HDMI 2.0 officially announced

"With a bandwidth capacity of up to 18Gbps, it has enough room to carry 3,840 x 2,160 resolution video at up to 60fps. It also has support for up to 32 audio channels, "dynamic auto lipsync" and additional CEC extensions. "

The connector itself is unchanged, ... The cables won't change either, as the group claims

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
SephirothX212266d ago

Good. My PC will put this to use!

2pacalypsenow2266d ago

If you have a 4k monitor it will

Coach_McGuirk2266d ago

or those wanting 1080p at 120hz over hdmi

UltimateMaster2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

"or those wanting 1080p at 120hz over hdmi"

You already have that with HDMI 1.4

Really, it's to get a faster frequency.

Right now, they are unable to get Active 3D (Not Passive 3D) on a 4K HD TV because there's not enough Bandwidth with the current HDMI, not even with the fastest ones.

And with 8K or 120fps TVs on the Way in the future, you need a better cable.

2pacalypsenow2265d ago

I think DVI does 120hz doesn't it?

SilentNegotiator2265d ago

Doesn't HDMI 1.whatever already support 4K?

ziggurcat2265d ago

@ silent:

i believe 1.4 supports 4K...

AndrewLB2265d ago

Zig- HDMI 1.4, 1.4a, and 1.4b can do 4K×2K i.e. 3840 × 2160p at 30fps maximum. To do 60fps you'd need 2.0.

Taiyed80- HDMI 1.4b can already do 3D 1080p video at 120 Hz

mewhy322265d ago

it's about time that this standard got established. I'd like to see 1080p at 120hz.

TehDiTH2265d ago

Why would anyone use HDMI on a PC and not use DVI?

Baka-akaB2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

Why should we use DVI over hdmi1 if not going above 1080p? It's the same , bare some issues on ports that would be the monitor's own fault .

And hdmi carry audio , for those that care and use Screens with speakers .

Kleptic2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

^ pc has an APU and mobo with HDMI 1.4 out...My home theater receiver has an HDMI front port...and i leave a standard PC power cord hanging under the entertainment office monitor doesn't have speakers, but has various audio out ports hooked up to the sound system. My desktop is only ever hooked up by 2 cables...

moving my desktop from my office to my living room takes about 5 minutes, and only involves 2 cables (power and hdmi) IPS office monitor is 1080p, and my HDTV is i could use dvi (for both, actually), but HDMI is a lot easier in the plug and play nature and not having to mess with additional audio least for the time being.

in my case...i have no need for additional anything, as the resolutions i do anything at are the same between both displays...and hdmi is currently the easiest and fastest way to handle it...

only thing being i'll be getting a high end discrete gpu for BF4 in early october...which will have hdmi, but i'm not exactly sure how the audio will work with that...can a gpu route sound too? i've actually never looked into it...but either way, my mobo has optical out too, so it'll just be one extra cable...

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 2265d ago
malokevi2266d ago

HDMI2 + 4K TV + XB1 + PS4 + Kick @$$ speaker setup = (pure bliss / awesome) * amazing

2266d ago
torchic2266d ago

am I the only person who just doesn't give an egg about the Oculus Rift? I was waaaay more interested in Illumroom.

and, what is this article doing on n4g?

malokevi2266d ago

Oculus Rift is cool, and I would love to give it a try, but I feel like the tech isn't quite there yet, from what I've read. Plus I don't have a desktop PC, so I wouldn't have any use for it.

My happy place is in front of a big TV, surrounded by tower speakers, with controllers, consoles, and games littered all over the place. Also, more than a few smoking receptacles.

gaffyh2265d ago

@torchic - illumiroom is just a projector, with the edges showing selected parts of the projection. It only works in certain light conditions, needs a bigger than average room, and probably costs a bomb. Oculus Rift is much cheaper (going by prototypes) and versatile.

Conzul2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

Occulus Rift is impressive tech, but it's the apex of the anti-social one else can see what you're seeing. Gone would be the "hotseat" moments (as split-screen used to be called), gone also would be all other non-networked MP experiences.

I will never buy into such VR. Too exclusive of other people who want to watch or just chill with you while you pop a few melons.

badboy7762265d ago

These Articles Never include the Price!

IaMs122265d ago


That maybe true but you don't have to use Occulus Rift all the time. If you know people want to watch or will be watching just don't put it on...

Im personally excited for it for the single-player experience aspect, should be fun.

Nafon2265d ago

as long as you are going big, throw in a ridiculously powerful PC to that setup.

The Great Melon2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )


Your thinking way too small. What prevents you from seeing your friends in the virtual world. Unlike standard games, VR really allows you to trick your brain to believe as if you are actually there. The people you see in VR will be convincingly real given that their movement will tie directly into the game. In the end all that separates VR from real life are photons, sound waves, and a little tactile feedback.

cunnilumpkin2265d ago

just like there is ZERO reason or need for a 1080p tv for the ps3 or 360 since 99% of the games are all 720p or less (diablo 3 is 576p on ps3 and 360....lulz)

there is ZERO reason for any tv higher than 1080p for ps4 xbox1

99% of the games will be 1080p or less (many of them will be MUCH LESS than 1080p)

honestly you would be fine with 720p again next gen, most AAA ps4 and xbox1 games will NOT even be native 1080p

GamingTruth2265d ago


wouldnt be hilarious to find out if late in the generation that the ps4 and xbox 1 were both upgradeable i would love to see how empty these sites would be of pc nerds and fanboys of pc then

Jazz41082265d ago

Since were of topic did anyone see microsoft purchased Nokia yesterday for 8 billiion? On topic this will be nice for the new 4 k tvs.

Baka-akaB2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

"just like there is ZERO reason or need for a 1080p tv for the ps3 or 360 since 99% of the games are all 720p or less (diablo 3 is 576p on ps3 and 360....lulz) "

There are big reasons to get one actually ... that would be the tv's quality itself . I wouldnt trust many 720p only screens to be as good for many things (like depth of black and colors , or refresh rate and input lag) to be better than some models at 1080p and soon above ..

Besides that 1% of games might be someone's favorite and good enough .

Finally , do you even know many people that solely game and can't use a 1080p screen for videos ?

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 2265d ago
ironfist922265d ago

What the heck is Ultra HDTV?

ATi_Elite2265d ago


$75 HDMI 2.0 cable to connect to a $10000 Monitor


Seriously though 4K monitors are dropping in price but it's gonna be a year before they are mass production affordable.

wtopez2265d ago

Yup! Just a quick change to the .ini file and you're off. (decent upgrade required to the GPU though).

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2265d ago
GiantEnemyCrab2266d ago

Do the new consoles support this format?

yewles12266d ago

No, only 1.4a, no 4K/60 here...

Neixus2266d ago

This isn't compatible,i believe.
But the cable included in both ps4 and xbone supports 4k, only for videos and pictures though.

GiantEnemyCrab2266d ago

Thanks for the info. I didn't figure games would be pushing the 4K benchmark anytime soon on consoles.

DOMination-2265d ago

X1 will support 4k gaming, it's been confirmed many times (whether there will be any is another matter)

Stsonic2265d ago

A top end PC can hardly support 4k right now so good luck with that.

kneon2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

You won't be getting 4K games without HDMI 2.0 as 1.4 is limited to 24fps. That's too low for the majority of games.

But I don't recall either Microsoft or Sony saying what version of HDMI they are using. If I recall correctly the PS3 shipped only a few months after 1.3 as finalized so we may seem the same situation again.

Conzul2265d ago Show
AbortMission2265d ago

You just went full r3tard, never go full r3tard Lol

Dasteru2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

No, it hasn't.

It has been confirmed that the X1 (aswell as the PS4) will support 4k resolution output, there has never been any official mention of it being for gaming though. So far it is only for movies/TV etc.

The XB1 wouldn't be able to play anything more than indies at that res and even then, the current HDMI 1.4 standard only supports [email protected], no higher.

Rhaigun2265d ago

X1 can barely do 1080p at 60fps. How in the world would you expect it to do 4k?

wtopez2265d ago


I wish you would say such rubbish to Kingnichedrix in person and not behind a k/b and mouse. The punch to the face you would receive would make you a better person from that point on.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2265d ago
+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2265d ago
AceBlazer132266d ago

o3o so.... what does this mean.

modesign2266d ago

a new HDMI cord that will be more expensive.

mushroomwig2266d ago

Not by much, it's still just a digital signal at the end of the day. You'd be an idiot if you paid more than £5 for one.


If I understood this right, the cord itself won't change, the ports on hardware will in case they support HDMI 2.0.

GameSpawn2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

Of course. Just because of this you'll be assured $200 Monster HDMI 2.0 cables that are just re-branded $15 made in China HDMI 2.0 cables.

The savvy shopper will avoid the bloated cables as they always have. There is NO reason for any reasonable length (3ft-10ft) of HDMI 1.3, 1.4, or 2.0 cables to cost more than $20-25 for a quality cable.

I can understand $100+ on cables over 50ft as the gauge of the wire MUST get bigger (smaller number) to have the ability to carry the signal over a longer distance; thicker wires + longer wires = more metal (copper in this case) = more money (copper ain't cheap -- it's used in EVERYTHING; high demand high price).

Mario182266d ago

Featured on PS5 and XBox One 2

Supports up to 32 speakers. Okay who has 32 speakers in their house? I am being serious

Watch people connect it to their 20" tv screens and DVD player and rejoice about how much better it is than HDMI 1

SatanSki2266d ago

Yes, lets stop the progress

admiralvic2266d ago

"Supports up to 32 speakers. Okay who has 32 speakers in their house? I am being serious "

Who doesn't have 32 speakers?!

Anyway. A lot of these features are pointless to most people, but they still give you the option down the road or allow you more freedom than before. Like my boss has 9 speakers in his celling (they go to the Kitchen and are designed so you can stand anywhere and hear things perfecting), 2 large speakers next to the TV and a subwoofer. So this is 11 / 12 out of the possible 32. I am sure there are people with bigger houses, crazier dreams and more than enough money to make them work.

Same sort of logic with Xbox One supporting 8 controllers. Who is going to use this feature? Maybe 0.001% of all owners, but no sense in telling them no. Especially when people had an uproar about the Wii U only supporting 1 tablet (now it supports 2 I believe).

cell9892266d ago

I only have 7 and 2 sub woofers, enough for now

Campy da Camper2265d ago

Wait, the WiiU supports 2 tablets now?????

Zancruz2265d ago

@cell989 Nice, Im rocking 9 speakers and 2 subwoofers... Its never enough for me, i want to add 2 more Subs! :)

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2265d ago
SniperControl2266d ago (Edited 2266d ago )

THX set-ups in cinemas have over 40 speakers all around the room, even home THX set-ups can come with over 20 speaker channels.
However you are looking around £10000 for just the amp and around the same for top end speakers. Check this out.

This was setup by a sound engineer and cost $6 mil.

Deceiver_Of_The_Gods2265d ago

I agree with almost everything you say guys but...XBox One...2? Dont you mean XBox Two?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2265d ago