# HDMI Forum Releases Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification



## Cristian_25H (Sep 4, 2013)

HDMI Forum, Inc., a non-profit, mutual benefit corporation, today announced the release of Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification. This latest HDMI Specification, the first to be developed by the HDMI Forum, offers a significant increase in bandwidth (up to 18 Gbps) to support new features such as 4K@50/60 (2160p), which is 4 times the clarity of 1080p/60 video resolution; 32 audio channels; as well as dynamic auto lip-sync and extensions to CEC. The complete Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification is available to Adopters on the HDMI Adopter Extranet. HDMI Licensing, LLC will host a press conference to discuss the new features of the HDMI 2.0 Specification at IFA 2013 in Berlin on Friday, September 6 at 12:00pm in the TecWatch Forum area of Hall 11.1.

Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification, which is backward compatible with earlier versions of the Specification, was developed by the HDMI Forum's Technical Working Group whose members represent some of the world's leading manufacturers of consumer electronics, personal computers, mobile devices, cables and components. The HDMI Forum currently has a membership of 88 companies.



 



"The introduction of the HDMI 2.0 Specification represents a major milestone for the HDMI Forum," said Robert Blanchard of Sony Corporation, president of the HDMI Forum. "Our members collaborated closely to take the highly successful HDMI Specification to the next level by expanding audio and video features for consumer electronics applications."

The HDMI Forum has chosen HDMI Licensing, LLC to be the Agent to license Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification. In this role, HDMI Licensing, LLC will provide marketing, promotional, licensing and administrative services, as well as education on the benefits of the HDMI Specification to adopters, retailers, and consumers.

"We are pleased to continue our work in supporting the HDMI Adopter base as well as the entire HDMI ecosystem," said Steve Venuti, president of HDMI Licensing, LLC. "Adopters can now continue to develop new product functionality over the HDMI interface as well as look to HDMI Licensing, LLC as their single contact for all their licensing and administrative needs."

Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification does not define new cables or new connectors. Current High Speed cables (category 2 cables) are capable of carrying the increased bandwidth.

The HDMI 2.0 Compliance Test Specification (CTS) is expected to be released before the end of 2013.

For more information about Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification please visit: www.hdmi.org.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Disruptor4 (Sep 4, 2013)

No mention of 120hz... ?


----------



## xaira (Sep 4, 2013)

only 32 audio channels? what is this, the stone age[/sarcasm]


----------



## jigar2speed (Sep 4, 2013)

Disruptor4 said:


> No mention of 120hz... ?



Cause it's not support... May be dual channel does it.


----------



## Disruptor4 (Sep 4, 2013)

jigar2speed said:


> Cause it's not support... May be dual channel does it.



Yeah exactly my point... I would've liked to see some form of support for more in v2.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 4, 2013)

damnit, still stuck at 60Hz/FPS?


just because TV broadcasts only do that, doesnt mean the damn TV inputs shouldnt when we see screens advertised as '400hz' all the damn time.


----------



## m1dg3t (Sep 4, 2013)

HDMI IS GARBAGE!

Get off the bandwagon people.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 4, 2013)

m1dg3t said:


> HDMI IS GARBAGE!
> 
> Get off the bandwagon people.



we cant all be the minority using uncommon formats midget, because then everyone would be you, and you'd have no one to argue with.


----------



## m1dg3t (Sep 4, 2013)

Mussels said:


> we cant all be the minority using uncommon formats midget, because then everyone would be you, and you'd have no one to argue with.



What are you on about? I don't argue with anyone 

I use optical out, on BOTH my PCs, to an AVR.

HDMI is a scam. It exists only for the purpose of HDCP.

TruStory.


----------



## EthanDW (Sep 4, 2013)

m1dg3t said:


> HDMI IS GARBAGE!
> 
> Get off the bandwagon people.


It's not garbage.
It's heading in the right direction.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 4, 2013)

m1dg3t said:


> What are you on about? I don't argue with anyone
> 
> I use optical out, on BOTH my PCs, to an AVR.
> 
> ...



yes yes, go enjoy your compressed audio elsewhere. not relevant to this thread.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Sep 4, 2013)

what's the point of having a TV that can do 400hz if the cable delivering the content to said TV can only do 60hz? is there some sort of processing done by the TV ?


----------



## m1dg3t (Sep 4, 2013)

Mussels said:


> yes yes, go enjoy your compressed audio elsewhere. not relevant to this thread.



And just WTF do you think HDMI is? 

All digital is compressed. You want uncompressed, go analogue.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Sep 4, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> what's the point of having a TV that can do 400hz if the cable delivering the content to said TV can only do 60hz? is there some sort of processing done by the TV ?



Actually yes. They use some kind of frame delay to smooth the fps and stuff. While this is excellent for live action, like sports, is a complete disaster for movies or tv shows...


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 4, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> what's the point of having a TV that can do 400hz if the cable delivering the content to said TV can only do 60hz? is there some sort of processing done by the TV ?



Yes, most TVs make up the extra frames to fill the space.

There is a good article on it here: http://hdguru.com/beware-of-phony-lcd-hdtv-refresh-rates/

Though I'd also like to point out that HDMI stopped doing hard limits on resolution and refresh rate with version 1.4(I think, maybe 1.3).  They basically changed the limit to whatever the bandwidth could handle, and gave recommended limits.

That being said, I believe HDMI 2.0 could do 120Hz @1080p, and I think I've seen someone doing 120Hz@720p using HDMI 1.4.

Edit: Found the video of Linus doing 120Hz@720p using HDMI 
http://youtu.be/_wMBS_bfkFk?t=3m33s


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Sep 4, 2013)

What the hell is "to support new features such as 4K@50/60 (2160p)."

Fifty? Does anyone want less than 60 frames?  Shame no 120.


----------



## Static~Charge (Sep 4, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> What the hell is "to support new features such as 4K@50/60 (2160p)."
> 
> Fifty? Does anyone want less than 60 frames?  Shame no 120.



50fps is PAL; 60fps is NTSC.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Sep 4, 2013)

*No support for 4K 48fps 3D*

I'm disappointed to see no support for 2160p 48fps 3D.  It would have only required 60% more bandwidth.  I can't see why they couldn't include 2160p/48/3D and then support every theatrical display standard available.  This means that it will be another 5-10 years before another HDMI bandwidth upgrade is produced and films like The Hobbit can be watched in their original format.  Of course, some competing interconnect could come about (possibly Displayport), but I don't see anything overtaking the giant that is HDMI.



m1dg3t said:


> And just WTF do you think HDMI is?
> 
> All digital is compressed. You want uncompressed, go analogue.



Of course all digital data is compressed; it would make no sense not to.  Mussels was referring to _lossy_ compression, which are the only multichannel formats that TOSLINK supports.  HDMI supports losslessly compressed multi channel audio formats.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Sep 4, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> I'm disappointed to see no support for 2160p 48fps 3D.  It would have only required 60% more bandwidth.  I can't see why they couldn't include 2160p/48/3D and then support every display standard available.  This means that it will be another 5-10 years before another HDMI bandwidth upgrade is produced and films like The Hobbit can be watched in their original format.  Of course, some competing interconnect could come about (possibly Displayport), but I don't see anything overtaking the giant that is HDMI.
> .



they can't do that because they do not have the technology yet. at least not at a cost that is feasible.


----------



## AsRock (Sep 4, 2013)

Screw 120Htz i wanted 128 channels haha.


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 4, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> I'm disappointed to see no support for 2160p 48fps 3D. It would have only required 60% more bandwidth. I can't see why they couldn't include 2160p/48/3D and then support every theatrical display standard available. This means that it will be another 5-10 years before another HDMI bandwidth upgrade is produced and films like The Hobbit can be watched in their original format. Of course, some competing interconnect could come about (possibly Displayport), but I don't see anything overtaking the giant that is HDMI.



Again, HDMI does not have set resolution limits.  Since this supports 2160p@60Hz it will support anything below that, including 2160p@48Hz.  As long as both devices on either end of the connection support the resolution and refresh rate HDMI 2.0 will support it.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Sep 4, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Again, HDMI does not have set resolution limits.  Since this supports 2160p@60Hz it will support anything below that, including 2160p@48Hz.  As long as both devices on either end of the connection support the resolution and refresh rate HDMI 2.0 will support it.



Please re-read my original post.  2160p/48/3D needs 60% more bandwidth than 2160p/60/2D, which is what the standard supports.  They probably could support it if they were willing to sacrifice legacy cable compatibility.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 5, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> What the hell is "to support new features such as 4K@50/60 (2160p)."
> 
> Fifty? Does anyone want less than 60 frames?  Shame no 120.



some countries run their power at 50Hz, (PAL) and therefore their TV signals work at 50 as well. its more of a compatibility setting, since most HD stuff is at 60.


----------



## 1c3d0g (Sep 5, 2013)

The Von Matrices said:


> Please re-read my original post.  2160p/48/3D needs 60% more bandwidth than 2160p/60/2D, which is what the standard supports.  They probably could support it if they were willing to sacrifice legacy cable compatibility.



Nobody gives a shit about 3D. If you wanted 120Hz support, I'd be with you all the way, but 3D is just a really lousy gimmick. :shadedshu


----------



## The Von Matrices (Sep 5, 2013)

1c3d0g said:


> Nobody gives a shit about 3D. If you wanted 120Hz support, I'd be with you all the way, but 3D is just a really lousy gimmick. :shadedshu



I rather like watching 3D content at home; there just isn't enough of it.  I acknowledge that people like me are not in the majority, but to say that "Nobody gives a shit about 3D" is just closed-minded.  Hollywood wouldn't be producing 3D blockbusters if they weren't extremely profitable, which means that there are a lot of people who are willing to pay extra to see 3D content.

If you're expecting to see 120Hz support added to HDMI, keep dreaming.  HDMI is primarily intended as a home video display standard, not a computer display standard.  There is no way that 120Hz support will be added to HDMI before video content is available.  If you assume people don't want 3D content, imagine how few will want 120Hz content.  There are masses of people who protest anything above 24Hz for films.  I support 120Hz on computer monitors, but HDMI is not intended for that use.  This is the reason why I am unhappy that 2160p/48fps/3D is not supported, because there _are_ films currently using this standard.


----------

