Samsung LCD UN46B7000 3D - HDMI 1.3 question

[wkward83]

The specs for this tv says it only has hdmi 4 hdmi 1.3 inputs. Isn't hdmi 1.4 required to watch 3d movies and 3d bluray? Thanks.

[Richard]

HDMI 1.4 won't be readily available until late this year due lack of supply. This is more of a frame issue than anything and I'm not sure when those 60 frames of 3D will arrive. Till then Blu-ray will be at 48 right/left frames for a 24 frame final and your display will handle the page processing instead creating 120 frames from the original without loss. HDMI 1.3 goes out to 60 frames 1080p and can clearly handle that.

BTW, same goes for broadcast HD due to bandwidth limitations. That cuts the information to each eye in half and viola, you have about the same amount of info.

[wkward83]

Thanks for the help, do you think this set will handle to the new espn 3d channel and other 3d channels ok!

[Richard]

yep

[Rodolfo]

Wkward83,

Your question is valid, unfortunately, the information that is circulating is not accurate, and when it is incomplete, it creates more confusion. However, the completed story of HDMI for 3D is very complicated, mainly because it does not depend on the spec alone.

By the way, the TV you mentioned does not specify that is 3D capable on Samsung’s website.

http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/tv-v ... l&tab=spec

That is a requirement to view 3D regardless if it has HDMI 1.3, and regardless if DirecTV can upgrade their 1.3 boxes to transport ESPN 3D over existing bandwidth.

So the answer to your specific question is actually: your TV can not handle either, but not because 1.3.

However, even if your TV were to be a 3D capable with HDMI 1.3, there are still many conditions surrounding the “could or could not” handle 3D from certain sources.

3D over HDMI is not only about bandwidth, it is also about having the correct 3D protocol/language for the TV to understand the player/set-top-box regarding the 3D format/structure used in the handshake. Not to mention how much complex it gets when you add an A/V receiver in between and the receiver manipulates the HDMI signal.

Please consult the following article series where I cover the subject of HDMI for 3D from many angles:

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/20 ... part_1.php

The manufacturer of a 3DTV could have designed the hardware (and chosen specific HDMI chips) to be software upgradeable to receive the protocol updates applicable to other 3D formats/structures, such as “over/under” of ESPN and DirecTV, which would be included in the 1.4a spec of HDMI coming soon. However, manufacturers can software-upgrade what they want even on 1.3 if they made their equipment capable to do so.

The bandwidth of even the HDMI 1.0 “SPEC” (4.95 Gbps) is sufficient for 2x1080p24 (3D film) or 2x1080i60 (3D video) coming from a 3D Blu-ray player. However, if the video signal is deinterlaced by the player as 2x1080p60 (3D video) the bandwidth required would double up and at least HDMI 1.3 “SPEC” (10.2 Gbps) would be required. Notice I highlighted “SPEC”.

Again, bandwidth is only part of the requirements for 3D. 3D protocols/language for interoperability is another part, and manufacturer design for HDMI and equipment is the other one, they could have implemented the 1.3 version with just the capabilities the TV needed at that time to keep the price down. A few cents of savings on a limited HDMI chip for example could be reason enough for the hardware to be incapable to be upgraded to other functionality, 3D and otherwise.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra

[wkward83]

Sorry the model number for the tv that I was meaning to ask about is the UN46C7000, not the b model, thanks.

[Rodolfo]

That set is 3D capable.

Here is the PR from Samsung that confirms your question, without even mentioning the HDMI version:
------------------
New in 2010, this year’s premium models in the LED TV lineup, the 7000, 8000 and 9000, all include Samsung’s proprietary built-in 3D processor and emitter that is optimized for, and enables compatibility with multiple 3D standards including half and full HD resolution formats as well as the Blu-ray Disc Association approved “Blu-ray 3D” standard. In addition, Samsung’s 3D system delivers a picture using a full color spectrum for an unbelievable, immersive viewing experience.
---------------------

As I mentioned on my previous post, HDMI versions and software implementations by manufacturers run two parallel paths.

The set maybe released with 1.3 (the 8000 claims 1.4 though), and have already, or be upgradable to, the 3D protocols for full (3D Blu-ray) and half (cable and satellite, DirecTV with ESPN, etc), like with many other 3D products. The bandwidth of 1.3 is the same as 1.4.

2010 will bring many products that will have 1.3 and 1.4. A manufacturer can implement features on a 1.2 product that are more complete than another product that claims 1.3, HDMI LLC does not mandate full implementation of all the features of each spec, nor deters a manufacturer to implement features from a higher spec on the installed chip, which may have an earlier HDMI version. One example is the Ethernet feature of 1.4 that many products claiming 1.4 may not implement.

A manufacturer does not even have to request authorization from HDMI LLC to do that.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra

[Richard]

Corrected the model number for this post...

Full left/right eye 1080p at a frame rate of 60 when summed is actually 120 frames of 1080p information which HDMI 1.3 can’t handle but HDMI 1.4 can. In the October 2009 issue of Widescreen Review is an article titled “Is 3D Ready For The Home?”, and Chris Chinnock specifically addressed this topic of HDMI bandwidth for 3D at 60 frames.

As noted in the specs, HDMI 1.4 can handle a 2Kx4K image (which 1.3 cannot) paralleling 1080p 60 frame 3D bandwidth requirements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_1.4

I have very reason to suspect that if you purchase a 3D ready TV and 3D ready Blu-player you will get 3D images if connected directly to the display (current Mitsubishi 3D DLP will require an adapter now but 2010-2011 season models released about August 2010 might not).

I can’t speak for the rest, concerning the inclusion of 3D standards and the possible requirement of firmware upgrades for past and current HDMI versions. Rodolfo has received information that the future could be quite messy and frustrating implementing 3D technology in existing systems due to compatibility issues such as HDMI pass through on the HDMI equipped A/V receivers we all bought over the last 2-3 years. If that pans out to be true, the 3D revolution will be about as effective as a one legged man in a butt kicking contest.

[Rodolfo]

Richard,

By correcting the model # on the title of the thread it would make my first response automatically incorrect (my statement that this TV is “not” 3D capable), and your response of “yes” automatically correct. The title of the original question must be kept to maintain consistency with the responses and the integrity of the content.

Regarding HDMI, I was careful to differentiate between specs, chip implementations, and manufacturer designs. When you meant 1.3 cannot “handle” 3D the statement implies that the spec is not capable and that a 1.3 chip/equipment implementation cannot be upgraded to the requirements of 3D, which as I said before: they can if they were designed that way.

I also said that HDMI 1.3 and 1.4 “specs” have the same bandwidth capacity (10.2 Gbps) and a chip/device designed without restricting those specs would be sufficient to carry 3D on half frame and full frame, for which even the bandwidth of the 1.0-1.2 spec would suffice.

If a manufacturer produced a device that has a 1.3 HDMI chip not restricted in bandwidth, and was designed to be firmware upgradable it is possible to have that device handle 3D, and other software related functionality, including higher resolution.

The article you provided was written by Chris Chinnock, president of Insight Media. We were both at CES’s 3D@HomeConsortium meeting with manufacturers, and we also crossed emails last week about his company claiming that 1.3 “SPEC” does not have enough bandwidth for 3D, when it actually does.

From my meetings and interviews with HDMI president Steve Venutti and Jeff Park they both confirmed that the 1.3 spec would even be sufficient for the 2x1080p60 of 3D if that was needed, but it is unlikely that any device would need to output or input that resolution today because the content is either 1080i60 or 1080p24 2D or 3D, and there is no reason for a 3D blu-ray player to upconvert a 2x1080i60 to a 2x1080p60 and demand doubling the transport capacity to accomodate for the higher resolution. But if it was needed the “spec” had the bandwidth to do it.

Chris article also mentions that “1.4 offers bit rate support of up to 100 Mbps”, I am not sure what he meant but, again, the bit rate is supported up to 10.2 Gbps, and the spec was also designed to go even higher than that.

I asked HDMI and Chris to address the matter directly, but I told Chris that the 1.3 spec has sufficient bandwidth for 3D, and that the issue was mainly the 3D protocols/language on the chip/devices, if they were designed to be firmware upgradable, as Cablelabs and cable companies are doing for the cable industry to accommodate 3D frame compatible over their legacy set-top-boxes.

Rodolfo La Maestra

[Richard]

As noted in the specs, HDMI 1.4 can handle a 2Kx4K image (which 1.3 cannot) paralleling 1080p 60 frame 3D bandwidth requirements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_1.4

Is Wiki wrong? I look forward to your explanation.