Remember when 1080p screens were considered “full” HD? These days you can find plenty of monitors with 4K UHD resolutions, with some companies pushing the boundaries to 5K, 6K, or even 8K… but you may need two cables to actually connect some of those displays.

In the future you may be able to do it with just one. VESA has just finalized the new DisplayPort 2.0 spec with support for up to a single 16K display at 60 Hz, or two 8K displays at 120 Hz.

DisplayPort 2.0 has a maximum bandwidth of 77.4 Gbps, which is nearly three times as high as you could go with DisplayPort 1.4.

Among other things, that means it should support:

  • Single 16K (15360 x 8460) display at 60 Hz with HDR
  • Dual 8K (7680 x 4320) displays at 120 Hz with HDR
  • Dual 4K (3840 x 2160) displays at 144 Hz
  • Three 10K (10240 x 4320) displays at 60 Hz with HDR
  • Three 4K (3840 x 2160) displays at 90 Hz with HDR

The standard supports both native DisplayPort connectors and Thunederbolt 3/USB-C connectors… although if you’re using a single USB-C cable for both video and data simultaneously, you’ll still be able to connect up to three 4K displays or a single 8K display (at 30 Hz).

You can read more details in the DisplayPort 2.0 announcement.

via The Verge and AnandTech

 

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign

or...

Contribute via PayPal

6 replies on “DisplayPort 2.0 will support 16K displays”

  1. 8k 144Hz should hopefully be where things stop. At that resolution and framerate, there’s no point, none whatsoever, in ever going any higher. You will gain nothing from having anything bigger in your house. Once everyone has that, maybe we can all be satisfied with what we have instead of feeling ashamed of ourselves for “merely” having 4k and 60Hz, which in my experience, should be plenty already.

    1. There’s so much to graphics than just resolution, framerate, and settings level. I mean, regular TV has much better “graphics” even if they’re only running at 480p/24fps from a Camera Recording.

      I’d much prefer a 720p/30fps with Actual Photorealism, than the current 4K/120fps with Ultra Settings. But we’re getting there. Easiest way is to look at consoles progression: Atari, Sega, NES, SNES, GBA, N64, PS1, PSP, Dreamcast, PS2, GameCube, Wii, Xbox, X360, PS3, WiiU, Switch, XB1, PS4, PS4 Pro, Xbox One X, and lastly Current Gaming PCs.

  2. Run the numbers. You don’t get 16K without heavy compression. You can’t even run one 8K screen without compression. The best you are going to do for a PC, where compression would be a problem, will be a single 8K screen in 36bit HDR at 60Hz. Unless you drag out that second cable again.

    1. Not to mention that 16K is pointless practically speaking unless you’re talking wall-sized displays or perhaps ultra-realistic VR.

    2. Displayports DSC is not chroma subsampling, it does not degrade the image quality to a degree were it is visually noticeable. The first DP 1.4 DSC monitors for 4K 144Hz are launching soon.

      “First and foremost, Display Stream Compression support is now mandatory for DisplayPort 2.0 devices. Previously introduced as part of DisplayPort 1.4 – and not really hammered out entirely until a couple of years after that – DSC is the group’s standard for “visually lossless” image compression. Operating on small groups of pixels, DSC offers modest compression ratios of around 3:1, with the goal of compressing images just enough to save power and bandwidth without introducing visual artifacts and without adding significant latency.”

      https://www.anandtech.com/show/14590/vesa-announces-displayport-20-standard-bandwidth-for-8k-monitors-beyond

      You will not see the difference, DSC is designed for PC usage, compression is not a problem.

      1. The technical terms of note here are that it is lossless compression using color space and storing similar pixels together. The fakenews story is that “Using JPEG compression the change is not noticeable.” The correct statement is that Display Stream Compression is lossless compression of video signals.

Comments are closed.