4k support on SX80 (or other codecs)?

[Aaron Wilson]

With large format 4k displays becoming cheaper, are there any plans to offer at least computer content on the local display at a higher resolution?

I just installed a dual-80" setup with a SX80 and its sad that I have to be limited to 1920x1080. I understand that a call will be limited to 1080, but it would be great to have the local content viewing at an increased resolution.

Any thoughts?

[Ciaran Hamilton]

Aaron,

Currently, no support or roadmap on Cisco codecs to support 4K content. Of course, under consideration at this time to see if this is really a highly desriable TP feature in the future 

[Aaron Wilson]

Thanks Ciaran.

It's unfortunate that you cannot use a resolution greater than 1920x1080 locally. I understand sending a resolution greater than 1080p would be an issue, but it would be nice to have a local-only option to exceed 1920x1080....it is such a dated and low-res option.

The EX90 can do 1920x1200 locally then send 1280x768, so I know the code is can do it. And the SX80 has to be more than powerful enough to handle the higher resolutions.

[bapayne]

I hope to see something road mapped soon. As more and more medical use cases come up, the need for Radiology to have native resolutions that approach 4K be easily shared is becoming a big issue.

[Wayne DeNardi]

You could change that by not having the local content pass through the SX80 when you want 4k displayed locally - you'd need some additional switching gear between the source, display and SX to do the switching and scaling, but it'd work well that way, then pass it as a lower resolution when you want to send it to the SX and in to a video conference to present to the far end.

Wayne
--
Please remember to rate responses and to mark your question as answered if appropriate.

[Aaron Wilson]

Certainly, though Cisco has made so many improvements on the video codecs and touch interfaces that there is less and less reason to go with outboard gear. Previously I would install a Crestron control system and video switcher, touch panel, ClearOne DSP/dialer and Cisco VC system.

Now, an SX80 registered to CUCM and a Touch10 can accomplish the majority of the above. :)

[Wayne DeNardi]

We're in the opposite boat here - we still do so many things and have many other requirements that the SX80 can't do by itself, that we're forced to have many external AV systems involved in pre- and post- on both the audio and video side.

GIven that there's not a lot of devices out that will do 4k anything (apart from a few Youtube videos and some new smartphones), let alone 4k video conferencing, I can see why the Cisco kit doesn't do it yet - there's just not going to be enough sales driven by the small number of people that need 4k to have to support it.  And even then, why stop at 4k - why not 8k, or higher?  They have to draw the line somewhere, and I think, with the majority of the world and use cases, 1080p is a prety reasonable point to have that line set at for now.  And given the viewing distance most people are away from the displays in a video conferencing room, the benefit of 4k isn't likely to be noticed anyway.

Wayne
--
Please remember to rate responses and to mark your question as answered if appropriate.

[omaliphant]

working in games, we are now moving to 4K60, and given we to build reviews over vidcon 1080P30/60 is no longer good enough... we are desperate to get to even 4K30, but the spark kits only support 4K15 at best which is useless for live game play :(

come on cisco, H265 4K30 should easily be doable at slightly higher call rates like 12000kbps ? there must be headroom on these codecs...