Using HDMI vs Component on PS3

Depends on your TV. If calibrated correctly The component input should be the same as the HDMI for anything less than 1080p.

So are you saying that for 1080p sources I'm better off with HDMI over component? Is there really a difference? Someone told me that serious AV connousiers still prefer component over HDMI, but he was a salesman and maybe full of it. The reason I'm curious is that my new HDTV I want to pick up only has 3 HDMI inputs; I'll use them for FIOS, Xbox and PS3. If in the future I need one of those inputs for another source, would I lose anything in terms of sound and PQ by switching to component for 1080p sources? Thanks.

To me they look about the same. The only difference that i really notice is that text is a bit sharper over HDMI. HDMI will give you the best picture over all but its not a dramatic leap and its not really that noticable in my opinion but its stll there. It probably depends on the size of your screen as well. I play on a 100 screen so I can tell that its a little sharper, where as if you played on something in the 30's or 40's maybe you couldn't see the difference. As far as sound goes, if your just running the sound right to your TV with out using a receiver, the HDMI and component should give you the same sound quality, but if you run HDMI to a receiver you can get true surround sound where with the regular component cables you only get two channel audio unless you use an optical cable, which would be the way to go there.

Thanks. This will be a 52" set. If I have all of my sources connected to the TV via HDMI and then an optical from the TV to the receiver, I'll get all of the surround sound signal, right, from all of the sources with a single connection between my receiver and my tv?

Right now I have my FIOS box that is hooked up to the TV via component since the set doesn't have HDMI inputs. When I listen to a TV channel through my surround system, if it really is only getting two channels, how is my receiver splitting that signal among my 5 speakers and sub? Thanks.

Without HDMI:

-You lose the ability to upscale DVDs.

-You lose all-around picture clarity and color range/depth.

-Depending on your audio gear, you stand to lose some nice audio formats.

-Depending on your display, you stand to lose some additional video functions.

In contrast, you'll lose very little by sacrificing the Xbox's HDMI connection. I'd switch that to component long before I switched the PS3.

This is tricky. Passing HDMI audio through your TV and out via optical to your receiver may not be possible. This is a bit out of the realm of my knowledge, but I'm not sure if there are (m)any displays that can do this. It should be able to do this with analog signals (RCA in, RCA out), but I'm not sure about HDMI in-optical out.


Matrixing. Standard fare for surround-era receivers. Here's a wikipedia link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surround_sound

On my displays, the difference was extremely noticable. Both my PS3 and 360 video over HDMI have proven to be a much cleaner signal compared to component.

However, HDMI compared to VGA is a different story on the 360 (not that it pertains to your question). Between these two, it's hard to discern and noticable differences.

Keep in mind, these are my findings. As ndskyz pointed out, there are other factors that may effect the signal. The best bet would be to try it out.

Okay, so if I can't run my HDMI signals through my TV to an optical out to my receiver, how does everyone have their PS3 and their TV channel source go through their receiver? My Denon receiver only has one optical in, so how would this work?

Either you have to decide which device will get the most surround sound use and connect that one to the single optical in or get a new receiver. I have my 360 and PS3 sending video to the TV (HDMI) and audio to my receiver (optical) since my TV also does not pass digital sound through (hardly any do).

I installed the DMC4 demo on both my 360 (via component) and PS3 (vis HDMI). The difference was startling on my 37" Tosh. The PS3 looked SO MUCH clearer and brighter. The difference was so apparent that I had to go read direct comparisons to see which version actually was supposed to look better. (For all intents and purposes they should look the same)

The main reason a lot of AV connoisseurs like component is because they don't have HDCP copy protection that is required with 1080p signals in HDMI.

take a peek at my post in the ps3 faq that will help explain what you lose by going with component.

I don't describe audio, but you won't get lossless audio unless you use HDMI for the ps3. Other standalone players have analog outs, but I think the future is to use HDMI for audio/video.

-Splints

I did the exact same thing you did, dloaded both, one on 360 (component) and one on ps3 (hdmi), but my findings were different than yours. I have an Infocus IN76 native 720p projector running on a 100 inch screen and they both looked pretty much identical. The only thing that was different was that the text was a bit sharper on the ps3, which was because of the HDMI cable, other than that the gameplay graphics looked almost identical to me. There are so many variables that could go into making one look better than the other, some displays handle certain signals better than others, and some displays need to be calibrated seperately on each input. HDMI will always give you the best picture available because its all digital but to me its not really THAT huge of a difference, at least on my display it isn't.