GatewayRedbirds.com

i was amazed at the quality difference when i made the switch to hdmi a year and half ago for my xbox. when i bought my new dvd/blu ray player a few months ago, i of course bought hdmi cables with. huge difference.

Jocephus wrote:i was amazed at the quality difference when i made the switch to hdmi a year and half ago for my xbox. when i bought my new dvd/blu ray player a few months ago, i of course bought hdmi cables with. huge difference.

You mean from component? There's almost no difference from component to HDMI/DVI. They're the same resolution and bitrate.

AdmiralKird wrote:

Jocephus wrote:i was amazed at the quality difference when i made the switch to hdmi a year and half ago for my xbox. when i bought my new dvd/blu ray player a few months ago, i of course bought hdmi cables with. huge difference.

You mean from component? There's almost no difference from component to HDMI/DVI. They're the same resolution and bitrate.

yeah, from component

1080i to 1080p should be noticeable to anyone, and that's the difference between component and HDMI.

He probably had the regular old Red/White/Yellow cables, not component, to have stated such a difference.

Maclowery wrote:He probably had the regular old Red/White/Yellow cables, not component, to have stated such a difference.

when i hear component cables, im thinking of these



and i think those are actually the xbox cables...so the switch to hdmi cables was vast

cpebbles wrote:1080i to 1080p should be noticeable to anyone, and that's the difference between component and HDMI.

The XBox 360 plays all games, except 3 out of ~900 titles, in 720p or less, some games like Halo 3, GTA4 run in 640p and the latest games sacrifice resolution even more, Modern Warfare 3 is 600p, and Battlefield 3 is 704p on consoles. It can convert them to 1080i/p output, but you don't get any benefit in lines of resolution. Consoles aren't powerful enough to generate 1080 lines of resolution for modern games. The only place where it would actually display 1080p would be in the menus, and those are devoid of almost all movement, rendering the benefits of 1080p over 1080i useless.

cpebbles wrote:1080i to 1080p should be noticeable to anyone

I doubt that is the case.

I have no idea why interlacing, an ancient hack to make TVs work with slow vacuum tube technology, has been preserved in HDTV standards, but I doubt it makes any difference in this case. The console is almost certainly natively generating progressive frames with an effective resolution much less than 1080p. Sending them as 1080i may in fact be fully equivalent to 1080p if the native frame rate is 30 fps, anyway.

This whole deal with 720p, 1080i, 1080p, and so on is mostly a marketing scam, imo. Most video is compressed and this, among other factors, limits quality far more than the signal output resolution.

Arthur Dent wrote:

cpebbles wrote:1080i to 1080p should be noticeable to anyone

I doubt that is the case.

I'm also skeptical.

Arthur Dent wrote:I have no idea why interlacing, an ancient hack to make TVs work with slow vacuum tube technology, has been preserved in HDTV standards

I think interlacing makes rapid movement seem smoother to the viewer. But then why didn't the TV makers just double the framerate?

I thought the majority of newer X-box Arcade games were 1080p. Interlacing made it to HD standards because the technology to drive 1080p was a few years away from mainstream technology and 1080i provides a better picture than 720p for most people.

I feel a little stupid btw. I had a couple of spare HDMI cables that I could have used but I never noticed the HDMI output port and thought I needed a proprietary form cable.