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

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
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.
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 101
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member
    Joke about supporting hardware shipping in 2024 in 3, 2,....
  • Reply 2 of 101
    joe28753joe28753 Posts: 82member
    Gigabyte per second does not equal Gbps.
  • Reply 3 of 101
    phone-ui-guyphone-ui-guy Posts: 1,019member
    20Gbps is not 20-Gigabytes per second... Standard nomenclature is a lower case b is bits and not Bytes which is uppercase B.
  • Reply 4 of 101
    seankillseankill Posts: 539member
    the people above are correct. b=bit
    8 bits = 1 byte

    Cool hardware though
  • Reply 5 of 101
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    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?

  • Reply 6 of 101
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,430moderator
    mstone wrote: »
    Yeah but how fast is 
    <h1 class="forum-h1" id="user_yui_3_7_3_1_1365455950789_936" style="margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:15px;padding-bottom:4px;font-size:26px;line-height:1em;color:rgb(58,66,73);font-family:FranklinGothicFSCdRegular;">20Gpbs in the headline?</h1>

    Clearly faster than the speed of thought. ;)

    This stuff is hot off the press, there's going to be more typos than usual.
  • Reply 7 of 101
    dimmokdimmok Posts: 359member
    Wow. And I just noticed the thunderbolt accessories in stores. Seems like the adoption/approval took forever
  • Reply 8 of 101
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    With this speed increase Retina is possible across the iMac line. It may also offer display daisy chaining
  • Reply 9 of 101
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    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!)
  • Reply 10 of 101
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member

    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?

  • Reply 11 of 101
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    The headline now says 20Gpbs. Gigi [B]pers bit[/B] second?
  • Reply 12 of 101
    gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,398member


    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/


    )

  • Reply 13 of 101
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    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!¡
  • Reply 14 of 101
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    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.

  • Reply 15 of 101
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,122member

    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.

  • Reply 16 of 101
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,430moderator
    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.
    solipsismx wrote:
    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.
  • Reply 17 of 101
    superbasssuperbass Posts: 688member
    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?
  • Reply 18 of 101
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Marvin wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 19 of 101
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,369member
    Marvin wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 20 of 101
    superbasssuperbass Posts: 688member


    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!

Sign In or Register to comment.