• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Xbox360: Component or VGA?

T

thelead

2[H]4U
2FA
Joined
May 28, 2005
Messages
2,293
Which one looks better on an LCD HDTV? Microsoft will have both options, but the VGA is $40. Is it worth it? Does it look better then component cables? Thanks in advance.
 
i heard xbox 360 was gonna come with gdtv/hdmi connectors, composet rca video and vga are not gonna give good resolutions

if you're talking about hdtv over rca composet then get that, they have 3 composet connections dedicated to video... look kinda like this
200412010021_1.jpg
 
Component is better than VGA or DVI.
I think HDMI is even better than component.
 
HDMI is DVI just a different connector.

Running from my PC i have both a VGA cable and DVI-to-HDMI cable plugged into my LCD front projector. I perfer VGA personally and can not really tell the difference, cept for on HDMI the picture looks a tab bit blended better, but not as crisp as VGA... my resolution is 1280x720 aka 720p on both VGA and DVI-HDMI cables.

So im looking forward to using either.. or straight component if needed.
 
Is component really truly better than DVI? I thought the digital video interface was as good as it gets - especially with HD content.
 
I am buying the VGA adapter the day it comes out. This will give me something useful to use for my VGA port on my nice LG 19" LCD. Man 2 more months...I CAN'T WAIT! :D
 
On a fixed pixel display(LCD/DLP), a digital connection (like DVI or HDMI) running at the display's native resolution is more than likely going to be your best bet. What leaves the output device is exactly what you see on your screen. On a console, this means there isn't a single D-A or A-D conversion during the entire process. No conversion = perfect signal. Whether this translates into a picture quality difference you can actually see vs. analog depends on all sorts of factors.

In the analog world, it's likely to be VGA>Component>SVideo>Composite. Individual results may vary, but most of the time this will be the case. It's the simple fact that more wires usually means a better picture, since you can transmit more discreet amounts of information on each wire. VGA and component will probably look very similar, but the other 2 will have quite noticable quality differences (it will look worse) on almost any display.

VGA - 5 signal wires
Component - 3 signal wires
SVideo - 2 signal wires
Composite - 1 signal wire

In your specific case, I would imagine that VGA would look the best. I'm really hoping the X360 comes with a DVI/HDMI output, though I doubt it will. I don't know if it would look much better than VGA, but at least I could guarantee 1 to 1 pixel mapping on my 1280x720 projector.
 
JBark said:
On a fixed pixel display(LCD/DLP), a digital connection (like DVI or HDMI) running at the display's native resolution is more than likely going to be your best bet. Less D-A and A-D conversions lead to a better quality signal. Whether this translates into a picture quality difference you can actually see depends on all sorts of factors.

In the analog world, it's likely to be VGA>Component>SVideo>Composite. Individual results may vary, but most of the time this will be the case. It's the simple fact that more wires usually means a better picture, since you can transmit more discreet amounts of information on each wire. VGA and component will probably look very similar, but the other 2 will have quite noticable quality differences on almost any display.

VGA - 5 signal wires
Component - 3 signal wires
SVideo - 2 signal wires
Composite - 1 signal wire

In your specific case, I would imagine that VGA would look the best. I'm really hoping the X360 comes with a DVI/HDMI output, though I doubt it will. I don't know if it would look much better than VGA, but at least I could guarantee 1 to 1 pixel mapping on my 1280x720 projector.
Click to expand...


So far Microsoft has only shown that the VGA adapter will only be available at launch. I wonder if a Digital Connection is at all possible then. I would figure that they would have a HDMI/DVI cable if the console had a Digital Output at launch. So my guess is that because of this, there will never be a HDMI/DVI cable ever for the Xbox360 unless they make the connection Digital in the future which is VERY possible since they will be upgrading to HD-DVD in future Xbox 360 machines. It is very AWESOME that they are offering a VGA adapter as it is so that everyone can experience Xbox360 in High Def.
 
^ yup yup

i love my projector too... its a amazing 720p native resolution though, cant accept 1080p signals.. just downscales to 720p

i would love for the 360 to have a dvi/hdmi output... has it been confirmed?
 
mentok1982 said:
Component is better than VGA or DVI.
I think HDMI is even better than component.
Click to expand...

Vga is better then component, Vga offers a true RGB colour connection, while component does not.
 
Arkanian said:
So far Microsoft has only shown that the VGA adapter will only be available at launch. I wonder if a Digital Connection is at all possible then. I would figure that they would have a HDMI/DVI cable if the console had a Digital Output at launch. So my guess is that because of this, there will never be a HDMI/DVI cable ever for the Xbox360 unless they make the connection Digital in the future which is VERY possible since they will be upgrading to HD-DVD in future Xbox 360 machines. It is very AWESOME that they are offering a VGA adapter as it is so that everyone can experience Xbox360 in High Def.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen, the video output chip on the X360 supports analog only, so it's very unlikely we'll get HDMI/DVI. But hey, a man can dream. :)

And yes, both BluRay and HD-DVD require an HDCP HDMI/DVI connection to display anything above 480p. So whenever the x360 gets one of those drives, we'll get a digital connection. But who knows when (if ever) that will happen. I might have to borrow/rent a PS3 when it comes out, just to see what the digital output looks like vs. component.
 
Thanks for all the info. I still don't know if the advantage of vga over component is worth $40 though. I guess we will see.
 
JBark said:
From what I've seen, the video output chip on the X360 supports analog only, so it's very unlikely we'll get HDMI/DVI. But hey, a man can dream. :)

And yes, both BluRay and HD-DVD require an HDCP HDMI/DVI connection to display anything above 480p. So whenever the x360 gets one of those drives, we'll get a digital connection. But who knows when (if ever) that will happen. I might have to borrow/rent a PS3 when it comes out, just to see what the digital output looks like vs. component.
Click to expand...
supposedly the rumors that have gone around,the video encoder in the 360 supports it just its not as of right now going to be an accessory for the console


if i even get to play high def......it gonna be on a CRT so im happy theres vga support,unless my biology teacher,or my P.E. teacher lets me use one of the 5 60inch plasma 1080P support tvs in my school :eek:
 
HDMI > DVI > VGA > Component

I don't make the rules, thats the way it is. I am almost positive the only difference between DVI and HDMI is that HDMI has increased band width and surround sound as part of the connection.
 
HDMI has both digital video and digital audio in 1 plug. The video is backward compatible with DVI-D from what I've gathered.

VGA and Component are analog signals.
 
Draax said:
HDMI > DVI > VGA > Component

I don't make the rules, thats the way it is. I am almost positive the only difference between DVI and HDMI is that HDMI has increased band width and surround sound as part of the connection.
Click to expand...
HDMI is just DVI with audio connectors......no extra bandwith video wise
 
paranoia4422 said:
HDMI is just DVI with audio connectors......no extra bandwith video wise
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too but Wikipedia seems to suggest otherwise.

Check it out at: HDMI Explanation

It comes in 2 flavors, Type A and B and also includes Digital Content Protection (Should have seen that coming)
 
It doesn't matter because few TVs have VGA input. So you WILL use component.
 
Well, my HDTV does supports DVI, component, and VGA. Thats why I was asking. Is going to VGA from component going to be as much of a jump as VGA to DVI? I notice a difference between my two 2005fpw's (one is connected VGA the other DVI) Or is the difference not as distinguishable because component and VGA are both analog?
 
The main reason people want this adapter is to play High Def on a LCD or CRT Monitor because they don'y have a HDTV.
 
Tetrahedron said:
yes there are
Click to expand...
no,DVI-I can be adapted to VGA because it includes an analog signal,in order to take a VGA signal to digital you need a converter not an adapter
* DVI-D (digital only)
* DVI-A (analog only)
* DVI-I (digital and analog)
 
paranoia4422 said:
no,DVI-I can be adapted to VGA because it includes an analog signal,in order to take a VGA signal to digital you need a converter not an adapter
* DVI-D (digital only)
* DVI-A (analog only)
* DVI-I (digital and analog)
Click to expand...

I was surprised to hear that there were because I know it would be impossible. Anyway, thanks for clearing it up. I was going to have to go back and look to see if there really were.

Well, if your TV does support VGA input, you can't go wrong with that. It can't be any less clear than component but they may be on the same level, I have never seen a comparison. PC monitors are a lot sharper than TVs so if there is a difference between the two, I doubt you'd notice it between VGA and good quality component cables. (but for those you'd probably have to buy the Moster ones because the X2 comes with MS official ones and they will probably use cheap ones like they did on the Xbox). The Moster ones are probably going to be $60 so maybe it is a cost advantage to buy the cheaper VGA for $30.
 
Draax said:
HDMI > DVI > VGA > Component

I don't make the rules, thats the way it is. I am almost positive the only difference between DVI and HDMI is that HDMI has increased band width and surround sound as part of the connection.
Click to expand...
HDMI = DVI > VGA > Component > S-Video > Composite
 
Shorty said:
HDMI = DVI > VGA > Component > S-Video > Composite
Click to expand...

If you have the choice between HDMI and DVI, you should always chose HDMI, that way 5.1 sound is routed through the same cable, which leads to less cable clutter.

So HDMI > DVI
 
Draax said:
If you have the choice between HDMI and DVI, you should always chose HDMI, that way 5.1 sound is routed through the same cable, which leads to less cable clutter.

So HDMI > DVI
Click to expand...
Video Quality, they are equal.
 
Draax said:
If you have the choice between HDMI and DVI, you should always chose HDMI, that way 5.1 sound is routed through the same cable, which leads to less cable clutter.

So HDMI > DVI
Click to expand...

yeah but my sound doesnt go into my TV (projector) it goes to my receiver.. defeating the purpose of HDMI.
 
Tetrahedron said:
yeah but my sound doesnt go into my TV (projector) it goes to my receiver.. defeating the purpose of HDMI.
Click to expand...
Yep....most TV's with HDMI have optical out so that you can hook it to your receiver. But yeah I see your point because almost everyone with HDTV's will probably have a receiver so it does defeat the purpose.
 
Shapeshifter said:
Vga is better then component, Vga offers a true RGB colour connection, while component does not.
Click to expand...

actaully no

That is like saying which is better.. DD or DTS?

It is all preferential

From a physical standpoint. Components can carry huge amounts of data just like VGA can

The difference between them is voltage signals.

Components has the luminance signal which carries the sync info and also happens to be 1.5x higher than the Rb Rg signal. Meaning if you connect compnents into a vga monitor the picture will look green.. awefully green. But if the VGA monitor can somehow decipher the component signal it should look normal.

VGA (or RGBHV) has broken the signal into its native components where each signal is on its own channel. This helps immensely especially over long distances OR if there is alot of "noise". All voltage are the same (before color correction of course).

Which is actaully better? They are two different ways to acheive the end means. None is actually better than the other. In terms of numbers. They both allow for the same bandwidth for information display.
 
Maichena said:
That's what I thought too but Wikipedia seems to suggest otherwise.

Check it out at: HDMI Explanation

It comes in 2 flavors, Type A and B and also includes Digital Content Protection (Should have seen that coming)
Click to expand...


HMDI + DCP become HDCP connector ;) Totally different regardless of what Wikipedia states.
 
Tetrahedron said:
yeah but my sound doesnt go into my TV (projector) it goes to my receiver.. defeating the purpose of HDMI.
Click to expand...

If you have a ghetto reciever that doesn't support HDMI switching, yes I guess you would have to route the audio seperate.

If you are going to spend upwards of 3K on a TV, I would think you would match it with a high quality reciever, ... but thats just me.
 
Someone clarify this for me please- Is VGA analog, or digital? Because if it is analog, I am in the understanding that even though I have a VGA-HDMI adapter for my HDTV, it won't work unless the signal is being sent digitally, instead of Analog?
 
Draax said:
If you have a ghetto reciever that doesn't support HDMI switching, yes I guess you would have to route the audio seperate.

If you are going to spend upwards of 3K on a TV, I would think you would match it with a high quality reciever, ... but thats just me.
Click to expand...

I have a Denon AVR-5700...and I have a Panasonic PTL-500U projector. 1280x720 (720P native res) So I meet your criteria - yet I don't have a ghetto receiver just because it doesn't support HDMI switching...

There are a lot of incredible recievers that are more than a couple years old that would not support HDMI switching because HDMI is a 2 year old technology.

For the rest of you folk...

DVI > Component....I've done the A/B test in my own home - with expensive component cables, and expensive DVI cable.

DVI is much sharper and since HDMI is the exact same standard with audio out and a overall smaller connector HDMI > Component....while DVI = HDMI.
 
Archaea said:
I have a Denon AVR-5700...and I have a Panasonic PTL-500U projector. 1280x720 (720P native res) So I meet your criteria - yet I don't have a ghetto receiver just because it doesn't support HDMI switching...

There are a lot of incredible recievers that are more than a couple years old that would not support HDMI switching because HDMI is a 2 year old technology.

For the rest of you folk...

DVI > Component....I've done the A/B test in my own home - with expensive component cables, and expensive DVI cable.

DVI is much sharper and since HDMI is the exact same standard with audio out and a overall smaller connector HDMI > Component....while DVI = HDMI.
Click to expand...


AVR-5700.

very nice reciever :)

and defenitely NOT ghetto. Hell my Integra seperate does NOT support HDMI switching and it is THX 2 ultra certified....and it is about 1 year old now.

and as for DVI it depends on the final output.

I can tell you that Component > DVI on my CRT based projector :) and also prices in cables does not signify the best. I use plain ole canare cables for my video without any issues what so ever at a cost that is nowhere near any of the "boutique" cables.
 
Draax said:
If you have a ghetto reciever that doesn't support HDMI switching, yes I guess you would have to route the audio seperate.

If you are going to spend upwards of 3K on a TV, I would think you would match it with a high quality reciever, ... but thats just me.
Click to expand...

a ghetto... lol

I have a Sanyo Z3 720p HD Front Projector.. my screen is 108inches.. much bigger than a 3k TV.. go figure a HDTV projector is better then a plasma or dlp tv set.. hmmm

so explain to me how I should hook my video (HDMI) to my projector and get sound to my 5.1 Onkyo speaker system without routing the sound to the receiver?
 
Tetrahedron said:
a ghetto... lol

I have a Sanyo Z3 720p HD Front Projector.. my screen is 108inches.. much bigger than a 3k TV.. go figure a HDTV projector is better then a plasma or dlp tv set.. hmmm

so explain to me how I should hook my video (HDMI) to my projector and get sound to my 5.1 Onkyo speaker system without routing the sound to the receiver?
Click to expand...

Its a very easy concept to grasp, your HDMI goes into your reciever, then to your projector. This allows for you to connect multiple HDMI devices to the reciever and have one output to your projector.

Typical, someone who is setting up a home theatre system will use the highest quality connection as a base line for buying hardware for the system. So if you have an HDMI projector or a TV, and a DVD player, satelite, or cable box with HDMI outputs, why would you not buy a reciever that has HDMI switching?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top