• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

gothi

Prophet of Truth
Member
Jun 23, 2020
4,433
I'd be surprised if DF is wrong but then again we don't know what they're testing and whether it's pushing the limit of the standard.
I'm not actually sure what they're going to test with tbh. What games do we have available today on PS5 that run at 4K/120 with HDR? I initially thought about Dirt 5 but that runs as 1440p in 120 mode so that's out.
 

EvilBoris

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest
Verified
Oct 29, 2017
16,680
Honestly , I'd be super surprised if it was not a 2.1 rated cable.
It would cause Sony loads of customer support issues for no reason.
The console literally has 8K printed on the Box and it would be very scummy to do that then not have hardware inside capable of delivering that.
 

EvilBoris

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest
Verified
Oct 29, 2017
16,680
I'm not actually sure what they're going to test with tbh. What games do we have available today on PS5 that run at 4K/120 with HDR? I initially thought about Dirt 5 but that runs as 1440p in 120 mode so that's out.

It internally renders at 1440p, but the console will be outputting 4K 120hz

Just like the PS4 Pro outs 4K 60hz for TLOU2 which is 1440p 30fps.

The PS5 cannot output 1440p to a display
 

gothi

Prophet of Truth
Member
Jun 23, 2020
4,433
Honestly , I'd be super surprised if it was not a 2.1 rated cable.
It would cause Sony loads of customer support issues for no reason.
The console literally has 8K printed on the Box and it would be very scummy to do that then not have hardware inside capable of delivering that.
You're well placed to answer this EvilBoris, how many cables have you come across that are labelled as being 2.0b spec but actually support the full bandwidth of 2.1 with no issue? If this mislabelling is a common thing in the HDMI cable world then perhaps we have our answer?
 
Last edited:

Yankee Ruin X

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,684
I forget...HDMI 2.1 is for 4K up to 120hz. HDMI 2.0 can do 4K 60hz max?
Also depends what level of HDR too, some 4k/60 HDR settings needs a higher bandwidth than the typical HDMI 2.0 18Gbps cables are rated for. If you get a 2.1 cable that should be rated for 48Gbps so should have no issues at 4k/60 with any HDR settings you can throw at it.
 

Nameless

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,347
Giant Bomb showed the HDMI cables during their unboxing, and they were noticeably thicker than standard 18gbps cables, so yes.

Bought a couple of 6ft 2.1s several weeks back just in case 3ft isn't enough to place these big bois. Which is good because the 4K Blu Ray Player I bought doesn't come with one, somehow.
 

SixelAlexiS

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,723
Italy
Because most people didn't have HDMI TVs.

We have confirmation that it's HDMI 2.1already, including in this thread.

If worst comes to worst and it's not. I can survive on native 4k 60Hz for a few days while I wait for a cable.
And now most people doesn't have TVs with HDMI 2.1 support... so the cable can totally be a mere 2.0.

And no, we don't have a real confirmation yet.
 

2Blackcats

Member
Oct 26, 2017
16,057
And now most people doesn't have TVs with HDMI 2.1 support... so the cable can totally be a mere 2.0.

And no, we don't have a real confirmation yet.

There's a pretty big difference between giving out a HDMI cable instead of composite that not everybody can use and giving out a HDMI 2.1 cable that everyone can use regardless of whether they need that spec.
 

gothi

Prophet of Truth
Member
Jun 23, 2020
4,433
Giant Bomb showed the HDMI cables during their unboxing, and they were noticeably thicker than standard 18gbps cables, so yes.

Bought a couple of 6ft 2.1s several weeks back just in case 3ft isn't enough to place these big bois. Which is good because the 4K Blu Ray Player I bought doesn't come with one, somehow.
That would definitely support the theory that they're capable of higher speeds, not obvious why they wouldn't label then as such then?
 
Dec 21, 2017
5,122
Because most people didn't have HDMI TVs.

We have confirmation that it's HDMI 2.1already, including in this thread.

If worst comes to worst and it's not. I can survive on native 4k 60Hz for a few days while I wait for a cable.

Most people dont have HDMI 2.1 compatible displays either, so I'm not sure how that's a relevant statement.

Confirmation? Great. Good guy Sony!

Yeah, no big deal.
 

Nostradamus

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,280
Most people dont have HDMI 2.1 compatible displays either, so I'm not sure how that's a relevant statement.

Confirmation? Great. Good guy Sony!

Yeah, no big deal.
Just because it currently concerns a tiny fraction of people, it doesn't mean it's ok for Sony to advertise functionality that's not supported right out of the box. It's a similar argument to people that are hostile towards120fps support even as an option.
It's not a huge deal of course but it's good to have for those that already have 120Hz TVs.
 
Dec 21, 2017
5,122
Just because it currently concerns a tiny fraction of people, it doesn't mean it's ok for Sony to advertise functionality that's not supported right out of the box. It's a similar argument to people that are hostile towards120fps support even as an option.
It's not a huge deal of course but it's good to have for those that already have 120Hz TVs.
They literally advertised HD with the PS3 and then shipped it without cables capable of that. There is a precedent.
 

disco_potato

Member
Nov 16, 2017
3,145
Yes I know but the previous cable I was using was also a 10M Fiber Optic HDMI 2.0 cable rated to 18gbps and it kept failing. Admittedly it was a cheaper but highly rated one off Amazon (and certified according to the ad), cost me £55 so not dirt cheap. It claimed it could handle 18gbps but after doing some digging seems these cheaper cables often can't do 18gbps and can often only do around 15-16gbps. Obviously this issue only becomes apparent when you have the hardware to actually push the bandwidth in these cables.

4k/60 at 4:2:2 will use 17.82Gbps and at 4:4:4 will use 20.05Gbps for HDR10/HLG and 24.06Gbps for DV. So if you have a cheaper cable until you actually start running 4k/60 at 4:2:2 with HDR you won't know if you have an issue with a 18Gbps cable. If it can only push 15-16Gbps of it's advertised speed then that's when you start losing signal on your screen which is what happened to me.

Edit - For the record I have always been a fan of buying cheap HDMI cables and this was the first time when that has bit me on the ass.

docs.google.com

HDMI Data Rates for 4K HDR Formats

Sheet1 HDMI data rates for 4K HDR formats Resolution,Frame rate,Chroma Subsampling,Bit Depth per channel,HDR formats,HDMI Data Rate,Required link speed,HDBaseT compatible Source 3840x2160p UHD,23.98, 24, 25, 29.97, 30,4:2:0^,8,none,8.91Gbps,9.0Gbps,Yes 10,HDR-10 & HLG 12,Dolby Vision 4:2:2,8,non...
Ah, so according to that table, it's not that the cable is cheap/faulty, it's that you're trying to output data that's not supported by 2.0 spec?
 

disco_potato

Member
Nov 16, 2017
3,145
I'm not actually sure what they're going to test with tbh. What games do we have available today on PS5 that run at 4K/120 with HDR? I initially thought about Dirt 5 but that runs as 1440p in 120 mode so that's out.
If they're testing the cable itself, they don't need the ps5 to do it.

I forget...HDMI 2.1 is for 4K up to 120hz. HDMI 2.0 can do 4K 60hz max?
It's not an official res supported by the 2.0 spec but you can do 4k120 with 8bit, 4:2:0. Only bring it up because ps4 pro uses 4:2:0 with 4k and tvs that lack hdr support, if not mistaken. Could maybe see ps5 reverting down to that to deal with it if the cable is indeed not 48gbps rated.
 

Yankee Ruin X

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,684
Ah, so according to that table, it's not that the cable is cheap/faulty, it's that you're trying to output data that's not supported by 2.0 spec?
No I was trying to output 4/60 4:2:2 with HDR-10 which should have a bandwidth of 17.82Gbps so a certified 18Gbps HDMI 2.0 cable should be able to do it but the first cable I got couldn't handle it suggesting that it actually had a lower max bandwidth than the advertised 18Gbps. I bought a new one, still HDMI 2.0 but this one is certified to 24GBps and should now be able to handle pretty much all 4k/60 HDR formats including 4:4:4 HDR-10 and maybe just squeak through it with Dolby Vision. So far had no issues running 4k/60 content through it unlike the previous cable I had.
 

Transistor

Vodka martini, dirty, with Tito's please
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
37,127
Washington, D.C.

gothi

Prophet of Truth
Member
Jun 23, 2020
4,433
I really don't know why people were doubting that an HDMI 2.1 device would come with an HDMI 2.1 cable
Because the cable is literally labelled as a 2.0b cable not 2.1

If you saw a picture of a USB cable that was marked as a USB2 cable, why wouldn't you ask questions when told it was actually a USB3 cable? The HDMI spec listed on the cable does not match up to what we're told it is, you don't find that the slightest bit odd and worthy of asking "what's going on here?".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.