Xbox 360 Video Comparison

GameSpot Hardware writes "GameSpot has compiled a detailed evaluation of what to expect from the upcoming Xbox 360 based on the type of cabling that you are forced to use. The article shows multiple image overlays to show the quality difference created when you take the unit down from its high definition origins." From the article: "In the name of gaming science, we went out and purchased an RF modulator just to see how our 360 looks using the connection. Unsurprisingly, the RF cable offered the worst image quality of all the cable types we tested. Even with our Canon S400, the colors appeared noticeably more faded, akin to a '70s-esque sepia effect. That might look OK if you're taking shots of your friends discoing out to Saturday Night Fever, but it doesn't fly while playing Xbox 360 games."

Comments

Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[JustNiz]

is that they didn't include DVI.
This alone is enough to make me not buy one.
I hope Sony doesn't make the same mistake with the PS3, although I'm now loathed to give Sony any money since that whole CD Protection rootkit thing.

Obviously

[the computer guy nex]

The quality of the Xbox360's graphics will only be as good as the weakest link. You need a 720p compatible TV, component cables, and a direct connection (no VCR passthroughs). Any less and you aren't getting your money's worth.

Re:Obviously

[RoadDoggFL]

And Xbox 360 connected to Composite cables passing through the VCR and to the TV will look better than an Xbox or PS2 connected to Composite cables passing through the VCR and to the TV.

What's your bloody point?

Re:Obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he stated his "bloody point" pretty obviously. Nice fanboi reaction there. Do you have pictures of J. Allard up in your bedroom? Since this is an article about the Xbox 360, yes, believe it or not, he was referring to the 360.

Now, relax your panties, take a deep breath and look at your calendar again - you only have a few more days until your spooge machine shows up...

Re:Obviously

[rAiNsT0rm]

And that makes up about what 30 people who will buy one? Honestly, the real image most will see is akin to the kiosks in Walmart/Best Buy... and it ain't all that perty.

Re:Obviously

[xero314]

Are there still people gaming on anything less than 720p campatible TV's?

Just kidding.

But seriously within the next couple years, if it isn't true already, 720p will be the standard minimum for all media. Honestly I couldn't image spending $400+ to play video games and not have them hooked up to anything not capable of 1080i. In the course of a video game sysem you will spend well over 2k on it, so why not buy yourself a decent tv to go with it. You can get 1080i for less that $1000 (I payed $1300 for mine 2 years ago and that's for a 42 inch mitsubishi). HD really makes a difference and is worth every penny. Not only is the picture quality higher, but things like progressive scan (480p/720p) help reduce motion sickness and eye strain.

Re:Obviously

[RoadDoggFL]

AC... figures.

He's complaining that your games won't look best unless you get expensive hardware. Well no shit, your PS2 games look best on expensive hardware, playing God of War on an HDTV in progressive scan thanks to component cables looks better than playing on a 20" TV with composite cables. Is that any reason to bitch?

Do you think PS3 and PC games don't look any better at higher resolutions? And on a final note, my "spooge machine" isn't coming for a while since the Revolution's launch date hasn't been announced yet.

Rez nazis?

[Iriel]

I understand how important it is to have vibrant images as part of a great gaming experience, but this review gave me the sensation that if I don't own an HDTV, the resolution task force is going to come to my house with clubs. Not only did I save myself $400 dollars by getting my desposit back, I saved myself the price of a new HDTV that I don't have (and can't afford anyway).

Somehow, I don't feel like I'm losing anything by gaming on PC anymore.

Re:Rez nazis?

[RoadDoggFL]

If graphics are your holy grail in gaming then no, you're not missing anything at all.

Re:Rez nazis?

[Paul Slocum]

I would be all about PC gaming if you could play multiplayer games on one computer. I primarily play games as a social activity, hanging out with my friends together in the living room. I have an extra computer that I can put in the living room for games, but I don't have four.

Re:Rez nazis?

[KDR_11k]

Well, what other reason is there to buy an Xbox 360 now when your old consoles are still working?

Re:Rez nazis?

[RoadDoggFL]

The games, the new features of Live, the marketplace, the new controller, the (unfortunate) multimedia capabilities?

And whether or not you're seeing the very best visuals your Xbox 360 can produce, they'll still be better than what the Xbox and PS2 could produce on the same setup. So why must people continue to bitch?

Re:Rez nazis?

[KDR_11k]

Games? The only game that's worth buying seems to be PGR 3 and is that enough to buy a 400$ console for it? Sure, there's going to be more games in the future but that's not a reason to buy the system NOW.
New features of Live? Well, they're not that useful without games to play on Live.
New Controller? Perhaps but once again I wonder what that's going to help when you don't have any games.
Multimedia Capabilities? Um, is there anything new? Okay, so it takes streams from PCs but didn't some XBMC thingamajig add that to the XB already?

And while it looks better than the PS2 or XB it doesn't look 400$ worth of better.

Re:Rez nazis?

[RoadDoggFL]

The only game that's worth buying seems to be PGR 3 and is that enough to buy a 400$ console for it? Sure, there's going to be more games in the future but that's not a reason to buy the system NOW.

"The only game worth buying" is a matter of opinion. I personally can't wait for NHL 2k6 on the 360, but I don't expect you to feel my sentiments (I know, that's such a novel approach to these kinds of things, isn't it?). Yes, I own it on Xbox but I also want it on the 360. Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo both look interesting, as well. Rentals, at least.

Well, they're not that useful without games to play on Live.

Yes, Live is going to be more than just to play games online now. And taking advantage of the demos online looks like it'll at least be interesing. Again, just because you don't care doesn't mean nobody cares.

Perhaps but once again I wonder what that's going to help when you don't have any games.

Oh, so now there aren't any games? That's cool, I guess even PGR3 can disappear during the course of a single /. post. Here's a thought: Maybe people will buy it out of support, showing console manufacturers that a well-designed, easy-to-develop-for, powerful console is actually a good thing. Maybe buying now can help send the message that gamers will buy a machine when there's thought put into it (still saddened that the Xbox was received so coldly when MS did everything right with it except being MS). But again, that's crazy talk.

Um, is there anything new? Okay, so it takes streams from PCs but didn't some XBMC thingamajig add that to the XB already?

Interfacing with peripherals is new, but you can't be bothered with looking things up, you're on a roll. I don't know the extent of the XBMC's features and capabilities, but I know with a Media Center XP (XP Media Center Edition? I don't know, this doesn't really interest me personally) you can stream HD content. That can be a huge deal to some people.

In closing, you don't have to buy a 360. But that doesn't mean that everybody should follow your lead.

Re:Nice Slashvertisment

[Anonymous Coward]

The "Problem Loading Page Co." must be making an absolute mint from this story!

Pretty weak article

[TripMaster Monkey]

I don't know why the authors of this article felt it necessary to go out of their way to demonstrate just how sucky a RF connector makes the XBox picture...if you drop that much money on an XBox, and you don't have a television in your house with so much as a composite input, you're officially too stupid to play video games (which is truly stupid indeed).

Re:Pretty weak article

[theantipop]

Along the same lines, the author would have done much better to just talk subjectively about the image quality. The one included screenshot was a crappy demonstration except to indentify that RF is ancient tech. And not to knock the SD400 (I own one), but a nicer DSLR with better color representation probably would've helped me feel like I can trust the images.

Re:Pretty weak article

[ThePolkapunk]

So your definition of stupidity is based on how much money a person has?

Re:Pretty weak article

[alienw]

I think the main problem there was a very poor-quality RF converter. RF and composite aren't that different if the TV set is even halfway decent. The RF signal is the composite signal shifted up from the baseband and with audio added in on a different frequency. Sounds like either the RF modulator was crap or the TV has a piss-poor comb filter (if it's an HDTV, that's pretty much a given -- the RF inputs on those are an afterthought). If I have to use a TV without composite inputs, it's best to use a VCR for the conversion, those generally have much better video circuitry than cheap RF modulators.

Re:Pretty weak article

[rAiNsT0rm]

Umm, seeing as how the actual number of TV sets that meet your criteria are pretty small overall, I'd say most people with a 360 will be too stupid to play them.

S-video is probably the best connection most will see, with the large majority being composite. Let's not kid ourselves, it ships with composite and that is what most will be using.

Re:Pretty weak article

[interiot]

If a person has enough money to plunk down for an XBox 360, they almost certainly have enough money for a TV with composite input (or a used VGA monitor laying around). If someone only has enough money for an RF input, I think that clearly, they should be looking in the used market for an older Playstation, N64, Dreamcast, what-have-you.

Re:Pretty weak article

[Delphiki]

Your post doesn't make any sense. First you say the number of TV that meet his criteria is very small. Then you say most people will use composite, which was the criteria the original poster listed. Read comprehension for the win.

Re:Pretty weak article

[ThePolkapunk]

Some people prefer the content to the games over the visual quality of the games. Those people interested in the games themselves that are present on XBOX 360, but do not have the money to buy the system AND a new TV will still buy the system.

Visual quality of video games is not all that matters.

Re:Pretty weak article

[Anonymous Coward]

..and this links back to the "they're idiots" thing. What game experience can you get on the 360 that you can't get on the xbox1? or ps2? People buying a 360 should be doing it because they want better graphics, as that is it's major (only?) difference from current systems.

Re:Pretty weak article

[rAiNsT0rm]

Actually it is you my friend who is qute mistaken. COMPOSITE is the red/yellow/white cable, that is the LOWEST quality next to RF which is what most TV's have and what the 360 ships with AS I STATED.

COMPONENT VIDEO, is the RGB which is the second to HIGHEST form of video quality.

My statement stands and is 100% correct, you, sir, need reading and comprehension FTW!!!1!!

Re:Pretty weak article

[Delphiki]

Your post talks about how most TVs ahve composite. The poster you responded to talks about TVs should have composite. Nobody mentioned the word component, until you, just now. Dood, u r sm4rt.

Re:Pretty weak article

[SilkBD]

Visual quality of video games is not all that matters.

In terms of the XBox360, it is. There is no new gameplay with the 360, it's all the same type of games with better graphics.

I agree with the grandparent, if you're going to get a 360... get a better tv first or stick with the original xbox.

Re:Pretty weak article

[rAiNsT0rm]

I have no idea what you are talking about, and I'm sure you don't either. Composite is plain audio/video cables, component are RGB. Component is what you need to get any results out of the Xbox 360. Please go back and read the article and you will quickly see your error. I'm not arguing with you any longer, because you are totally wrong.

Re:Pretty weak article

[freeweed]

Nope. It's how the SPEND the money.

Buying an Xbox360 and hooking it up to a 20 year old TV.. or buying an Xbox and hooking it up to a new, $200 TV. The former will look like complete crap, and have very few games available to play. The latter will get you hundreds of games, with better visual quality.

Seeing as the sole reason for the Xbox360 is the improvement in graphics capabilities (unless there's some new feature I'm missing), I'd agree with the parent. Stupid.

Re:Pretty weak article

[supabeast!]

I think his point was that if you don't have the money for a good, modern TV but you spend $300-$400 for a new game console, you're stupid.

Re:Pretty weak article

[cornface]

You have provided the most retarded thread I've read on slashdot in ages, and that's saying quite a bit.

Thanks for that.

Re:Pretty weak article

[Jarlsberg]

Seeing as the sole reason for the Xbox360 is the improvement in graphics capabilities (unless there's some new feature I'm missing), I'd agree with the parent. Stupid.

That's because you haven't been paying attention ;). There's the huge RAM increase. The Xbox had 64 MB, the Xbox 360 has 512 MB. This enables much larger maps (and hopefully, better PC versions of console releases -- remember the painfully short Thief 3/Deus Ex 2 maps?).

There's the triple-core processor, which is a bit of a cat in the hat. It's going to be interesting to see how the game manufacturers will take use of that feature.

There's the Xbox Arcade. Remember the Nintendo fanboys trumping the ability the download old NES/SNES games? This is the Xbox version. Sure, you may not get Mario, but you get perfect versions of old arcade hits.

Re:Pretty weak article

[Anonymous Coward]

but you theoretically could get perfect versions of old arcade hits. In reality, it will be stuffed with ports of web-based flash and java games.

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[the computer guy nex]

Microsoft researched this and found there was no quality difference between component and HDMI. They did you a favor by not offering 150$ cables that were no improvement, but I'm sure you weren't ever buying a 360 anyway.

Nice one gamespot

[sam_paris]

Gamespot officially tells us what we all knew before.

The better your tv, the better your picture...

Thanks for that gamespot!! I was going to use my black and white 50hz 15 inch'er with rf input until I saw this article!

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[Anonymous Coward]

It doers have HDMI though doesn't it? HDMI is identicle to DVI in quality.

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder about the quality of VGA connector to my 26 inch LCD HDTV. Is there a reason that the quality would be less than DVI? HD console gaming is all hype right now and probably won't improve until the government starts their HD converter subsidy. The only games I crank up the resolution on my PC are clicky games, like a Diablo clone or RTS. Moot point in the console world.

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[Xugumad]

$150 cables? Wow, someone's been hanging around AV shops too much. You can get much much cheaper (around $10) DVI/HDMI cables that will do just as good a job as long as it's fairly short (2-3 metres at most) and you don't tape it next to the power cable or anything.

While the video carried over the cables isn't error checked or corrected (HDMI audio is error corrected, if anyone cares), it takes a hell of a lot more interference to put noticable faults in a digital signal, than it does analogue.

I also find it hard to believe there was no quality difference, but am willing to accept it wasn't noticable (to most people).

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[alienw]

VGA is an analog standard, DVI/HDMI is digital. This does not necessarily mean a quality difference, although substandard VGA cables and D/A converters can make a huge difference.

IDK

[TiggerPac]

I don't know what the bigger waste of time is... reading the original article or reading the Slashdot comments to it.

Re:IDK

[superpulpsicle]

I am trying to figure out how much M$ is paying slashdot to advertise xbox 360. This is like the 20th xbox article posted in a week. The sad truth is that less than 5% of us will actually own one at launch date. It's all for nothing.

Re:IDK

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, they didn't need to spend money, but then again they didn't know that their main competitor was going to alienate all respectable geeks in the space of a mere week!

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[apoc06]

hold on... youre telling me that microsoft [the maker of the xbox360] said that HDMI [the spec that their competitor is using in their ps3] is no better than component connectors? sounds like FUD.

you are right that they did you a favor by not including more expensive cabling, AICBW but IIRC HDMI /is/ better than component connections.

I don't understand the HDTV hype

[Anonymous Coward]

I can honestly say that I don't understand the HDTV hype that is going on in the world today.

HDTV Will NOT:

• Make bad moives any better

• Make bad videogames any better

• Make bad TV shows any better

All HDTV does is produce a crisper picture; if you're already upset with the quality of content you're getting HDTV will do nothing to improve it. I understand Microsoft's focus on online gameplay because that can provide compelling and unique gameplay experiances; I understand Nintendo's focus on a new controler because that can provide compelling and unique gameplay experiances;and I understand Sony's inclusion of 7 controller 'ports' because that can provide compelling and unique gameplay experiances; but what does HDTV really provide?

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[Delphiki]

HDTV Will:

• Make good movies better
• Make good videogames better.
• Make bad TV shows better.

Why are you so focused on what it will do to bad content, instead of good content?

But hey, if you really don't care about graphics then do you watch TV on the cheapest TV you could buy? Or better yet a black and white TV left over from decades gone by? Do you still watch nothing but VHS tapes and listen only to casette tapes?

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[bigman2003]

Better-More-Faster

Just like the RF comparison in the article- we want to, and like to, move forward with the quality of the visuals.

Ask a PC gamer to take his resolution down to 640x480, and play games there. It just isn't as nice.

This is the same reason that digital cameras go up in quality (megapixels) every year. We want to see things that look better and better.

Play a standard def game (or movie, or anything else) on a 42" screen...things start to look REALLY bad.

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[Anonymous Coward]

Will it really make movies better?

Much like the Special edition of starwars was better than the originals because of better special effects?

The reality is that the first thing PC gamers drop when performance degrades is the resolution because it has a minimal effect on gameplay (to a limit, eventually people prefer to play at 800X600 with Medium Textures/Model detail because it is better than playing at 640X480 with High Texture/Model detail).

It is debatable as to whether higher-resolution actually produces better looking games; there is no game that has been released that even comes close to looking as good as a computer generated movie on DVD.

On a side note, HDTV resolutions can make good games worse; take Fear and play it on a pretty modest computer and force yourself to use High resolutions (1600x1200), you will either have to turn all of the detail in the game to low (with lighting off and no shadows) or play at a really choppy framerate; I know I love playing games at 15fps.

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[Delphiki]

Will it really make movies better?

I can say with 100% certainty that yes, HDTV makes movies better. For me anyway, if you dont' care about picture quality at all then I guess it won't, but I don't know anyone for whom this is the case.

It is debatable as to whether higher-resolution actually produces better looking games; there is no game that has been released that even comes close to looking as good as a computer generated movie on DVD.

First of all, the two parts of this sentence, as far as I can tell, have nothing to do with each other. Secondly, that's debatable? Really? So you think some people would argue that the same scene, with the same FPS, the same models, lighting, textures, etc, would look just as good at 640x480 as it would in 1600x1200. I can't imagine anyone arguing that.

On a side note, HDTV resolutions can make good games worse; take Fear and play it on a pretty modest computer and force yourself to use High resolutions (1600x1200), you will either have to turn all of the detail in the game to low (with lighting off and no shadows) or play at a really choppy framerate; I know I love playing games at 15fps.

So you're saying sometimes you need to trade off one graphical aspect for another. Shocking. But that's an extreme case. I've played games plenty of times where I turned down other settings before the resolution. With consoles it's harder to offer a huge number of resolutions than it is on the PC, so they render everything at 720p and then scale it down for some people. So people playing at 480p will get a slightly worse picture than they would if the console hadn't been designed for HDTV. But people with a tv that supports 720p will definitely have a much better picture than if the 360 had been designed for 480p.

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[drmarcj]

This is the same reason that digital cameras go up in quality (megapixels) every year. We want to see things that look better and better. Yes, true. However, it's amazing how many people have a 4+ megapixel camera that they never use at full resolution since it fills up their memory card and they don't actually care about the difference (or worse, they don't know how to change the resolution, which is usually preset to something less than the maximum. My point (and I do have one) is that we get a lot of stuff foisted on us that is bigger, faster, more megapixels, lemon scented whatever, but is not actually better in a way that regular folks will appreciate. As much as nice graphics helps make a good game great, it doesn't do jack if the game is lousy. In that case I really would rather play a great game at 640x480. The sad truth is that a lot of what is supposedly making the XBox 360 'better' is hyped up graphics stuff, when the thing that will matter in the long run is whether the games are going to be good. If they don't, it's $400 of badly spent money.

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all, the two parts of this sentence, as far as I can tell, have nothing to do with each other. Secondly, that's debatable? Really? So you think some people would argue that the same scene, with the same FPS, the same models, lighting, textures, etc, would look just as good at 640x480 as it would in 1600x1200. I can't imagine anyone arguing that.

The two parts of the sentence are related because a computer generated DVD movie looks far better than Doom 3, Half Life 2, Fear, etc. even when those games have outrageous resolutions (for example 1920x1280). On the second point, the reality is that you don't get the same performance from a game at 640x480 as you do from 1600x1200; as you mention later there is a trade-off. Would you rather have higher-resolution texture maps, more complicated shaders, higher-detail models better lighting and shadows or a higher resolution? This is the reality! Most console games (on next generation consoles) would look better if they stayed with lower resolutions (480p with digital output), and focused on matching DVD output rather than jump to HDTV. Look at FEAR:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2575 &p=4
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2575 &p=5
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2575 &p=6

You get nearly 3X the framerate (without AA+AF) at 800x600 compared to 1600x1200, with AA+AF or Soft-Shadows you ~3.5X the framerate (I suspect that if they did both Soft-Shadows and AA+AF you would have over 4x the framerate). So basically, you have the choice of running Fear (max details) with Soft Shadows, 4xAA and 4xAF at 800x600 OR running it at 1600x1200; which do you choose?

Re:I don't understand the HDTV hype

[oldwolf13]

I'd choose 1024x768 2xAA 2xAF

because resolution while not the be all end all... still make a difference.

No DVI - no HDMI - no 1080p

[esobofh]

Not on my shopping list anymore... POS. What the hell is Bill thinking??

Re:No DVI - no HDMI - no 1080p

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

Re:No DVI - no HDMI - no 1080p

[NeMon'ess]

He was thinking the 360 wouldn't be able to render 1080p at acceptable framerates because the hardware and games are designed to run at 30fps in 720p.

He was also thinking there are almost no TVs on the market that support true 1080p, and LCD's limited to 1280x1024 would have to discard every third pixel to shrink 1920 down to 1280. A good solution there would be to just render 1280x1024 instead of widescreen, but that brings back my first sentence.

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[ProppaT]

I think the point of the OP was that no dvi = no hooking it up to his LCD monitor. I agree, it would be nice to have the option of DVI....but it is a console made for being played in front of a TV. The audience for a VGA/DVI hookup would be so limited it wouldn't be worth it. Also, if someone was going to sit in front of a monitor at a desk to play a game, they might as well play a PC game to begin with. Half of the appeal of console systems is being able to play them in your livingroom.

Gamestops Angle Is?

[Bellum Aeternus]

Why Gamespot? Shouldn't this article been written by, say, BestBuy who actually sells HDTVs too?

Anyhoo - I actually know a lot of people who don't see a reason to upgrade their TV. It works, right? And HD doesn't come around here anyways (least, not yet). They do see a reason to upgrade everything else constantly. Perhaps, this is a push my Redmond to get "news" (I use the term loosly here) agencies to get the word out the 360 does looks great, it's your TV that sucks.

PS.
There are a lot of people who don't know that TVs come in various qualities 'cause they always shop at WalMart, they're not stupid - they're just not geeks and are underinformed (read: ignorant). Remember, WalMart sells Xbox too.

Headline

[Gogo0]

NEWS FLASH!!!

RF Picture quality sucks!
Component quality sucks less!
Svideo quality sucks even less!
Composite quality is pretty good!
DVI/HDMI quality is the best you can get on a consumer-grade tv!

For $10 I will write an article for your website arguing between TOSLINK and 75Ohm coax for audio, and then finish it with a tie.
IT WILL BE A REVELATION TO EVERYONE.

Oh, it will be an Xbox2 article too, so that it gets posted on Slashdot.

Re:Headline

[LordNimon]

You have "component" and "composite" backwards.

Re:Headline

[kernelfoobar]

Close, just switch component and composite.

composite is a single cable (usually yellow colored to identify it)
component is several cables (usually red, green and blue colored cables to identify them)

and yes, slashdot seems obsessed with Xbox...

Re:Headline

[mink]

Something people need to know about S-Video vs. composite.
The quality of these against each other is highly dependent on your TV (or whatever device you connect to) and the source.

S-Video has things separated (not to the extent of component) by the device generating the signal and the TV does not need to do much filtering on it. Composite has all the video signal combined so the TV needs to run the signal through a filter to separate out things.

The quality of the filter (most often referred to as Y/C 3d(or 2d) comb filter) determines how good a job of this the device (TV or console) will do. Some TV sets have low end comb filters so the S-Video out of the console will look better. Some TV sets have very good comb filters and it can make composite video look better then the comb filter in the console can generate on the S-Video signal.

Re:Headline

[Gogo0]

Yeah, I always switch those around when I type or talk about them. Thankfuly, never when I purchase them =]

Re:Headline

[KDR_11k]

Where does SCART fit in there?

Re:Headline

[Hast]

SCART is just a type of connector like RCA. You can have a SCART which carries a component/composite and/or S-video as well as stereo audio.

Re:Headline

[KDR_11k]

That leaves the question what kind of signal the X360 sends over SCART.

Re:Headline

[Hast]

Whichever you connect to it.

I have RGB inputted from my Xbox to my TV. I also have a GameCube hooked up with a different Scart using composite connections. Point is, the Scart doesn't really specify the signal any more than saying it's "RCA" (those are the connectors you usually get on composite/component wires).

Now I bet that you can get a description which just say "scart" and then it's probably because it's by marketing. ;-)

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[Prophet of Nixon]

Why do people obsess about DVI? I can't even get certain deinterlacing applications to work right over it, and there is no quality difference at all on a 21" LCD. I'm glad that said 21" LCD has 2 VGA inputs too, otherwise I would have returned it. I'll never buy a monitor that only inputs DVI, and I'll never buy a video card that only outputs DVI. Besides, with all the awful video DRM that's on the way, isn't having an analog option a good thing?

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[gabebear]

"I'll never buy a video card that only outputs DVI."

You know almost all(like 99.9%) of video cards with DVI ports are DVI-I which includes VGA in the extra pins. I have seen some ancient compaq TNT2s that were DVI-D, but those are were far outside the norm.

DVI-V = no digital signal, just vga rearranged (I've never seen one of these)
DVI-D = only digital, no vga. Generally this is what a monitor's DVI port is
DVI-I = both digital and analog, you can hook this one up to anything(you need an adapter for standard vga) and it's the most common DVI output

HDMI and DVI-D are basically the same thing in a different pinout, however DVI equipment doesn't normally support interlaced modes while HDMI has to. Anyhoo, what "deinterlacing applications" don't work with DVI??

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[egomaniac]

I have a high-end theater in my home, with an Infocus 7205 projecting onto a 160" scren (that's over thirteen feet diagonal).

During the installation, I very carefully compared component video quality against DVI video quality using a high-end DVD player. With good component cables and proper calibration, no one in my family (myself included) was able to tell the difference between the two.

My theater is about the most demanding environment you can find, with a very large screen, completely dark room, and a thirty foot cable run from the equipment closet to the projector. My wife is a professional digital photographer, and as a result both of us are very sensitive to image quality. And even while carefully scrutinizing the screen we couldn't tell the slightest difference.

Now, I confess that ended up using DVI over component for the main DVD hookup. But it's purely practical -- my DVD player won't output an upscaled signal over component, and the image is better if the DVD player does the upscaling rather than the projector. (The DVI vs. component test had to be done at 480p for that reason). Also, I have been able to tell the difference when using crappy component cables (but crappy DVI cables are even worse).

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[JustNiz]

>> Besides, with all the awful video DRM that's on the way, isn't having an analog option a good thing?

Only if you never want to play/see any DRM-encrypted media.

Anything DRM-encrypted will not be decryptable (therefore viewable) by hardware that doesn't support DRM en/decryption end-to-end. Meaning your analog-only card and monitor.

your sig

[Skadet]

funny, I'm like 15 minutes from you in Davis. small world.

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[OMGtehRed]

You don't want to buy a video game system JUST because of the video cables? Go fuck yourself in the ass.

S-Video input is more direct

[CreateWindowEx]

The console doesn't use a comb filter to produce the S-Video (two-wire) output from a composite source (1 wire)--it is going the other way from basically an internal component signal (3 wire) down to 2 wire. When the console synthesizes a composite signal, some information is destroyed, especially in NTSC, that can never be brought back. With S-Video, the luminance (Y) signal is transmitted directly with no modulation, and only the UV (or Cr/Cb--I'm being a little fast and loose here) signals are encoded together into a chroma signal, which is less destructive (e.g., more of the original signal can be reconstructed accurately).

Re:S-Video input is more direct

[mink]

Well I have to admit I was taking what my knowledge/experience with LD players (where I learned that sometimes a good TV can make composite look better then S-Video) and applying that to console video. I always assumed there was something like a comb filter doing the break out on the source side for S-Video.

But you basically do have hd already...

[thegreathoe]

correct me if i'm wrong....but they are offering a vga cable for $40 *wally-world link here*. and since most monitors can support atleast 1024x768 what's the need for the hdtv? i'm just going to get the svga cable and use my 21" monitor and digital projector until i get my hdtv for xmas.

Re:Obvious shortcomning in Xbox360 spec

[Prophet of Nixon]

I was running DVI-out to DVI-in, and DScaler wouldn't do anything (I use a tv tuner for s-video and composite input), the screen just stuck. Switched back to VGA-VGA, without even closing the program, and everything was fine. In any case, I wasn't interested in DVI anymore since I got absolutely no benefit from it, and it caused problems.

I haven't tried DVI-out to VGA-in with a converter for lack of a converter, but you have made me wonder what the specs on those ports are. Might be good to watch for if I have to buy a new video card anyway, I've noticed that many of them have 2 DVI ports now.