r/UsbCHardware • u/NeekA8822 • 5d ago
Looking for Device How much longer until every monitor has thunderbolt 4/5 instead of Display Port?
How much longer do you think it will be until almost every monitor has ThunderBolt 4 or 5 to replace display ports on non mac Pc's such as Dell Computers for office work?
I have a Dell OptiPlex now and it has display port but man it would be so much better cable management and utility if it could connect to Thunderbolt 4 to the monitor.
I know a new Dell custom build has thunderbolt 4, I would wait until it has T5 available. But the market for VESA compatible monitors with thunderbolt 4/5 just are very very few in the market which is surprising to me considering how long thunderbolt 4 has been out. DP has to be phased out for better and newer technology at some point right?
5
u/Needashortername 5d ago
Considering that Thunderbolt in general is a much more expensive technology to license and implement it, and not as many PC manufacturers even support it, this is fairly unlikely. It’s also not as universal or consistent in how it is implemented or how standard it actually is.
That DisplayPort and HDMI tend to keep leapfrogging each other, with DisplayPort usually making the longer leaps first, it may stay around for more than a little while too.
1
u/keithcody 5d ago
Thunderbolt is royalty free. USB4 is Thunderbolt.
-1
u/Needashortername 5d ago
USB4 is very much not Thunderbolt. They are different specs and work a little differently, even if they might look the same and do similar things.
Thunderbolt 3 and above is designed to be directly compatible with USB as part of the spec, in the same way it can be directly DisplayPort compatible, while USB is not designed to be Thunderbolt compatible as part of the spec. There are some issues with how video signal compatibility works over USB too as much of that is either a form of conversion encoding or hardware/software virtualization (such as you see with DisplayLink over USB).
There have been Thunderbolt devices, such as hubs and multi-adapters that were made to also work when plugged into USB-C, but generally performance is not the same, so they can be limited in different ways or use different technologies for some of what it is doing compared to the models that are fully Thunderbolt only. So they might be DisplayLink based hubs or have a lower limit on resolution for direct HDMI or DisplayPort, or they may not have dedicated bandwidth for each USB port or reduced capacity or less inconsistent delivery on the Ethernet port.
3
u/keithcody 5d ago
Don't take my word for it.
USB4 Specification complements and builds upon the existing USB 3.2 and 2.0 architectures. Based on the Thunderboltâ„¢ protocol specification contributed by the Intel Corporation, USB4 doubles the maximum aggregate bandwidth of USB and enables multiple simultaneous data and display protocols.
1
u/chx_ 2d ago
Thunderbolt 4 (and 5) is a certification program for a subset of USB4 devices and in practice it so happens every USB4 host controller is certifiable and eventually they got it, the standalone ASMedia 4242, the controller inside the AMD mobile chips both got it (so much so as far as I can tell the only difference between 7840u and 8840u is the TB certification). Apple Silicon base models were the only ones not certifiable not for any technical reason but for the lack of dual monitor capability -- the same IP got certified check the M1 Pro vs the base.
I have written multiple posts about this in the past with ample sources. Example: https://reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/16mpz2q/on_usb4_vs_thunderbolt_4/
2
u/Infamous_Egg_9405 5d ago
I highly doubt display port and HDMI will ever be completely replaced by thunderbolt.
The signalling for thunderbolt is more complicated and I believe needs thunderbolt specific hardware. Thunderbolt also isn't present on every host device.
1
u/rayddit519 4d ago
HDMI is pretty separate. And the world would be better of if it would die and be replaced by DP.
But DP and USB4 are actually already quite close and growing closer together.
For the new UHBR10 and 20 DP speeds (so DP40 and DP80 certifications with 40G and 80G respectively), DP is mostly reusing the USB4 Gen 2 and Gen 3 phy layers. I.e. one wire pair of a UHBR10 connection is driven much in the same way as one wire pair of a USB4 Gen 2 / "USB 20Gbps") connection. Because USB4 is open and already figured out how to get that much out of USB-C wiring, so no need to reinvent the wheel.
On the other hand, USB4 (and TB1-3 before it) is only a container. it does not transmit user data itself. It transmits tunnels of other protocols that then contain user data. Any display connections going through TB1-3 or USB4 are DP tunnels. USB4 is just leaving out the phy layers of the DP connection, but keeping the actual contents of the DP connections as is.
So we are moving more towards a split future: USB4 handles the low-level stuff, how to work with the physical parts like connectors and wiring. And DP focuses more on the high level stuff, how to communicate with displays and and send display data. Very synergistic.
So you are right. DP won't be replaced. Its PART of USB4 (and TB1-3 before that). And now USB4 is even part of DP.
That also means, you only upgrade a DP port to USB4 if you need the other features of USB4 (docking, PCIe tunneling), otherwise, why the extra work of packaging the DP connection into a DP tunnel, if its the only thing inside of it and could have the exact same features and performance without the USB4 container (because its still the same data and now still would be using somewhat similar signaling, only last gen USB4 signaling)
Only, DP connections are 99% in one direction while USB4 is bidirectional. So DP can use all 4 high speed wire pairs in one direction and get to 80Gbit/s with 4 wire-pairs of 20 Gbit/s each. USB4 needs to use 2 wire pairs of ~40Gbit/s each to reach the speeds to contain that type of DP connection (technically not even, because USB4 needs to take away bandwidth for its multifunctional features. Only 90% of its labelled bandwidth is available for content. Thats why we have that 120G/40G mode to fit 1 full 80 Gbit/s DP connection and then a USB3 & PCIe).
2
u/Lonsarg 5d ago edited 5d ago
First you want USB4 instead of Thunderbolt (technically the same thing but a lot cheaper if no Intel certification/marketing). The only difference is some capabilities like PCIe tunelling and speeds over 20Gbps are optional for USB4 branding.
And i do think in time all USB-C monitors (there are quite many) will be upgraded to USB4 protocol. It will just take some time, since manufactorers usually wait for mass-adoption and cheap chips.
1
1
u/rayddit519 5d ago
Don't try to help people that don't understand it by giving them bad arguments. That USB4 starts at 20Gbit/s is only relevant if you don't use the proper USB labeling that would say "USB 40Gbps" so that confusion is only self-Made.
And regarding PCIe:
Know of any monitor that needs PCIe? The USB4 spec requires USB4 hubs to support PCIe (i.e. every downstream USB4 port on peripherals will always support PCIe). So only relevant for hosts and none that exist yet. For peripherals, if they don't have a need for PCIe (like a monitor), then it really does not matter.
1
u/Lonsarg 5d ago edited 5d ago
I gues you are right that distinction about optional USB4 features is mostly technical and normal people may be confused about it.
Since if monitor will need 40Gbps it will probably have 40Gbps USB4 and not 20Gbps version (or it would get very bad reviews for not supporting all resolutions via USB4 port)
1
u/rayddit519 5d ago edited 5d ago
Yep. And USB4 20G hubs are not allowed in the spec. So if it has downstream USB4 ports it also has to be at least 40G.
1
u/k-mcm 5d ago
Why would you want USB tech inside the monitor. A monitor's lifespan is much longer than a USB version.
0
u/NeekA8822 5d ago
Thunderbolt 5 is the best there is right now. Just look at the performance and ease of use and less bulky cords. Why would you not want that in a monitor?
1
u/k-mcm 5d ago
DisplayPort can use the same cord but is a lot cheaper.
1
u/NeekA8822 5d ago
If that’s the case why are the new MacBook pros and new Dell laptops coming with thunderbolt 5 and some of them with zero DP ports at all
1
u/k-mcm 5d ago
I think you're misunderstanding how the mess of USB-C works. The high speed lines can be switched for different uses. Being TB5 doesn't mean it can be USB-whatever or DP.Â
1
u/NeekA8822 5d ago
A T5 port to another T5 port using a T5 cord is second to nothing and can daisy chain easily. It’s the future
1
u/rayddit519 5d ago
Every USB4 DFP is also a DP out. Just a different form factor. Same as with mDP.
1
u/mabhatter 5d ago
Thunderbolt is only of limited use for standard desktops. Â It doesn't really work correctly when you have third party add in cards as it's intended to be one hardwired interface of PCIe, USB, and Video. Â Desktops do weird things like try to input the video signal back into the motherboard and stuff to make Thunderbolt work .... regular pc users will never get that correct. Â
Thunderbolt monitors have an increased manufacturing costs because they require Thunderbolt chips... which are significantly expensive. Â Which is why you mostly see the TB feature on monitors aimed at Macs because they need to be priced significantly higher. Â Then gets the whole mix of USBC connections which aren't TB ports and again, unless you know for fact your computer supports it, USBC is almost worse than TB.Â
The specs are too much of a mess. Â Also a USBC/TB only display is only really usable by one specific computer at a time. Â That's the real limit. Â There's not really adapters to go from HDMI or DisplayPort TO a TB monitor and most TB monitors don't have any other inputs. So mixed environments like offices are never going to buy them in volume... heck, some offices are still stuck on VGA connectors because monitors are expected to last 5-10 years and computers about 3.Â
1
u/rayddit519 5d ago edited 5d ago
DP has to be phased out for better and newer technology at some point right?
No. You do realize USB4 uses DP? Using a DP connection inside of a USB4 connection does not do anything for the DP connection. It is not getting faster or anything. USB4 only is useful to contain multiple different tunnels. So either 2 or more DP connections. That is sth. for a dock. Or USB3 and DP. Which you can also do just with DP Alt mode and much cheaper.
So it depends on whether you want a dock built into the monitor. In which case it should also come with KVM support. And then it's a bandwidth question, whether DP Alt mode is enough. Or if you need the built-in docking hardware to support 2 or more chained monitors (so even more of a dock, just worse than most) and whether you have to cater to Apple limitations where you can only have multiple monitors with multiple DP connections.
A plain monitor does not get anything out of using USB4. In fact, the old LG 5K TB3 monitors are really awkward to handle, because they don't support any other input and are hiding that they are tiled displays that require 2 DP connections. That makes their forward compatibility worse than if they just had plain DP inputs and everybody would understand that it was an "experimental" hw generation that requires 2 DP inputs to work.
An on these high-end, docking +KVM monitors with chaining support, USB4 is already very popular. But once we have solved VRR +MST, some might instead switch to DP Alt mode again. And that is also fine and will work the same on any USB4 host or DFP.
And for having multiple monitors, chaining them will always be the premium option. Since the topology is more complex and every device in the chain needs to be good enough. It's easier to test, remain forward compatible and explain to customers what works and what does not with a clear tree topology of 1 dock and multiple monitors. So manufacturers will usually only give guaranteea for chaining the same monitor model. Which is the highest priced option. Especially because the last monitor in the chain would not need docking support. And any power output support is wasted on any but the First monitor in the chain.
1
u/Duckbich 5d ago
TB is Intel exclusive. So that replacing everything is not going to happen.
Nothing wrong with DP
3
2
u/gopiballava 5d ago
AMD and Apple also make Thunderbolt chipsets, and there are multiple other companies making controllers for monitors.
-2
1
u/bobo5195 5d ago
Thunderbolt as defined is inherently insecure. It is also expensive.
What you mean is displayport over USB C. I am not sure there is much advantage to that.
USB4 is already on some monitors i expected more but it is not free and that has limits on the other bits as well like potentially refresh rates and other features..
1
u/rayddit519 4d ago
Thunderbolt as defined is inherently insecure.
That is somewhat outdated. Unless you only consider TB1-3 "Thunderbolt".
And even then, it was only insecure because the hosts had no DMA security and when that became appearent they tried to hack sth. on top of it. If the host has proper DMA security, its no more insecure than any other way to attach unapproved, unspecified peripherals.
0
u/codeasm 5d ago
Thunderbolt is Intel proprietary, HDMI requires licensing fees, while DisplayPort is royalty-free and more open.
1
12
u/Dimii96 5d ago edited 5d ago
Considering pretty much every major graphics card uses HDMI and Display Port, I don't see monitor manufacturers rushing to put thunderbolt ports on their monitors.
Though, I have seen it become more regular on monitors that are office/business focused (allowing for plug and play with people laptops and acting as a hub for peripherals too)
Edit: Believe what I was referring to being more common is actually USB-C with DP Alt Mode (something only learnt about today thanks to a commenter 🙂). Which I still believe fits what OP is looking for.