Benefits(?) of HDMI vs Component in the high-def consoles

[Diamond.G]

It works fine for me as well, but compared to the ease of use and features that HDMI holds it sucks, sucks may be a to strong word, sorry about that, it inhales.

Yes i use component as well, yes i have used it for the past 4 years, yes i know 1080p is supported on some TV´s and from some devices. But HDMI is just plain better and holds a future.

Again sorry about the sucks.. it was to strong

I also find it amazing that so many people are just ready to roll over and conceed fair use because Hollywood wants to control how and when you watch the content you have purchased from them. The only thing that was wrong with DVI was the lack of audio, but there isn't anything stopping companies from comming out with SPDIF 2.0 or something that allowed the optical line to carry uncompressed audio.

Sorry for the small rant. I am baffled that so many people would ignore the fact that DVI is pretty sufficient.

General question: is the HDMI connector in the PS3 Single link or Dual link?

 

[TheChefO]

Component is just not as "future proof" as HDMI is.

Seeing "future proof" and HDMI always gets a giggle out of me. Are you aware how many revisions this "standard" has been through since inception? Now as one of the early adapters to the format, how do you think they feel about their "future proof" device?

Not to mention many of the HDMI devices which are supposed to compatible with other HDMI devices, are not.

This "standard" is a joke and Component is just as capable in resolution for HDTV's. The biggest reason for this "superior, future proofed standard" being introduced is copy protection.

On a technical level DVI support was fine and optical could carry any amount of audio data and quality they wanted to put through it. Fact is these formats were too "open" for their liking.

Instead we get the joke that is: HDMI.

Check AVS forums for a good laugh.

/rant

 

[Arwin]

General question: is the HDMI connector in the PS3 Single link or Dual link?

Answer:

BJC Series-2 DVI/HDMI Cables:
In addition to our straight HDMI cable, we offer the BJC Series-2 cable in a DVI/HDMI configuration, with a single-link DVI-D connector on one end and an HDMI connector on the other. These cables function equally well in either direction: HDMI to DVI, or DVI to HDMI. We're often asked why there isn't a DVI-I to HDMI cable or a DVI-D Dual Link to HDMI cable; the reason is that HDMI (at least, the 19-pin version of HDMI implemented on all consumer HDMI devices) is a single-link, digital-only standard, so there's no way to hook it up either to a DVI analog or Dual-Link signal; one could build the cable, but the additional pins at the DVI end wouldn't actually be hooked up to anything. In principle, HDMI is supposed always to be backward-compatible with DVI, so that any HDMI device should work with any DVI-D single-link device. In practice, although the two almost always work together, it's not uncommon to run into device compatibility issues.

 

[Gubbi]

But HDMI is just plain better and holds a future.

The only advantage of HDMI now is that it is one cable instead of two. By the time HDMI 1.3 is ubiquitous (ie. all commodity TVs and receivers have it) we'll be playing games on our PS4s.

Cheers

 

[Diamond.G]

Answer:

Ah, well that stinks . Kinda makes the whole "Future proof" claim kinda silly, since there is a dual link version of HDMI (29 pins) and it is compatible with the dual link dvi version. So when the UHDV displays that were being shown at NAB ever appear we will all be at square one again.

 

[Todd33]

The only advantage of HDMI now is that it is one cable instead of two. By the time HDMI 1.3 is ubiquitous (ie. all commodity TVs and receivers have it) we'll be playing games on our PS4s.

Cheers

If you take out the unnecessary condition of 1.3 in your quote that time is now. All flat panels and low end receiver are HDMI now. Receiver that HDMI switch and do uncompressed audio are down ~$500.

 

[Dave Baumann]

General question: is the HDMI connector in the PS3 Single link or Dual link?

If you are talking about in relation to DVI then this is an area where HDMI and DVI diverged. DVI stuck with a 165MHz transmitter rate, but increases the support (either maximum pixel rates and/or high bit depths) by increasing the number of transmitters, recievers and respective pins - hence dual link. Big cables are not that liked in consumer land hence the method HDMI achieves higher bit depths is by increasing the transmitter / reciever clock rates to above 300MHz. This is one of the reasons that Deep Color and the like will probably remain optional for the forseeable future.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Nope i will not come off it, component sucks, it´s expensive, old tech, cumbersome, and it doesn´t support 1080p (not rly). Hopefully it will die soon, i´m sure component will move to an option instead of being included in the future. And the sets that don´t support HDMI is either old or suck.

Lol, listen to yourself dude! Cumbersome!? It's a CABLE! I plug it in, I walk away, I don't look at it again for years.

It's like sayind IDE sucks, it's so cumbersome compared to SATA, I wish it would just DIE....Like who the heck cares this much about cables?? None of em 'suck', if they do the job they do the job.

And you can keep hoping it will die(not sure why you care if other people use component), but it ain't happening, component will be standard for the next 10 years at least.

 

[AlNom]

And you can keep hoping it will die(not sure why you care if other people use component), but it ain't happening, component will be standard for the next 10 years at least.

I agree, just look at composite and S-Video! Those things will never die. Although one could argue that the devices are moving towards HDMI (DVD upscalers and hi def players), TVs and receivers will maintain those legacy connections for years and years because they're (1) cheap (2) a sort of backwards compatibility feature.

 

[Deusp]

Lol, listen to yourself dude! Cumbersome!? It's a CABLE! I plug it in, I walk away, I don't look at it again for years.

It's like sayind IDE sucks, it's so cumbersome compared to SATA, I wish it would just DIE....Like who the heck cares this much about cables?? None of em 'suck', if they do the job they do the job.

And you can keep hoping it will die(not sure why you care if other people use component), but it ain't happening, component will be standard for the next 10 years at least.

Component has the slight problem of being inferior to HDMI in terms of video quality and sound quality. The ICT flag that downgrades all component outputs in future Blu-ray or HD-DVD movies will also suck quite a bit too. Plus HDMI is digital while component is analog, so other problems like bad cables will rarely be an issue with HDMI.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Component has the slight problem of being inferior to HDMI in terms of video quality and sound quality. The ICT flag that downgrades all component outputs in future Blu-ray or HD-DVD movies will also suck quite a bit too. Plus HDMI is digital while component is analog, so other problems like bad cables will rarely be an issue with HDMI.

I would agree with the word 'slight' or maybe marginal would be more accurate.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

I love this new SKU. I think it's a great move by MS. A lot of early X360 adopters will upgrade to Elite and sell off their premiums to a buddy and increase the rate of expansion of the userbase. I'm probably going to buy one for $480 and sell my X360 Premium to a friend for $300. That way I get the Elite for $180 w/cables and a black controller, and he'll get the Premium for the price of a Core. I might wait until 65nm is standard though, and to see if they'll bring some of the movie/TV content to Canada.

They'll probably drop this SKU to $399 and go $299 Premium and $199 Core later this year anyway. Still well below the PS3 pricing.

 

[Deusp]

I agree, just look at composite and S-Video! Those things will never die. Although one could argue that the devices are moving towards HDMI (DVD upscalers and hi def players), TVs and receivers will maintain those legacy connections for years and years because they're (1) cheap (2) a sort of backwards compatibility feature.

Composite and S-video also suck quite a bit too in terms of quality. Like all legacy products, they have a genuine reason to exist but there's also a genuine reason why they should die out quickly.

 

[Deusp]

I would agree with the word 'slight' or maybe marginal would be more accurate.

According to you anyways. For others, the reasons why HDMI is better than component are very substantial, and there's no reason to chide someone for thinking HDMI is substantially better.

 

[Sis]

According to you anyways. For others, the reasons why HDMI is better than component are very substantial, and there's no reason to chide someone for thinking HDMI is substantially better.

You cannot categorically say that HDMI has better video quality than component. Those who insist on this either a) have equipment and tested this such it makes the statement true for them or b) just assume digital > analog.

 

[TheChefO]

According to you anyways. For others, the reasons why HDMI is better than component are very substantial, and there's no reason to chide someone for thinking HDMI is substantially better.

What exactly about HDMI is better than Component?

(BTW component cables don't carry audio - FYI)

One is digital, the other is analog. They both support 1080p which is "FULL HD". Any difference in pixel bleed based on the difference of cable source alone would be considered minimal by most users and at these high resolutions and typical viewing distance I doubt the majority of the people (that dont watch TV with binoculars) could honestly tell the difference.

The main advantage of this format is not for you the consumer, but for Hollywood (content protection).

/offtopic

To clarify: some misinformation on this format that may exist, some switch boxes do not support enough video bandwidth to properly display 720p or 1080i, much less 1080p. However, this is not a limitation of component, rather a limitation of the switch it is running through (recievers, or video switches). This same limitation may exist on some TV's which would show a difference between these formats but I have not researched this aspect of the video bandwidth issue.

 

[Todd33]

It makes little difference about the technical aspects of component and HDMI, component is being phased out. TVs and receivers are getting more and more HDMI inputs and less and less component. Which do you want on your console as a standard in five years?

 

[Sis]

It makes little difference about the technical aspects of component and HDMI, component is being phased out. TVs and receivers are getting more and more HDMI inputs and less and less component. Which do you want on your console as a standard in five years?

I'd prefer to have both.

 

[Todd33]

I'd prefer to have both.

Agreed, which is why people complained about the lack of HDMI on the 360 over a year ago.

 

[TheChefO]

It makes little difference about the technical aspects of component and HDMI, component is being phased out. TVs and receivers are getting more and more HDMI inputs and less and less component. Which do you want on your console as a standard in five years?

True Component is being phased out but like Sis said, I'd prefer both. I've seen many an occasion where HDMI performed poorly in comparison to component so why would I want to be tied to this (inferior ) format alone?

Regarding the point at hand of hdmi v component. As long as the truth is known about the formats and the facts aren't twisted, I don't disagree with your assertion for not wanting to have dead technology that cannot be taken advantage of. But on that note, how many tv's/receivers are shipping today that do not come with Component in?


( I disagree on the "less and less component" comment )