Used to work in corporate events and we'd have bit their hands off for these at that kind of price! Used to pay around that for CAT5 extenders, and then you had the added hassle of power at both ends and extra cabling complexity. That looks like a great option for running an HDMI 2.0 or DP1.4 signal long distances.
now our HDMI2.1 Fiber Optic Cable can meet over 300meters long reach signal transmission only plug and play. Feel more details please email us [email protected]
HDMI over Ethernet appears to be a lot cheaper these days - if you only need 1080P. If you need 4K (or more) or to avoid extra power adapters, this might be worth the price.
now our HDMI2.1 Fiber Optic Cable can meet over 300meters long reach signal transmission only plug and play. Feel more details please email us [email protected]
now our HDMI2.1 Fiber Optic Cable can meet over 300meters long reach signal transmission only plug and play. Feel more details please email us [email protected]
$2.74/ft for active display port cable is not a bad deal (however many others are offering similar $40-$200 less it seems) $2.13/tt for HDMI cable on high side IMO have seen go for $1.45 thereabouts if you get specific lengths (not always the longest cables)
It would be cool to see an HDMI to Ethernet SR or LR adapter. That way you could lay out a low latency, full bandwidth video connection over any length you chose. It would take a fair bit more engineering to bundle all of the low speed interfaces into one piece of fiber though. This is still a very cool product.
The tricky thing with trying to run over standard Ethernet is bandwidth. Most HDMI-over-Cat5/6 products are not actually using Ethernet signaling, they're just running HDMI signaling over the Cat5/6 cables.
Plain old standard 1920x1080 24bpp 60Hz video requires just short of 3 gigabits per second of raw bandwidth. That is to say what's basically considered the entry level for modern display devices requires the second fastest variant of copper ethernet to exist. 4K60 takes you well north of 10 gigabits per second, putting you firmly in high-end enterprise networking territory. Higher refresh rates or greater bit depths (HDR) take it even further.
The solutions I'm aware of that actually run over ethernet all are basically video capture devices that compress the signal down to rates usable over common equipment, usually using H.264 or H.265. This introduces latency and lowers video quality, which is usually acceptable for applications where the screen is mostly playing videos but doesn't work so well for desktop or gaming.
Since these sorts of things also tend to be installed with at least one end in a place that's not easy to get to it's desirable to be future-proof, so such a product would have to be using at least 25GbE to support 4K
The first is HDBaseT which has a fiber spec and permits using SFP+ transceivers for the PHY. That get you pretty much every fiber available in some fashion. However, these cannot be mixed in with normal network traffic.
There are various AV-over-IP extenders that'll do uncompressed 3840 x 2160 @ 30 Hz over a 10 Gbit Ethernet connection. However, I have yet to see any sort of AV-over-IP extender leverage more than 10 Gbit of bandwidth which means higher resolutions would invoke some compression. Various protocols like SDVoE, AVB and some SMPTE standards do have provisions to go to higher bandwidths, just no vendor in the AV space has actually implemented them yet. The upgrading beyond 10 Gbit networking is exceedingly expensive and any sort of wide spread AV-over-IP solution with the expectation of providing >25 Gbit bandwidth would likely need 400 Gbit backbone infrastructure in place. Though once you have that 400 Gbit backbone, it could work with, well, 400 different 1 Gbit streams over a single cable.
Personally I am avoiding the various AV-over-IP products as there are way too many implementations right now with everyone attempting vendor lock-in. For example, both Crestron, SVSI/AMX/Harmon/Samsung, and Audinate have M-JPEG2000 based AV-over-IP products which are not interoperable with each other. It really is shocking to see the same underlaying compression schemes and communication protocols used between different vendors but they go out of their way to make sure don't work with each other. Also if any vendor says they can do 4K60 over 1 Gbit at good quality with low latency, they are flat out laying to you. The 18:1 compression ratio is just too much to do near real time (solutions like H.264/H.265 are not real time but do produce better picture quality). However, 1080p60 looks fine over 1 Gbit and 4K looks great over 10 Gbit.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
16 Comments
Back to Article
WinterCharm - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
wow, that price tag though O_Ohaukionkannel - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
You need these in big auditorios and maybe sport halls and so on. And in those situations... well these Are cheap!WinterCharm - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
Good point.This is definitely not a consumer product.Thorburn - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
Used to work in corporate events and we'd have bit their hands off for these at that kind of price! Used to pay around that for CAT5 extenders, and then you had the added hassle of power at both ends and extra cabling complexity.That looks like a great option for running an HDMI 2.0 or DP1.4 signal long distances.
WinterCharm - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
It's cool to know that in their segment these are actually very competitive prices :) thank you for that enlightening comment. :)hdmiaoc - Thursday, April 22, 2021 - link
now our HDMI2.1 Fiber Optic Cable can meet over 300meters long reach signal transmission only plug and play. Feel more details please email us [email protected]Ken_g6 - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
HDMI over Ethernet appears to be a lot cheaper these days - if you only need 1080P. If you need 4K (or more) or to avoid extra power adapters, this might be worth the price.hdmiaoc - Thursday, April 22, 2021 - link
now our HDMI2.1 Fiber Optic Cable can meet over 300meters long reach signal transmission only plug and play. Feel more details please email us [email protected]hdmiaoc - Thursday, April 22, 2021 - link
now our HDMI2.1 Fiber Optic Cable can meet over 300meters long reach signal transmission only plug and play. Feel more details please email us [email protected]Dragonstongue - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
$2.74/ft for active display port cable is not a bad deal (however many others are offering similar $40-$200 less it seems)$2.13/tt for HDMI cable on high side IMO have seen go for $1.45 thereabouts if you get specific lengths (not always the longest cables)
willis936 - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
It would be cool to see an HDMI to Ethernet SR or LR adapter. That way you could lay out a low latency, full bandwidth video connection over any length you chose. It would take a fair bit more engineering to bundle all of the low speed interfaces into one piece of fiber though. This is still a very cool product.wolrah - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
The tricky thing with trying to run over standard Ethernet is bandwidth. Most HDMI-over-Cat5/6 products are not actually using Ethernet signaling, they're just running HDMI signaling over the Cat5/6 cables.Plain old standard 1920x1080 24bpp 60Hz video requires just short of 3 gigabits per second of raw bandwidth. That is to say what's basically considered the entry level for modern display devices requires the second fastest variant of copper ethernet to exist. 4K60 takes you well north of 10 gigabits per second, putting you firmly in high-end enterprise networking territory. Higher refresh rates or greater bit depths (HDR) take it even further.
The solutions I'm aware of that actually run over ethernet all are basically video capture devices that compress the signal down to rates usable over common equipment, usually using H.264 or H.265. This introduces latency and lowers video quality, which is usually acceptable for applications where the screen is mostly playing videos but doesn't work so well for desktop or gaming.
Since these sorts of things also tend to be installed with at least one end in a place that's not easy to get to it's desirable to be future-proof, so such a product would have to be using at least 25GbE to support 4K
Kevin G - Thursday, March 28, 2019 - link
There are two kinda today.The first is HDBaseT which has a fiber spec and permits using SFP+ transceivers for the PHY. That get you pretty much every fiber available in some fashion. However, these cannot be mixed in with normal network traffic.
There are various AV-over-IP extenders that'll do uncompressed 3840 x 2160 @ 30 Hz over a 10 Gbit Ethernet connection. However, I have yet to see any sort of AV-over-IP extender leverage more than 10 Gbit of bandwidth which means higher resolutions would invoke some compression. Various protocols like SDVoE, AVB and some SMPTE standards do have provisions to go to higher bandwidths, just no vendor in the AV space has actually implemented them yet. The upgrading beyond 10 Gbit networking is exceedingly expensive and any sort of wide spread AV-over-IP solution with the expectation of providing >25 Gbit bandwidth would likely need 400 Gbit backbone infrastructure in place. Though once you have that 400 Gbit backbone, it could work with, well, 400 different 1 Gbit streams over a single cable.
Personally I am avoiding the various AV-over-IP products as there are way too many implementations right now with everyone attempting vendor lock-in. For example, both Crestron, SVSI/AMX/Harmon/Samsung, and Audinate have M-JPEG2000 based AV-over-IP products which are not interoperable with each other. It really is shocking to see the same underlaying compression schemes and communication protocols used between different vendors but they go out of their way to make sure don't work with each other. Also if any vendor says they can do 4K60 over 1 Gbit at good quality with low latency, they are flat out laying to you. The 18:1 compression ratio is just too much to do near real time (solutions like H.264/H.265 are not real time but do produce better picture quality). However, 1080p60 looks fine over 1 Gbit and 4K looks great over 10 Gbit.
SirMaster - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
What about HDMI 2.1?Krause - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
That's really cool, but why do Optical cables need shielding against EMI?willis936 - Wednesday, March 27, 2019 - link
They don't. The electrical cables bundled in there do.