Consumer Technology Need help with a long (~30 ft) HDMI cable.

[Jason]

The super-long HDMI cable I use to connect my PC to my TV appears to no longer be working and even though I have no near-term plans to upgrade my GTX 970 () or 2013 Panasonic plasma, I figure I may as well future proof this replacement cable if I have to spend the money anyhow. I can't find my tape measure right now but I think 30 feet is about right to give me plenty of slack on both ends (the damage to the current cable probably came from not enough slack at the PC end causing the connector to get bent around as I moved the PC around).

 

My current cable came from Blue Jeans Cable, which would be my preferred choice for where to buy the replacement, except their site says they're still only shipping HDMI 2.0 cables. The last time I bought an HDMI cable on Amazon that was this long I had bad experiences with crap where the AWG was way too thin for the length of the cable and it either wouldn't carry a signal or the picture would be total mess. This Monoprice one says it supports HDR but that apparently doesn't guarantee that it's HDMI 2.1???

 

Basically is 2.0 still okay, or is it so much more money to get 2.1 instead of 2.0 that I should just stick with another 2.0 cable if I have no near term plans to upgrade my TV to something that supports HDMI 2.1 and then replace the cable again once I eventually get a new TV? In either of which cases I'd probably just get another cable from Blue Jeans. Or if I should avoid 2.0, is that Monoprice one okay?

 

@Mr.Vic20 @Spork3245 @Ghost_MH @Ominous

[Jason]

Digging around slightly more the Monoprice one says it's 18 Gbps, and based on Wikipedia if it's not 48 Gbps then it's not HDMI 2.1? The Monoprice option that says it's 48 Gbps is $162 for 30 ft, whereas Blue Jeans is $49.50 for 30 ft or $53.25 for 35 ft, and then the first Monoprice one I linked to in the OP is $59.99? Which seems like the answer is to go with one of the Blue Jeans ones because going from ~$50 to say $75 to future-proof seemed okay but going from ~$50 to $162 seems not worth it given that by the time I upgrade the rest of my setup (the TV especially probably has at least another couple of years left) there might be something newer than 48 Gbps HDMI 2.1 anyhow.

[Ghost_MH]

This should help.

 

 

That said, look for the standard you want and match it to the listed speed of the cable. If it's matching 2.1 speeds then it should be mostly compliant to all other 2.1 specs since the speed of the cable is usually the biggest problem. We are still just talking about a bunch of copper...unless you want to get fancy and get an optical HDMI cable.

 

This is different from USB-C since you don't normally have to worry about power delivery over HDMI. 30' is just at the brink of what I'd consider doable in an HDMI cable before we have to start talking about active cables.

[Jason]

34 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

This should help.

 

 

That said, look for the standard you want and match it to the listed speed of the cable. If it's matching 2.1 speeds then it should be mostly compliant to all other 2.1 specs since the speed of the cable is usually the biggest problem. We are still just talking about a bunch of copper...unless you want to get fancy and get an optical HDMI cable.

 

This is different from USB-C since you don't normally have to worry about power delivery over HDMI. 30' is just at the brink of what I'd consider doable in an HDMI cable before we have to start talking about active cables.

 

Well the point is that since I haven't been in the market for a new TV, receiver, etc in years I have not been keeping up on the latest with AV specs and thus have no real idea what spec I want.   If my current TV is from 2013, my graphics card is from 2015, my receiver is so old it doesn't have HDMI at all, and the only thing I could see upgrading in the next couple of years is the graphics card if I somehow hit the lottery on one at MSRP (or more likely just buy a prebuilt), does it make much sense to spend ~$150 buying something the more future proof 48 Gbps cable instead of just buying another 18 Gbps cable for $50?

 

And the current one is about 50 ft and worked fine for 10 years. I don't think it's an active cable, I think Blue Jeans just used an extra chonky gauge of wire to get it to work. 

[Ghost_MH]

21 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Well the point is that since I haven't been in the market for a new TV, receiver, etc in years I have not been keeping up on the latest with AV specs and thus have no real idea what spec I want.   If my current TV is from 2013, my graphics card is from 2015, my receiver is so old it doesn't have HDMI at all, and the only thing I could see upgrading in the next couple of years is the graphics card if I somehow hit the lottery on one at MSRP (or more likely just buy a prebuilt), does it make much sense to spend ~$150 buying something the more future proof 48 Gbps cable instead of just buying another 18 Gbps cable for $50?

 

And the current one is about 50 ft and worked fine for 10 years. I don't think it's an active cable, I think Blue Jeans just used an extra chonky gauge of wire to get it to work. 

 

Yeah then you don't really need anything fast. Older HDMI specs are fine going longer distances since they weren't carrying as much data. If you aren't looking to upgrade anything any time soon then just grab a 2.0 cable that maxes out at 18Gb. You don't need more than that for 4k/60 HDR with all the audio channels you can throw a stick at.

[Mr.Vic20]

The longer the HDMI cable the higher bandwidth cable you want because there will be some signal loss. Get a 48Gbps cable to ensure you have the distance covered as well as supporting an future needs you might have. Do NOT pay and arm and a leg for an HDMI cable just make sure that A.) you buy from a reputable vendor and b.) the cable is rated for 48Gbps. Here is an article that covers the basics:

 

How to Avoid Buying a “Fake” HDMI 2.1 Cable

WWW.HOWTOGEEK.COM

---

Because HDMI 2.1 devices, like the Xbox Series X, PlayStation 5, and graphics cards from NVIDIA and AMD, are pushing more pixels than ever, the last thing you need is an unreliable cable causing problems. Here’s how to avoid getting scammed.

 

[Jason]

2 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Yeah then you don't really need anything fast. Older HDMI specs are fine going longer distances since they weren't carrying as much data. If you aren't looking to upgrade anything any time soon then just grab a 2.0 cable that maxes out at 18Gb. You don't need more than that for 4k/60 HDR with all the audio channels you can throw a stick at.

 

9 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

The longer the HDMI cable the higher bandwidth cable you want because there will be some signal loss. Get a 48Gbps cable to ensure you have the distance covered as well as supporting an future needs you might have. Do NOT pay and arm and a leg for an HDMI cable just make sure that A.) you buy from a reputable vendor and b.) the cable is rated for 48Gbps. Here is an article that covers the basics:

 

How to Avoid Buying a “Fake” HDMI 2.1 Cable

WWW.HOWTOGEEK.COM

---

Because HDMI 2.1 devices, like the Xbox Series X, PlayStation 5, and graphics cards from NVIDIA and AMD, are pushing more pixels than ever, the last thing you need is an unreliable cable causing problems. Here’s how to avoid getting scammed.

 

 

It looks like the Blue Jeans HDMI cable I currently have is probably is an active HDMI cable after all, this is what it says on their site for the one I'm looking at for either 30 or 35 ft:

 

Quote

For applications where the full 18.0 Gbps bandwidth is needed to run for 20 feet or more, we offer the BJC Series-3A Active HDMI Cable. These cables, made for us by Elka International in China, use a boost/EQ chip specifically designed for the maximum 18 Gig bandwidth permitted under HDMI 2.0, and are powered from the HDMI socket (so no need for an external adapter). The Series-3A cable is "directional" in that it is designed to take the signal from one end and amplify and EQ that signal at the other, so it's important to be sure to hook it up in the correct direction! These cables are CL2 rated for in-wall installation, and are certified "High Speed With Ethernet." See Instruction sheet for Series-3A HDMI Cables.

 

And to @Mr.Vic20's point about reputable vendors, part of why I'm inclined to go Blue Jeans again is because although there's the downside of them only selling 18 Gbps HDMI 2.0 cables (which @Ghost_MH is saying is apparently more futureproof than I was thinking than anyhow) there's the upside of them being a reputable no-bullshit vendor.

[Jason]

This at the end of @Mr.Vic20's article also sounds like it jives with what I was thinking of no point in future proofing now with no immediate plans to upgrade given that HDMI 2.1 is pretty new, and that by the time I'm ready to start upgrading things either something even newer will have come along in HDMI land or at least the prices for 2.1 cables will have come down (maybe Blue Jeans will provide 2.1 cables by then for example).

 

Quote

However, the new specification was designed in response to the first wave of 8K-capable TVs and devices, most of which are still years away from mainstream adoption. You’ll see a lot more HDMI 2.1 devices and accessories (including cables) hitting the market in the years to come.

 

Eventually, even budget brands, like Amazon Basics, will start selling Ultra High-Speed cables that support bandwidths of 48Gbits per second at low prices with no certification.