The HDMI Forum is using CES — the annual showcase of all things home theater — to announce the new HDMI 2.2 specification. In a press release this morning, the trade association confirmed that the new spec will up total bandwidth significantly to a new high of 96Gbps. And yes, that means the introduction of an “Ultra96” HDMI cable that “enables all the HDMI 2.2 specification features.”

“Higher resolutions and refresh rates will be supported and more high-quality options will be provided,” the HDMI Forum said in its release. An example of an HDMI 2.2 cable (below) calls out some of those, including 4K at up to 480Hz, 8K at up to 240Hz, and 10K at 120Hz. Current HDMI cables can already pass 4K at 120Hz, so I doubt most people will feel any temptation to upgrade for years to come. And you’ll need content for any of these higher resolutions to be worthwhile, and there’s still a dearth of native 8K entertainment out there. 

But with many TVs now offering 4K at up to 144Hz, and as consumers gravitate towards larger screens, the HDMI Forum sees ample reason to keep pushing forward. 

There is at least a more helpful aspect of this spec for everyone: HDMI 2.2 includes a “Latency Indication Protocol (LIP) for improving audio and video synchronization, especially for multiple-hop system configurations such as those with an audio video receiver or soundbar.” In my experience, HDMI 2.1 and eARC have mostly resolved frustrating audio / video sync issues, but they can still pop up as a frustration depending on your setup. Apparently HDMI 2.2 will go further in keeping everything lined up and keeping this headache in the past.

Interestingly, the HDMI Forum is already anticipating tariff issues and has implemented an extensive certification program that includes anti-counterfeit labeling on packaging. You certainly can’t miss the Ultra96 badging.

HDMI 2.2 will be released in the first half of this year and be widely available “to all HDMI 2.x adopters.” Your TV and external devices will need to support the specification in order to unlock that new level of bandwidth, so we’re just starting down what’s inevitably going to be a long road.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 143 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Can someone force cable manufacturers to print the bandwidth or at least the version on the fucking cable already?!

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 60 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Half of them will print the highest bandwidth regardless of the actual cable's capabilities so that won't help.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The options are to hope the writing is accurate, or to change the connector to break cross-compatibility.

    Buy cables from reputable sources and return anything that doesn't do what it's advertised to do, I guess. I like having as few ports as possible! Haha

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Nothing stops them from putting the "new" connector on a shitty cable either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    They do but probably not in a way that you understand. Instead of the bandwidth which to be honest most people won't know what that means either, they use

    STANDARD HDMI CABLE

    STANDARD HDMI CABLE WITH ETHERNEiT

    HIGH SPEED HDMI CABLE

    HIGH SPEED HDMI CABLE WITH ETHERNET

    ULTRA HIGH SPEED HDMI CABLE

    Each one specifies the standard and is almost always printed on the cable. I can't think of any off the top of my head that wasn't labeled but I'm sure there are and if you don't see it printed on the cable then throw it out.

    You can read more about this naming convention here. https://www.cablematters.com/Blog/HDMI/HDMI-cable-types-the-ultimate-guide

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Why do that when you can just make the same cable you've been selling all along and change the description to "Full HD 1080p 4K 8K 16K 48GBPS 96GPS PlayStation 4 5 6 Switch 2 Xbox Series X S One 360 Male Female HDMI 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 Cable" on Amazon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 86 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    At this point we should just swing to 10 gbps sfp+ ports, it's faster, it's lower latency, it's upgradable to 100gbps, it travels over fiber, but most importantly, it is a network protocol and we can use it for our Internet.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Instead, they're trying to force everything to USB with DP Alt mode which has a ton of the same annoyances...but at least USB C is flippable I guess.

    HDMI 2.1 cables have 19 wires and USB 3.2 has 13 or 14 (can't remember) so they're really finicky and fragile. Fiber has 1 or 2 and is VERY rugged in comparison...you can literally tie a knot in a fiber cable and it'll still work.

    Plus with fiber, if your AVR blows up, it can't take the other equipment out with it since it's electrically isolated.

    Fiber is also cheap cheap cheap!

    Fiber is thin and easy to route.

    Fiber can ALSO be shortened, extended, etc. in the field.

    The only downside is the cost of the splicing tools (and the cleanliness required)

    And I guess SFP connectors are pretty gnarly. But if it was aimed at consumers, they could slap a nice rubberized coat on it...

    Man, I love fiber.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Fiber needs like an 8” minimum bend radius… I think that’s for just a single strand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Fiber has 1 or 2 and is VERY rugged in comparison...you can literally tie a knot in a fiber cable and it'll still work.

    Emm, not with glass fibers. My friend uses it between router and switch, and the one of the fiber breaks. So, traffic can be sent to router but nothing the other way around. He said he didn't even touch or put significant stress on the cable. Yet, it breaks in a weird way, and hard to troubleshot without proper equipment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (12 replies)
    [–] 44 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Make it work on Linux please

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    The hacker known as Linux has used HDMI to illegally steal movies. It will never be supported. You will never have HDMI 2.1, let alone 2.2

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Wait Linux still does not have 2.1 support yet? Hasn't that been around for years at this point? What's been holding it back?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    What's the real world application of 98Gbps? Based on a quick Google search, 8K doesn't even hit 10Gbps at 480fps.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That’s probably compressed, raw sounds impossible to do those

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Imagine how large those 10k resolution games are gonna be.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 16 points 2 years ago

    DisplayPort better

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Can we just completely drop HDCP so I can make things work together without having to burn incense and make a sacrifice to the Tech gods?!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    HDMI 2.2 will be released in the first half of this year and be widely available “to all HDMI 2.x adopters.” Your TV and external devices will need to support the specification

    Will this solve eARC sync issues on existing devices that support 2.1? Like I could just get a new cable and it would work?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Let me know when we have cables that can hit 1000Hz at 8K, so I can finally own a blur-free OLED. Until then, I'm perfectly content with 4K120.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Perfectly content with 4K120

    Come on. You say it like it's a compromise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Can anyone ELI5 how we are able to release new standards all the time? Are there technological advances that allow more bandwidth? If not, why not start with higher bandwidth?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Going for higher bandwidth tends to increase signal interference. There are various ways to deal with that, most of which cost money. For example, most high speed data cables use twisted pairs that help cancel out interference. To go faster, the twists need to be tighter, and that's more expensive to make.

    If there is no customer demand for those use cases, then there's no reason to force a more expensive cable, connector, or signalling electronics just so you can meet specs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I'm picturing cables in my head like the ones they deploy on seabeds to accommodate this 😄

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›