Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

HDMI Announces USB-C to HDMI Cables for 4K Displays and TVs

djang0 said:
Only 30 Hz for 4K. Still 60 Hz+ for 1080p.

So it's still useful if you don't need 4K.

(Correct me if I'm wrong)

On another note, is there any technical reason that would prevent them from supporting HDMI 2.0 over USB C?
Click to expand...
You're correct. It is just that 1080p@60Hz is not particularly new or impressive as a spec. Neither is 4k@30Hz.

Need to achieve 4k@60Hz before one can really say that an I/O is capable of doing 4k. Anyone actually using 4k will stick to Thunderbolt until that is true.
 
TurboPGT! said:
Need to achieve 4k@60Hz before one can really say that an I/O is capable of doing 4k. Anyone actually using 4k will stick to Thunderbolt until that is true.
Click to expand...
If you only need 4K for movies, 30 Hz is enough since it's greater than 24/25 Hz. Anything above for that use will not improve the experience, but rather degrade it.
 
TurboPGT! said:
You're correct. It is just that 1080p@60Hz is not particularly new or impressive as a spec. Neither is 4k@30Hz.

Need to achieve 4k@60Hz before one can really say that an I/O is capable of doing 4k. Anyone actually using 4k will stick to Thunderbolt until that is true.
Click to expand...

I agree, but 4K hasn't gained that much traction yet, and quite a lot of people probably don't care about it either in the forthcoming future.
 
Additional functionality is always welcome, so this is nice. However, 30Hz sucks unless you're watching 24/30fps movies or displaying static content. I can't wait for kaby lake/cannonlake 4k/60Hz capabilities to become ubiquitous. I bought my 4k TV waaayyy too early (luckily got it for only $450 though).

Specifically, I WANT MY KABY LAKE MAC MINI AND I WANT IT SOON :)
 
Mailia said:
If you only need 4K for movies, 30 Hz is enough since it's greater than 24/25 Hz. Anything above for that use will not improve the experience, but rather degrade it.
Click to expand...

For movies on a TV, yeah 30 Hz is enough. But if it's for using a computer with a 4K monitor, not so much.
 
I sincerely think OS X is the key element that prevents 4k @ 60hz over HDMI 1.4b.

I was one those people who bought an early 4k TV. It's best HDMI input is a 1.4b. Wasn't expecting much from this panel as I got it cheap, but it actually has incredibly low latency- great to game on. Windows 10 has no problem pushing 4k @ 60hz with HDMI 1.4b. It's flawless and works beautifully, but OS X (latest El Capitan) running on the same machine will not go above 30hz @ 4k. It's a software thing and it pisses me off. I've tried every type of adapter and display resolution app to force OS X to display 4k @ 60hz via HDMI and I've even tried fooling OS X into thinking it was outputting as display port with no luck. It's such a shame, because I know OS X is beautiful at 4k 60hz.

There are workarounds to get OS X to display at 4k 60hz over HDMI, but it requires an ''active display port to HDMI 2.0 adapter,'' a piece of software called ''SwitchResX,'' and 4k TV with HDMI 2.0.

I'm sure Apple has reason to prevent 4k @ 60hz via HDMI less than v2 standard (maybe unstability in certain instances), but man, it's annoying that Windows 10 can take advantage of this on the same hardware.

If I've learned anything from this experience, it's been that if you plan on buying a 4k TV, you better make sure it has at least one HDMI 2.0 port.
 
Avi360 said:
I sincerely think OS X is the key element that prevents 4k @ 60hz over HDMI 1.4b.

I was one those people who bought an early 4k TV. It's best HDMI input is a 1.4b. Wasn't expecting much from this panel as I got it cheap, but it actually has incredibly low latency- great to game on. Windows 10 has no problem pushing 4k @ 60hz with HDMI 1.4b. It's flawless and works beautifully, but OS X (latest El Capitan) running on the same machine will not go above 30hz @ 4k. It's a software thing and it pisses me off. I've tried every type of adapter and display resolution app to force OS X to display 4k @ 60hz via HDMI and I've even tried fooling OS X into thinking it was outputting as display port with no luck. It's such a shame, because I know OS X is beautiful at 4k 60hz.

There are workarounds to get OS X to display at 4k 60hz over HDMI, but it requires an ''active display port to HDMI 2.0 adapter,'' a piece of software called ''SwitchResX,'' and 4k TV with HDMI 2.0.

I'm sure Apple has reason to prevent 4k @ 60hz via HDMI less than v2 standard (maybe unstability in certain instances), but man, it's annoying that Windows 10 can take advantage of this on the same hardware.

If I've learned anything from this experience, it's been that if you plan on buying a 4k TV, you better make sure it has at least one HDMI 2.0 port.
Click to expand...

You must be mistaken... cause HDMI 1.4 doesn't do 4K@60Hz. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
 
djang0 said:
You must be mistaken... cause HDMI 1.4 doesn't do 4K@60Hz. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
Click to expand...

It's strange, I've looked it up a few times and you're right, according to most documentation, HDMI 1.4 spec can't officially do 4k @ 60hz. However, in my setup, I most certainly CAN get windows to output 4k @ 60hz over HDMI 1.4b. Maybe it's a glitch or something unique about my setup, but I'm telling you, it most certainly is outputting 4k @ 60hz via HDMI 1.4b when running in Windows. It's mind boggling because it shouldn't work, but it does. The 4k labels the port at ''BEST 4k @ 60z'' but according to the TV manual it's a HDMI 1.4b, which is in complete contradiction to the HDMI 1.4b standard.

When I say 4k, I mean the consumer standard ''Ultra HD" (3840x2160) which technically isn't actually 4k- but that's a whole separate discussion, haha.

Anyway, point again being, when black friday comes around this year, do the research, make sure there's at least one HDMI 2.0 port.
 
Last edited:
Well, this adapter will surely drain your battery and then what will you do with only one USB-C port? Thanks, Apple!
 
Avi360 said:
. . . .

I'm sure Apple has reason to prevent 4k @ 60hz via HDMI less than v2 standard (maybe unstability in certain instances), but man, it's annoying that Windows 10 can take advantage of this on the same hardware. . . . .
Click to expand...

Apple's new marketing mode seems to tell us that customers are not all that important, what is important is holding back technology until "The next great thing" event. IMO apple is holding all 4k back till it gets a media deal, so Apple can have a big media splash announcing a partner and amazing 4K resolution across all products. It just sucks being an Apple customer these days, and unless something changes in the next few months many that I know are rethinking their loyalty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: djang0
nt5672 said:
Apple's new marketing mode seems to tell us that customers are not all that important, what is important is holding back technology until "The next great thing" event. IMO apple is holding all 4k back till it gets a media deal, so Apple can have a big media splash announcing a partner and amazing 4K resolution across all products. It just sucks being an Apple customer these days, and unless something changes in the next few months many that I know are rethinking their loyalty.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. That's probably part of the equation here! It's disappointing, but I guess business is business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672
bjjp2 said:
This sounds unequivocally good. Waiting for everyone to explain why it sucks.
Click to expand...

It's convenient, but that's about it. This cable basically neuteres all the cool features of USB-C.

I want power, data, audio, and video through one cable. This USB-C cable to HDMI is another reason for display manufacturers to cheap out and not include a USB-C hub.
 
TXCherokee said:
I not only use HDMI out to connect my Mac Mini to it's monitor for work but also for play. I don't see what the issue is.
Click to expand...

That's a Mac mini though - the Mac mini is actually suited for this purchase - someone connecting their MacBook up to a TV is having a really ugly and lousy experience.
[doublepost=1472749604][/doublepost]
jblagden said:
That’s only true if you’re using a 4K monitor for work because the 30Hz refresh rate only applies to 4K screens. If you’re using either a 1080p monitor, or maybe even a 2K monitor, you should be able to get 60 Hz.
[doublepost=1472738597][/doublepost]I wonder if this adapter would work on an Ubuntu Phone. I’m curious because all four Ubuntu phones have USB-C and lack HDMI.
Click to expand...

Oh well, in that case - this solution is fine to ditch that silly HDMI port on a MacBook Pro all together - utter waste of space for most.
[doublepost=1472749779][/doublepost]
TurboPGT! said:
That was my point essentially...until it hits 60Hz, its not "really" supported. Only somewhat supported.

Despite what others would have you believe, USB-C is not actually ready to take over the world.
Click to expand...

You're going on about HDMI though - USB-C is just a connection type, you'll be able to drive 4k monitors at 60hz with DP, you not WANT to do this with HDMI, its a consumer connection for a TV, not for connecting computer monitors.
 
nt5672 said:
Apple thinks their customer base is exclusively teenagers/students that snapchat. They don't need no additional ports.
Click to expand...

Or they sell different computers for different accessories. If you've bought a MacBook to stream HDMI to an external monitor all day, frankly you're an idiot - its not its purpose - stop expecting machines to do everything.
[doublepost=1472749945][/doublepost]
Mailia said:
What does it waste space from?
Click to expand...

It's (now) an utterly unnecessarily clunky very specific port with one usage case and its too large - it wastes space inside and outside on the case as well as useless chips on the board - and thankfully now it'll be dead.
 
dannys1 said:
You're going on about HDMI though - USB-C is just a connection type, you'll be able to drive 4k monitors at 60hz with DP, you not WANT to do this with HDMI, its a consumer connection for a TV, not for connecting computer monitors.
Click to expand...
HDMI is completely fine for computer monitors and 2.0 supports 4K at 60 Hz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shamino
Apple should include one of these when buying a USB-C only device (Macbook...), least they could do for the price IMO.
 
dannys1 said:
It's (now) an utterly unnecessarily clunky very specific port with one usage case and its too large - it wastes space inside and outside on the case as well as useless chips on the board - and thankfully now it'll be dead.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that sounds like you don't actually have a reason for claiming it wastes space. How does it even waste space on the outside of the case? And have you even seen the board that the HDMI port is soldered onto? The port has pretty much the same footprint as a regular USB port. I'm also interested in all of the multiple chips you can eliminate from the computer if you don't have a HDMI port but rather pass it out from the USB-C port.

Also, speaking of clunky ports with one usage case: MagSafe.
 
MacRumors said:
The licensing group behind the HDMI interface has introduced a new HDMI Alternate Mode that will allow for USB-C devices like the 12-inch MacBook, smartphones, and tablets to connect to HDMI-enabled 4K displays and TVs over a single cable, with no adapters or dongles required.
Click to expand...
Cool, how's that going to work?
MacRumors said:
The new specification will lead to the release of simple HDMI to USB-C cables that support the full range of HDMI 1.4b features, including 3D, Ethernet, and CEC.
Click to expand...
Oh… I'm not sure "no adapters or dongles required" means what you seem to think it means.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back