Do expensive HDMI cables really make a difference?

Question

I am looking at buying some 4 metre HDMI cables, I notice they are ranging from cheap to surprisingly expensive.

Do expensive HDMI cables actually make a difference or is it just a gimmick?

I will be using these with a 37" 1080P LCD screen and surround sound system.

Answer 1

For cables which are carrying analogue signals (such as SCART connectors or Component Video) then there is a noticable difference between cheap and more expensive ones. If you're using SCART for anything then spend your money on good verisons of these.

For HDMI cables, which carry digital signals only, there is not so much improvement between cheap and expensive ones. Having said that, you should be aware that the attenuation effects of cheap ones will be greater.

The better cables will have less internal resistance, generate less of their own 'electrical noise' and also have better screening from interference. They will also be mechanically stronger.

So, the longer the cable, the greater the signal reduction - and the greater is your risk of it picking up interference; and the greater is it's chances of suffering from an affect called "dispersion", where the digital signals can sometimes get "out of step" (and give some interesting artifacts to your pictures).  

The "quality" of the cable that you buy also depends on the quality of your equipment.

It doesn't matter what your screen size or sound system is. You should be aware that the ability of your television to reproduce HD pictures in their full glory depends on the inherent Quality of the set AND the inherent Quality of its peripherals (the HD source device).

That is, if you have a cheap tv set then you'll probably not see a picture improvement just by using expensive cables; but if you have a really Good tv and you're feeding it from a really Good Blu-ray player, then a good HDMI cable will enable the system to give a noticably better picture.

Also, a long cable will have more 'pull' on the conectors - even if you use a strain-relief device - so you need to be sure that they're good quality and not likely to come apart or be a bad (loose) fit in the sockets.

This means that for a long cable you shouldn't buy the cheapest ones.

Four metres is a very long cable, so opt for something less than the rip-off price but do pay more than the cheap-and-nasty type. There will come a point where the price has escallated by more than the noticable benefit.

Sorry it's a long answer but it's a good question and deserves more than a simple (yes/no), and uninformed,  answer. The decision is yours but take into account the quality and specification (particularly Contast Ratio) of your tv and HD source before you spend a lot of money.

Answer 2

They probably do make a difference but not to the naked human eye, so stick with the cheaper ones

Answer 3

You don't generally benefit from expensive HDMI cables ... but you may not want to buy the cheapest either (the build quality does vary ... impacting on longivity, stiffness, etc ... even if the cable's video and audio performance doesn't).  For proof see the first 2 links (and there have been similar articles in other publications since).

HDMI basically works perfectly or doesn't work at all. The problem comes as cables get longer ... at some point they fail. So short cables are not a problem. Longer cables can be. The 3-5 m point is often considered the limit for cheap cables ... although there are exceptions.  Note that when assessing length you have to consider the total before and after any switching devices.

So ... the only time you may need an expensive HDMI cable is if you are a) going to install it inside a wall (it should be CM rated), and b) if you are trying to connect at long distances (over 5 m or so).

For a 4 m cable you shouldn't need to spend more than about $30.  Look for an HDMI 1.3 certified cable at the 3rd link. For longer cables, or if you want the best for reasonable price, look to Blue Jeans Cables (last link. Look for their cable information centre ... well worth reading).

Answer 4

Over a 4M length, you probably won't see a difference - save your money.

HDMI is a digital signal - it's numbers.  If the TV can make out the numbers, it will assemble a perfect picture every time.  If it can't make out the numbers, you will get nothing.  A cable will not change the actual numbers themselves, so it will not make the picture look any better or worse.

A digital signal will not degrade enough over 4M to the point the TV can't decode the information.  Just get the standard cables.

Now, if you were running 100M of the stuff . . .

I hope this helps.  Please return and select a Best Answer from all of those submitted.

Answer 5

There is absolutely no difference in quality between an expensive HDMI cable and a cheaper one. The Gadget Show on Channel 5 proved this a couple of weeks ago where they compared a £5 cable to a £112 cable - there was no difference in picture or sound quality at all!

Its all a big con!

I have a HDMI cable worth £25 (got it free with my PS3) its absolutely fine but, if I had to buy one myself I would hapily go Ebay a cheap one!

Answer 6

Three of these, varying from cheap, middle price and expensive,  were tested on the Gadget Show a few weeks back. They concluded that there was very little difference between any of them and they all gave a good picture. I would go for a middle price range myself, as that is what I generally do when buying anything electrical. I'm sure a lot of the expense, goes into the  packaging! Happy viewing!

Answer 7

The difference is marginal, while the cost is, well, not marginal.