or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Intel announces next-gen Thunderbolt with 4K resolution support, 20Gbps speeds coming in 2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel announces next-gen Thunderbolt with 4K resolution support, 20Gbps speeds coming in 2014

post #1 of 101
Thread Starter 
At the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) Show in Las Vegas, Nevada, Intel on Monday announced the next-generation of Thunderbolt transfer technology, which promises to bring data transfer speeds up to 20-gigabits per second, a doubling over existing Thunderbolt hardware.

Thunderbolt
Soure: Intel


According to Intel, the upgraded Thunderbolt interface will be able to hit the 20Gbps transmit speeds over two channels, meaning adopters could see a theoretical doubling in performance from current Thunderbolt systems, reports Engadget. The high-speed tech, code-named Falcon Ridge, allows for simultaneous 4K video file transfer and display over two I/O channels.

Driving the tech will be a new Thunderbolt controller, currently designated by the codename Redwood Ridge, which is expected to be integrated with Intel's fourth-generation Core processor lineup this year. Improvements over the previous Cactus Ridge controller are DisplayPort 1.2 capability when connecting to native DP displays, improved power management and a supposed decrease in material cost.

The Thunderbolt ecosystem has been slowly gaining momentum after Apple and Intel introduced the interface in 2011, with manufacturers finally bringing products to the consumer marketplace.
For example, Corning showed off its thin optical cables for the standard at this year's Macworld. Apple was first to support Thunderbolt with its early-2011 MacBook Pro. Some Windows-based PCs have started to implement the protocol, though it is far less common than competing technology like USB 3.0.

Due to initial pricing of Thunderbolt hardware, which mostly consisted of external hard drive arrays, the interface remained out of reach for non-professional buyers. Adding to the tech's adoption problems was Intel's reportedly strict licensing practices.

Intel is preparing for production to begin later this year ahead of a 2014 release, and notes existing Thunderbolt cables and connectors will be compatible with the buffed protocol.
post #2 of 101
Joke about supporting hardware shipping in 2024 in 3, 2,....
post #3 of 101
Gigabyte per second does not equal Gbps.
post #4 of 101
20Gbps is not 20-Gigabytes per second... Standard nomenclature is a lower case b is bits and not Bytes which is uppercase B.
post #5 of 101
the people above are correct. b=bit
8 bits = 1 byte

Cool hardware though
post #6 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy View Post

20Gbps is not 20-Gigabytes per second... Standard nomenclature is a lower case b is bits and not Bytes which is uppercase B.

Yeah but how fast is 

20Gpbs in the headline?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #7 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Yeah but how fast is 

20Gpbs in the headline?


Clearly faster than the speed of thought. 1wink.gif

This stuff is hot off the press, there's going to be more typos than usual.
post #8 of 101
Wow. And I just noticed the thunderbolt accessories in stores. Seems like the adoption/approval took forever

One thought he was invincible... the other thought he could fly.

They were both wrong.

Reply

One thought he was invincible... the other thought he could fly.

They were both wrong.

Reply
post #9 of 101
With this speed increase Retina is possible across the iMac line. It may also offer display daisy chaining
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #10 of 101
The way this is worded, and with that diagram, it's totally not clear at all whether this is "twice as fast" as the current Thunderbolt.

Another total FAIL at description/reporting (again!)
post #11 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

With this speed increase Retina is possible across the iMac line. It may also offer display daisy chaining

 

What indication do you have that it is currently not possible...or that it has anything to do with Thunderbolt bandwidth?

 

Meaning, other than a Retina iMac extending its display to a Retina Thunderbolt Display, what does this have to do with actually producing either product?

post #12 of 101
The headline now says 20Gpbs. Gigi pers bit second?
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/8/13 at 3:38pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #13 of 101

Yes what resolution is possible on the current thunderbolt? Obviously not 3840x2160....?

 

(edit: I see someone did get 2560x1600 on an external monitor 

http://chris.dziemborowicz.com/blog/2012/07/04/fix-external-monitor-resolution-on-macbook-pro-with-retina-display/

and Apple says it supports 2 such displays

http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs-retina/

)


Edited by GregAlexander - 4/8/13 at 3:18pm
post #14 of 101
There is absolutely no need to support 4K resolutions since there is no reason that any display will ever need to support it in the future¡ 1080p forever!¡

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #15 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The headline now says 20Gpbs. Gibi pers bit second?

A lot of people don't know what a Gibi is. I know what a GiB is.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #16 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The headline now says 20Gpbs. Gibi pers bit second?

I'm not sure what the difference is but the chart tells me that whatever it is it's 4 times faster the USB 3.

post #17 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

Yes what resolution is possible on the current thunderbolt? Obviously not 3840x2160....?

(edit: I see someone did get 2560x1600 on an external monitor 
http://chris.dziemborowicz.com/blog/2012/07/04/fix-external-monitor-resolution-on-macbook-pro-with-retina-display/
and Apple says it supports 2 such displays
http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs-retina/
)

For some reason, the dual Thunderbolt ports seem to support more than 10Gbps using (I assume) one controller. 2560 x 1600 x 24bpp x 60Hz x 2 = 11.8Gbps. Anandtech got 11Gbps data transfer with dual TB ports. Each port can't do more than 10Gbps though and 4K needs 3840 x 2160 x 60 x 32 = 15.9Gbps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX 
There is absolutely no need to support 4K resolutions since there is no reason that any display will ever need to support it in the future¡ 1080p forever!¡

Monitors yes, TVs under 60" no.
post #18 of 101
When will it be (or will it ever be) plug-and-play in windows?

I flip back and forth between Windows and Mac depending on the client/project, and lack of plug play with a thunderbolt drive basically made me need to switch to USB3.

Seriously, did they not think about this, or are they trying to supplant USB3 as number 1 by completely dropping the ball on windows PCs? I mean when was the last time you had a device that wasn't PnP?
Edited by Superbass - 4/8/13 at 4:12pm
post #19 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Monitors yes, TVs under 60" no.


1) All TVs have built-in monitors.

2) Where is this new "under 60" qualifier coming from? Are you now saying that 60" and up will eventually be 4K? If so, then you are then agreeing with my original point.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #20 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

For some reason, the dual Thunderbolt ports seem to support more than 10Gbps using (I assume) one controller. 2560 x 1600 x 24bpp x 60Hz x 2 = 11.8Gbps. Anandtech got 11Gbps data transfer with dual TB ports. Each port can't do more than 10Gbps though and 4K needs 3840 x 2160 x 60 x 32 = 15.9Gbps.
Monitors yes, TVs under 60" no.

I don't know about that I find 1080 P monitors to be very grainy.

As for this report, I think I will go to the horses mouth as this article is confused.
post #21 of 101

I think its just a matter of there not being any reason to have a 4k monitor at this point - Bluray is only 1080p, and it'll be a while before any film companies start encoding at 4k and any streaming/digital companies start selling 4k. The bandwidth is way higher, and they won't be able to charge that much extra for 4k in most cases. Also, so many people have invested in Bluray drives and 1080p that sales of 4k tvs will probably be pretty slow. 1080p upscaled to 4k won't be noticable on smaller televisions either. (although 60" is a pretty big cutoff - i would say 1080p upscaled to 4k wouldn't be very noticeable on a 40" tv at normal viewing distance- 60" is a bit of a stretch.)

 

On a computer monitor, however, 4K will be very useful, especially when it comes to photo editing/graphic design. A pair of retina (or higher) type displays at 24-26" will be great to work on!

post #22 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

When will it be (or will it ever be) plug-and-play in windows?
MS has completely lost direction and frankly I'm not sure they will ever get their mojo back. Business is actually developing a hostile attitude towards the company due to all of the issues around running and upgrading Windows. I also think MS has a bit of an attitude due to being left out of the Apple/Intel partnership to develop this technology.
Quote:
I flip back and forth between Windows and Mac depending on the client/project, and lack of plug play with a thunderbolt drive basically made me need to switch to USB3.
I've stated this again and again but Apple got everything they wanted out of TB as a docking port. Everything on top of that is gravy for them.
Quote:
Seriously, did they not think about this, or are they trying to supplant USB3 as number 1 by completely dropping the ball on windows PCs? I mean when was the last time you had a device that wasn't PnP?

TB was never intended to replace USB in any form.
post #23 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1) All TVs have built-in monitors.

2) Where is this new "under 60" qualifier coming from? Are you now saying that 60" and up will eventually be 4K? If so, then you are then agreeing with my original point.

I'm not sure what other have been thinking but from my perspective, when the mention of 1080P monitors is made, the resolution on a significantly large enough screen is not acceptable. I suspect this is why apple uses higher res screens in the iMac. 4K may be an overkill in some cases for a computer monitor but the 1080P node is just terrible.
post #24 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


[...] 4K needs 3840 x 2160 x 60 x 32 = 15.9Gbps.

 

Why times 60 rather than 30? What source is 60 frames per second?

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for supporting 60fps, I'm just curious how you arrived at that figure?

post #25 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I'm not sure what other have been thinking but from my perspective, when the mention of 1080P monitors is made, the resolution on a significantly large enough screen is not acceptable. I suspect this is why apple uses higher res screens in the iMac. 4K may be an overkill in some cases for a computer monitor but the 1080P node is just terrible.

Absolutely! In the 4K HDTV thread from a few weeks back I talked about that and ran numbers as to where the "Retina" effect most of us saw on smaller 1080p and even 720p panels start to fall away in the 50" to 60" ranges. I even talked about people buying a new HDTV and thinking it's worse than there previous picture precisely because they've enlarged the display but not their living room thus giving a worse experience in certain ways.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #26 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Where is this new "under 60" qualifier coming from? Are you now saying that 60" and up will eventually be 4K? If so, then you are then agreeing with my original point.

TVs coming out that are that size are 4K. They just cost around $38k.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v 
Why times 60 rather than 30? What source is 60 frames per second?

A computer refresh rate is usually 60Hz or 75Hz.
post #27 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

TVs coming out that are that size are 4K. They just cost around $38k.

You have been participating in a thread where I specifically link to an article that lists 55" and 65" UltraHD TVs from Sony to be released in 2 weeks for $4,999 and $6,999, respectively, yet are now claiming that they are all around $38,000 on top of assuming that prices today would still be the same as in the future without any acknowledgment that Thunderbolt with 4K support isn't yet available. You are sounding like a Luddite with falsified claims and desire to never see a display get to 4K (or surpass) it despite phones now available with 1080p.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #28 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You have been participating in a thread where I specifically link to an article that lists 55" and 65" UltraHD TVs from Sony to be released in 2 weeks for $4,999 and $6,999, respectively, yet are now claiming that they are all around $38,000 on top of assuming that prices today would still be the same as in the future

I'm well aware of the $5k Sony display and even referenced it before you posted the link. I don't think 4K is beneficial at those sizes. You'd have to be less than 6ft away - who sits less than 6ft away from a 60" TV? With an 85" display, I could see some people sitting closer than 10ft away. Between 60"-85", any pixels/blurriness would be more noticeable the higher up it went.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

without any acknowledgment that Thunderbolt with 4K support isn't yet available.

I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not yet available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You are sounding like a Luddite with falsified claims and desire to never see a display get to 4K (or surpass) it despite phones now available with 1080p.

It's not that I don't want to see them go to 4K or 8K or higher, I just don't see how it's going to make a difference. If I said to you 4K was no good, some media is higher than 4K, why not go all the way to 16K and future proof it, wouldn't you think it was unnecessary? I just think moving to 4K is unnecessary for the purposes of home entertainment. Obviously manufacturers are running out of marketing terms and TV margins are too low so they need to push something new. It's a solution without a problem though.
post #29 of 101
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post
Joke about supporting hardware shipping in 2024 in 3, 2,....

 

I don't see how that would apply here, given that Apple has currently adopted Thunderbolt infinitely faster than any other computer manufacturer.

 

Infinitely because none of them use it yet, after three years.

 

Now, if you're talking PC adoption, that's a joke.


Originally Posted by v5v View Post
What source is 60 frames per second? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for supporting 60fps…

 

ARE YOU INSANE, MAN?! DON'T QUESTION IT, THEN! lol.gif

 

Get the support out there from the get-go. That way the whiners won't be able to complain, "Well, there's no support for it; let's just not do it."

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #30 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I'm well aware of the $5k Sony display and even referenced it before you posted the link. I don't think 4K is beneficial at those sizes. You'd have to be less than 6ft away - who sits less than 6ft away from a 60" TV? With an 85" display, I could see some people sitting closer than 10ft away. Between 60"-85", any pixels/blurriness would be more noticeable the higher up it went.

That is all sorts of wrong. You made this statement before where you think that a higher PPI means that you need to sit closer. Again, 1080p isn't cutting it as we move into larger and larger displays. For example (like I showed in the other thread), a 55" 1080p HDTV will require the user to sit up to 7' away to get the minimum Retina effect for someone with 20/20(6/6) vision. Unless you want to argue that HEC displays will not get bigger and that living rooms will get shorter thus making 1080p the only option for the foreseeable future but that's a hard position to reasonably take, especially with Intel, VESA, HDMI Consortium, Sony, etc. all supporting 4K right now.
Quote:
I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not yet available..

That's exactly what I mean. You keep talking about today when all this discussion is about what's coming tomorrow. Hence the article title which contains announces, next-gen, and coming in 2014.
Quote:
If I said to you 4K was no good, some media is higher than 4K, why not go all the way to 16K and future proof it, wouldn't you think it was unnecessary.

Reductio ad absurdum. We're now just getting to the point where 2x 1080p can be supported effectively with HW and within a few years of the prices being where HDTVs were when they took off and you want to go 4x and 8x the number of pixels? In the words of the prophet Ed Lover, "Come on, Son!"
Edited by SolipsismX - 4/9/13 at 6:28pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #31 of 101

I know an I-O/peripherals company has some interesting things planned in conjunction with this.

"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #32 of 101

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Why times 60 rather than 30? What source is 60 frames per second?

 

A computer refresh rate is usually 60Hz or 75Hz.

 

Oh yeah... duh. How can you tell I'm a TV guy first and computer guy second... or ninth... lol.gif

post #33 of 101

I'm surprised PC fans haven't posted the usual defensive post about how awesome USB3 is.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #34 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I'm surprised PC fans haven't posted the usual defensive post about how awesome USB3 is.

 

Well, it *IS* finally useful, and for a lot of applications may be a perfectly reasonable, lower-cost alternative to TB. Like an external drive that's not SSD or RAID, or capturing a single video stream.

post #35 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I'm surprised PC fans haven't posted the usual defensive post about how awesome USB3 is.

1) Macs now have USB 3.0 with Ivy Bridge. They usually stop something being a feature after Apple adds it. Usually it's the "it's about time" or "such-and-such has had it for x-long" type comments, often followed by a pic of someone's collection of gadgets that they think proves they aren't a troll.

2) A lot of "PC" manufacturers, especially at the top end, have adopted TB or DP protocols, oft with mDP ports so that makes it hard to argue how much Apple sucks when the vendor they claim is better is also backing it.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #36 of 101
It would be nice of they would upgrade the iDevices to TB sooner rather than later. USB just doesn't cut it for synching 64GB. Sure, the internal flash only goes so fast, but that won't be the bottleneck forever.
Even more interestig though would be TB on AppleTV, especially dual TB, with iOS given the ability to recognize external drives.
post #37 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by X38 View Post

It would be nice of they would upgrade the iDevices to TB sooner rather than later. USB just doesn't cut it for synching 64GB. Sure, the internal flash only goes so fast, but that won't be the bottleneck forever.
Even more interestig though would be TB on AppleTV, especially dual TB, with iOS given the ability to recognize external drives.

1) Even once the NAND gets faster it has a long way to go before it comes close to exceeding USB 2.0 speeds. 18-25MB/s for NAND with 35-40MB/s actual throughput for USB2.0. Then consider that they could use USB3.0 speeds which will then jump it ahead considerably.

2) You'll hear people say that an iDevice can't have a TB controller because it doesn't have an Intel Core processor. That's not accurate. Since we're only talking about the iDevice being a peripheral it's possible, just like we have with displays, external drives, etc. That said, the cost, power usage, and size all make it less than likely for some time to come.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #38 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

 

What indication do you have that it is currently not possible...or that it has anything to do with Thunderbolt bandwidth?

 

Meaning, other than a Retina iMac extending its display to a Retina Thunderbolt Display, what does this have to do with actually producing either product?

 

"Improvements over the previous Cactus Ridge controller are DisplayPort 1.2 capability when connecting to native DP displays".

 

DisplayPort 1.2 supports daisy chaining of DisplayPort 1.2 monitors. No Apple Thunderbolt Display required.

post #39 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

For some reason, the dual Thunderbolt ports seem to support more than 10Gbps using (I assume) one controller. 2560 x 1600 x 24bpp x 60Hz x 2 = 11.8Gbps. Anandtech got 11Gbps data transfer with dual TB ports. Each port can't do more than 10Gbps though and 4K needs 3840 x 2160 x 60 x 32 = 15.9Gbps.

Wikipedia lists other values: 2560 × 1600 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz for 10.46 Gb/s for CVT and 8.06 Gb/s for CVT-R.

For 4K they list: 3840 × 2160 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz 21.39 Gb/s for CVT and 16.00 Gb/s for CVT-R, which is supported with DP 1.2 that is available with today's TB chipset update. The delay of the Mac Pro (and ATD) updates, and new rumours of notebook updates this quarter might have been planned around the DP 1.2 update in the new chipset.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #40 of 101
We need a daisychainable realistically priced (=read simple, max 350Euros) box that has space to fit one PCIe card and about 3-4 2,5 inch drives. Amen.

You could have different models but they should all be chainable. Now having another model much the same but have two PCIe slots, you could have a controller/pcie ssd and descrete graphics...

I let the rest to your imagination. Now that would seriously allow some crazy applications for macs that they dont really fit that well currently...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Intel announces next-gen Thunderbolt with 4K resolution support, 20Gbps speeds coming in 2014