HDMI 2.2 arrives with 16K video and 96Gbps bandwidth support

AppleInsider

The HDMI Forum has officially made the HDMI 2.2 standard available to manufacturers, with future-proof features such as 16K video support and an increase in maximum memory bandwidth of up to 96 gigabits per second.

The HDMI 2.2 standard is now available to manufacturers.

On Wednesday, a significant update to the ever-popular HDMI standard was released. Seven years after the arrival of HDMI 2.1, the HDMI Forum has unveiled the full specifications of the standard's successor, HDMI 2.2.

The headline feature of HDMI 2.2 is its support for higher video resolutions and faster refresh rates, including 16K at 60Hz and 12K video at 120Hz, which represents a significant improvement. For reference, the HDMI 2.1 standard only supported 8K video at 60Hz and 4K video at 120Hz.

HDMI 2.2 supports additional high-quality options and full chroma formats, including 4:4:4 mode on an 8K display at 60Hz. Users of 4K displays will have access to 4:4:4 mode with an impressive 240Hz refresh rate, with full 10-bit and 12-bit color.

The 96 gigabit per second bandwidth in HDMI 2.2 is double the 48 gigabit per second bandwidth available in the HDMI 2.1 standard. HDMI 2.0 offered only 18 gigabits per second of bandwidth, while HDMI 1.4 provided 10.2 gigabits per second. The original HDMI 1.0 standard delivered just 3.96 Gbps.

In addition to the HDMI 2.2 standard, the HDMI Forum has launched the "Ultra96" feature name, which manufacturers are encouraged to use. The "96" in the name indicates that a specific product supports a maximum of 96Gbps of memory bandwidth, in compliance with the newly announced HDMI 2.2 standards.

Products bearing the Ultra96 designation will require a dedicated Ultra96 HDMI Cable. Understandably, the new Ultra96 HDMI Cable standard supports 96Gbps of memory bandwidth, twice as much as the preceding Ultra High Speed HDMI Cable.

"The HDMI Forum is proud to release the new HDMI 2.2 Specification to enable higher performance capabilities and features for exciting and immersive new solutions and products," said the president of the HDMI Forum, Chandlee Harrell. "And the introduction of the new Ultra96 feature name will help consumers and end-users ensure their product's maximum bandwidth is supported."

The HDMI 2.2 standard also includes a new Latency Indication Protocol (LIP) that allows for improved audio and video synchronization. Multiple hop system configurations, as well as those with an audio-video receiver or soundbar, will benefit from this feature.

Why you won't need an Ultra96 HDMI cable just yet

While the HDMI 2.2 standard supports 16K video at 60Hz, it's currently overkill, as you'll need a compatible monitor to make it a reality. Products with 16K displays are few and far between, especially if you're looking for an external monitor.

The HDMI 2.2 standard supports 16K video at 60Hz, and 12K video at 120Hz. Image Credit: HDMI Forum.

You would also need content that can take advantage of the 16K display, and that's simply not feasible at the time of writing. Most of the video content currently available has a resolution of 4K or 8K, and it wouldn't be easy to find games that support 12K or 16K, either.

The goal of the HDMI 2.2 specification is effectively future-proofing -- ensuring compatibility with future products and devices through a new standard for display manufacturers. It's not clear how long it will take for companies to fully take advantage of the HDMI 2.2 standard, however.

In 2021, the first Apple Silicon 14-inch MacBook Pro and 16-inch MacBook Pro only supported the HDMI 2.0 standard. The MacBook Pro only received support for HDMI 2.1 in January 2023, when the two laptop models gained Apple's M2 Pro and M2 Max chips.

Although Apple itself is not listed as a member of the HDMI Forum, the company extensively supports HDMI in various forms and advocates for adopting new standards where possible. Aside from devices with dedicated HDMI ports, there are embedded HDMI implementations in Lightning, USB 3.0, USB 3.1 Type-C, and Thunderbolt 3, enabled by adapters.



Read on AppleInsider

sflocal

Waiting for the usual tech-nerds to start complaining next week on what's taking Apple so long to implement HDMI2.2 after being available for "the last few years".

*crunching popcorn*

ihatescreennames

sflocal said:

Waiting for the usual tech-nerds to start complaining next week on what's taking Apple so long to implement HDMI2.2 after being available for "the last few years".

*crunching popcorn*

Or complaining they can’t watch native 16K full resolution on their iPhone.

edited June 25

sflocal

ihatescreennames said:

sflocal said:

Waiting for the usual tech-nerds to start complaining next week on what's taking Apple so long to implement HDMI2.2 after being available for "the last few years".

*crunching popcorn*

Or complaining that can’t watch native 16K full resolution on their iPhone.

and at 360hz cuz "Android's been doing it for years"... 

jintech

What's next after 16K? 20K? 24K?

Sign me up when we have 32K.

cia

The new options for 4K are actually great.  8K is nifty and all, but high refresh uncompressed 4K is more useful in the computer display space. Finally 144Hz uncompressed 4k!

mplsp

This is actually the first HDMI standard that can support 5k at 120Hz without extra compression (a display Apple has offered since 2014). It also eclipses the latest DisplayPort spec that was released last year and maxed out at 80 Gbps

edited June 26

jvm156

16k is for VR. not sure what other use it would have 

jdiamond

Worth pointing out that there isn't actually bandwidth for 4:4:4 @ 16K, so it's a weird claim to make.  With high dynamic range, it can't even hit 24 fps.  At least 3:1 compression would be needed for true 16K.  The problem is they keep doubling bandwidth and quadrupling the pixel count.

While I agree with everyone that no one needs 16K, why advertise a standard that it can't actually achieve?  Just call it the "solid 8K solution" instead.

edited June 26

shamino

This resolution is pointless for home theater use.  But we may see it in actual movie theaters.  Right now, theater projectors go up to 8K, which (to my eyes, anyway) is good enough.  But maybe not for people sitting in the front row of a large theater room.

But for those vertical-market applications, we'll probably see the equipment manufacturers shipping custom cables with the equipment, maybe contracting it out to one of the big-name cable manufacturers.  The odds of seeing such a cable in your local Best Buy is going to be very low, because (IMO, anyway), there is going to be no actual need for consumer equipment to use that data rate.

At least until someone decides they want to put a 25G Ethernet channel on the same cable with a video signal.   

apple4thewin

So the Max fully supported refresh rate on a 4K display using HDMI 2.2 is 240hz? I can see people trying to hit that on current PCs.

avon b7

And now GPMI is coming to market:

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/gpmi-is-way-better-than-hdmi-but-it-may-never-be-able-to-compete/

Almost guaranteed to catch on in China and perhaps appear outside China too. 

shamino

avon b7 said:

And now GPMI is coming to market:

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/gpmi-is-way-better-than-hdmi-but-it-may-never-be-able-to-compete/

Almost guaranteed to catch on in China and perhaps appear outside China too. 

But what's the point?  Higher resolutions?  But do people need or want TVs with more than 8K resolution in their homes?  More HDR?  Are people having problems with 10-bit video?  And why can't HDMI adopt 12-bit or higher depth?  More audio formats?  HDMI is already has support for any audio standard (Dolby Digital, Atmos, DTS, etc.) a media publisher is likely to use.

Sounds like a solution desperately in need of a problem.

avon b7

shamino said:

avon b7 said:

And now GPMI is coming to market:

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/gpmi-is-way-better-than-hdmi-but-it-may-never-be-able-to-compete/

Almost guaranteed to catch on in China and perhaps appear outside China too. 

But what's the point?  Higher resolutions?  But do people need or want TVs with more than 8K resolution in their homes?  More HDR?  Are people having problems with 10-bit video?  And why can't HDMI adopt 12-bit or higher depth?  More audio formats?  HDMI is already has support for any audio standard (Dolby Digital, Atmos, DTS, etc.) a media publisher is likely to use.

Sounds like a solution desperately in need of a problem.

Technology independence and the ever-growing need for bandwidth and low latency, plus power delivery. 

If you are forced to roll your own you might as well futureproof things to a degree. 

The same thing is happening with Nearlink. 

roundaboutnow

16K does have potential application in the Pro AV realm to address large direct view LED displays or tiled/blended arrays of smaller displays. Of course, we would need a source capable of delivering a 16K signal, which would feed some sort of processor that also must be capable of accepting 16K to split/distribute the signal to the entire display array. (Right now, media servers capable of multiple 4K outputs exist for these applications, so I would say 16K is not urgent).

Still not a fan of the HDMI connector though.

rezwits

I know I like to put my MacMini M4 Pro on 4K@120 and I just can't.  Out here in Vegas it's just too hot in the summer.  I get crazy striations and artifacts, if I don't sleep it and let it sit for over a week.  I am currently having to sleep the M4 Pro to keep it cool and not fry the chips.  I could only imaging how HOT an 8K@120 would get, just at idle even, on some newer machine.  The best setting is 4K@40-120VRR.  At least with that when it's idle it throttles down and the heat is manageable.

I honestly don't see how we could even have 8K@120 or 8K@240 constant, in a future, without some kind of pro-motion technology or VRR.

2¢