented through a firmware upgrade?
A: Upgradeability needs to be designed into the silicon and that is up to the manufacturers, although implementing FRL is most likely going to require new hardware.

Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable

Q: What is an Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable?
A: The Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable is the first cable defined by the HDMI Forum. Ultra High Speed HDMI Cables comply with stringent specifications designed to ensure support for high resolution video modes such as 4Kp50/60/100/120 and 8Kp50/60 as well as new features such as eARC and VRR. Ultra High Speed HDMI Cables exceed the requirements of the latest international EMI standards to significantly reduce the probability of interference with wireless services such as Wi-Fi.

Q: Is the Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable a Category 3 cable?
A: Yes

Q: Is this cable required for delivering HDMI 2.1 Specification features?
A: The cable is the best way to ensure that high-bandwidth dependent features are delivered including the enhanced video and audio performance, and accounting for the new EMI characteristics

Q: What cable(s) do I need to make use of the eARC feature?
A: Ultra High Speed HDMI Cables are designed to support the new eARC feature in addition to the highest resolution video modes. The Standard HDMI Cable with Ethernet and the High Speed HDMI Cable with Ethernet will also support eARC.

Q: When will I be able to purchase an Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable?
A: Schedules for the availability of Ultra High Speed HDMI Cables are determined by the manufacturers of the cables. Manufacturers will be able to ship these cables once the HDMI 2.1 Compliance Test Specification (CTS) is available and a cable has passed compliance testing. The HDMI Forum is actively working on development of these tests and expects them to be available in 1H 2018.

Q: Will existing HDMI High Speed Cables deliver the HDMI 2.1 features also?
A: Existing HDMI High Speed Cables with Ethernet can only deliver some of the new features, and the new Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable is the best way to connect HDMI 2.1 enabled devices to ensure delivery of all the features.

Q: What connectors does the Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable use?
A: It is compatible with HDMI connectors Types A, C and D.

Q: Does the Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable have an Ethernet channel?
A: Yes, it supports the HDMI Ethernet Channel.

Q: Can the Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable work with existing HDMI devices?
A: The cable is backwards compatible and can be used with all existing HDMI devices.

Q: What is the maximum length of this cable?
A: The specification does not indicate a cable length. Cable length depends on the cable manufacturer. It is likely the maximum lengths for passive cables will be approximately 2 to 3 meters.

Q: Are active cables supported in the specification?
A: The specification permits wire, passive, active, and converter Category 3 cable assemblies.

Q: Will these cables require a new cable name logo for their packaging?
A: Yes, they have an official Cable Name Logo design and colors, requirements for on-cable printing and cable name translations. Details are available in the Adopted Trademark and Logo Usage Guideline (ATLUG) on the HDMI.org website.

Dynamic HDR

Q: Does Dynamic HDR require the new Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable?
A: No, but it will be necessary to enable 4K120 and 8K60 video with HDR due to the high bandwidth required by these resolutions and refresh rates.

Q: Which HDR formats does the specification support?
A: It supports various static and dynamic HDR solutions.

Q: How does the specification support multiple HDR solutions?
A: Static and Dynamic HDR-enabled devices that implement the HDMI 2.1 Specification transmit both Static and Dynamic HDR metadata over the HDMI interface in a standardized way; and also go through the same mandatory HDMI compliance testing to ensure they can properly send/receive Static and Dynamic HDR metadata over the HDMI interface regardless of product manufacturer. This ensures consumers can get all the benefits of Dynamic HDR without possible compatibility issues.

Q: Is Dynamic HDR accessible via a firmware upgrade?
A: Manufacturers may or may not be able to enable Dynamic HDR with a firmware upgrade. Contact the manufacturer of your product to see if this is possible.

eARC

Q: Will this work with any HDMI cable?
A: This works with HDMI High Speed Cables with Ethernet and the new Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable.

Q: Is eARC available through a firmware upgrade?
A: Generally speaking, no. Check with the manufacturer of your product to confirm.

Q: What audio formats are supported?
A: The latest high-bitrate audio formats are supported including DTS Master, DTS:X, Dolby TrueHD, Dolby Atmos and more.

Q: Will the existing ARC-enabled products work with new products that use eARC?
A: Maybe. Manufacturers can produce products that are compatible with both eARC and ARC. However, eARC is not defined to be backwards compatible with ARC.

Gaming and Media Features

Q: What features are added to the HDMI 2.1 Specification for video gaming and media playback?
A: HDMI 2.1 Specification has added the following new features:

Auto Low-Latency Mode (ALLM)
Variable Refresh Rate (VRR)
Quick Frame Transport (QFT)
Quick Media Switching (QMS)

Q: What is Auto Low-Latency Mode (ALLM)?
A: This feature lets a game console, PC or other device send a signal to the display which will cause it to automatically switch to a low-latency, low-lag mode for gaming. This could benefit other uses, such as karaoke and video conferencing. When the source no longer requires this mode—for example, when switching to a movie stream—the source disables the signal and the display reverts back to its previous mode.

Q: What is Variable Refresh Rate (VRR)?
A: VRR lets a gaming source deliver video frames as fast as it can, which in many cases is slower than the normal static refresh rate. Graphics processors require different absolute periods to render each frame, and this time is dependent upon the complexity of the scene, the horsepower of the GPU, the resolution selected and the frame rate. When the GPU is taxed by the other three factors and does not finish rendering the next frame by the time it needs to be displayed, the source must either repeat the current frame or display the partially-rendered next frame, which causes judder and tearing. By waiting until the next frame is ready to transport it, a smoother gaming experience can be provided to the user.

Q: What is Quick Frame Transport (QFT)?
A: QFT transports each frame at a higher rate to decrease “display latency”, which is the amount of time between a frame being ready for transport in the GPU and that frame being completely displayed. This latency is the sum of the transport time through the source’s output circuits, the transport time across the interface, the processing of the video data in the display, and the painting of the screen with the new data. This overall latency affects the responsiveness of games: how long it appears between a button is pressed to the time at which the resultant action is observed on the screen.

While there are a lot of variables in this equation, not many are adjustable from an HDMI specification perspective. QFT operates on the transport portion of this equation by reducing the time it takes to send only the active video across the cable. This results in reduced display latency and increased responsiveness.

Q: What is Quick Media Switching?
A: QMS uses the VRR mechanism to eliminate the blackout period when all devices in the HDMI connection chain change video modes. As long as the resolution remains the same and only the frame rate changes, QMS will smoothly switch between media rates. For example, when looking at trailers from a streaming service, some are likely in 24Hz, some in 50Hz, and some in 60Hz. Every time a different frame rate trailer is selected, the entire system must change its clocking and re-sync, causing an A/V blackout (a “bonk”). Knowing that a change-of-video mode causes bonks, streaming services add a built-in delay so that users do not miss the first part of the trailer. Or optionally, they output everything at the same frame rate—which requires either the streaming service to provide single-frequency streams or the streaming box to perform the conversion.

QMS eliminates bonks by using the VRR mechanism to change frame rates, allowing rapid, smooth changes from a nominal 60Hz rate to any media rate below it (down to 24Hz).

Q: Can I use all of these features together?
A: QMS is all about presenting the best media playback experience. There are no reaction times involved, so latency is not an issue (ALLM and QFT should not be used). ALLM should not be enabled with QMS because ALLM disables the extensive video processing your TV does. The frame rates are static within a video stream, so VRR is not necessary. And as described previously, QMS and VRR use the same technology under the hood, so they cannot operate together. (QMS has a constant frame rate, VRR has a varying frame rate.)

On the other hand, adding ALLM to VRR and QFT is encouraged for the best gaming experience.

Your gaming box will take care of these choices for you. If you are streaming video or playing a BluRay, it would only enable QMS; if you fire up a game, it would enable ALLM, VRR, and QFT, depending on what your system supports.

Q: Will my devices support these new features?
A: Ask the manufacturers of your devices. More details are available in the HDMI 2.1 Gaming and Media Features white paper available to HDMI 2.1 Adopters on the Adopter Extranet.

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 05:42 AM

LIST OF CABLES OFFERING LONGER LENGTHS CLAIMING TO SUPPORT 48 GBPS & HDMI 2.1:


(1) RuiPro RuiPro8K:

These are reportedly capable of passing 50 Gbps via what is essentially a quadruple-core composition in which 4 lots of 12.5 Gbps are passed, wherein 12.5 * 4 = 50 Gbps.

I will shortly be receiving and testing these cables and will report back my findings on here accordingly.

https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...MAGE%201-L.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...EET_Page_1.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...EET_Page_2.jpg

I will update this thread with respect to other cables as and when these also become available.

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 05:42 AM

Reserved #3

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 05:43 AM

Reserved #4

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 05:43 AM

Reserved #5

Postmoderndesign 06-03-2019 07:16 AM

Have you tested the Belkin Ultra High Speed HDMI cable?

Here is a post listing 6 HDMI 2.1 cables: http://www.rightisbest.com/best-48gb...2108-2019.html

Otto Pylot 06-03-2019 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARROW-AV (Post 58133446)
LIST OF CABLES CLAIMING TO SUPPORT 48 GBPS & HDMI 2.1:


(1) RuiPro RuiPro8K:

These are reportedly capable of passing 50 Gbps via what is essentially a quadruple-core composition in which 4 lots of 12.5 Gbps are passed, wherein 12.5 * 4 = 50 Gbps.

I will shortly be receiving and testing these cables and will report back my findings on here accordingly.

I will update this thread with respect to other cables as and when these also become available.

:wink:


Will you be using the same equipment and testing protocols that SimplayLabs uses? Simplay Labs is an ATC who has currently been testing the Ruipro cables but being as the cables are active, they can not receive the QR label which designates them as a "certified Ultra High Speed HDMI" cable. I've tested the short length Ruipro cables in a consumer setting for HDMI 2.0b, without sophisticated equipment, and they worked just fine. Hopefully Ruipro has overcome the issues they originally had with eARC at 30m.

ARROW-AV 06-03-2019 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Postmoderndesign (Post 58133788)
Have you tested the Belkin Ultra High Speed HDMI cable?

Here is a post listing 6 HDMI 2.1 cables: http://www.rightisbest.com/best-48gb...2108-2019.html

None of those cables are longer length cables, as in 15m+ / 50 ft+

This is specifically regarding cables that both offer longer lengths and claim to support 48 GBPS video bandwith and HDMI 2.1 :)

:wink:

RichB 06-03-2019 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARROW-AV (Post 58134630)
None of those cables are longer length cables, as in 15m+ / 50 ft+

This is specifically regarding cables that both offer longer lengths and claim to support 48 GBPS video bandwith and HDMI 2.1 :)

:wink:


If you don't intend to include <15 meter cables in this thread, then you may want to change the title.


- Rich

Otto Pylot 06-03-2019 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichB (Post 58136348)
If you don't intend to include <15 meter cables in this thread, then you may want to change the title.


- Rich


As I'm sure you know, the current HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications state that 3m (9') is the maximum length for passive cables. As I understand it, the idea is to start with the HDMI specification, establish that in fact there are cables that can actually meet that specification, and then work up to the longer lengths. The "special 48Gbps HDMI cable" that is mentioned in the specs will probably be a hybrid fiber cable. Whether HDMI.org will allow certification for an active cable longer than that is still to be determined.


Hopefully the smoke and mirrors around the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications and cables will start to dissipate somewhat with some independent testing by a reputable source. Distance is going to be the killer, so far. Lots of folks are going to get hung up on "HDMI 2.1" as being the end-all, not realizing the connection limitations.

ARROW-AV 06-04-2019 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichB (Post 58136348)
If you don't intend to include <15 meter cables in this thread, then you may want to change the title.


- Rich

Not really :)

The reputable shorter length cables will have official certification that guarantees their efficacy, hence we already know that these should properly and reliably support 48 GBPS and HDMI v2.1. Consequently there is absolutely no need whatsoever to test these cables as testing has already been carried out as part of the certification process.

However, if the same pattern follows what transpired with the HDMI 2.0b cables then the longer length cables will not benefit from such official certification to guarantee their claimed performance. Consequently it is only these longer length cables that require testing.

I did already explain and cover this fact in the original thread, as well as within my previous evaluation and testing report, wherein I have posted a link to this in the OP :)

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-04-2019 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58137826)
As I'm sure you know, the current HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications state that 3m (9') is the maximum length for passive cables. As I understand it, the idea is to start with the HDMI specification, establish that in fact there are cables that can actually meet that specification, and then work up to the longer lengths. The "special 48Gbps HDMI cable" that is mentioned in the specs will probably be a hybrid fiber cable. Whether HDMI.org will allow certification for an active cable longer than that is still to be determined.

Hopefully the smoke and mirrors around the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications and cables will start to dissipate somewhat with some independent testing by a reputable source. Distance is going to be the killer, so far. Lots of folks are going to get hung up on "HDMI 2.1" as being the end-all, not realizing the connection limitations.

Precisely :)

It makes absolutely ZERO sense for me to repeat testing of cables that are offically certified and as such have already undergone comprehensive testing which confirms there efficacy.

My whole reason for carrying out my previous evaluation and testing exercise because there was no such certification and testing with respect to the longer length cables.

So I am intending on carrying out a similar evaluation and testing exercise with respect to the HDMI 2.1 48 GBPS cables, wherein I am assuming that the same pattern will apply, meaning there is only need to test the longer length cable which are not covered by official certification and testing.

I should add that I personally found it ridiculous that it was necessary for someone like me to carry out such testing as I previously did with respect to the longer length HDMI 2.0b cables and it is even more ridiculous that I am having to do it again with respect to the new HDMI 2.1 cables. Wherein, if by some miracle HDMI.org pull their finger out and both allow and organize official certification of the linger length cables, which of course by their very nature have to use active as opposed to passive technology, then I won't have to carry out this evaluation and testing exercise... but quite frankly I am not expecting this to happen! ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58134482)
Will you be using the same equipment and testing protocols that SimplayLabs uses? Simplay Labs is an ATC who has currently been testing the Ruipro cables but being as the cables are active, they can not receive the QR label which designates them as a "certified Ultra High Speed HDMI" cable. I've tested the short length Ruipro cables in a consumer setting for HDMI 2.0b, without sophisticated equipment, and they worked just fine. Hopefully Ruipro has overcome the issues they originally had with eARC at 30m.

Ideally I would like to not only carry out the same testing that SimplyLabs uses but also go above and beyond that with respect to testing using real equipment and media in a proper home theater environment.

I did not previously test for ARC functionality for a variety of reasons, primarily due to its limitations and lack of real world usage at the time; however, eARC is an entirely different kettle of fish and so this time I will most certainly be testing for it, wherein this will involve using Simplay Labs SL-870 eARC Protocol Analyzer Tool.

The additional testing will be tricky to carry out at the present time given the complete lack of consumer 8K media and supporting AV equipment; however, this will obviously change very soon, so as soon as I am able to do so I will be able to include this testing as well :)

:wink:

RichB 06-04-2019 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARROW-AV (Post 58138768)
Not really :)

The reputable shorter length cables will have official certification that guarantees their efficacy, hence we already know that these should properly and reliably support 48 GBPS and HDMI v2.1. Consequently there is absolutely no need whatsoever to test these cables as testing has already been carried out as part of the certification process.

However, if the same pattern follows what transpired with the HDMI 2.0b cables then the longer length cables will not benefit from such official certification to guarantee their claimed performance. Consequently it is only these longer length cables that require testing.

I did already explain and cover this fact in the original thread, as well as within my previous evaluation and testing report, wherein I have posted a link to this in the OP :)

:wink:


"Long HDMI cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1 " ;)


- Rich

harsh 06-04-2019 07:08 AM

I recall reading that the way the various wires were being used changed in a way that didn't demand cable upgrades to get the higher speeds. This would be similar to the situation in network cabling where it was originally assumed that CAT6 or greater would be required for gigabit networking speeds (CAT5e is now assumed to be good to >1Gbps).



Perhaps the testing should begin with budget high-speed cables and if they all satisfy the requirements, the assumption on which the test is based may be flawed or just plain wrong.

ARROW-AV 06-04-2019 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichB (Post 58138882)
"Long HDMI cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1 " ;)


- Rich

No, ALL HDMI cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1 :)

This thread is for discussing all HDMI v2.1 cables which properly and reliably support 48 Gbps & HDMI 2.1, not just the longer length cables.

However, as far as which cables I will be including within my evaluation and testing exercise, for the reasons that I have already explained, this will be focusing on the longer length cables.

If for whatever reason there is a subset of shorter length cables that fall outside of the official certification and testing, and as such also require testing then I will test these as well, however, at the present time I don't see this happening :)

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-04-2019 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harsh (Post 58138880)
I recall reading that the way the various wires were being used changed in a way that didn't demand cable upgrades to get the higher speeds. This would be similar to the situation in network cabling where it was originally assumed that CAT6 or greater would be required for gigabit networking speeds (CAT5e is now assumed to be good to >1Gbps).

Perhaps the testing should begin with budget high-speed cables and if they all satisfy the requirements, the assumption on which the test is based may be flawed or just plain wrong.

The shorter length cables, as per with respect to the existing HDMI 2.0b cables, will benefit from official testing and certification (see HERE for details: https://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/premiumcable/faq.aspx)

Consequently, when purchasing shorter length HDMI 2.0b cables you want to look out for the official certifcation stamp, namely THIS:

https://www.hdmi.org/images/ccpLabel.png

As such there is absolutely ZERO need to test these cables, and so only the cables that fall outside of this, namely the longer length cables.

There is nothing wrong with the official testing and it certainly is not "plain wrong" :)

The problem is that they have not previously, nor is there the intention to test and certify ALL types of cables, including the longer length cables which use ACTIVE as opposed to PASSIVE type cable technology.

I have no ideal why this is the case and personally find the situation to be utterly ridiculous given a great many people use and have no choice but to use the longer length cables. Go figure!

So we have the ludicrous situation of the longer length cables not having any such performance quality control testing or certification to protect consumers, with bogus marketing performance claims being made by many manufacturers; wherein, it should be noted that in my previous evaluation and testing exercise every single make and model of cable except only TWO failed my tests! :eek:

I would be nice if the longer length cables were to also be officially tested and certified, in which case I would be able to cancel my evaluation and testing exercise, but as of right now it is my understanding they they aren't, so here we are :)

:wink:

Otto Pylot 06-04-2019 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARROW-AV (Post 58138792)
Precisely :)

It makes absolutely ZERO sense for me to repeat testing of cables that are offically certified and as such have already undergone comprehensive testing which confirms there efficacy.

My whole reason for carrying out my previous evaluation and testing exercise because there was no such certification and testing with respect to the longer length cables.

So I am intending on carrying out a similar evaluation and testing exercise with respect to the HDMI 2.1 48 GBPS cables, wherein I am assuming that the same pattern will apply, meaning there is only need to test the longer length cable which are not covered by official certification and testing.

I should add that I personally found it ridiculous that it was necessary for someone like me to carry out such testing as I previously did with respect to the longer length HDMI 2.0b cables and it is even more ridiculous that I am having to do it again with respect to the new HDMI 2.1 cables. Wherein, if by some miracle HDMI.org pull their finger out and both allow and organize official certification of the linger length cables, which of course by their very nature have to use active as opposed to passive technology, then I won't have to carry out this evaluation and testing exercise... but quite frankly I am not expecting this to happen! ;)


Ideally I would like to not only carry out the same testing that SimplyLabs uses but also go above and beyond that with respect to testing using real equipment and media in a proper home theater environment.

I did not previously test for ARC functionality for a variety of reasons, primarily due to its limitations and lack of real world usage at the time; however, eARC is an entirely different kettle of fish and so this time I will most certainly be testing for it, wherein this will involve using Simplay Labs SL-870 eARC Protocol Analyzer Tool.

The additional testing will be tricky to carry out at the present time given the complete lack of consumer 8K media and supporting AV equipment; however, this will obviously change very soon, so as soon as I am able to do so I will be able to include this testing as well :)

:wink:


Excellent. Will you also be using the SL-8800 Plus Protocol Analyzer and the SL-881 6G HDMI/MHL AVG?


I agree about the need to adequately test the longer cable lengths for HDMI 2.1 reliability (Ultra 48Gbps). Shorter lengths, 25' or less, have already been tested and certified for HDMI 2.0b so that's a done deal. That being said, I'm not aware of any certification/testing program for HDMI 2.1 at the 1m - 3m maximum length as outlined in the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications. At what length will you start your evaluations from? I've always felt that the "special 48Gbps HDMI cable" as mentioned in the HDMI 2.1 specifications would be a hybrid fiber cable (like Ruipro) so it would be interesting to see how well they will perform for the Ultra High Speed HDMI designation at around 10' and above. I do know from my informal testing of the shorter length Ruipro hybrid fiber cables that they have no issues at all with HDMI 2.0b (being an active cable is not a problem at short lengths) so hopefully that will transfer as well to HDMI 2.1.


I have three wishes on my cable wish list. One, is that HDMI.org would allow for certification of active cables. Two, cable mfrs would list which of the HDMI 2.1 hardware options their cables have been tested for and not just state "HDMI 2.1 compatible" or "tested for HDMI 2.1 specifications" and three, extend the certification length to 50' (passive or active). The consumer has been getting ripped off far too long with slick marketing and unsubstantiated claims. The Belkin cable released over a year ago is a prime example.


We've always said that price is not an indicator of cable quality/reliability and that in most cases, a $20 cable will perform as well as a $60 cable. That, I think, is going to change with the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications and hybrid fiber cables. Mostly due to the physical design of the cable, components, and the active chipsets involved. Unfortunately, hybrid fiber cables are expensive, but for the connection technology to finally catch up to the video technology that may be the price we have to pay ;) to meet those video standards and demands. As a side note, for those who are still in need and interested in a reliable cable for HDMI 2.0b at lengths longer than 25' the hybrid fiber cables are probably the best bet. I'm really looking forward to your evaluations.

jong1 06-04-2019 10:42 AM

Are you planning on testing eARC?

Hybrid cables will, presumably, use electrical wiring for the ARC return path. RuiPro had problems even with ARC in earlier versions of their cable, which I think they have resolved, but eARC will make things challenging all over again.

15M+ is not an inconsiderable distance at eARC data rates for what may be pretty unbalanced/shielded electrical wires.

Postmoderndesign 06-04-2019 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58139736)
Excellent. Will you also be using the SL-8800 Plus Protocol Analyzer and the SL-881 6G HDMI/MHL AVG?


...The consumer has been getting ripped off far too long with slick marketing and unsubstantiated claims. The Belkin cable released over a year ago is a prime example.


Otto-are you saying that the Belkin cable is an example of slick marketing and unsubstantiated claims and is not HDMI 2.1 capable or is not proven HDMI 2.1 capable?

Otto Pylot 06-04-2019 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jong1 (Post 58139898)
Are you planning on testing eARC?

Hybrid cables will, presumably, use electrical wiring for the ARC return path. RuiPro had problems even with ARC in earlier versions of their cable, which I think they have resolved, but eARC will make things challenging all over again.

15M+ is not an inconsiderable distance at eARC data rates for what may be pretty unbalanced/shielded electrical wires.

The hybrid fiber cables will use the solid copper wiring around the glass fiber core for ARC (and presumably eARC), HDCP, and EDID. Ruipro has solved the 5m/15m issue with eARC but the last time I talked to them they were still working on some issues with the 30m length.

Otto Pylot 06-04-2019 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Postmoderndesign (Post 58140792)
Otto-are you saying that the Belkin cable is an example of slick marketing and unsubstantiated claims and is not HDMI 2.1 capable or is not proven HDMI 2.1 capable?

Belkin originally announced their "HDMI 2.1 capable" cable before the final ratification of the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications and before CTS requirements were finalized. That sent up red flags for me. They provided no independent testing data or how they even determined that one, the cables were tested using specific industry-approved equipment or two, they worked in consumer devices, which was interesting because there were no fully compliant HDMI 2.1 consumer devices at the time. The cables may in fact work, and hopefully ARROW-AV's testing will show that, but given how much smoke and mirrors there are around HDMI 2.1 and HDMI cables in general, just because a mfr says their cables work is not good enough for me.

jong1 06-04-2019 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58140848)
The hybrid fiber cables will use the solid copper wiring around the glass fiber core for ARC (and presumably eARC), HDCP, and EDID. Ruipro has solved the 5m/15m issue with eARC but the last time I talked to them they were still working on some issues with the 30m length.

Don't get me wrong Ruipro seem to be the good guys ands my 15M cable is working [email protected], but it sounds like this is still a totally unshielded copper cable (unlike, say, coax) and not even twisted pair. I'd definitely like some evidence eARC, on this and other hybrid cables, is as solid and reliable as the fiber video connection, even in a possibly electromagnetically "noisy" crowded conduit :).

Otto Pylot 06-04-2019 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jong1 (Post 58141166)
Don't get me wrong Ruipro seem to be the good guys ands my 15M cable is working [email protected], but it sounds like this is still a totally unshielded copper cable (unlike, say, coax) and not even twisted pair. I'd definitely like some evidence eARC, on this and other hybrid cables, is as solid and reliable as the fiber video connection, even in a possibly electromagnetically "noisy" crowded conduit :).


The copper wire is AWG 26/28/30/shielded/twisted. The current Ruipro cables are tested by Simplay Labs, which is an ATC using the latest testing equipment authorized by HDMI.org. However, the cables are active so they can't get the "certification" with the QR label like passive HDMI cables under 25' can.

jong1 06-05-2019 12:35 AM

Oh, OK, sounds good. Still, may not be true of all long active fiber cables and has proven an issue in the past. I still think eARC should be part of any testing regime.

Postmoderndesign 06-05-2019 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58140874)
Belkin originally announced their "HDMI 2.1 capable" cable before the final ratification of the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications and before CTS requirements were finalized. That sent up red flags for me. They provided no independent testing data or how they even determined that one, the cables were tested using specific industry-approved equipment or two, they worked in consumer devices, which was interesting because there were no fully compliant HDMI 2.1 consumer devices at the time. The cables may in fact work, and hopefully ARROW-AV's testing will show that, but given how much smoke and mirrors there are around HDMI 2.1 and HDMI cables in general, just because a mfr says their cables work is not good enough for me.

Thanks for the response Otto. The cables remain unproven for HDMI 2,1 and as they are two meters long it seems they are too short for Arrow-AV to test them.

A while back DVD player standards were changing rapidly and I bought so many DVD players that I began buying electronics with the future in mind-thus the Belkin Ultra High Speed cables. I don't recommend that strategy. And I think it will be more than a year in the future that I will need HDMI 2.1.

ARROW-AV 06-05-2019 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58139736)
Excellent. Will you also be using the SL-8800 Plus Protocol Analyzer and the SL-881 6G HDMI/MHL AVG?

In short, I don't know yet :)

What I ideally would like to use would be new models of the excellent MURIDEO SIX-G Reference Signal Generator and SIX-A Reference Signal Analyzer in conjunction with the Simplay Labs equipment, however these don't exist yet! I am waiting on a response from MURIDEO regarding if and when these will become available.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58139736)
I agree about the need to adequately test the longer cable lengths for HDMI 2.1 reliability (Ultra 48Gbps). Shorter lengths, 25' or less, have already been tested and certified for HDMI 2.0b so that's a done deal. That being said, I'm not aware of any certification/testing program for HDMI 2.1 at the 1m - 3m maximum length as outlined in the HDMI 2.1 hardware specifications. At what length will you start your evaluations from? I've always felt that the "special 48Gbps HDMI cable" as mentioned in the HDMI 2.1 specifications would be a hybrid fiber cable (like Ruipro) so it would be interesting to see how well they will perform for the Ultra High Speed HDMI designation at around 10' and above. I do know from my informal testing of the shorter length Ruipro hybrid fiber cables that they have no issues at all with HDMI 2.0b (being an active cable is not a problem at short lengths) so hopefully that will transfer as well to HDMI 2.1.

At the present time I am assuming that there will indeed be the same equivalent certification/testing program for HDMI 2.1 at the 1m - 3m maximum length, as per with respect to the HDMI 2.0 cables. In which case I won't bother to test these. However, if it transpires that there won't then I will :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Pylot (Post 58139736)
I have three wishes on my cable wish list. One, is that HDMI.org would allow for certification of active cables. Two, cable mfrs would list which of the HDMI 2.1 hardware options their cables have been tested for and not just state "HDMI 2.1 compatible" or "tested for HDMI 2.1 specifications" and three, extend the certification length to 50' (passive or active). The consumer has been getting ripped off far too long with slick marketing and unsubstantiated claims. The Belkin cable released over a year ago is a prime example.

I 100% agree. It is utterly ridiculous that active cables cannot be certified. And I agree that the certification length across the board should be increased to 50'. It's a ludicrous situation there being no quality control / guarantee for the longer length cables :mad:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jong1 (Post 58139898)
Are you planning on testing eARC?

Yes :)

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-05-2019 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Postmoderndesign (Post 58143408)
Thanks for the response Otto. The cables remain unproven for HDMI 2,1 and as they are two meters long it seems they are too short for Arrow-AV to test them.

A while back DVD player standards were changing rapidly and I bought so many DVD players that I began buying electronics with the future in mind-thus the Belkin Ultra High Speed cables. I don't recommend that strategy. And I think it will be more than a year in the future that I will need HDMI 2.1.

Like I have said, if it transpires that there is not going to be a testing / certification program with respect to the shorter length HDMI 2.1 cables, as per exists with respect to the HDMI 2.0 cables, then I will most certainly test them. But if there is, then I won't :)

:wink:

ARROW-AV 06-05-2019 07:17 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Here's the production information / data sheet for the new RUIPRO8K HDMI 2.1 cables:


https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...EET_Page_1.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...EET_Page_2.jpg

:wink:

TrendSetterX 06-05-2019 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARROW-AV (Post 58143468)
Here's the production information / data sheet for the new RUIPRO8K HDMI 2.1 cables:





https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...EET_Page_1.jpg



https://photos.smugmug.com/HDMI-21/i...EET_Page_2.jpg



:wink:

Taking the listed specs literally, that new cable will fail for all compressed 2.1 formats.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.