HDMI 2.2 specs announced.

Better than expected, HDMI2.2 is announced with 96Gbps bandwidth and new cable certification

HDMI2.2 supports up to 4k 320hz at 10bit RGB 4:4:4 with HDR. It can also
extend to 4k 480hz with DSC enabled.

HDMI 2.2 also contains support for a new audio sync protocol that aims to eliminate audio syncing issues for home theatre systems
 
Yeay, now all I need are new supported screens, new gpus, new Amp , 5 new hdmi cables & a supported KVM. Cant see much change from 10k :mad:

All joking aside, Its great that the cables standards are finally catching up with what's needed, however it will likely be years for it to filter through to devices to enable a compatible setup.

I see a new display port standard has also been announced today DP 2.1b - however it max's out at 80Gbps active 3m max length. Which is less than the new hdmi standard, which is supprising, I'd have hoped a new display port to be able to really push things and allow high fps, high res, and high pallet. Maybe next decade....
 
Good to see the sync issues are being improved. Definitely a quality of life improvement that’s needed. Depending on source, I have various different audio delays to program into my amp.

Someone smarter may know this - with cables at 96gbps, why are we using copper instead of something like a new fibre optic standard? Surely things like attenuation and the issues with so many HDMI cables I’ve had (that can’t carry the signal intended, sometimes over time) would be avoided. Perhaps new issues introduced but it feels like we must be getting near some limit of practicality on copper. A certification is certainly one thing that is important but it’s tricky to even know which brands to trust.

I also find the implementations of ARC and CEC often lacking and flaky. Is it just me?
 
Was playing around with a bandwidth calculator and looks like 1000hz is possible now, if someone comes up with a 1000hz 1080p esports monitor, it can be driven with HDMI 2.2 without compression and full RGB 4:4:4 color

Unfortunately it doesn't look like any major devices will use HDMI 2.2 this year, all TVs announced so far at CES are HDMI 2.1, we have no HDMI 2.2 monitors yet either and its likely the newest GPU's will still be HDMI 2.1 as well. While not yet announced, I'm fairly confident new soundbars and audio products at CES will be HDMI 2.1 as well unless they are only launched much later this year.

We'll have to wait for 2026 to take advantage of this new tech

For me, that means I'll be avoiding buying new AV tech this year where I can so I can wait for next year

alex24 said:
Good to see the sync issues are being improved. Definitely a quality of life improvement that’s needed. Depending on source, I have various different audio delays to program into my amp.

Someone smarter may know this - with cables at 96gbps, why are we using copper instead of something like a new fibre optic standard? Surely things like attenuation and the issues with so many HDMI cables I’ve had (that can’t carry the signal intended, sometimes over time) would be avoided. Perhaps new issues introduced but it feels like we must be getting near some limit of practicality on copper. A certification is certainly one thing that is important but it’s tricky to even know which brands to trust.

I also find the implementations of ARC and CEC often lacking and flaky. Is it just me?
Click to expand...

I've had issues with ARC on HDMI 1.4, but since changing to a HDMI 2.1 TV and soundbar, I've had zero e-ARC issues since and its been years for me now with no issues - no disconnects, no handshake errors, no audio sync issues etc, zero problems for me personally.

As for copper cables, the higher the bandwidth, the shorter, or thicker the cable needs to get. I've got a 10 meter HDMI 2.1 cable and its copper and it works flawlessly and its super thick
I believe HDMI 2.2 cables will either be very short, or if they are not short they'll be incredibly thick or if its thin then its fibre optic
 
Last edited:
alex24 said:
Good to see the sync issues are being improved. Definitely a quality of life improvement that’s needed. Depending on source, I have various different audio delays to program into my amp.

Someone smarter may know this - with cables at 96gbps, why are we using copper instead of something like a new fibre optic standard? Surely things like attenuation and the issues with so many HDMI cables I’ve had (that can’t carry the signal intended, sometimes over time) would be avoided. Perhaps new issues introduced but it feels like we must be getting near some limit of practicality on copper. A certification is certainly one thing that is important but it’s tricky to even know which brands to trust.

I also find the implementations of ARC and CEC often lacking and flaky. Is it just me?
Click to expand...
Have you seen the coat of the fibre hdmi cables? Can imagine many people paying 100 quid for a cable, it's like being back with monster scary leads :cry: . I think hdmi is only 5 m max anyway and after that it's fibre, likely for those reasons.
 
theone8181 said:
Have you seen the coat of the fibre hdmi cables? Can imagine many people paying 100 quid for a cable, it's like being back with monster scary leads :cry: . I think hdmi is only 5 m max anyway and after that it's fibre, likely for those reasons.
Click to expand...

I suppose they are not common so a bit niche and therefore expensive. But they are cables that encode/re-encode the signal to and from HDMI so that fibre can be used. I was thinking more like a fibre connectivity standard that means future TVs and hardware would have that built in, so the cabling was only a simple fibre connection, which would be cheaper. Maybe it makes devices more costly though. I have some TOSLINK cables that are basically that I believe, but that is a very old standard. But maybe you can see what I mean.
 
alex24 said:
I suppose they are not common so a bit niche and therefore expensive. But they are cables that encode/re-encode the signal to and from HDMI so that fibre can be used. I was thinking more like a fibre connectivity standard that means future TVs and hardware would have that built in, so the cabling was only a simple fibre connection, which would be cheaper. Maybe it makes devices more costly though. I have some TOSLINK cables that are basically that I believe, but that is a very old standard. But maybe you can see what I mean.
Click to expand...
I'm not actually sure what the difference is between the internals of toslink Vs hdmi fibre, I assume much lower wavelength (thus bad for eyes) to get the throughout.
 
In a way I'm kinda glad to see these HDMI 2.2 certified cables coming.

I've found it can be a nightmare to get good working HDMI 2.1 cables, even certified, a lot of them can be very hit and miss. 4K60 seems to be relatively achievable now, but I recently had to replace a certified 2.1 cable after upgrading to a new 4k120 capable AV Receiver setup, and it took 3 attempts to get one that worked properly and somewhat reliably at 4K120 with HDR etc. Unfortunately getting a decent cable tester is quite expensive, and the ones built into at least Denon AVRs seem somewhat inconsistent, but at least a cable that cannot do the higher bandwidth always fail, whereas good cables will only fail some of the time, so as long as I rerun the test 4-5 times, it'll usually come up on at least a few of them as passing the higher bandwidth tests lol

These were all HDMI 2.1 certified cables too!

With the HDMI 2.2 specs being more demanding, it should get easier to get cables capable of doing this, even if they cost a bit more, as 96Gbps tested cables shouldn't struggle to pass 48Gbps.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom