DisplayPort Details: IDT launches PanelPort
Tuesday 25th March 2008, 09:02:00 PM, written by Arun
A few months ago we published an article on IDT's DisplayPort efforts and the standard in general, and today IDT has unveiled its new PanelPort product line. We took the opportunity to ask a few technical questions on DisplayPort and got encouraging news on the cost benefits of Direct Drive.
The main product being announced today is IDT's general-purpose VPP1600EMG DisplayPort receiver with timing controller, which supports resolutions of up to 1920x1200 and sports 2 differential pair lanes. Why not the full four lanes supported by DisplayPort? Well, this is IDT's generic product aimed at customers who don't need (or can't afford) feature set and/or timing controller customizations. So it obviously needs to be as cheap as possible while still targetting as much of the market as possible; in that context, two lanes is a fairly attractive sweetspot, and IDT obviously also has variants with one or four lanes up its sleeve. Customized variants for several key customers are already sampling.
The cost benefits of having fewer lanes are significant, but much of the analog front end has to remain identical so the benefit is still far from linear. From a consumer point of view, it doesn't matter either way: receivers and transmitters can tell each other how many lanes they support and then test them to see whether there is packet loss. If there is, for example if you are using a cable noticeably longer than 15m, then the number of exposed lanes will be lower and the monitor's maximum resolution likely won't be supported. The specification allows for receivers to reduce the throughput even before 15m, but PanelPort won't have that problem at least.
Most of the cost benefits of DisplayPort aren't at a chip level, but rather at a system level: for example, compared to dual-LVDS (which is used in high-resolution notebooks), less than half the pins and wires are necessary for DisplayPort despite supporting 25% more bandwidth. In the grand scheme of things, the lack of royalties won't matter much (it's just a couple of cents while the chip itself costs a couple of dollars) so in the standalone display market, the primary cost benefits are in a quite different place: Direct Drive.
IDT estimates the system-wide cost benefits for Direct Drive to be in the $4-10 range. And then you need to consider that the various parts of the production and sales chain takes a markup; so the effect on the final price paid by the consumer may be up to 2-3x higher, resulting in cost benefits from ~$8 to ~$30. We certainly think that's very appealing, especially given how sleek and attractive Direct Drive monitors can be. We wish the best of luck to IDT and their competitors and look forward to seeing how real DisplayPort/Direct Drive products turn out in the second half of this year.
The main product being announced today is IDT's general-purpose VPP1600EMG DisplayPort receiver with timing controller, which supports resolutions of up to 1920x1200 and sports 2 differential pair lanes. Why not the full four lanes supported by DisplayPort? Well, this is IDT's generic product aimed at customers who don't need (or can't afford) feature set and/or timing controller customizations. So it obviously needs to be as cheap as possible while still targetting as much of the market as possible; in that context, two lanes is a fairly attractive sweetspot, and IDT obviously also has variants with one or four lanes up its sleeve. Customized variants for several key customers are already sampling.
The cost benefits of having fewer lanes are significant, but much of the analog front end has to remain identical so the benefit is still far from linear. From a consumer point of view, it doesn't matter either way: receivers and transmitters can tell each other how many lanes they support and then test them to see whether there is packet loss. If there is, for example if you are using a cable noticeably longer than 15m, then the number of exposed lanes will be lower and the monitor's maximum resolution likely won't be supported. The specification allows for receivers to reduce the throughput even before 15m, but PanelPort won't have that problem at least.
Most of the cost benefits of DisplayPort aren't at a chip level, but rather at a system level: for example, compared to dual-LVDS (which is used in high-resolution notebooks), less than half the pins and wires are necessary for DisplayPort despite supporting 25% more bandwidth. In the grand scheme of things, the lack of royalties won't matter much (it's just a couple of cents while the chip itself costs a couple of dollars) so in the standalone display market, the primary cost benefits are in a quite different place: Direct Drive.
IDT estimates the system-wide cost benefits for Direct Drive to be in the $4-10 range. And then you need to consider that the various parts of the production and sales chain takes a markup; so the effect on the final price paid by the consumer may be up to 2-3x higher, resulting in cost benefits from ~$8 to ~$30. We certainly think that's very appealing, especially given how sleek and attractive Direct Drive monitors can be. We wish the best of luck to IDT and their competitors and look forward to seeing how real DisplayPort/Direct Drive products turn out in the second half of this year.
Tagging
IDT ± DisplayPort, PanelPort
