Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thunderbolt has OLD DisplayPort
- Thread starter cube
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is no problem. OP just seems to be disappointed that TB supports older version of DP instead of the newer and faster one.
DP adoption overall isn't going too well. In PC circles it's often considered a weird Apple thing (even though it isn't) and in Apple circles it's often considered an unreliable connection requiring expensive adapters.
I think the main thing hindering DP, and thus DP1.2, is that DVI and HDMI do the job just fine for the vast majority of people.
From what I've seen there's nothing stopping DP 1.2 from running over TB - down the road.
DP 1.2 is an extension of DP 1.1 to drive dual displays and mux Ethernet and USB data. Keep in mind that the maximum data rate of DP 1.2 is 20.6 Gbps. From what I've read, that's just the maximum design bit rate for driving dual 2560x1600 displays at 60Hz, plus USB, plus Ethernet, and overhead to boot. To drive a single display you only need about 8Gbps with either version of the DP standard.
Also, there's nothing stopping Intel's future TB chips from using multiple channels to achieve much higher aggregate bit rates to carry multiple DP signals, etc. Especially with optical.
So yes, the current implementation of TB is limited to driving a single display (due to bit rate constraints) but I don't think it precludes DP 1.2 nor is there anything stopping Intel/Apple from expanding the capabilities of TB in the future to drive multiple displays - even beyond what DP1.2 is capable of.
DP 1.2 is an extension of DP 1.1 to drive dual displays and mux Ethernet and USB data. Keep in mind that the maximum data rate of DP 1.2 is 20.6 Gbps. From what I've read, that's just the maximum design bit rate for driving dual 2560x1600 displays at 60Hz, plus USB, plus Ethernet, and overhead to boot. To drive a single display you only need about 8Gbps with either version of the DP standard.
Also, there's nothing stopping Intel's future TB chips from using multiple channels to achieve much higher aggregate bit rates to carry multiple DP signals, etc. Especially with optical.
So yes, the current implementation of TB is limited to driving a single display (due to bit rate constraints) but I don't think it precludes DP 1.2 nor is there anything stopping Intel/Apple from expanding the capabilities of TB in the future to drive multiple displays - even beyond what DP1.2 is capable of.
Last edited:
Aside from driving a display, what other device exists right now that could keep up with the full bandwidth of a thunderbolt connection?
The new Intel and Sandforce SSD drives are reported to be able to write at 500 megabytes/sec. That multiplied by 8 = 4,000 megabits/sec, whereas the full bandwidth of TB is 10,000 megabits/sec.
So not even the fastest hard drives can keep up with TB capacity.
Seems like TB just turns the device into the bottleneck instead of the connection. Either way, people still can't get full utilisation out of their gear.
What good is TB when everything else out there (besides display) is only rated for a fraction of its speed?
The new Intel and Sandforce SSD drives are reported to be able to write at 500 megabytes/sec. That multiplied by 8 = 4,000 megabits/sec, whereas the full bandwidth of TB is 10,000 megabits/sec.
So not even the fastest hard drives can keep up with TB capacity.
Seems like TB just turns the device into the bottleneck instead of the connection. Either way, people still can't get full utilisation out of their gear.
What good is TB when everything else out there (besides display) is only rated for a fraction of its speed?
RAID setups can provide great bandwidths. An 8-bay enclosure with eight HDs can provide up to ~1200MB/s, while TB can provide "only" ~900MB/s in real world. Two SSDs alone in RAID 0 can provide more than 1000MB/s.
However, the real thing about the bandwidth is that you can connect multiple devices into one TB port without sacrificing the performance. You can have for example three external HDs, iPhone, iPad and a monitor connected to a single TB port and you still won't max out the speed of TB.
There is always a limiting factor. Currently it has been USB 2.0 but now it will be the drive. I prefer this way.
In the future, yes.
Can USB 2.0 be updated to USB 3.0 via firmware? No. Current Thunderbolt is based on copper while future versions will use fiber. You will need new hardware to support higher speeds.
Is there a rumor when this new version will come?
I haven't heard any timeframes for 100Gb/s. Could be that we will see e.g. 20Gb/s and 50Gb/s before 100Gb/s. We are looking at several years at least.
It's just a guess but I think they might be using an older version because they can't cram the speed for the newer display port standard alongside Thunderbolt's general device capacity on the same connector at the moment?
Also I doubt this would work but could the spare bandwidth from the general connection be used to drive a second display? It might kinda hinder the awesomeness of Thunderbolt to detract from it in this way but if you could, it'd technically be no worse than displayport 1.2 If you had enough bandwidth leftover to utilize a USB 3.0 connector (too tired for smart stuff like teh maths A.T.M.), hey, all the better.
I don't see many monitors with DisplayPorts out there on the general consumer market myself. The only one I can think of off hand is the Apple Cinema Display, alongside the Apple created Mini DisplayPort, it's not hard to see where this mentality came from. In fact, while I'm sure there are monitors out there, its so uncommon that I'm kinda guilty as charged...
Also I doubt this would work but could the spare bandwidth from the general connection be used to drive a second display? It might kinda hinder the awesomeness of Thunderbolt to detract from it in this way but if you could, it'd technically be no worse than displayport 1.2 If you had enough bandwidth leftover to utilize a USB 3.0 connector (too tired for smart stuff like teh maths A.T.M.), hey, all the better.
I don't see many monitors with DisplayPorts out there on the general consumer market myself. The only one I can think of off hand is the Apple Cinema Display, alongside the Apple created Mini DisplayPort, it's not hard to see where this mentality came from. In fact, while I'm sure there are monitors out there, its so uncommon that I'm kinda guilty as charged...
Haven't seen does the AMD 6750M even support DP 1.2. I don't see this as a big deal though. Maybe for enthusiasts like you it might be a small drawback but for an average user it does not matter.
I'm curious is this limitation will affect the audio support through Thunderbolt. For example, if I want to use a mini-dp to HDMI cable in a Thunderbolt port will it transmit audio? It seems like it should since DP 1.1a has full audio support but its an interesting question.
Yes, it will work or Yes, it will affect it. lol..
I bought the adapter I linked in my post above and I should have it in a week or so. I expect it to support audio and video but I'll test it and post the results here. Those monoblock mini display port cables are a steal of a deal.
6400M (4 displays), 6600M & 6700M (6 displays) series support DisplayPort 1.2
DisplayPort 1.2 is not only about multiple displays, it is also about 3D deep color 30" displays, quad-HD displays.
We cannot wait for a Thunderbolt upgrade. Two differents ports MUST be provided, so the whole idea of using the same connector FAILS.