AVS Forum banner

Official "1080p Vs. 720p" Thread Discussion

467K views 1K replies 373 participants last post by  JLaud25 
#1 ·
In an effort to reduce the redundant topics that tend to clutter up this forum, we are starting this thread with an intention to "corral" the disussion of this particularly popular topic to this one location, as much as humanly possible.


Above all else, the goal of this "sticky thread" is to be the one-stop information center for new forum members who have questions about 1080p and 720p, and their relative merits. General resolution questions are also fair game in this dedicated thread. Here you may post your facts, observations, questions, relevent links.


Yes, some debate is permitted, however, let's do our best to be dispassionate information providers. Best to leave resolution debates outside the confines of this thread. Again, what we are mainly trying to do here is provide a single location where the more experienced forum members can direct new/inexperienced members to, in order to save us all from repeating the same basic information over and over and over and.. well, you get my drift.



To get us started, I've copied some posting contributions here from another recent thread, which centered around this very same topic. The following opinions are by no means definitive, but hopefully a reasonably good starting point for discussion. Feel free to add your own contributions as you see fit.

FINAL NOTE: This initial thread post is subject to revision, if necessary, upon review of our moderator, MarkRubin, as well as my own subsequent scrutinizing. Perhaps we will add informational links to this first thread post, as they become available.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions /forum/post/0


The independent experts all tend to agree on this point.. 1080p is just about the least important factor in picture quality particularly if you are seated outside the physical boundaries where our human eye can no longer discern the resolution differences. This is a sliding distance scale which depends on screen size in relation to seating distance. Here's one such chart example:

http://hdguru.com/wp-content/uploads...ance_chart.pdf


Color accuracy, contrast, black levels, scaling/processing all come before resolution in importance. The smaller the panel, the less important resolution becomes UNLESS you will be using the panel as a computer monitor (where you'll often be seated within 4ft. of the display, and at a distance that close, you will much more likely notice & appreciate the difference). On a 37" panel, for example, you have to be within 5ft. to tell the difference. And that's under ideal circumstances.


Disregard any poster who suggests otherwise. They are seeing something other than the true difference between 1080p & 720p when they claim they can tell the difference even on smaller (37"-42") panels beyond 5-6ft. The difference they claim to see is likely to be in the processing of non-native signal, i.e., panels will typically display their native rate better than they can a lesser resolution which the panel then has to scale to match it's own.


If you have a 1080p 42" panel, for example, assuming for a moment that you are seated outside the optimal seating boundary for fully resolving (seeing) 1080p content, the panel will still often look better displaying 1080p content merely because it doesn't have to scale the resolution. Feed the 1080p panel some other lesser resolution which then must be upscaled to match the panels 1080p native rate, then on all but the most expensive panels with excellent processing, the image will look inferior not because 720p is a lesser resolution, but because the panel simply cannot do a very good job scaling it. Or, maybe the panel handles scaling these duties well, but the particular 1080p model just so happens to have better color rendition, contrast, etc., than another particular example of a 720p panel, and as a result, it looks better under any circumstances, regardless of their comparative resolution capabilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nmlobo /forum/post/0


The 1080p sets are the only sets that will display both broadcast formats of 720p and 1080i with no loss of detail. They upconvert (scale) the 720p to 1080p (screen resolution) and deinterlace the 1080i/60 and display 1080p/30 with no detail loss.


A 768 display has to scale every input signal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mongoos150 /forum/post/0


] Contrast, color saturation and color accuracy are all more important than resolution. Your display could very well produce a better picture because of better color saturation/contrast and have nothing to do with the bump in resolution. The difference in sets under 42" is negligible - people only think they can see a difference because *usually* they are seeing differences in contrast, color saturation and color accuracy as opposed to resolution differences.
 
See less See more
2
#754 ·
Well I just done a test on my 71 inch LCoS (1920x1080) and I can tell you sitting 10 foot away that 1080i on blu-ray leaves 720P for dead on my TV. I was supprised the difference.

But the same test was done on the kids Samsung (blu-ray switching from one tv to another) and I cannot barely tell the difference on a 40 inch LCD (1920x1080). It shows you the bigger the TV is the more hungry it is for resolution.

Both were tested on 720P and 1080i.
 
#755 ·
I don't retract my statment--I still believe that come April of 2008 next year's Panasonic Plasma 65-inch will cost less than a Pioneer 60-inch Kuro.


I'm not saying it will have a better picture--only saying that it wil be significantly better than this year's Panasonic offerings.
 
#756 ·
i love you guys!! maybe y'all can make some recommendations for me. i would like to buy a new tv......... a 42" plasma or LCd it doesn't matter. think of it this way........ if you were watching '300' or 'hero' or 'house of flying daggers' and wanted THE ABSOLUTE BEST picture at the lowest price, what would u guys recommend?


i have a regular dvd player, but more than likely i'll upgrade to a HD one in the future

price is big factor for me.... cheaper the better, but i don't want crap

i'll sit 7 -9 feet away from it

i play a little ps2 also, i may buy an xbox 360 or a ps3 at the end of next year, i'm definitely not in a rush though

i watch regular/standard cable right now too
 
#757 ·
I found this post in another forum and wondered what you guys thought about its merits.


"Also keep in mind that there are few 720p displays with native 1280x720 resolution. Any incoming 720p signal will be resized to the native resolution of the TV. Even with a native 1280x720 resolution most displays will overscan the frame -- they will enlarge the frame by about 5 percent and then cut off 5 percent of the image around the edges.


So both 720p and 1080p displays will resize an incoming 720p signal. The 720p display is not likely to look better than the 1080p display.


In fact, it can be argued that enlarging by ~55 percent (720p to 1080p plus overscan) will give better results than enlarging by 5 percent (720p plus overscan) assuming that they are both displayed at the same physical size. Enlarging by small percentages leads to severe moire artifacts. Here's are some crops from an original image, one enlarged by 5 percent and another enlarged by 55 percent:




Notice how the 5 percent enlargement has much more severe moire artifacting? This is because the larger display has more "in between" pixels to work with. (Keep in mind that both of them would be displayed at the same physical size on the TV screens, the 720p display would simply have larger pixels than the 1080p display.) Of course, real video wouldn't have lines this sharp but there are times when moire artifacting can be quite visible. "
 
#758 ·
I don't think this is the wrong thread, but if it is, I'm sorry. Didn't think this question was thread worthy.


Tomorrow morning, my family is purchasing the Sharp 42" AQUOS LCD HDTV (LC-42D43U). Viewing distance will be 6-9 feet away. It will be used mostly for regular television programs (either sd or hd from a scientific atlanta/cablevision 4400 or 8300, whichever would work best), some DVDs, and almost no gaming. This is a huge upgrade from what we have now (some 7 year old 27, and the price is really great (only 700&$). Pros and cons would be a extremely appreciated.


Are either cable boxes even capable of displaying HD? If not, we will upgrade


Some specs are


720p (1366 x 768)resolution

NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuners

Widescreen aspect (16:9)

6000:1 contrast ratio

2 HDMI inputs

High brightness


If you need to know any more information, please ask! I'll suply it.
 
#759 ·
Great forum/great thread, but I have a question in regard to image resolution.

The TV I am looking at (Samsung HPT4264 42" Plasma HDTV) has an image resolution of 1024 x 768, while according to what I've read, 720 is generally 1280 x 720.

According to the following image from Wikipedia, 1024 x 768 is XGA.




Can someone clarify this? Can 720p be 1024 x 768 as well? What difference will I see when watching a DVD/HD-DVD/BluRay?
 
#760 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by UVremix /forum/post/12293954


It will be used mostly for regular television programs (either sd or hd from a scientific atlanta/cablevision 4400 or 8300, whichever would work best)


Are either cable boxes even capable of displaying HD? If not, we will upgrade

I've had the SA-8300HD STB w/Brighthouse Cable Co. for a few years now, and it is a fairly capable box w/2 HD Tuners & 160 gig PVR. Mind you, this is no TIVO box, but it ain't a bad performer either. There is long running AVS thread on this STB if you care to wade through the pages.


PS: Welcome to AVS!
 
#761 ·
I am currently beating my head against the wall over the whole 720p vs 1080p, 42" vs 50", combination argument. I have read and read. Looked at the math concerning resolutions, pixel sizes, and eyeball resolving power.


I gave up and went to BB and actually looked at the units next to each other and.....I can't tell. Period. One note here...I wear glasses with corrected vision of not quite 20/20 and 0 astigmatism


Our local store has the PDP-5080HD right below the PDP-5010FD with the TH-50PZ700U directly to the left of the 5080HD. They were running the same "store feed" that was showing on every screen in the place. I stood at my viewing distance (app 11 feet) and I literally put my nose on the screen.


Literally, I could see no difference between the Pioneer sets (that could be attributed to resolution differences) and little difference between the Pio's and the Panny. I am assuming there may be some difference with a BD or HD-DVD but am unconvinced. There were some differences between the Pios and panny that I think were more "whole package" than resolution related.


I went "looking" for pixels as I moved closer and I still could not see a difference. Hmmm. So much for a clear cut difference and making the choice easier.


I can already hear the screaming about bad conditions and sources at BB. True but all the TV's were dealing with the same conditions. Doesn't it make sense that with "perfect" conditions I would still see little or no difference?
 
#762 ·
I've spent the better part of 2 days trying to decide on a TV to buy. Have got the okay from the wife and can't pull the trigger because I just can't seem to decide if I want LCD or Plasma...or if I want 720P or 1080P.


One thing I have decided on is that I want a 50 or 52 inch display. Might consider settling for a 46 or 47 inch, but really want a 50.


Initially, I was leaning toward 1080P....mainly because I just figure that if I'm gonna spend 2k, might as well get something with the highest resolution available so that I don't need to be behind the game in 3 years.


But I have to admit that while in numerous stores, I really didn't see much difference between the 720P sets and the 1080P sets....except generally $600-$700 in price.


Basically, the main reason I didn't plop down the cash and walk out with a TV is because I was only looking to spend $1600-$1700....and it's not easy finding 1080P, 50 inch sets in that price range.


However, I did see a bunch of 50 inch sets in that range with 720P....both LCD's and Plasmas. Saw a very nice Panny 50 inch plasma for $1,499 that was 720P....and it's 1080P counterpart was $2,300. And really, I didn't see much difference in PQ. Surely not $900 worth.


No idea what I want to do. At this point, I'm almost inclined to just wait and see if prices drop. But also would really like a HD TV to watch some football and movies with.


Really is pretty bad though when I do want a TV, but just don't feel comfortable enough with my decision (or the technology) to make the purchase.


If you were buying a TV today, would you consider buying one with 720P? What do you think happens with 720P sets 5 years down the road? Will I be wishing I had 1080P?
 
#764 ·
This is all very confusing....but I've just scanned this whole thread and basically think I've got a decent understanding.


First of all, I think you have to weigh your needs. You have to really look at what the TV will be used for.


Personally, I plan to use my TV as basically a main TV that will be used to watch current cable (or HD cable) and watch some movies. I have alot invested in current DVD's and don't see myself revamping my whole collection to Blue-Ray or HD DVD. And my TV watching is usually sports.


I started out my TV search looking solely at 1080P sets thinking that I had to have the "best" thing out there. However, I haven't purchased anything yet because I want a 50 inch screen and the prices have been about $2,200-$2,400 for "lower brand" models...which is more than I was looking to spend.


Now after reading this thread, I went shopping and saw quite a few 720/768 sets that really looked great. The Panny Plasma 50PX60U was one nice looking set....and saw a nice looking Sammy 50 inch plasma as well. And the prices on those sets were almost $1,000 cheaper in many cases.


Seems pretty clear to me that 720/768 sets are very adequate for the technology that is out there today in terms of broadcast TV and standard DVD's....and even for an XBox 360. 1080P only really seems to be a huge deal for Blue-Ray/HD DVD and for heavy gamers/computer users.


I still haven't made my purchase, but I don't think I'm going to automatically dismiss 720/768 sets.


Way I look at it, those sets will easily suffice for the next 5 years. And I think by that time, I could then move that set to the basement or bedroom and buy myself a 1080P (or higher) set for probably close to another $1,500.


So at the end of the day, I'll have 2 TV's for basically the same price as I could get my 1080P set now. Seems to make some sense. Seems like I'd probably be pretty happy with a 720/768 50 inch plasma set right now if I could get a nice price around $1,200-$1,300 or so. Going from the 27 inch CRT I've had for 14 years, I'm sure I'd be blown away.


Now I also understand there are good reasons to buy 1080P and maybe you are "future-proofing" yourself. It does seem logical that it would become a the standard resolution at some point. But I think it'll take quite awhile for broadcasting to ever reach a 1080P standard. And it'll also take quite awhile for Blue-Ray or HD DVD to fully replace DVD's. Heck, seems like just last year that local movie stores stopped putting VHS tapes out for rent. And VHS has been dead for 10 years. And who knows what will happen. They'll probably start coming out with 3240P sets in 5 years and then you'll still be behind the 8 ball.


This whole darn thing seems like a constant evolution. I know there would be merits in getting 1080P. But I also don't think I'd get a whole lot of benefit out of 1080P for at least a few years since I'm not a heavy gamer and don't really have a desire to get a HD DVD player until it's the major player in all DVD sales.


I'm still on the fence and don't really know what to do. Basically, I can either wait another year or so and buy a 50 inch 1080P set when the price comes down into the $1,300-$1,500 range. Or I can get my 720/768 set now and start enjoying HD content on sets that look perfectly fine to me for a price I'm more comfortable paying...and pick up my 1080P set 3-4 years down the road.


But then there is also one side that says...If you're making the leap to HD, then do it right and get the 1080P......
 
#765 ·
I must agree with the previous poster. I too agonized over this same decision for about 12 months before finally making a decision. I ended up going with the Pioneer PDP-5080 which is a 768p set and have not regretted the decision at all.


In my current set-up, I sit about 10-15 feet away and the display is mounted above my fireplace in the wall on an articulating mount. At the distance I mentioned, I could not discern a difference when I went to view other sets that were 1080 or 720. In my opinion, the Pioneer offered a superior picture quality to all sets, 1080 and 720 in that price range, and that was what ultimately swayed me to that set.


I should add that I do not have a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player yet due to wanting for the price to come down and for there to be a clear victor in the battle. I am not in a hurry to make that purchase so I can wait for a year or two for that to shake out. I also do not game on the display and only watch HD and SD cable from Comcast. Picture is fantastic and again, I couldn't be happier with the decision. The Pioneer was expensive but the overall picture quality justified the cost in my opinion.


When someone is making the decision to compare 720vs1080, you have to take into account all factors in your specific case. For that reason there is not a clear answer to the question of which is better because it depends. Sure, I would have preferred to get the 1080 Pioneer, but I couldn't afford it. So, for the money, the 720 was the BEST display for me.
 
#766 ·
Truthfully, I don't know why you guys still undecided on purchasing a 50" 1080p plasma for $2400. I bought my first plasma 3 years ago, 43" Pio with 720p for $3800, it is NOT a hard decision for me for the prices of these plasma today.


I bought another Panny 720p over 1.5 years ago at BB and had to pay $2800 for it and that was the sale price.


The bigger the screen the higher resolution you need for clarity, simple as that. 720p is good investment for bedroom or kids for video games but overall 1080p is the way to go for the price.
 
#767 ·
It's not that I don't see the Merits of 1080P....


But, I can almost buy 2 720P TV's for the price of one 1080P.


720P pictures are still very, very good in my eyes and I think will suffice my needs for the next 4-5 years at least. Then, I'll buy a 1080P set for $1,000 and move the 720 P to the basement or kids room.


I'll wind up with 2 high-def TV's for around $2,500. However, if I buy the 1080P, 50 inch TV I want right now, I'll be already spending $2,500....for technology that I really won't be able to take full advantage of for several years anyways.


Maybe my thinking is all wrong. But I'm gonna be happy as all heck moving from my 27 inch CRT that we've had for 13 years to a 50 inch plasma (currently close to buying the Panny TH-50PX77U). Sure, I'd like the 1080P version...but I'd be spending $2,400 versus $1,500 and I'm just not sure that extra $900 is really worth it right now. I'm not a heavy gamer and don't really care about blue-ray or HD DVD right now.


I know we need to turn over at least 2 TV's in our house. So I figure I'll go with the cheaper 720P right now and then get 1080P in a few years when the price is bound to fall quite a bit.
 
#770 ·
Will there be a problem viewing 1080p signals on a 720p set? I am considering a 720p because as far as I know there are no current or scheduled future broadcasts in 1080p. Put another way, viewing 480 signals on HD sets obviously has a degraded picture quality due to less "information" in the 480 signal. Does it work backwords in that putting more information(1080p) into a 720p set just compresses the signal, or will it create an area of static or some otherwise unuseable signal on the viewing area of the screen? I am new to this stuff and don't want to "under" buy.

Thanks


Froggy65
 
#771 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackc04 /forum/post/12334613


I don't think its rare ... lots of 1080p TVs do 1:1 mapping, sharp, sony, vizio, just to name a few.

just take a look at the list in this forum, it looks pretty skimpy to me. That and I'm pretty sure none of them have it on by default, and many have restrictions like only on some inputs, etc.


Just saying that 1080p overscanned on a 1080p set looks like junk.
 
#772 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froggy65 /forum/post/12334661


Will there be a problem viewing 1080p signals on a 720p set? I am considering a 720p because as far as I know there are no current or scheduled future broadcasts in 1080p. Put another way, viewing 480 signals on HD sets obviously has a degraded picture quality due to less "information" in the 480 signal. Does it work backwords in that putting more information(1080p) into a 720p set just compresses the signal, or will it create an area of static or some otherwise unuseable signal on the viewing area of the screen? I am new to this stuff and don't want to "under" buy.

Thanks


Froggy65

There's HD broadcast from directv and yes the 1080p set automatically adjust to whatever signal the source comes from. So if yur watching dvd then it switched to 480p but if u watch blue ray then it goes to 1080p mode.
 
#773 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by el_do33 /forum/post/12340194


There's HD broadcast from directv and yes the 1080p set automatically adjust to whatever signal the source comes from. So if yur watching dvd then it switched to 480p but if u watch blue ray then it goes to 1080p mode.

OK but, what if there was only a 1080p signal and you were viewing it on a 720p set? Any compromises going with a 720p TV?


Froggy65
 
#774 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froggy65 /forum/post/12342204


OK but, what if there was only a 1080p signal and you were viewing it on a 720p set? Any compromises going with a 720p TV?


Froggy65

I think that downscaling is easier than upscaling - less chance for artifacts, so a decent 720p TV can scale a 1080 source without introducing noticeable artifacts. That being said, regardless of the scaling ability of the TV, you'll lose roughly half the pixels when going from 1080 to 720. The extent to which that matters is the subject of this thread. The general consensus is that if you sit close enough to the TV, and if the TV is big enough, you'll notice a difference (the amount of difference is also a subject of debate). I suggest to read the thread more closely, especially the first few pages.
 
#775 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froggy65 /forum/post/12334661


Will there be a problem viewing 1080p signals on a 720p set? I am considering a 720p because as far as I know there are no current or scheduled future broadcasts in 1080p. Put another way, viewing 480 signals on HD sets obviously has a degraded picture quality due to less "information" in the 480 signal. Does it work backwords in that putting more information(1080p) into a 720p set just compresses the signal, or will it create an area of static or some otherwise unuseable signal on the viewing area of the screen? I am new to this stuff and don't want to "under" buy.


Froggy, most HD broadcasting done right now is 1080i, and if your display properly deinterlaces the 1080i signal, as well as proper HD 3:2 inverse telecine, then you will have 1080p w/all its 2-million-plus pixels of information in the original source material on a 1080p Display.


In other words, the myth & erroneous arguement about not having a 1080p broadcast is a red herring and a moot non-issue when most of the HD broadcasting here in the US is already 1080i.


You should read Gary Merson's articles "Are You Getting All of the HDTV Resolution You Expected?". This will answer alot of your questions w/real facts & information.
 
#776 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froggy65 /forum/post/12342204


OK but, what if there was only a 1080p signal and you were viewing it on a 720p set? Any compromises going with a 720p TV?


Froggy65


To echo what Jackc04 says, go back to the beginning of this thread. One of the first posts gives you a link to a seating distance chart showing optimum distances for viewing different formats. Because I am new here I can't post the URL. However, from this table, I get the impression that we made the right decision. We decided on a 37", 720p set. We sit more than 7'-3" (87") from the set, so there would be no benefit to getting a 1080p set. Is my reasoning off?
 
#777 ·
Thanks for the info. Like I said, I am pretty new to all of this HD stuff, been watching it (the idea/technology) for a while, just never got the right answers from the various people that I talked to. I did scan the first few pages, and more, of this thread but didn't see what I was looking for. In the past, family members have had larger TV's that they said were HD, and every one of the pictures that I saw looked terrible. Of course I couldn't tell them that with all that they had invested, but it always turned me off to the whole idea of HD. My 20yr old 27" Zenith is still the best picture that I have ever seen in real life use (in homes, not in the stores that sell HD). The set that I was looking at is a 40" Samsung LCD, 720p to be viewed at a distance of 10'-13'. I just didn't know if there would be any problems "downscaling" the image.


Thanks

Froggy65
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top