Does the image look the same when comparing HDMI video with Component video?

Question

What's the big difference between them? :)

Answer 1

As far as the picture is concerned, the experts have been able to tell the difference between HDMI and Component. In those instances HDMI was uniformly labelled as "better".

For a routine user (people who don't work with video) the differences are likely to be so subtle that we would have to be told what to look for before we identified a difference. This is based on the assumption that the cables are relatively short (6 feet or less).

Because component video is an analog signal it is subject to loss. Thus, the longer the cable(s) the more loss AND higher quality cables WILL impact the video you will see.

HDMI is a digital source. So, it either transmits the signal or it does not. As such there is no difference between a $100 Monster HDMI cable and a $2 generic HDMI cable (YES, you can find HDMI cables for $2 online). Nor does it make a difference if the cable is 6 feet or 400 feet. Both pictures will be identical (see link below for the study).

One major difference is the HDMI can carry both HD video and multichannel audio within the same cable. This means if you are connecting a High Def cable/sat reciever to a TV, the one cable with carry both the picture AND the sound. That's up to 10 cables (3 component and up to 7 channels of surround RCA audio) condensed into one cable.

I think the audio advantages are more significant than the video, because of this.

Answer 2

There are lots of factors that affect whether you will see a difference in the picture when comparing Component and HDMI.

Quality of component cable being used. Component video is an analog transmition so poor quality cables will diminish picture quality. HDMI being digital is not quite as succeptible to quality issues unless going longer lengths or using more advanced features like advanced color and surround modes.

The source you are comparing. Upscaling DVD players and Blu-Ray players can only deinterlace DVD to 480p through component but through HDMI can scale to 1080p. Also most TVs will only accept up to 1080i through component video while they will accept 1080p through HDMI.

The TVs ability to improve the picture through internal scaling on that input. Sometimes it isn't the signal that is so much different but the display devices ability to handle the different signal types.

Certainly HDMI is capable of higher quality than component but earlier HDMI equiped TVs seemed to look better on component because they had perfected the signal handling already and not so much with HDMI. Those issues seem to have been worked out by now.

HDMI does get the nod for picture quality and it is more convenient to connect 1 cable instead of 3-5 depending on the audio cables you are using but it still hasn't been perfected yet. HDMI has a handshaking process that happens whenever you first turn on a device. This is where the 2 devices talk back and forth to let each other know what it is and what it's capabilities are. If you are using a cable or satellite box to connect through an AV receiver using HDMI and you change channels sometimes you will go through a period of adjustment where everything reintroduces itself and you get a blank screen for awhile. This is one reason some installers still prefer component.

Every time someone asks any question about HDMI someone always mentions that there is no difference between a cheap HDMI and an expensive HDMI cable. I used to think so to until I did some research and tests of my own. Here is what these people are not telling you.

The need for high quality HDMI will depend largely on the application.

If you are connecting an upconverting DVD player to the TV directly the low grade cable is fine. This is likely to be a short run (HDMI looses signal strength faster than other cables) you are only transmitting a 720p image at best (this is the native resolution of the TV so no need to go higher.)

As you start adding Distance, Connections or signal you will need to get better cables. Here is what I mean.

If you are transmitting a 1080P image instead of a 720P you need greater data transfer speed because the bitrate is faster.

If you add uncompressed audio like Dolby TrueHD or dts-HD you need even more speed.

Throw in other things like X.V. Color, Bonus View on Blu-Ray, 120Hz refresh rates (yes I know that it happens in the TVs but that may change) and now you need a pretty darn good cable.

Put a receiver in the signal path (Blu-Ray to Receiver to TV) and the quality of the cables becomes more important.

Stick the cable in the wall to a flat panel TV and you had better have a good HDMI cable.

Cable over 10', 15', 25' 50'? You will need progressively better cables.

All of these things add up.

This is why some of the companies who make super cheap cables are starting to make "enhanced quality cables" for a bit more. If there was no difference they wouldn't need to offer "enhanced quality cables".

Answer 3

From what I have heard and read there will be little or no difference in picture quality.

Answer 4

The Image should be the same.  HOWEVER the devil is in the details:

- Some people never bother to calibrate the inputs with a setup disk so they do see a visible difference between the 2 connection types from the same DVD player or HD source.  The Brightness/contrast/sharpness/etc. settings are often separate for each input.

- All HDTV's have to convert the analog COMPONENT signals into digital.  These circuits are ... expensive and cheaper HDTV's do not do well.  HDMI being digital to start with is easier to process so HDMI can show less artifacts on more budget televisions.

So this is why some people say there is a difference, but it's the TV more than the cable type.

Are you trying to decide which?  Go with HDMI.

A good HD rated component cable from BlueJeansCables (a site I have trusted for years) is about $55.  My HDMI cable from them (the good Belden stuff) was $38.  And I also bought their chinese made cheap cable for about $24.

So HDMI is a cheaper cable (if you know where to shop), and tends to be easier for the TV to process.

It's not a perfect thing - sometimes HDMI looses handshake, my BluRay player refuses to work with my HDMI switch (works fine with Cable, HD-DVD, xBox).  But it will be the future so go with HDMI now.

Answer 5

Yes, they look the same.

HDMI is a simplified connection.  Not only does it provide video- audio connection is accomplished also.

Answer 6

HDMI vs Component Cables..

HDMI uses just 1 cable to offer video, audio and hd

Componet Cables use individual cables for each feature

HDMI has been able to roll all 3 into 1 cable

Since your using one cable vs 3 cables usually the image is slightly improved, it also depends on the wiring in the house and how old it is.

Answer 7

Yarr!

Seems like you are the average "joe" who is a little curious.

....and these guys want to bore you with details.

that sucks.

....but they are right.

Good luck

More questions? Just e-mail me. I have owned a home theater business.

Answer 8

HDMI is PURE digital, where as Component is analog still.

All HDMI Cables are the SAME, so do not get jerked around by expensive retail MONSTER brands. It all just ends up as a bunch of binary electronic pulses that either each the display, or dont.

We sell 9$ HDMI Cables on our website that support 1080p 1.3b Compatable so they will do everything that a Monster 100$ one will do.

-The HD Cable Source Team

http://www.HDCableSource.com/