DisplayPort 1.4 to Use 'Lossless' Compression for Higher-Quality 8K Video Over USB-C - MacRumors
Skip to Content

DisplayPort 1.4 to Use 'Lossless' Compression for Higher-Quality 8K Video Over USB-C

The Video Electronics Standards Association yesterday formally announced its new DisplayPort 1.4 standard, setting the stage for improved video quality and color for external display connections over both DisplayPort and USB-C connectors.

dp_usb_c
Rather than an increase in actual bandwidth, the improvements in DisplayPort 1.4 come due to improved compression, taking advantage of VESA's new Display Stream Compression 1.2 standard to support High Dynamic Range (HDR) video up to either 8K resolution at 60 Hz or 4K resolution at 120 Hz.

DSC version 1.2 transport enables up to 3:1 compression ratio and has been deemed, through VESA membership testing, to be visually lossless. Together with other new capabilities, this makes the latest version of DP ideally suited for implementation in high-end electronic products demanding premier sound and image quality.

dp_1_4_compression
In addition to video-related improvements, DisplayPort 1.4 also expands audio capabilities with support for 32 channels, 1536kHz sample rates, and broader support for "all known" audio formats.

The approval of DisplayPort 1.4 comes even though consumers are still awaiting the arrival of devices supporting the previous DisplayPort 1.3 standard. Intel had been expected to support DisplayPort 1.3 in its current Skylake generation of chips, but the company instead opted to offer dual DisplayPort 1.2 support. As we detailed earlier this year, the lack of DisplayPort 1.3 support in Skylake could lead Apple to hold off on releasing a new 5K Thunderbolt Display until next year when chips supporting the standard become available.

Intel hasn't laid out its DisplayPort support plans beyond Skylake, so it's unknown whether the company will first move to DisplayPort 1.3 or if it can jump straight to the new DisplayPort 1.4 standard. Either way, we're unlikely to see Macs supporting DisplayPort 1.4 until 2017 at the earliest.

Related Roundup: Studio Display
Buyer's Guide: Displays (Buy Now)
Related Forum: Mac Accessories

Popular Stories

2026 Macs and Studio Display 2 Feature

Apple Adds More 2026 Macs and Studio Display 2 to Refurbished Store

Friday June 26, 2026 7:12 am PDT by
Earlier today, we reported that Apple added the MacBook Neo to the refurbished store on its website, and it turns out the new additions go beyond that. The other products added to Apple's refurbished store in the U.S. and Canada for the first time today include the MacBook Air with the M5 chip, MacBook Pro models with M5 Pro and M5 Max chips, and the second-generation Studio Display (2026)....
iPhone 18 Pro Deep Red Feature

iPhone 18 Pro Launching in Two Months With These 12 New Features

Friday July 17, 2026 10:39 am PDT by
It is now mid-July, and that means the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are now just two months away. The devices are expected to look similar to the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, but there will still be many year-over-year changes, with rumored features including a smaller Dynamic Island, 5G via satellite, and more. Apple is expected to unveil the iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, ...
iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max Feature

'Apple Upgrade' Program Reportedly Launching Next Week

Tuesday July 21, 2026 8:30 am PDT by
Apple and Klarna are partnering on a new "Apple Upgrade" leasing program set to launch in the U.S. on Tuesday, July 28, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. The program will allow you to finance most iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch models, with a 24-month term for iPhones and Apple Watches and a 36-month term for iPads and Macs. Customers will be able to pay off the device early during...

Top Rated Comments

Canubis Avatar
136 months ago
Compression is never lossless. It may be imperceptible to the ear or eye, but it is still compressed at some level.
Excuse me, but this is complete nonsense. Indeed there is true lossless compression (though I cannot say for sure that "lossless" in this article truly means lossless). Just think about zip compression, you compress a text file by zipping it and get the exact same file with all data back when unzipping it. That's exactly what happens also with audio or video, when talking about lossless compression, though algorithms may differ.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
136 months ago
Jesus. Never in my life would I have believed this is how people actually think.
Dude, I don't want to mock you but you are so wrong, so UTTERLY ignorant about this subject, it's not funny.

Let me simply point out that LOSSLESS compression is a well-defined mathematical field, it is built upon probability theory, like all CS it consists of theorems and algorithms, and it applies to all random processes (think "data streams") regardless of whether they are text, video, sensor data, or anything else.
It has NOTHING to do with "rephrasing" and use of "shorter words". Your comment is the sort of thing I'd expect EE's to send each other on April Fools' day as a joke.
I think you missed the joke.
Score: 19 Votes (Like | Disagree)
136 months ago
Compression is never lossless. It may be imperceptible to the ear or eye, but it is still compressed at some level.
And compressing a file in the form of a ZIP 'archive' is also never lossless. If you zip a text file, the text will be shortened by slight rephrasing and the use of shorter words. This may be imperceptible to the reader but it is still compressed at some level.
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
136 months ago
Compression is never lossless. It may be imperceptible to the ear or eye, but it is still compressed at some level.
No - there are plenty of lossless compression algorithms. E.g. LZW compression used by GIF, some types of TIFF and ".zip" files (using lossy compression on executables and data files is not a good idea), Apple Lossless ('https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Lossless') audio, FLAC ('https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC') audio, .png files...

Lossless compression works by finding a more efficient way to pack the data. E.g. replacing frequently occurring patterns with short codes or 'run length encoding' (e.g. if there is a row of 1000 white pixels just send 'white' and '1000'). Morse code is another example (frequently occurring letters are given the shortest code rather than ASCII which uses 8 bits for every single character - Huffman encoding is the algorithmic equivalent).

With lossless compression, you get back exactly what you put in. You don't get the sort of 100x compression you see with lossy compression, but 2-3x is feasible.

However, "visually lossless" is either a redundancy (if its lossless, of course there's no visual difference) or weasel words.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
136 months ago
And compressing a file in the form of a ZIP 'archive' is also never lossless. If you zip a text file, the text will be shortened by slight rephrasing and the use of shorter words. This may be imperceptible to the reader but it is still compressed at some level.
Nonsense. Here, let me try:


$ cat > sonnet.txt
Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate.
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer's lease hath all too short a date.
^D
$ zip sonnet.zip sonnet.txt
$ rm sonnet.txt
$ unzip sonnet.zip
$ cat sonnet.txt

Hey, you scrubbed up OK!

$


Well, you learn something everyday.

Did you hear the one about a well-known photocopier manufacturer ('http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/06/xerox_copier_flaw_means_dodgy_numbers_and_dangerous_designs/') who used over-zealous lossy compression on their devices until people found that it was changing the numbers in the small print on spreadsheets?
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
136 months ago
And compressing a file in the form of a ZIP 'archive' is also never lossless. If you zip a text file, the text will be shortened by slight rephrasing and the use of shorter words. This may be imperceptible to the reader but it is still compressed at some level.
Jesus. Never in my life would I have believed this is how people actually think.
Dude, I don't want to mock you but you are so wrong, so UTTERLY ignorant about this subject, it's not funny.

Let me simply point out that LOSSLESS compression is a well-defined mathematical field, it is built upon probability theory, like all CS it consists of theorems and algorithms, and it applies to all random processes (think "data streams") regardless of whether they are text, video, sensor data, or anything else.
It has NOTHING to do with "rephrasing" and use of "shorter words". Your comment is the sort of thing I'd expect EE's to send each other on April Fools' day as a joke.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)