HDMI 2.2 is set to debut at CES 2025

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/hdmi-2-2-is-set-to-debut-at-ces-2025-the-new-standard-brings-higher-resolutions-refresh-rates-and-bandwidth

by thunderbong • 2 years ago

58 126 2 years ago

tomshardware.com

betaby• 2 years ago

HDMI Forum to AMD: No, you can’t make an open source HDMI 2.1 driver

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/hdmi-forum-to-amd-no...

bpye3• 2 years ago

This is such an annoying limitation. With monitors it’s one thing, as DisplayPort is normally an option as well (though with an iGPU maybe not), but if you want to display on a high end TV? You need to go find an active DisplayPort -> HDMI converter that supports all the features you need.

From the bug report [0], there was an update 5 months ago that discussions (at AMD) were still ongoing.

[0] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/1417

p_l15• 2 years ago

The point of HDMI port is that access to it is controlled by the consortium, and that it includes DRM.

This isn't necessarily compatible with FOSS.

bigfatkitten2• 2 years ago

I'd love to see the driver include an error message with the personal cellphone number of whoever it was at the HDMI Forum who made that decision.

"For further information, call these people."

qwerty4561272• 2 years ago

If confirmed, this would align the new HDMI standard with the latest DisplayPort 2.1 technologies, offering consumers expanded options for ultra-high-definition media and gaming experiences.

Why do we need new HDMI when there already is DisplayPort for this?

peterburkimsher2• 2 years ago

Because HDMI connectors can fit on PCBs.

https://forum.kicad.info/t/hdmi-pcb-edge-connector-for-raspb...

Never tried that with a DisplayPort connector.

Scene_Cast22• 2 years ago

Oh, that's a neat edge connector idea, I've only seen this done with USB before.

do_not_redeem• 2 years ago

For those applications wouldn't MiniDP work just as well? Or DP-over-USB C?

IshKebab• 2 years ago

I've never seen a single commercial device do that. I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't allowed.

That's not a reason to keep HDMI. Obviously the real reason is that HDMI makes money for the people selling it.

wtallis3• 2 years ago

Yeah, that's definitely never going to pass EMI testing.

Kirby642• 2 years ago

There’s no reason DisplayPort couldn’t do the same thing. The connector on the inside is basically identical.

That being said, although creative, it’s a pretty terrible idea. PCBs are not meant to be edge connectors. Especially if they aren’t designed for it (ie using hard gold on the edge connector plating).

tjohns• 2 years ago

HDMI supports features needed for entertainment centers, like CEC and eARC. DisplayPort doesn’t have these.

qwerty4561272• 2 years ago

Curious. Never heard of these. Thanks.

saidinesh5• 2 years ago

Is there any reason why most TVs still don't support USB C display port and just support HDMI?

With the recent drama around HDMI vs. Foss drivers on Linux, I'm curious why haven't we seen that bigger push from TV vendors to support USB C display port.

Most of my monitors work with USB C, Even consoles like steam deck, a lot of high end phones seem to support USB C.

So... Are there any features of HDMI that USB C display port doesn't support?

nuxi• 2 years ago

CEC is probably one of them, but I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

jsheard4• 2 years ago

I don't think DisplayPort has an equivalent to eARC either.

LeoPanthera• 2 years ago

DisplayPort in native mode lacks some HDMI features such as Consumer Electronics Control (CEC) commands. The CEC bus allows linking multiple sources with a single display and controlling any of these devices from any remote. DisplayPort 1.3 added the possibility of transmitting CEC commands over the AUX channel. From its very first version HDMI features CEC to support connecting multiple sources to a single display as is typical for a TV screen.

The other way round, DisplayPort's Multi-Stream Transport allows connecting multiple displays to a single computer source.

This reflects the facts that HDMI originated from consumer electronics companies whereas DisplayPort is owned by VESA which started as an organization for computer standards.

cesarb• 2 years ago

From its very first version HDMI features CEC

That depends on whether or not you consider single-link DVI-D as the "very first version" of HDMI.

DidYaWipe5• 2 years ago

I imagine CEC could be added to DisplayPort.

throwaway484763• 2 years ago

DP has a different management interface that's actually better because it's a standard unlike CEC.

wmf• 2 years ago

The world doesn't care about FOSS drivers.

Anyway, HDMI is for TVs and DisplayPort is for monitors. They're both entrenched enough that it doesn't make much sense to try to cross over.

Trigg3r• 2 years ago

Ok, but, why not just try to converge on one connector? as you say, the world doesn't care...

moritzruth• 2 years ago

I don't know how true it is, but I heard that

- TV manufacturers are often (always?) members of the HDMI consortium, meaning they financially profit from each device that has an HDMI port.

- Manufacturers of devices with HDMI ports are heavily discouraged from also including competing ports like DP.

p_l15• 2 years ago

DRM is pretty much mandatory in HDMI in home entertainment setup, and is controlled by the media companies' cabal, which is important to vendors in that space (who are often members too).

Also, lowest common denominator HDMI in TV format has HDCP decoder as the only complex part, you can theoretically drive a dumb panel with few fixed function ICs that aren't even related to HDMI. Simplest dumbest case you can advertise the bare minimum supported display setting in EDID, and plop few buffers and ADCs and drive an analog TV off it.

Meanwhile simplest possible DisplayPort implementations still requires that your display can handle packetized data sent over PCI-E PHY layer, with more complex data structures and setup information than "plop an I2C rom chip here, few ADCs and buffer logic here, and you've got HDMI without HDCP to analog CRT".

Kon5ole• 2 years ago

Is there any reason why most TVs still don't support USB C display port and just support HDMI?

Personally I’m convinced it’s mostly because the display manufacturers want to discourage the use of TVs as monitors, in order to protect their margins on monitors.

8k monitors should be sub 1000 usd by now and standard for anyone working with screens. You can get that as a tv but not as a monitor. :(

shadowpho• 2 years ago

why most TVs still don't support USB C display port and just support HDMI

Cost. USB c has much more overhead. For example, people expect they’ll be able to charge with it and have usb pass through.

liquidise• 2 years ago

Curious about the length limitations.

DisplayPort and Thunderbolt are starting to make lengthier runs (7+ ft) tricky, which is still within the realm of cable management, particularly with hybrid standing/sitting desks.

Scene_Cast22• 2 years ago

Same. It's already tough finding a cable with enough length to go from from my floor-standing PC through my cable-managed standing desk and monitor arm.

jsheard4• 2 years ago

There will probably be long (and expensive) fiber optic cables eventually, but yeah the basic copper cables are likely to have very limited reach.

xienze• 2 years ago

They already exist. I recently bought a 33 foot fiber DP1.4+USB3.1/2 (depending on how much video bandwidth you’re using) cable on Amazon for about $130.

mschuster913• 2 years ago

If you need long runs, place a pair of SDI media converters in between. Spec is IIRC 100m for coax cable runs, longer if you run fiber.

lousken• 2 years ago

linux support? none? ok i'll pass

rgovostes• 2 years ago

CEC should be required by the spec. It's tantalizingly close to "just works" but marred by devices that ought to support it but don't, like my RTX 3060/Windows (which?).

Another fun issue I have with it is that my Apple TV 4K will randomly (1 time in 3-4 hours?) tell the receiver to change input when I'm on another. I'm guessing there's some scheduled wake happening and it inadvertently treats it as a user interaction. Adds a nice element of difficulty to Elden Ring.

DidYaWipe5• 2 years ago

My favorite is when my receiver decides to send audio to my PROJECTOR instead of to the goddamned speakers that are attached to said receiver.

I heard tinny sound coming from somewhere behind me and was baffled when I approached the projector and heard sound coming from its tiny built-in speaker.

deergomoo• 2 years ago

I feel like it will be a long time before this is considered essential, if it ever is. An end-to-end 2.1 setup will get you 4K120 with e-ARC and numerous flavours of VRR and HDR (though I don't think those last two are necessarily tied to a specific HDMI version).

Heck, it's still rare to find a TV where all HDMI ports are 2.1 (for years it was only LG, not sure if it's changed this year).

doubled1122• 2 years ago

still rare to find a TV where all HDMI ports are 2.1

On a couple of 4K Samsung monitors I have, HDMI port 1 is HDMI 1.4 and HDMI port 2 is HDMI 2.0.

Couldn't be simpler. The HDMI version is on the port label. Something about the situation makes me chuckle.

radicality3• 2 years ago

Why aren’t they all hdmi 2.0, isn’t it backwards compatible? Or it’s just to save them a $ while technically still being able to advertise it as hdmi 2.0 ?

Gigachad3• 2 years ago

VR needs it. You’ve got two displays that have a very high resolution and refresh rate, which need to share one cable.

bhouston• 2 years ago

I really prefer USB C over both DisplayPort and HDMI.

Reasons:

- Easy to hook up to modern laptop (all MacBooks) that only have USB-C outputs.

- This allows your TV to become a hub.

- I have invest in a lot of high quality USB C cables rather lots of differ types of cables all of which requires either hubs, or built-in converters.

Can you hook up a USB C display to a iPhone or Android phone directly yet?

My ask of TV manufacturers:

Modern TVs should have built in cameras/microphones (or the ability to pull in a cameras via USB and mount it on top) to enable video conferencing so that my chromecast/Google TV device can run get me into Zooms/Google Meets without any other devices.

paulcarroty• 2 years ago

Can you hook up a USB C display to a iPhone or Android phone directly yet?

Your phone should have a video output inside the usb-c port.

radicality3• 2 years ago

Isn’t video over USB-C still DisplayPort, just encapsulated?

p_l15• 2 years ago

Usually it's raw DisplayPort connection using some of the SuperSpeed lanes on USB3/USB-C connector. Encapsulation is optionally available when running Thunderbolt/USB4 on the port, then between consenting devices you can setup a virtal circuit where DisplayPort packets are encapsulated in Thunderbolt/USB4 packets.

DidYaWipe5• 2 years ago

Video through your USB-C port IS DisplayPort. It's just a different physical connector.

(Yes, I realize that there's a video-over-USB thing with a similar name, but that's old heavily-compressed niche junk.)

lurking_swe• 2 years ago

hilarious that the “protocol” has the word Port in it. Could it be any more confusing? especially when something named “DisplayPort” is working via a USB-C port.

what a mess. it’s like a parody skit…imagine how a layman would interpret all this.

amelius5• 2 years ago

Sounds like a hack to me. Does the USB-C protocol allow the use of another protocol over the same connector?

Iulioh2• 2 years ago

Man, this is a sad answer in this forum.

Do you know anything about USB C and why there aren't any cables over 3m (10ft)?

And why these are 100$+ cables?

(Usb4/Tb3+ cables, capable of 40gbps like a hdmi2.1)

duskwuff• 2 years ago

Can you hook up a USB C display to a iPhone or Android phone directly yet?

iPhone: yes.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/105099#:~:text=USB-C%20displ...

MBCook• 2 years ago

Mandate QMS and fix it.

It’s 2024. Why do TVs flash and stutter switching modes? It’s pathetic. Quick Media Switching partially fixes this. It makes TVs switch their frame rates fast, so you can go from 24 to 30 to 60 without noticing it. Nice right?

But that’s it. Need to switch resolution or go from normal to HDR? QMS doesn’t support that. Back to black screens.

Come on. This should be table stakes.

I didn’t see it mentioned in the article at all though.

DidYaWipe5• 2 years ago

HDMI should have been abolished in favor of DisplayPort ages ago.

https://hackaday.com/2023/07/11/displayport-a-better-video-i...

There are a couple of video cameras and viewfinders (particularly from BlackMagic) that have emerged in the last couple of years using DP.

gjsman-10004• 2 years ago

DisplayPort never caught on in the home entertainment market - have you ever seen a DisplayPort TV? And why would there be one, when everyone’s happy with HDMI?

DisplayPort, for most intents and purposes, has lost the format war. You buy a laptop - it’s HDMI on the side, not DisplayPort. You buy a monitor - DisplayPort is never an exclusive port on any model, but HDMI is.

bpye3• 2 years ago

That’s not really true. Any device with USB-C video out is using DisplayPort, not HDMI. HDMI alt mode exists, but AFAIK never shipped in any products.

p_l15• 2 years ago

HDMI replaced VGA as the "lowest common denominator port" for conference usage, not as major display tech.

HDMI is also for various reasons very tightly bound with home entertainment ecosystem because the DRM is mandatory while it's optional in DisplayPort.

Meanwhile DisplayPort has effectively won the format war for computer displays, and on all newer display connectors.

dcan• 2 years ago

I would argue the opposite - DisplayPort has won the computing format war, especially on laptops. Most laptops will have at least two USB-C ports with DisplayPort tunneling. Most business PCs have only DisplayPort connectivity, with the assumption that you'll buy a DisplayPort to HDMI adapter (if you have an older monitor that only supported HDMI).

True, we will never see them on the TV, but on the computer it is all DisplayPort.

dathery• 2 years ago

Why do you assert that everyone is happy with HDMI? It has a lot of problems even before we get into the technical details. For example, it is so secretive and closed that the HDMI forum won't even let AMD implement HDMI 2.1 in their Linux driver: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/hdmi-forum-to-amd-no...

jsheard4• 2 years ago

DisplayPort, for most intents and purposes, has lost the format war. You buy a laptop - it’s HDMI on the side, not DisplayPort.

The laptops USB-C ports probably speak DisplayPort though. There was another USB-C alt mode which carried HDMI instead but that spec was abandoned, DisplayPort is the de facto standard USB-C video protocol now.

kccqzy• 2 years ago

Besides DisplayPort over USB-C that people have already mentioned there's also eDP which is basically the standard for connecting a laptop's screen to its GPU. You buy a laptop, regardless of what external port it has, DisplayPort is used on the internal display. And since most laptop users don't regularly connect to external displays, one can certainly say that the usage of DisplayPort here far eclipses HDMI.

immibis3• 2 years ago

I'm seeing less and less HDMI ports on computer monitors, graphics cards, projectors, etc. Since IIRC they charge a royalty per port, this makes a lot of sense.

I buy a laptop - it's USB only. No HDMI, DisplayPort, VGA, headphone jack or anything else. When was the last time you bought one?

I buy a desktop graphics card. 1 HDMI - for compatibility, you know - and 3 DisplayPort. The HDMI is port number 2.

Last time I used a projector it was DisplayPort or VGA. I brought brought both kinds of adapters just in case.

My newest monitor has power input, DisplayPort and VGA. No HDMI.

Gigachad3• 2 years ago

DisplayPort in a way won. USB-C video is DisplayPort. And the HDMI port on your laptop is just an internal USB adapter for DisplayPort alt mode for hdmi.

BonoboIO• 2 years ago

HDMI should have made it easy to see what cable is supporting what.

The HDMI versioning chaos did not help.

The worst is still USB 3.1 Gen 2.1 Hyper Giga Super Speed Mark II

radicality3• 2 years ago

Yeah I have no idea how normal non-tech people are supposed to make any sense of USB-C cables and device compatibility.

Even us tech people find it difficult. Small rant - I have the M1 Max MacBook which comes with “USB4”. I remember at some point getting a SanDisk external “USB4” ssd which claimed 20Gb/s, you would think it should all work together. But no, apparently the ssd needed 3.2 2x2 support, which the Mac doesn’t implement, since it’s apparently only a optional part of USB4 spec…

One other funny thing - Apple’s page for “Identify the ports on your Mac” has 5 separate entries that are all USB-C shape. https://support.apple.com/en-us/109523

throwaway81523• 2 years ago

Just wait til they extend USB to carry this new super speed HDMI.

dweekly• 2 years ago

"...this would align the new HDMI standard with the latest DisplayPort 2.1 technologies"

ivewonyoung• 2 years ago

DP doesn't have eARC for audio, that won't work.

jeffbee2• 2 years ago

DisplayPort "fast AUX" stream is more than capable of returning audio or even video data to the "source" and some videoconferencing rigs even implement this. But I don't see why the industry would be motivated to adopt and consolidate around that standard when HDMI's bidirectional features already exist and are widely supported.

ACAVJW4H• 2 years ago

There’s an interesting middle-ground worth mentioning: a 2-in-1 connector https://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Rego-Electronics/845-00... that can take both HDMI and DisplayPort cables, which could be a neat solution for devices juggling both standards.

Here’s a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZpHizpZSPQ showing a PC with this connector in action.

Maybe not a game-changer, but it’s an interesting idea to reduce port clutter without forcing a winner in the format war just yet.

amelius5• 2 years ago

What I want is a display standard that allows (or legally forces) a monitor to detect the signal within 100ms.

Waiting for a monitor for 5 seconds (often without knowing what it is doing or on which input it is looking) is such a bad UX.

ksec4• 2 years ago

It actually has little to nothing to do with the connector standard but more of the TV system itself. I know there is HDMI / HDCP handshake but they dont contribute much to the 5s of switching channels.

amelius5• 2 years ago

I'm talking about switching sources on a monitor that's already on ;)

switch007• 2 years ago

It should also be legally mandated to have individual buttons for each input instead of having to navigate a silly software menu, for when the auto detection invariably fails !!

dav43• 2 years ago

The tech industry bodies need to look in the mirror at themselves rather ferociously. These usb, smart, hdmi bodies are failing the consumers, failing sustainable practices and just smell like poorly run bodies.

eBombzor• 2 years ago

HDMI 2.1 is useless already, how many monitors halve the bandwidth of their 2.1 connector? Standards need enforcing, none of this fake HDMI 2.x bullshit.

ksec4• 2 years ago

It is sad that TV has barely been supproting HDMI 2.1, may be this is more of a Mediatek or the chip's problem. We only expect Sony TV in 2025 to have more than one HDMI 2.1 port. How long do we have to wait for HDMI 2.2?

HDMI 2.2 is set to debut at CES 2025

Related Stories