Originally Posted by anand_raman
I want to use the video processing of oppo's Qdeo which seems to be much better (at-least for my eyes) than the onkyo's HQV. For now I have connected oppo's hdmi 1 out to 818 but have disabled onkyo video processing on that input.
Originally Posted by skybolt
I have the exact same setup, but I have one question for you, why would you not want to take advantage of the Onkyo's HQV Vida processor? You should hook the 103 directly to the 818 via HDMI and out of the 818 to your veiwing source. Don't over complicate things just use them as they were intended. You won't be disappointed.
I look at it from a software engineer's perspective. You have hardware (Mediatek + QDEO (103) or VRS (103D)). The Mediatek I believe handles a lot of the video processing functions, with either the QDEO or the VRS handling a small subset.
Then there's the software (firmware) written to take advantage of the hardware. How good, bad or indifferent that is is defined by the engineering staff and the company.
Most PC's have very similar hardware (disks, graphics, etc.), the thing that differentiates them is the software. If you love Linux over Windows, it's the software. If you love the PS4 over the XBox (or vice versa) it's most likely the software. So in the case of video processing, why ignore the software and the engineers?
I have a QDEO processor in my Pioneer Elite VSX-33. I have a BDP-83 with the ABT processor and Mediatek. Every test I've done both systematic (Spears and Munsil, etc.) and qualitative (watching 'problematic' blurays - Ratatoie) has led to the same thing whenever the Oppo is involved : I shut processing in the VSX-33 off.
I attribute that slightly to the chip, mostly to the firmware programming done by the Oppo engineers.
So when I compare video processing, I consider: Firmware programming + main video chip + auxiliary video chip(s). In the 103D, for example that would be Oppo engineering + Mediatek + VRS + Darbee.
I would think that an AVR company (Pioneer, Onkyo, Denon, etc). is less likely to have as much focus and funding for video software than a company whose only business is that. Just my opinion, but it makes sense to me.