Monday, September 15th 2014

VESA Releases DisplayPort 1.3 Standard, 4K at 120 Hz

The Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) announced the release of the DisplayPort 1.3 audio / video (A/V) standard. An update to the widely used DisplayPort 1.2a standard, this latest version increases the maximum link bandwidth to 32.4 Gbps, with each of four lanes running at a link rate of 8.1 Gbps/lane-a 50% increase from the previous version of the DisplayPort standard. Allowing for transport overhead, DisplayPort's 32.4 Gbps combined link rate delivers 25.92 Gbps of uncompressed video data.

The increased bandwidth enables higher resolution monitors, including recently announced 5K monitors (with pixel resolutions of 5120 x 2880) using a single DisplayPort cable without the use of compression. It will also enable higher resolutions when driving multiple monitors through a single connection using DisplayPort's Multi-Stream feature, such as the use of two 4K UHD monitors, each with a pixel resolution of 3840 x 2160, when using VESA Coordinated Video Timing.
DisplayPort 1.3 continues to support video conversion to VGA, DVI and HDMI. DisplayPort 1.3 adds support for HDCP 2.2 and HDMI 2.0 with CEC (Consumer Electronics Control), which enhances DisplayPort's utility for television applications, including 4K video with copy protection. The new standard adds support for the 4:2:0 pixel structure, a video format commonly used on consumer digital television interfaces, which enables support for future 8K x 4K displays.

DisplayPort 1.3 also enhances DisplayPort's value for multi-function interfaces that combine data transport, A/V transport and other capabilities on a single cable. It further refines protocols that enable DisplayPort to share a single cable with other data types. With its higher 8.1 Gbps per-lane link rate, DisplayPort 1.3 can support a single UHD monitor with 60Hz refresh and 24-bit color over two lanes, while assigning the remaining two lanes to increase capacity for alternate data types, such as SuperSpeed USB data, as allowed in DockPort. DisplayPort is the A/V transport standard used by DockPort, Thunderbolt and other wired and wireless multi-function interface standards.

"While becoming a mainstream video standard, DisplayPort continues to be at the cutting edge of A/V transport," said VESA Board of Directors Chair Alan Kobayashi, Fellow & Executive R&D Management for DisplayPort Group at MegaChips Technology America. "These new enhancements to DisplayPort will facilitate both higher resolution displays, as well as easier integration of DisplayPort into multi-protocol data transports, which will satisfy consumer's desire for simplicity and ease-of-use."

The DisplayPort standard is offered to VESA members without any license fee.
Add your own comment

13 Comments on VESA Releases DisplayPort 1.3 Standard, 4K at 120 Hz

#1
ZoneDymo
so could this also push 4k at 120hz? and what can it push 5k at?
Posted on Reply
#2
W1zzard
3840 x 2160 x 3 (bytes per pixel) x 144 (Hz) x 8 (bits per byte) = 28,665,446,400 Gbit/s

so short a few gbit/s, 144 Hz might be possible with some encoding scheme that doesn't use 24 bits per pixel

3840 x 2160 x 3 (bytes per pixel) x 120 (Hz) x 8 (bits per byte) = 23,887,872,000 Gbit/s

120 Hz is fine.

5120 x 2880 x 3 (bytes per pixel) x 8 (bits per byte) = 353,894,400 Mbit per frame, so roughly 73 FPS at 5K
Posted on Reply
#3
thekaidis
ZoneDymo said:
so could this also push 4k at 120hz? and what can it push 5k at?
(3840*2160*120)/(5120*2880) = 67.5Hz
Posted on Reply
#4
stren
thekaidis said:
(3840*2160*120)/(5120*2880) = 67.5Hz
wizz used 2280 not 2880 which is why his math is wrong - so 73.2 would be the max. Your 67.5 assumes 4K at 120 is using full bw which its not
Posted on Reply
#5
heydan83
And what about FreeSync?, no words of that...
Posted on Reply
#6
W1zzard
stren said:
wizz used 2280 not 2880 which is why his math is wrong - so 73.2 would be the max. Your 67.5 assumes 4K at 120 is using full bw which its not
fixed my post, thanks
Posted on Reply
#7
LAN_deRf_HA
So is 5k pushing to be the 1080p of UHD? Thought that was supposed to be 8k.

And is this really the best bandwidth they could manage or do they just relish in introducing new versions? This, SATA, HDMI, always seem to do the bare minimum.
Posted on Reply
#8
MikeMurphy
Good, but going back to 24-bit colour seems old school.

5k will always be an unusual resolution.
Posted on Reply
#9
Prima.Vera
MikeMurphy said:
Good, but going back to 24-bit colour kinda sucks.
I also need to better understand what is the difference between 24 and 32 bits. I was sure that 32bit is actually 24bit+8bit alpha channel, but not sure how does this translates into graphics quality...
Posted on Reply
#10
Steevo
MikeMurphy said:
Good, but going back to 24-bit colour seems old school.

5k will always be an unusual resolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_depth

Dell is making a 5K, we need standards to catch up to where we can go before the mass market will buy into any new standards.
Posted on Reply
#11
Ronald
heydan83 said:
And what about FreeSync?, no words of that...
I am still waiting for Multi-Stream Transport in monitors... :mad:
Posted on Reply
#12
Relayer
heydan83 said:
And what about FreeSync?, no words of that...
I'm curious too. Is "AdaptiveSync" still optional for 1.3, like it is for 1.2a?
Posted on Reply
#13
W1zzard
MikeMurphy said:
Good, but going back to 24-bit colour seems old school.
the 32-bit you are thinking about are 8 bit each for red, green, blue and transparency. hardware access to a 32 bit block is very fast,

to access groups of 24 bits you'd have to perform a lot of work for each pixel on the cpu to extract the right bits, and sometimes do two memory transfers just to get one pixel (when it sits across the boundary of a 64-bit memory address). so for performance reasons, usually, a 24 bit graphics pixel still uses 32 bits of memory

obviously the monitor doesn't need transparency, so 24 bit over the wire is enough. internally i'd expect monitors to use 32-bits for each pixel again, just because it's so much faster and easier to access
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment