Silkland, one of the cable manufacturers we talked about in this video, has reached out to us and updated their product pages to be much clearer about what their DisplayPort 2.1 cables are capable of. 1. Silkland's Amazon listings now correctly state that cables at 2m lengths and longer are only capable of 40 Gbps, not 80 Gbps as previously stated. Cables at 0.5m and 1m length remain at 80 Gbps. This can be seen here and also in other regions (not an affiliate link) www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCQ6FQ33?th=1 Silkland tell us this was an internal communication issue between the product department (who make the cables) and the operations editors (who upload the product listing to retailers). Moving forward, Silkland will be addressing this issue by requiring the product department to give accurate information to the operations team and that these product listings will be clearly detailed with accurate specs. 2. Silkland's cables are now properly listed as VESA Certified for DP80 at 0.5m and 1m lengths, and DP40 at 2m lengths. This can be seen at the VESA website www.displayport.org/product-category/cables-adaptors/?ps&pman%5B0%5D=silkland&pcat%5B0%5D=dp80-certified-cables&pcat%5B1%5D=dp40-certified-cables Silkland tell us they weren't originally listed in the DP40 and DP80 sections because it's VESA's decision what categories products are placed under on their website, but they contacted VESA to have the website updated to reflect the results of certification. 3. Silkland's DisplayPort 2.1 cables over 2m in length have been updated to say they support 40 Gbps speeds, but remain without VESA Certification for DP40. Silkland are claiming these products are actually capable of 40 Gbps but the certification standard is more strict and even if the bandwidth can reach 40 Gbps, it may not pass certification due to other factors like attenuation. However internally they have tested these cables to work at 40 Gbps using both testing equipment and real world monitors like the Samsung Neo G9. At this stage we'd still recommend sticking to certified cables at the lengths you're interested in where possible, anything beyond that you will have to take the manufacturer at their word. 4. Silkland are working on DP54 cables and some existing products (eg. 2m cables) will be upgraded to DP54 spec. DP80 cables certified up to 2 meters in length are also in the research and development phase, though shorter term goals are for 1.5 meters in length followed by 1.8 and 2.0 meters. We're still going to keep an eye on the cable situation but I appreciate Silkland updating things to be more accurate and clear for consumers which was a major concern brought up in this video
New sub here -- Ty for posting this update. I appreciate when companies do this, especially when they reach out and seem to be trying to avoid making people frustrated.. which is more than I can say for most companies these days.
it really fell apart with 1.4, theres no reason to not use 1.5-1.9 but the manufacturers are pushing so hard to get people to switch to usb-c or hdmi and just be happy with mediocrity
You need to have PhD in cables to buy one. Hate that. Not the first time companies does that, this apply to everything today. What a mess. Thank you for sharing this with us, I think this type of content help a lot in many different ways at once
@@odjsjaks no, what you do is program the devices to tell you "hey buddy, your shit is running slow cuz the cables are crap" and refund the cable. this'll work for HDMI, DP, USB, Ethernet, PCI-E, anything. the devices know this because they start out at the high rate and fall back if there're errors, they just don't show you for some reason.
@@odjsjaks thats why i left out USB-PD, it's the one most likely used between dumb devices (eg wall adapter + power bank). then the only solution is keeping logs which a device with a screen can display later.
Thanks so much for the clarification. Definitely didn't expect "Vesa Certified Displayport 2.1 cable at 80Gbps" to not necessarily work for UHBR20, due to the lack of a specific DP80 certification... This is messier than HDMI2.1 (where HDMI2.0 speed can also be HDMI 2.1) and USB3.2 (where 5Gbps is also a type of USB3.2)! I can see many consumers making the wrong purchase already.
It's not necessarily that they don't work. Organizations like VESA make their money not by making standards, but rather, by selling certifications. Same with HDR certifications for things like HDR400 and such. So the certifications can help, but they're also kind of meaningless because it's all a money scheme to sell certifications. For example, the LG OLED's didn't have HDR400 certification, but they certainly could do HDR400 and more. To get these certifications, costs 10's if not hundreds of thousands of dollars per product tested. Companies have to send their products off to them, they might only spend 20 minutes looking at it and testing it, and boom....here's a $10,000 bill to the company for the certification. Of course it's not that simple, they make it complex to create a facade to justify the cost. Now you can see why not only are things more expensive, lots of companies simply don't bother with certifications because of the predatory costs associated with getting them. And when it comes to cable makers, who might sell maybe 10,000 cables for 10 dollars, to get certification would be a huge cut of their entire profits.....all just to get certification, for something their cable may be able to do despite lack of certification. That's also why the standards are constantly being trickled up, because it requires a new certification, which makes organizations like VESA a LOT of money. They could have created a singular modular cable design decades ago, one that can handle far into the future, and would also be cheap to mass produce, but that's why we have tons of different cable types. I mean just look at all the things that have been simplified....like headphone jacks and speaker wires. That's because these things existed before overcomplication, and they have no good way of forcing a change on them to make money from them, but if they could they sure would, and you'd have 50 different headphone plugs.
@@peoplez129 thanks for the detailed response! And yes I completely agree with you on the money-making scheme for orgs like VESA. However, as the reality stands, for us consumers who want to make sure our purchase works, a correctly certified one will 99% give us what we want. A non-certified product may also work, as you said, but there is a greater chance that they don't deliver. For this reason, I for one would still buy the certified one to avoid the gamble. But I 100% agree with you that the whole system really should change.
You gotta be aware they they all go down the USB route to make intercomptible with the encoding scheme and possible tranfer speeds. The maximum line tranfer speeds usbd by USB and after a certain point it currently is only unidirectional.
Its a sham that its allowed to sell those cables, with misleading info. It should be mandatory to show the buyer what said cable spesifically support, like: Bla bla bla : (ticked box) Bla bla bla: (unticked box) Etc.... Also listings should have a link to the vesa website, which also shows you that the cable is indeed supported. Edit: Great two videos! Very good info and it will saves us money.
By that logic, many things have been shams for a few generations now. Hardly the first time we've had this issue. HDMI, USB (before everyone making them became concussion patients) RJ45 as well as others, have had maximum lengths-to-spec considerations before active cables had to be a thing... and not exactly linking to the official boards to explain it all. I think it stands out more now after HDMI and USB in particular have made their moves in recent, but not exactly new overall.
@@MaddJakd mind elaborating on the RJ45 naming issue? Or are you talking about those standards that aren't IEEE ratified? Latest is Cat 7 and that only recently, Cat8 is not, it exists due to data center need, and Amazon products just mislead as product cert doesn't exist so can't enforce. Ethernet standards are some of the most clear tbh, in terms of that they directly state minimum spec / bandwidth, and the different types of shielding and what they're for, so can plan pretty easily once you have a spec sheet. Most homes should just be Cat6 nowadays, since most runs will be
@Masterrunescapeer if you bothered to actually read as opposed to skimming, I was blatantly talking about cable length considerations not being new. Learn how conversations work.... or retake the comprehension portion of english before acting like you have any legit bones to be picked.
so what you're saying is that USB, HDMI and DP have all created a mess of naming schema where the advertised version is functionally meaningless to most end users, with the important things being stuck in the fine print, if there at all... fantastic.
I miss when standards referred to an interface, it was a line of technobabble. Honestly, I feel like *we feel* scammed because things are made 'apparently simple', when they're not. Everything being 'made marketable', is a blight upon the industry. "Wi-Fi 6" WTF is that? Must JustWork^TM with anything else 'Wi-Fi 6' Vs. "IEEE 802.11ax" Oh, it's an IEEE standard; I should probably look into/ask a pro what is and isn't supported on my hardware.
Still is an issue considering HDMI consortium allowed a bunch of 1.X cables to be 2.0 cables by changing the spec after releasing it. Not as bad as USB but still.
Do you mean 2.1 where everything under the sun can be a 2.1 cable. The bandwidth is just too high for cheep copper look at ethernet cables. You need cat 8 for over 10gbe links. And only up to 100ft. At half the data rate of dp 2.1. Just look up a cat 8 cable termination to see how much extra is put in to the cable. And the cables use sold core copper as well. There are 400gb dac cables but they cost like $200 for 2m and are really short as well.
@@andrewmcewan9145 It's whichever version that came out right before 2013 when I bought my 1080p 3DVision 2 monitor. So, it might be 1.4a that I'm thinking of.
Would be good to see as future content, maybe a once a year thing of cable testing to see if their performance lives up to their names and "certification". Would be a great way to help buyers avoid getting burned the hard way.
If Cat8 cables for 40 Gbps Ethernet can be certified to 30 meters, surely one can certify something like 80 Gbps DP for 2 meters, unless the DP standard cable/connector design is somewhat questionable to begin with.
@@bot_365 also, i'm not sure this is true, 48V for POE sure, but i doubt it would be 48Vfor signaling, but i could be wrong as i have never worked with cat8 ethernet
@@Tracenji You are correct, 48v is only poe power and not signaling voltage at all. The signal voltage is around +/- 1v on Ethernet differential signal lines.
I have purchased a Club3D DP2.1 a month ago. Yes, I can confirm these cables are VERY short. I had to relocate and change the orientation of my PC and Display.
I had this issue when moving to a 1440p/165Hz monitor years back. None of the DisplayPort cables I had would reliably output that, including the one which came in the box with the ViewSonic monitor I bought. I ended up buying a Club 3D one for ~$25 that I'm still using and has never given me any problems - other than the fact that it's about twice as thick as any other display cable I own, so is a little hard to route.
Great warning video! Even with HDMI a similar misleading mess occured some years ago. To connect a PC to a 4k OLED TV just 5m away using hdmi, I tried 10m electric cables which allegedly supported 4K at their lengths, yet in spite of their advertised bandwidth capacity they did not work properly. Eventually the only way was to use an hdmi fiber cable. The much more demanding DP 2.1 is likely to go through the exact same misleading advertisement and disappointments for sure.
I'm pleased by the fact i was your source for this video. Many info you're providing clearly come from my 2 month old posts on TPU forum (1.2m max length of DP80 cables, copper vs fiber, DP40 cables sold as DP80, DP80 certification list). Good video, bye.
It's kinda insane the industry didn't transition to optical cables a long time ago considering bandwidth for digital video has been a problem that existed since the DVI days. But I guess they just couldn't manage to make HDCP annoying enough with optical cables… 🤷♀
While the fibre itself is rather cheap, the transceivers are still expensive. Looking at 40GbE QSFP+ active cables (which have 80Gb total bandwidth), you'd be spending 30-60 Euro for a 5m cable. Bare MPO-12 fibre would be cheaper, but fibre connectors are definitely NOT durable enough for "mass consumer market" use.
DP 1.4a had this issue as well but not as terrible. When the RX 5700 XT was having black screen issues, one of the things AMD recommended was to use a Certified DP cable. For some people, this did work to solve the issue. However, Certified DP cables are much shorter then most cables you can purchase. For someone like me, who has a three monitor setup, this isn't going to work easily with a 1.5m cable, as typically your PC tower sits on one side or the other of the monitors. Only having the PC under the desk or in the middle of the desk is going to solve this issue, and not many people will want to return to the 90s. Optical cables are going to be more expensive (likely because it will need transmit/receive hardware inside each of the connectors), and people who are not used to dealing with optical cables are going to likely be crushing them, twisting them, and breaking them in all kinds of ways because they won't be used to dealing with optical cables. It's going to take quiet the pubic service announcement to get people used to dealing with optical.
I think we're starting to get to the point where we might as well start to embrace fibre as a mainstream connectivity solution when it comes to desktop computers and pressure manufacturers to integrate the hardware that's necessary for cheaper passive fibre cables to become the norm. It might increase prices initially, but I believe it'll eventually benefit us all in the long run (fast USB-C cables are also a nightmare and it's not getting any better)
Cable Matters has never failed me. I'm sure they'll make one. I have two of their HDMI 2.1 cables, one short copper, one active optical 5m one, and an adapter from DP 1.4 to HDMI 2.1. They're flawless.
The lack of standardization in industry "standards" is maddening. How has this been allowed to continue on like this for so many years? I suspect it has everything to do with the fact that lawmakers do not play PC games, so this is not an issue that affects them personally.
it more like we have a lack of 8+k120Hz TVs. since right now all the research is being done to improve contrast instead of resolution. for most 4k is already good enough that jagged edges aren't a problem. the near sighted veiw is a priority over how much of the golden gate bridge you can see in the background.
The issue is not the lack of standards. The issue is the oversimplification for marketing purposes. Before the era of mass consumer proliferation, *you* (the user) had to know what you were plugging in, and what the interface was capable of. Nowadays, we're trained into "Wi-Fi is Wi-Fi, USB is USB, HDMI is HDMI, and DP is DP. It all JustWorks^TM". The 'technobabble' names of old, used to mean "pay the F attention, or find someone who does".
Excellent video!!! Incredible how these retailers decide to lie instead of being honest. Even if it "works" at higher bandwidth... if its not certified at a specific speed, then its not certified. Don't lie to the consumer.
Seeing how goddamn slow alt+tab, or any other mode changes, is with DSC, I'm more than glad that the FO32U2P supports the solution for this insanity and cant wait for new GPUs. I mean it takes several seconds to do a alt+tab out of exclusive fullscreen. Unbelievable. I would lose several seconds of a game intro cutscene, because starting a game does the same. There seems to be indeed no harm in image quality by the DSC, but I have no comparison of course, but the insane slow mode changes are driving me crazy. I'm very, very glad now that the FO32U2P wont be the limiting factor in future.
Hopefully the fibre optic style cables come out, and are cheap enough to be feasible. I had similar issues with getting a fibre hdmi cable that supported 4k120. Mimimum lengths for that started at 3m going up to 100m. While the price went from £70 up to over £120.
Maybe they should rename DP40 as 2.1b, DP54 as 2.1c and DP80 as 2.1d. It would make it clear that they all support the rest of the DP2.1 features and the letters would indicate the maximum tested link speed.
How dare you come in here and make such boring names!? That shit makes too much sense and does not looks as cool as DP2.1 DP80 TURBO EXTRA MEGA HQ HIGH DEF MUCH WOW GAMING RGB
What's misleading is you failing to mention that there is not a single graphics card currently made, even the professional top-tier cards, that support the full DP 2.1 protocol and certainly not at the UHBR20 standard needed for some of the monitor resolutions/FR you mention. It doesn't matter what cable or monitor you use if the graphics card doesn't support the full protocol.
2m DP80 active cables won't necessarily need to be fiber optic cables. It's possible to get slightly more length out of a copper cable with redriver chips. There are already USB4 40Gbps copper cables with active redrivers, and 40Gbps USB4 signalling is very similar to DisplayPort UHBR20 (USB4 has two 20Gbps links in each direction, for 40Gbps bidirectional, whereas DP 2.1 UHBR20 can use all 4 links in one direction for a total of 80Gbps unidirectional).
I feel this is an important area that must be explored when purchasing a monitor - the connection from the monitor to the GPU. Most importantly, what is the difference between all the configurations (including the Mac variants) - so shall I go HDMI or DP and what does each variation give me? Is that a project you have considered?
Theres really only going to be a few situations where there'll be a difference: A. Your monitor configuration exceeds the bandwidth available of your cable so you need to use DSC or reduce resolution/refresh rate/color depth. B. Sleep/hibernate protocols are different for different video ports. What might let you wake your monitor up from power off might not work when using a different cable. C. The individual cable or video port might be broken which can cause artifacting or no connection to be detected on the devices. D. The standards supported on one protocol are different than the standards supported on another (a recent example is HDMI 2.1 on Linux). These are the only circumstances where I'd imagine there'd be a difference. This really isnt enough to make an entire video about.
There was the same issue with HDMI 2.1 when it first came out. You could only really get cables.up to 6ft in length. I have this gigabyte monitor, and at least for now I can just switch it to DP 1.4 mode in the OSD until the cable situation gets better. I bought this monitor more for Gigabytes superior KVM implementation anyway.
I can't tell you over the years how many times I bought a cable with terms that should work but don't. I've bought expensive cables that suck, and cheap cables that work well above the spec they list. I feel like you've got a golden opportunity to do the community and world a service of just buying a truckload of cable brands/specs at three or four lengths and posting results with affiliate links for the ones that work. The ones that fail to meet advertised spec regardless of actual certification go to some kind of public wall of shame and we consumers can contact or avoid those companies to improve or go out of business.
As someone who has bought 3 DP cables in the past before I finally got my monitor working properly... I appreciate this video a lot. Big Cable wants to sell more cables I guess!? (/s) VESA should honestly feel required to clear things up for consumers.
Even active optical cables are no guarantee of signal quality, as I've learned with Fibbr brand DP1.4 active cables. In fact, with their cables, somehow the shorter cables cause MORE dropouts. (What, do they put all the reject transceivers and fibers in the short cables?) It makes me wary of even trying DisplayPort 2.0. 1M cable: dropouts. 2M cable: slightly fewer dropouts. 3.3M cable: even fewer dropouts. 33-meter cable they sent me when I ordered a 3.3-meter cable: no dropouts.
I think he did ... like 2 years ago when HDMI 2.1 was rather new. It's the same issue really, you can have 2.1, but without the full 48 Gbps link speed.
It is theoretically possible that some of these uncertified cables can achieve 80gbps speeds under certain circumstances (such as in a zero EMI environment), but if they were only certified for a lower bandwidth then it's very unlikely that they can be relied on in a normal home or office environment. VESA really should not be allowing companies to advertise cables as capable of achieving speeds greater than they're certified for.
Hey man, have you considered reviewing the new msi optix mag274qrf-qd e2 monitor? Ive heard its quite good but i always come to your videos to see if it's really true.
Cable problem. Yes. DP 2.1 cables will follow the same path as HDMI 2.1 cables. Very muddy listings. Also; start thinking about fiber for anything longer than 8ft. The market is waiting for Nvidia's announcement on the 5090 & 5080. I'll give this until the end of this year, and you will start seeing a lot more DP 2.1 cables.
So, there IS a solution for longer cables... but as ever it is expensive: fiber optic. There are fiber optic DP80 cables out there, and they can go to extremely long lengths. Fiber Command is one that I've personally used, though not at 80gbit speeds. Even there you have to be careful and check to see that it is actually DP80/80gbit certified as there are plenty of them that are only DP40 because they use basically the same transmitters that they do in fiber optic HDMI 2.1 cables. Any that support 80gbits are going to be over $100, so not cheap cables. But if you want high bandwidth Display Port over longer distances right now, it is an option, just an expensive one.
Well crap, I was hoping that DisplayPort would see the folly that HDMI pulled did with the 2.1 spec, but instead they went "Yessir, I'll have some of that" and served up a heaping plate of it. It's still early in the lifecycle, and long before I need it for my systems as I'm happy with 1440p/144Hz so things might get better in the future (especially with pieces like this, pointing out the issues and confusion), but I kinda doubt it. Bandwidth and cable length seems to be a gigantic issue industry-wide right now. Try finding a USB4/Thunderbolt4 cable longer than your forearm for instance. That's less of an issue than this 1.2M limit, but still incredibly restrictive. Basically requires you to have your desktop directly behind the monitor, and forget almost any VESA mounts. Maybe some of these new ultra-high-bandwidth standards that aren't providing power (like DP, HDMI & Oculink) need to just bite the bullet and jump over to fiber optic. Active cables can work a bit, but seems more like an intermediary bandage and can be more prone to failures, connection issues and inferior parts being used. It'll certainly make them more expensive and the amount of companies able to make fiber cables is fewer, but it might be worth it in the long run.
There is a reason most high-throughput interconnects use fiber optics, it is just far easier to cram a lot of data into light than a super-high frequency signal on copper.
I bought the Silkland DisplayPort 2.1 Cable 3M [VESA Certified], DP 2.0 Cable [16K@60Hz, 8K@120Hz, 4K@240Hz] 80Gbps HDR, HDCP DSC 1.2a, Display Port 2.1 Cord you described and it replaced a 3m 1'4 cable that was resulting in a black screen for a few seconds on a regular basis. No drop outs and a stable output to my dell oled 3440x 1440 at144hz. good for that output but probably not 80Gps
That Club 3D DP80 cable still says only "4K120Hz" in its name at 3:04. On their official page it says "4K240Hz". So why is it not labeled as 4K 320 Hz anywhere? Is your DisplayPort Cable Specs table wrong? The Glory Mark DP80 cable does not mention what combination of resolution and refresh rate it supports anywhere.
Active cables ain't cheap. The 15ft active fiber DP 1.4 cable I currently own is ~$75. The only main advantage is that fiber is dirt cheap, so you can get absurd length cables for just a few dollars more, as long as you're willing to pay for the expensive active parts in the plug. (And you remember to plug them in the correct direction.) I just wish DisplayPort would stop imitating the horrible branding of HDMI and USB specs. Low quality cables have become a genuine problem over the last decade. I'm getting to the point where I'm willing to buy some very expensive cables from reputable brands just to avoid these types of insane shenanigans. It's genuinely hard to find cables that deliver the speeds the advertise, or even cables that simply work. The minute that one of these companies finally gets their act together and creates a straight forward branding for their specification, I'm going to be switching over to that type of cable exclusively for all my products. If USB gets their spec figured out first, I'll be a USB 5.0 house for everything from displays to charging. But I'm done dealing with DisplayPort cables that cause monitor flickering and having to sort my USB C cables into half a dozen piles depending on which set of specs they support. I'd rather go back to the days where you had multiple different types of cables with different plugs, because at least back then you could visually tell what a cable supported by how the cable looked. Now days, you need to carefully read both ends of the cable, and hope that your manufacturer bothered to print the correct branding on the ends of the cable, and even then, you'll find they simply lied about what's printed on the cable. It's a mess. Personally, I'm buying a LOT less cables than I used to, because cable quality has become a big enough problem that I've changed my philosophy from "a cable for every location" to "only this one cable I know works". For high end displays, I'm basically committing to only buying active cables from reputable brands. Those brands get a lot more money from me, but the number of cables I'm buying has gone way down, which isn't helping the certification companies that make a profit from every cable sold. Hopefully buying fewer cables will affect their bottom line enough to force them to change, and fix the quality and labeling problems they've created. Until then, I'm content with repurposing cables I know I can trust, rather than gambling with cables that cause my monitor to flicker.
That was before Neoliberal economics really took hold, back when destroying your own company's reputation for a quick buck was stupid, short-sighted & nonsensical, rather than standard business practice.
That said, analog signal capable of carrying display data for 4K 240Hz 10Bpc image would have even greater bandwidth requirements. Would likely need a rigid microwave coax line with V connectors...
@@MoraFermi "analog in the middle" sounds absolutely dreamy to me, NGL. Since the death of the CRT and VGA (more a CRT-control port, than Video-out port), there's always been a latency overhead. TBQH, I think the 'solution' to your stated 'issue' and the real-world one at-hand, have a similar fix: Separate out the Serial Links over Coax/Twinax, just like Gen4 and Gen5 risers do. The effective 'frequency' of these interfaces is reaching into the microwave range so, why not use PHYs intended for that use?
I went through this a few weeks ago, predicted it wouls happen with a 4k high refresh monitor for me, and yes you can't find official VESA certified DP80 longer than a meter YET, but i'm sure a longer one should come out soon
But I got this monitor now and its a pure dream. I got it today evening and I'm still at default settings of the monitor and the defaults are already superb to me.
I'm waiting on a company to send me a test sample of their 10ft UHBR20 (DP80) cable. Should be certified, so that's nice - although maybe not the one I'll receive. I believe they're also doing a 6ft option. I didn't double-check with them, but I assume both ends are full size DP. I'd wager if they're working on it, plenty others are, so we should see some improvement to the DP80 cables market in the next few months. Been using fiber options for excessively long runs of HDMI2.1 for a while. Hoping they come out with fiber options for DP80 this year. The 6ft and 10ft options I mentioned are unfortunately copper only for now. Cost-effective, but limited to more typical (and arguably practical) lengths.
Guess I was right, when after the last video I thought this reminded me of when HD TV were coming out, back then many got "certified" to label their TV HD (720p) or FullHD (1080p), but some didn't even allow HD input, but that didn't matter as the display in the TV could in theory display at 720p or 1080p. What a mess.
Also, good luck using this spec of monitor in a multi-screen setup on any GPU made in the next 10 years. Monitor/GPU industry seems to love adding features that can't actually be combined together. (Currently having to run my 144Hz screens at 95Hz because the 2080ti I'm using can't do anything higher at 4K without chroma subsampling, which ruins text clarity.)
I recall the struggle getting a reasonable length DP 1.4 cable for my first 144Hz monitor years ago. These days I can't even find an HDMI cable that doesn't cause a intermittent flash artifact between my RTX30 GPU and my LG C2, requiring either a PC restart or a cable re-plug. The least problematic cable so far is the one that came with my PS5 but the GPU and display still won't handshake properly a third of the time.
I've almost always had to buy separate cables for high end displays, audio equipment and lighting. If anything you've highlighted how cheaply most standard cables are manufactured. HDMI gets around this through compression--not better cable quality. This seems odd to people who rarely (if ever) buy high end equipment but the cables provided by high end electronics OEMs are more of a courtesy and for trouble shooting than for use in the end application. It is more common than not that high end electronics applications obligate custom cables and the OEMs don't want to waste money on something they know probably isn't going to get used--same with power cables.
Two of my 4 cables I needed 10ft (3m). Certified 2.1 but lower speeds but DSC is fine with me and required no matter what. By time this is all sorted we will have 4k 480hz monitors that need DSC even with UHBR20.
It always starts like this, it seems like its usually a few years after a new DP capability before you start seeing 10FT/3M+ cables, I just started being about to get viable ones for 4K144, and I can now get those like 25Ft, im sure they will figure it out with these, if nothing else we will go fiber optic, which really isnt that expensive anymore
It does but a) everything you will buy today will be DP 1.4a. b) only difference between DP 1.4 and 1.4a is in improvement in DSC quality (more profiles).
I am not surprised about pricing and length. Similarly fast QSFP28 DAC (100 GbE) cables cost as much or more. AOC even significantly more. I wonder if we ever switch to QSFP28 for the interface instead of Displayport. We then could use different transceivers to accommodate different needs for cable length / speed, even fiber optics.
It may be down to physics too- I know wifi isn't the exact same thing, but based on the frequency of data transfer the max range of say, 3G is like 100km, while 5G is only like 1km. I assume as the bandwidth of the copper increases, so too does the range decrease. Eventually we may just need new display port standards based on fibre instead of copper.
when i first transitioned into 4k i remember having to get an active HDMI cable in order to reach 60hz every other cable was limited to 30hz.... this sounds very much like a repeat of that... that was probably like 15 years ago....
Reviewers needs to stop saying DP 1.4 is fine, they need to understand that the average consumer is not a tech channel and almost no one is buying a new monitor every year, no one should be stuck with DSC problems for the next ~6 years.
What DSC problems? If everything you're saying is true the majority don't even own a monitor that is compatible with this cable and are already stuck experiencing those "problems" and don't even know it. Then again the people who regularly watch these channels also tend to be the same people who regularly upgrade and are likely the first to experience the problems this video addresses.
I've just been looking around and noticed the 16K rated DP2.1 cables on Amazon and it'll say in the description 80gbps for the 1m but 40gbps for the 2m and 3m. I've actually been using DP1.4 cables on my 4k 240hz and 4k 144hz monitors. I still get the 4k 240hz on my Neo G8 which is obviously because it's using the upsampling system they have. I'm going to try and swap to newer cables, I can get away with 1m or even 0.5m with my G8 because my PC is on the desk right next to the monitor.
Thank you. Very informative as always! Are you able to do a recommendation/review on the longer length HDMI 2.1 certification? It would be really useful for a lot of people out there using this current standard. Cheers
Aren't there optical Displayport 2.1 80Gbps cables already? Cost is higher, but length isn't a factor anymore. I have been using 30m Hdmi 2.1 Optical cables for years.
At least there's a single monitor with DP2.1 especially for those wanting such spec monitor now and say new GPU later. But on next CES I really expect all new high end monitors with it.
Very interesting... I am using a 5m DP 1.4 cable (4k 120 Hz), and the connection is... pretty bad. Sometimes there is some "snow" on the screen, sometimes I have to bend the cable a bit, and sometimes I have to change the DisplayPort slot on the GPU. So, it sounds like 5m for DP 2.1 is basically guaranteed to not happen any time soon (unless you spend >$100 for some fiber optics converters or whatever).
I'm not sure if the issue is (just) the cable. In my experience, most interference / signal reflection issues happen at the *connectors,* where the wires can't be twisted / shielded. And using MiniDP instead of full-size DP might be part of the problem.
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.920 | 3 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwiW2M_kAg4/mqdefault.jpg)
Silkland, one of the cable manufacturers we talked about in this video, has reached out to us and updated their product pages to be much clearer about what their DisplayPort 2.1 cables are capable of.
1. Silkland's Amazon listings now correctly state that cables at 2m lengths and longer are only capable of 40 Gbps, not 80 Gbps as previously stated. Cables at 0.5m and 1m length remain at 80 Gbps. This can be seen here and also in other regions (not an affiliate link) www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCQ6FQ33?th=1
Silkland tell us this was an internal communication issue between the product department (who make the cables) and the operations editors (who upload the product listing to retailers). Moving forward, Silkland will be addressing this issue by requiring the product department to give accurate information to the operations team and that these product listings will be clearly detailed with accurate specs.
2. Silkland's cables are now properly listed as VESA Certified for DP80 at 0.5m and 1m lengths, and DP40 at 2m lengths. This can be seen at the VESA website www.displayport.org/product-category/cables-adaptors/?ps&pman%5B0%5D=silkland&pcat%5B0%5D=dp80-certified-cables&pcat%5B1%5D=dp40-certified-cables
Silkland tell us they weren't originally listed in the DP40 and DP80 sections because it's VESA's decision what categories products are placed under on their website, but they contacted VESA to have the website updated to reflect the results of certification.
3. Silkland's DisplayPort 2.1 cables over 2m in length have been updated to say they support 40 Gbps speeds, but remain without VESA Certification for DP40. Silkland are claiming these products are actually capable of 40 Gbps but the certification standard is more strict and even if the bandwidth can reach 40 Gbps, it may not pass certification due to other factors like attenuation. However internally they have tested these cables to work at 40 Gbps using both testing equipment and real world monitors like the Samsung Neo G9.
At this stage we'd still recommend sticking to certified cables at the lengths you're interested in where possible, anything beyond that you will have to take the manufacturer at their word.
4. Silkland are working on DP54 cables and some existing products (eg. 2m cables) will be upgraded to DP54 spec. DP80 cables certified up to 2 meters in length are also in the research and development phase, though shorter term goals are for 1.5 meters in length followed by 1.8 and 2.0 meters.
We're still going to keep an eye on the cable situation but I appreciate Silkland updating things to be more accurate and clear for consumers which was a major concern brought up in this video
Wow, that's a very fast response and action by a manufacturer.
What a great advertisement move.
New sub here --
Ty for posting this update. I appreciate when companies do this, especially when they reach out and seem to be trying to avoid making people frustrated.. which is more than I can say for most companies these days.
Love yea but this all sounds liek greek lol
Lol, I just checked that link, I have set Amazon to German and in German the product listing still says 80Gbps for the longer cables …
the person who thought displayport 2.1 should have like 4 different versions should be fired.
- Are you GPU bound or CPU bound?
- Nah, I'm cable bound...
Kinky.
Nah, I'm user bound!
Imagine still being hard drive bound.
@@TheZoenGaming
kinky
it’s cables unboxed now 😎
cables untangled
Cables Unboxed
Best one 😂
We need this channel. Now.
Monitors are not cheap
First it was USB, then it was HDMI, and now even Displayport has jumped on the asinine naming/optional features bandwagon. Awesome.
Do I detect sarcasm mayhaps?
@@jemborg no he's completely serious about loving asinine naming conventions
@@Shotblur awesome.
it really fell apart with 1.4, theres no reason to not use 1.5-1.9 but the manufacturers are pushing so hard to get people to switch to usb-c or hdmi and just be happy with mediocrity
It's infuriating, really.
You need to have PhD in cables to buy one. Hate that. Not the first time companies does that, this apply to everything today. What a mess. Thank you for sharing this with us, I think this type of content help a lot in many different ways at once
It’s become the same with USB
@@odjsjaks no, what you do is program the devices to tell you "hey buddy, your shit is running slow cuz the cables are crap" and refund the cable. this'll work for HDMI, DP, USB, Ethernet, PCI-E, anything. the devices know this because they start out at the high rate and fall back if there're errors, they just don't show you for some reason.
@@odjsjaks thats why i left out USB-PD, it's the one most likely used between dumb devices (eg wall adapter + power bank). then the only solution is keeping logs which a device with a screen can display later.
Length is always a problem when it comes to DP.
I see what you did there 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Are we still talking about cables?
@@radiofuture6911 not the kind you think.
@@radiofuture6911Some cables might be involved but not the way it's used in PCs.
Thanks so much for the clarification. Definitely didn't expect "Vesa Certified Displayport 2.1 cable at 80Gbps" to not necessarily work for UHBR20, due to the lack of a specific DP80 certification... This is messier than HDMI2.1 (where HDMI2.0 speed can also be HDMI 2.1) and USB3.2 (where 5Gbps is also a type of USB3.2)! I can see many consumers making the wrong purchase already.
It's not necessarily that they don't work. Organizations like VESA make their money not by making standards, but rather, by selling certifications. Same with HDR certifications for things like HDR400 and such. So the certifications can help, but they're also kind of meaningless because it's all a money scheme to sell certifications. For example, the LG OLED's didn't have HDR400 certification, but they certainly could do HDR400 and more. To get these certifications, costs 10's if not hundreds of thousands of dollars per product tested. Companies have to send their products off to them, they might only spend 20 minutes looking at it and testing it, and boom....here's a $10,000 bill to the company for the certification. Of course it's not that simple, they make it complex to create a facade to justify the cost. Now you can see why not only are things more expensive, lots of companies simply don't bother with certifications because of the predatory costs associated with getting them.
And when it comes to cable makers, who might sell maybe 10,000 cables for 10 dollars, to get certification would be a huge cut of their entire profits.....all just to get certification, for something their cable may be able to do despite lack of certification. That's also why the standards are constantly being trickled up, because it requires a new certification, which makes organizations like VESA a LOT of money. They could have created a singular modular cable design decades ago, one that can handle far into the future, and would also be cheap to mass produce, but that's why we have tons of different cable types. I mean just look at all the things that have been simplified....like headphone jacks and speaker wires. That's because these things existed before overcomplication, and they have no good way of forcing a change on them to make money from them, but if they could they sure would, and you'd have 50 different headphone plugs.
@@peoplez129 thanks for the detailed response! And yes I completely agree with you on the money-making scheme for orgs like VESA. However, as the reality stands, for us consumers who want to make sure our purchase works, a correctly certified one will 99% give us what we want. A non-certified product may also work, as you said, but there is a greater chance that they don't deliver. For this reason, I for one would still buy the certified one to avoid the gamble. But I 100% agree with you that the whole system really should change.
You gotta be aware they they all go down the USB route to make intercomptible with the encoding scheme and possible tranfer speeds. The maximum line tranfer speeds usbd by USB and after a certain point it currently is only unidirectional.
Its a sham that its allowed to sell those cables, with misleading info.
It should be mandatory to show the buyer what said cable spesifically support, like:
Bla bla bla : (ticked box)
Bla bla bla: (unticked box)
Etc....
Also listings should have a link to the vesa website, which also shows you that the cable is indeed supported.
Edit:
Great two videos! Very good info and it will saves us money.
By that logic, many things have been shams for a few generations now.
Hardly the first time we've had this issue.
HDMI, USB (before everyone making them became concussion patients) RJ45 as well as others, have had maximum lengths-to-spec considerations before active cables had to be a thing... and not exactly linking to the official boards to explain it all.
I think it stands out more now after HDMI and USB in particular have made their moves in recent, but not exactly new overall.
@@MaddJakd mind elaborating on the RJ45 naming issue? Or are you talking about those standards that aren't IEEE ratified? Latest is Cat 7 and that only recently, Cat8 is not, it exists due to data center need, and Amazon products just mislead as product cert doesn't exist so can't enforce.
Ethernet standards are some of the most clear tbh, in terms of that they directly state minimum spec / bandwidth, and the different types of shielding and what they're for, so can plan pretty easily once you have a spec sheet. Most homes should just be Cat6 nowadays, since most runs will be
@Masterrunescapeer if you bothered to actually read as opposed to skimming, I was blatantly talking about cable length considerations not being new.
Learn how conversations work.... or retake the comprehension portion of english before acting like you have any legit bones to be picked.
so what you're saying is that USB, HDMI and DP have all created a mess of naming schema where the advertised version is functionally meaningless to most end users, with the important things being stuck in the fine print, if there at all... fantastic.
I miss when standards referred to an interface, it was a line of technobabble. Honestly, I feel like *we feel* scammed because things are made 'apparently simple', when they're not.
Everything being 'made marketable', is a blight upon the industry.
"Wi-Fi 6" WTF is that? Must JustWork^TM with anything else 'Wi-Fi 6'
Vs.
"IEEE 802.11ax" Oh, it's an IEEE standard; I should probably look into/ask a pro what is and isn't supported on my hardware.
The fact you can say "DP" and "length" so many times in one video without cracking is a testament to your steel resolve.
Consumers: "We're tired of being scammed."
Organizations creating standards: "Don't worry, we won't help."
What’s the point of a “standard” if the “standard” has 4 different versions?
vesa moment 💀
@@Frozoken 😂
Do you know what standard even mean?
Intentional obfuscation of product capabilities. Basically they think we are so stupid that they can get away with it.
It is extremely scammy to expect a regular customer to know the difference between the different versions of the 2.1 standard.
I remember similar problems when HDMI 2.0 came out. Lots of cables were advertised as supporting either 18 Gbps or 4K 60 Hz, but they weren't.
Still is an issue considering HDMI consortium allowed a bunch of 1.X cables to be 2.0 cables by changing the spec after releasing it. Not as bad as USB but still.
Do you mean 2.1 where everything under the sun can be a 2.1 cable.
The bandwidth is just too high for cheep copper look at ethernet cables. You need cat 8 for over 10gbe links. And only up to 100ft. At half the data rate of dp 2.1. Just look up a cat 8 cable termination to see how much extra is put in to the cable.
And the cables use sold core copper as well.
There are 400gb dac cables but they cost like $200 for 2m and are really short as well.
@@andrewmcewan9145 It's whichever version that came out right before 2013 when I bought my 1080p 3DVision 2 monitor. So, it might be 1.4a that I'm thinking of.
@@andrewmcewan9145 It was whichever one came out right before I bought my 3DVision 2 monitor in 2013, so I might be thinking of version 1.4a.
It's still an issue with 2.0 and even more so with 2.1. Buying an HDMI cable is like a lottery.
Would be good to see as future content, maybe a once a year thing of cable testing to see if their performance lives up to their names and "certification". Would be a great way to help buyers avoid getting burned the hard way.
Granted! A person can spend a lot of money searching for the right car.
If Cat8 cables for 40 Gbps Ethernet can be certified to 30 meters, surely one can certify something like 80 Gbps DP for 2 meters, unless the DP standard cable/connector design is somewhat questionable to begin with.
Ethernet cables work on 48 volts.
Display port is 3.3 volts.
@@bot_365 48V is only for PoE, not for data transmission
@@bot_365 Display port 3.0 NOW WITH 48 VOLTS
@@bot_365 also, i'm not sure this is true, 48V for POE sure, but i doubt it would be 48Vfor signaling, but i could be wrong as i have never worked with cat8 ethernet
@@Tracenji You are correct, 48v is only poe power and not signaling voltage at all. The signal voltage is around +/- 1v on Ethernet differential signal lines.
I have purchased a Club3D DP2.1 a month ago. Yes, I can confirm these cables are VERY short. I had to relocate and change the orientation of my PC and Display.
Oh yes, we need the DP 2.1 4x2 3:4:5 80Gb 420Hz Cat 89 with Sonic and Knuckles.
How these people name these things is beyond me.
I had this issue when moving to a 1440p/165Hz monitor years back. None of the DisplayPort cables I had would reliably output that, including the one which came in the box with the ViewSonic monitor I bought. I ended up buying a Club 3D one for ~$25 that I'm still using and has never given me any problems - other than the fact that it's about twice as thick as any other display cable I own, so is a little hard to route.
even worse 144p 144hz HDR10 uses a lot of data.
Great warning video! Even with HDMI a similar misleading mess occured some years ago. To connect a PC to a 4k OLED TV just 5m away using hdmi, I tried 10m electric cables which allegedly supported 4K at their lengths, yet in spite of their advertised bandwidth capacity they did not work properly. Eventually the only way was to use an hdmi fiber cable. The much more demanding DP 2.1 is likely to go through the exact same misleading advertisement and disappointments for sure.
I'm pleased by the fact i was your source for this video.
Many info you're providing clearly come from my 2 month old posts on TPU forum (1.2m max length of DP80 cables, copper vs fiber, DP40 cables sold as DP80, DP80 certification list).
Good video, bye.
Exactly same problem I have notice where looked for longer cable for Thunderbolt 4 (or USB C 40GbE)
Cables for TB4 are commonly half the length of TB3
Thanks for this clarification! I canceld a cable on Amazon which I ordered few minutes ago. 👍👌
Yes, I agree. I was also surprised by the length of the cable to this monitor. I had to put the computer on the table next to the monitor.
It's kinda insane the industry didn't transition to optical cables a long time ago considering bandwidth for digital video has been a problem that existed since the DVI days.
But I guess they just couldn't manage to make HDCP annoying enough with optical cables… 🤷♀
While the fibre itself is rather cheap, the transceivers are still expensive. Looking at 40GbE QSFP+ active cables (which have 80Gb total bandwidth), you'd be spending 30-60 Euro for a 5m cable.
Bare MPO-12 fibre would be cheaper, but fibre connectors are definitely NOT durable enough for "mass consumer market" use.
You can’t bend optical since it’s glass and glass break.
DP 1.4a had this issue as well but not as terrible. When the RX 5700 XT was having black screen issues, one of the things AMD recommended was to use a Certified DP cable. For some people, this did work to solve the issue. However, Certified DP cables are much shorter then most cables you can purchase. For someone like me, who has a three monitor setup, this isn't going to work easily with a 1.5m cable, as typically your PC tower sits on one side or the other of the monitors. Only having the PC under the desk or in the middle of the desk is going to solve this issue, and not many people will want to return to the 90s.
Optical cables are going to be more expensive (likely because it will need transmit/receive hardware inside each of the connectors), and people who are not used to dealing with optical cables are going to likely be crushing them, twisting them, and breaking them in all kinds of ways because they won't be used to dealing with optical cables. It's going to take quiet the pubic service announcement to get people used to dealing with optical.
Thank you for being always so thorough Tim !
I think we're starting to get to the point where we might as well start to embrace fibre as a mainstream connectivity solution when it comes to desktop computers and pressure manufacturers to integrate the hardware that's necessary for cheaper passive fibre cables to become the norm. It might increase prices initially, but I believe it'll eventually benefit us all in the long run (fast USB-C cables are also a nightmare and it's not getting any better)
Cable Matters has never failed me. I'm sure they'll make one. I have two of their HDMI 2.1 cables, one short copper, one active optical 5m one, and an adapter from DP 1.4 to HDMI 2.1. They're flawless.
The lack of standardization in industry "standards" is maddening. How has this been allowed to continue on like this for so many years? I suspect it has everything to do with the fact that lawmakers do not play PC games, so this is not an issue that affects them personally.
it more like we have a lack of 8+k120Hz TVs. since right now all the research is being done to improve contrast instead of resolution. for most 4k is already good enough that jagged edges aren't a problem. the near sighted veiw is a priority over how much of the golden gate bridge you can see in the background.
The issue is not the lack of standards. The issue is the oversimplification for marketing purposes.
Before the era of mass consumer proliferation, *you* (the user) had to know what you were plugging in, and what the interface was capable of.
Nowadays, we're trained into "Wi-Fi is Wi-Fi, USB is USB, HDMI is HDMI, and DP is DP. It all JustWorks^TM".
The 'technobabble' names of old, used to mean "pay the F attention, or find someone who does".
Excellent video!!! Incredible how these retailers decide to lie instead of being honest. Even if it "works" at higher bandwidth... if its not certified at a specific speed, then its not certified. Don't lie to the consumer.
Excellent work, much appreciated. Will pass on the info to other people and look forward to the actual review of that Aorus.
3:15 Well I can, with absolute certainty, say that my PC and my graphic card ARE in very close proximity! :D
hahaha, thanks, hadn't noticed.
Here's to hoping Steve finds out for a ribbing on next podcast 😆
You needs a 6m PCI riser cable!
Seeing how goddamn slow alt+tab, or any other mode changes, is with DSC, I'm more than glad that the FO32U2P supports the solution for this insanity and cant wait for new GPUs.
I mean it takes several seconds to do a alt+tab out of exclusive fullscreen. Unbelievable. I would lose several seconds of a game intro cutscene, because starting a game does the same.
There seems to be indeed no harm in image quality by the DSC, but I have no comparison of course, but the insane slow mode changes are driving me crazy. I'm very, very glad now that the FO32U2P wont be the limiting factor in future.
Glad this is being addressed, thank you Monitors Unboxed!
My gf says the same thing, it's the length thats the issue
You heard the solution: stop being passive and go be active
length doesnt matter if the technic is right
She just has to get a reserve cable if the one being used is too short.
Putting the longer one in a drawer comes to mind.
Try finger, but hole.
Not really an issue imo. It's more about positioning
Hopefully the fibre optic style cables come out, and are cheap enough to be feasible. I had similar issues with getting a fibre hdmi cable that supported 4k120. Mimimum lengths for that started at 3m going up to 100m. While the price went from £70 up to over £120.
so comprehensive, thank you!
So is there no solution to getting a long enough 2.1 cables anywhere? Couldn't see anything on the website you suggested
Great. Now I need a training course to buy a DP cable thanks VESA.
Maybe they should rename DP40 as 2.1b, DP54 as 2.1c and DP80 as 2.1d.
It would make it clear that they all support the rest of the DP2.1 features and the letters would indicate the maximum tested link speed.
How dare you come in here and make such boring names!? That shit makes too much sense and does not looks as cool as DP2.1 DP80 TURBO EXTRA MEGA HQ HIGH DEF MUCH WOW GAMING RGB
i disagree, a cable is valued by its data rate mostly. it could carry whatever protocol it wants, its just copper.
What's misleading is you failing to mention that there is not a single graphics card currently made, even the professional top-tier cards, that support the full DP 2.1 protocol and certainly not at the UHBR20 standard needed for some of the monitor resolutions/FR you mention. It doesn't matter what cable or monitor you use if the graphics card doesn't support the full protocol.
2m DP80 active cables won't necessarily need to be fiber optic cables. It's possible to get slightly more length out of a copper cable with redriver chips.
There are already USB4 40Gbps copper cables with active redrivers, and 40Gbps USB4 signalling is very similar to DisplayPort UHBR20 (USB4 has two 20Gbps links in each direction, for 40Gbps bidirectional, whereas DP 2.1 UHBR20 can use all 4 links in one direction for a total of 80Gbps unidirectional).
It was mentioned that an active copper spec is being worked on
Come back when this can run of USB-C.
Screw this cable mess.
I feel this is an important area that must be explored when purchasing a monitor - the connection from the monitor to the GPU. Most importantly, what is the difference between all the configurations (including the Mac variants) - so shall I go HDMI or DP and what does each variation give me?
Is that a project you have considered?
Theres really only going to be a few situations where there'll be a difference: A. Your monitor configuration exceeds the bandwidth available of your cable so you need to use DSC or reduce resolution/refresh rate/color depth. B. Sleep/hibernate protocols are different for different video ports. What might let you wake your monitor up from power off might not work when using a different cable. C. The individual cable or video port might be broken which can cause artifacting or no connection to be detected on the devices. D. The standards supported on one protocol are different than the standards supported on another (a recent example is HDMI 2.1 on Linux). These are the only circumstances where I'd imagine there'd be a difference. This really isnt enough to make an entire video about.
I would love to see a full video on cable recommendations for all resolutions and refresh rates. That would be rad!
There was the same issue with HDMI 2.1 when it first came out. You could only really get cables.up to 6ft in length.
I have this gigabyte monitor, and at least for now I can just switch it to DP 1.4 mode in the OSD until the cable situation gets better.
I bought this monitor more for Gigabytes superior KVM implementation anyway.
Bonitors Bnboxed
bogos binted?
👽
I can't tell you over the years how many times I bought a cable with terms that should work but don't. I've bought expensive cables that suck, and cheap cables that work well above the spec they list. I feel like you've got a golden opportunity to do the community and world a service of just buying a truckload of cable brands/specs at three or four lengths and posting results with affiliate links for the ones that work. The ones that fail to meet advertised spec regardless of actual certification go to some kind of public wall of shame and we consumers can contact or avoid those companies to improve or go out of business.
The mention of club3d.... That brings me back. If you've been through that era, you know
Check with Blue jeans cables to see if they sell a longer Display port 2.1 compatible cable. All their cables are tested with a Fluke cable tester.
This was super helpful, thank you!
As someone who has bought 3 DP cables in the past before I finally got my monitor working properly... I appreciate this video a lot. Big Cable wants to sell more cables I guess!? (/s) VESA should honestly feel required to clear things up for consumers.
Even active optical cables are no guarantee of signal quality, as I've learned with Fibbr brand DP1.4 active cables. In fact, with their cables, somehow the shorter cables cause MORE dropouts. (What, do they put all the reject transceivers and fibers in the short cables?) It makes me wary of even trying DisplayPort 2.0.
1M cable: dropouts. 2M cable: slightly fewer dropouts. 3.3M cable: even fewer dropouts. 33-meter cable they sent me when I ordered a 3.3-meter cable: no dropouts.
Will you make similar videos on the HDMI equivalents? 2.1 listings are problematic
I think he did ... like 2 years ago when HDMI 2.1 was rather new. It's the same issue really, you can have 2.1, but without the full 48 Gbps link speed.
I recommend next video to be the dozen of ideas to name display cables. We can wait a month or 2 for the Gigabyte review
It is theoretically possible that some of these uncertified cables can achieve 80gbps speeds under certain circumstances (such as in a zero EMI environment), but if they were only certified for a lower bandwidth then it's very unlikely that they can be relied on in a normal home or office environment. VESA really should not be allowing companies to advertise cables as capable of achieving speeds greater than they're certified for.
Hey man, have you considered reviewing the new msi optix mag274qrf-qd e2 monitor? Ive heard its quite good but i always come to your videos to see if it's really true.
Cable problem. Yes.
DP 2.1 cables will follow the same path as HDMI 2.1 cables. Very muddy listings. Also; start thinking about fiber for anything longer than 8ft.
The market is waiting for Nvidia's announcement on the 5090 & 5080. I'll give this until the end of this year, and you will start seeing a lot more DP 2.1 cables.
So, there IS a solution for longer cables... but as ever it is expensive: fiber optic. There are fiber optic DP80 cables out there, and they can go to extremely long lengths. Fiber Command is one that I've personally used, though not at 80gbit speeds. Even there you have to be careful and check to see that it is actually DP80/80gbit certified as there are plenty of them that are only DP40 because they use basically the same transmitters that they do in fiber optic HDMI 2.1 cables. Any that support 80gbits are going to be over $100, so not cheap cables. But if you want high bandwidth Display Port over longer distances right now, it is an option, just an expensive one.
Well crap, I was hoping that DisplayPort would see the folly that HDMI pulled did with the 2.1 spec, but instead they went "Yessir, I'll have some of that" and served up a heaping plate of it.
It's still early in the lifecycle, and long before I need it for my systems as I'm happy with 1440p/144Hz so things might get better in the future (especially with pieces like this, pointing out the issues and confusion), but I kinda doubt it.
Bandwidth and cable length seems to be a gigantic issue industry-wide right now. Try finding a USB4/Thunderbolt4 cable longer than your forearm for instance. That's less of an issue than this 1.2M limit, but still incredibly restrictive. Basically requires you to have your desktop directly behind the monitor, and forget almost any VESA mounts.
Maybe some of these new ultra-high-bandwidth standards that aren't providing power (like DP, HDMI & Oculink) need to just bite the bullet and jump over to fiber optic. Active cables can work a bit, but seems more like an intermediary bandage and can be more prone to failures, connection issues and inferior parts being used. It'll certainly make them more expensive and the amount of companies able to make fiber cables is fewer, but it might be worth it in the long run.
There is a reason most high-throughput interconnects use fiber optics, it is just far easier to cram a lot of data into light than a super-high frequency signal on copper.
Thank you Tim. You saved me a mistake and money.
I bought the
Silkland DisplayPort 2.1 Cable 3M [VESA Certified], DP 2.0 Cable [16K@60Hz, 8K@120Hz, 4K@240Hz] 80Gbps HDR, HDCP DSC 1.2a, Display Port 2.1 Cord you described and it replaced a 3m 1'4 cable that was resulting in a black screen for a few seconds on a regular basis. No drop outs and a stable output to my dell oled 3440x 1440 at144hz. good for that output but probably not 80Gps
That Club 3D DP80 cable still says only "4K120Hz" in its name at 3:04. On their official page it says "4K240Hz". So why is it not labeled as 4K 320 Hz anywhere? Is your DisplayPort Cable Specs table wrong?
The Glory Mark DP80 cable does not mention what combination of resolution and refresh rate it supports anywhere.
Active cables ain't cheap. The 15ft active fiber DP 1.4 cable I currently own is ~$75. The only main advantage is that fiber is dirt cheap, so you can get absurd length cables for just a few dollars more, as long as you're willing to pay for the expensive active parts in the plug. (And you remember to plug them in the correct direction.)
I just wish DisplayPort would stop imitating the horrible branding of HDMI and USB specs. Low quality cables have become a genuine problem over the last decade. I'm getting to the point where I'm willing to buy some very expensive cables from reputable brands just to avoid these types of insane shenanigans. It's genuinely hard to find cables that deliver the speeds the advertise, or even cables that simply work.
The minute that one of these companies finally gets their act together and creates a straight forward branding for their specification, I'm going to be switching over to that type of cable exclusively for all my products. If USB gets their spec figured out first, I'll be a USB 5.0 house for everything from displays to charging. But I'm done dealing with DisplayPort cables that cause monitor flickering and having to sort my USB C cables into half a dozen piles depending on which set of specs they support. I'd rather go back to the days where you had multiple different types of cables with different plugs, because at least back then you could visually tell what a cable supported by how the cable looked. Now days, you need to carefully read both ends of the cable, and hope that your manufacturer bothered to print the correct branding on the ends of the cable, and even then, you'll find they simply lied about what's printed on the cable. It's a mess.
Personally, I'm buying a LOT less cables than I used to, because cable quality has become a big enough problem that I've changed my philosophy from "a cable for every location" to "only this one cable I know works". For high end displays, I'm basically committing to only buying active cables from reputable brands. Those brands get a lot more money from me, but the number of cables I'm buying has gone way down, which isn't helping the certification companies that make a profit from every cable sold. Hopefully buying fewer cables will affect their bottom line enough to force them to change, and fix the quality and labeling problems they've created. Until then, I'm content with repurposing cables I know I can trust, rather than gambling with cables that cause my monitor to flicker.
HDMI refuses to support Linux on AMD cards, DisplayPort has a problem. We never should have strayed from the one true display connector, the VGA
Not to mention that HDMI 2.1 also has the same problem, you can have a HDMI 2.1 cable that doesn't have the full 48 Gbps link speed.
All hail VGA
That was before Neoliberal economics really took hold, back when destroying your own company's reputation for a quick buck was stupid, short-sighted & nonsensical, rather than standard business practice.
That said, analog signal capable of carrying display data for 4K 240Hz 10Bpc image would have even greater bandwidth requirements. Would likely need a rigid microwave coax line with V connectors...
All hail mesozoic period ports 😂
@@MoraFermi "analog in the middle" sounds absolutely dreamy to me, NGL. Since the death of the CRT and VGA (more a CRT-control port, than Video-out port), there's always been a latency overhead.
TBQH, I think the 'solution' to your stated 'issue' and the real-world one at-hand, have a similar fix: Separate out the Serial Links over Coax/Twinax, just like Gen4 and Gen5 risers do. The effective 'frequency' of these interfaces is reaching into the microwave range so, why not use PHYs intended for that use?
I went through this a few weeks ago, predicted it wouls happen with a 4k high refresh monitor for me, and yes you can't find official VESA certified DP80 longer than a meter YET, but i'm sure a longer one should come out soon
But I got this monitor now and its a pure dream. I got it today evening and I'm still at default settings of the monitor and the defaults are already superb to me.
I'm waiting on a company to send me a test sample of their 10ft UHBR20 (DP80) cable. Should be certified, so that's nice - although maybe not the one I'll receive. I believe they're also doing a 6ft option.
I didn't double-check with them, but I assume both ends are full size DP.
I'd wager if they're working on it, plenty others are, so we should see some improvement to the DP80 cables market in the next few months.
Been using fiber options for excessively long runs of HDMI2.1 for a while. Hoping they come out with fiber options for DP80 this year. The 6ft and 10ft options I mentioned are unfortunately copper only for now. Cost-effective, but limited to more typical (and arguably practical) lengths.
Glad I didn't wait for the dp 2.1
I’ll give it a year and tech will catch up
Guess I was right, when after the last video I thought this reminded me of when HD TV were coming out, back then many got "certified" to label their TV HD (720p) or FullHD (1080p), but some didn't even allow HD input, but that didn't matter as the display in the TV could in theory display at 720p or 1080p. What a mess.
Kept mind-resimbling his hoodies logo with the MW3 logo 😅
I'm fairly adept with tech, and this had my head spinning. How confusing can we make it? Yes!
Also, good luck using this spec of monitor in a multi-screen setup on any GPU made in the next 10 years. Monitor/GPU industry seems to love adding features that can't actually be combined together. (Currently having to run my 144Hz screens at 95Hz because the 2080ti I'm using can't do anything higher at 4K without chroma subsampling, which ruins text clarity.)
I recall the struggle getting a reasonable length DP 1.4 cable for my first 144Hz monitor years ago. These days I can't even find an HDMI cable that doesn't cause a intermittent flash artifact between my RTX30 GPU and my LG C2, requiring either a PC restart or a cable re-plug. The least problematic cable so far is the one that came with my PS5 but the GPU and display still won't handshake properly a third of the time.
I've almost always had to buy separate cables for high end displays, audio equipment and lighting. If anything you've highlighted how cheaply most standard cables are manufactured. HDMI gets around this through compression--not better cable quality.
This seems odd to people who rarely (if ever) buy high end equipment but the cables provided by high end electronics OEMs are more of a courtesy and for trouble shooting than for use in the end application. It is more common than not that high end electronics applications obligate custom cables and the OEMs don't want to waste money on something they know probably isn't going to get used--same with power cables.
Two of my 4 cables I needed 10ft (3m). Certified 2.1 but lower speeds but DSC is fine with me and required no matter what. By time this is all sorted we will have 4k 480hz monitors that need DSC even with UHBR20.
I think they already established 120Gbps connections for USB-Alt Mode - wa sthat last year - but yeah who knows if there's even equipment for that. xP
It always starts like this, it seems like its usually a few years after a new DP capability before you start seeing 10FT/3M+ cables, I just started being about to get viable ones for 4K144, and I can now get those like 25Ft, im sure they will figure it out with these, if nothing else we will go fiber optic, which really isnt that expensive anymore
It also has a 'bandwidth configuration' problem in the different UHBR layouts that are not made clear to consumers.
Yep, not confusing at all. Good to see Club3D in there but that there are actually other players this time around.
Does DP 1.4 also have sub-categories, the same way 2.1 has DP80, DP40, etc.?
It does but a) everything you will buy today will be DP 1.4a. b) only difference between DP 1.4 and 1.4a is in improvement in DSC quality (more profiles).
@@Meddixi Awesome, thanks!
I am not surprised about pricing and length. Similarly fast QSFP28 DAC (100 GbE) cables cost as much or more. AOC even significantly more. I wonder if we ever switch to QSFP28 for the interface instead of Displayport. We then could use different transceivers to accommodate different needs for cable length / speed, even fiber optics.
It may be down to physics too- I know wifi isn't the exact same thing, but based on the frequency of data transfer the max range of say, 3G is like 100km, while 5G is only like 1km. I assume as the bandwidth of the copper increases, so too does the range decrease. Eventually we may just need new display port standards based on fibre instead of copper.
when i first transitioned into 4k i remember having to get an active HDMI cable in order to reach 60hz every other cable was limited to 30hz.... this sounds very much like a repeat of that... that was probably like 15 years ago....
Reviewers needs to stop saying DP 1.4 is fine, they need to understand that the average consumer is not a tech channel and almost no one is buying a new monitor every year, no one should be stuck with DSC problems for the next ~6 years.
What DSC problems? If everything you're saying is true the majority don't even own a monitor that is compatible with this cable and are already stuck experiencing those "problems" and don't even know it. Then again the people who regularly watch these channels also tend to be the same people who regularly upgrade and are likely the first to experience the problems this video addresses.
They could use a repeater build into the cable, wich allows more length of the cable
I've just been looking around and noticed the 16K rated DP2.1 cables on Amazon and it'll say in the description 80gbps for the 1m but 40gbps for the 2m and 3m. I've actually been using DP1.4 cables on my 4k 240hz and 4k 144hz monitors. I still get the 4k 240hz on my Neo G8 which is obviously because it's using the upsampling system they have.
I'm going to try and swap to newer cables, I can get away with 1m or even 0.5m with my G8 because my PC is on the desk right next to the monitor.
Why was I not informed this channel is a thing??? I had no idea it even exists >:(
Thank you. Very informative as always! Are you able to do a recommendation/review on the longer length HDMI 2.1 certification? It would be really useful for a lot of people out there using this current standard. Cheers
Aren't there optical Displayport 2.1 80Gbps cables already? Cost is higher, but length isn't a factor anymore. I have been using 30m Hdmi 2.1 Optical cables for years.
At least there's a single monitor with DP2.1 especially for those wanting such spec monitor now and say new GPU later. But on next CES I really expect all new high end monitors with it.
Just link up a bunch of cables using adapters, bonus points if you switch connector as well
Very insightful. Thank you
Very interesting...
I am using a 5m DP 1.4 cable (4k 120 Hz), and the connection is... pretty bad. Sometimes there is some "snow" on the screen, sometimes I have to bend the cable a bit, and sometimes I have to change the DisplayPort slot on the GPU.
So, it sounds like 5m for DP 2.1 is basically guaranteed to not happen any time soon (unless you spend >$100 for some fiber optics converters or whatever).
Its not the length that matters, but what you do with it..
Or so im told..
Jokes aside, great video! Cant wait for the full review!
In the UK we can purchase UGREEN DP 2.1 cables that are 3metres off of amazon and are apparantley VESA Certified.
Are those 3 meter cables DP40 or DP80?
Always quality content from you guys.
same is true for hdmi 2.1 sadly some companies sell fake slow hdmi 2.1 cables 😢
I'm not sure if the issue is (just) the cable. In my experience, most interference / signal reflection issues happen at the *connectors,* where the wires can't be twisted / shielded. And using MiniDP instead of full-size DP might be part of the problem.
That sounds a lot like the USB-C cable bollocks. 😅😭