"1K" must be a typo; it would refer to the legacy XGA resolution of 1024x768.

"2K" has its origins in digital cinema (where it actually was 2000 pixels wide), but it has since become used interchangeably with 1080p (1920px wide) alongside "4K" becoming the common term for 2160p (3840px wide).

(Further confusing things, I've also seen some usage of "2K" to indicate 1440p, although it would be more accurately termed "2.5K".)

I think I have a decent understanding of the bandwith provided by various TB/USB standards, but this article was all over the place and actually made me doubt the information I've researched in the past for my home desk setup.

And this article somehow misses the most interesting aspect of the USB 4.0 Version 2 announcement: retroactive bandwidth upgrades to existing cables. (https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/1/23332838/usb-4-version-2-8...)

That might just be a misunderstanding as well, though. I get the impression that the USB folks aren't very discerning about their terminology in press releases. They could really use an editor to avoid this kind of confusion.

Since when has the "K" designation referred to the vertical? 2K = 2048 horizontal. 4k = 4096 horizontal.

I have personally never seen 1080p referred to as 1K

I honestly don't know why people bother with the "K" names and the "UHD", "QHD", etc. No two people seem to agree exactly what they all mean.

It's far easier to just use the the numeric resolution, "1920x1080", "3840x2160", etc.

FHD has about 4x the amount of pixels than 1K. They'd be still off by a factor of two (32/4 = 8 vs 4).

The problem is that 2K is already taken. So we have

1K --> FHD (1920x1080)

2K --> QHD (2560x1440)

4K --> UHD (3840×2160