• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Fully Tested: The Xbox 360 Elite's HDMI Video is the Best

FrankT

Member
When the Elite showed up earlier today, I decided to cut to the chase and test the only thing that matters on it: the HDMI output. It's not a new console. Almost everything about the Xbox 360 in white stands true for the Elite: It theoretically doesn't run cooler, or quieter, or faster, and you've already seen the beauty shots, videos, guttings, and more weeks ago.

Don't let the black paint job distract you; the only thing you need to ask is if it improves the video quality. After seven hours of testing, with standard definition DVDs, HD DVDs, benchmark discs, WMV movies from Marketplace, games, and even photos, I have my verdict:

The XBox Elite's HDMI output is the best around for all the formats I mentioned above.

Should you buy it?

Gamers who have an Xbox 360? No!

Videophiles looking for an HD DVD player? No!

Videophiles looking to get into the Xbox Live video marketplace? Yes, but know that this bitch is still loud.

Guys like me who are gamers and video geeks? Ya, this is for you. The fact that all that video and audio is being piped through a single HDMI cable is a bonus. And this is confirmed by only one other Xbox Elite owner, but I swear it's a touch cooler and quieter, but those differences could come from the old unit's worn fan bearings, and dust on heatsinks causing undue heat retention. It's a wash.

It's kind of technical, but if you really want to know why the HDMI is better, read on.

Let's start with video. Playing back the Xbox 360 Marketplace trailer of 300 (720p), I paused and photographed the WMV file at similar timestamps, and compared component and HDMI output of both using a Canon 30D DSLR: Shadow detail was better with the HDMI.

Then I ran through the HD DVD player, using Tokyo Drift and the newly minted HQV Silicon Optics test disc—the rigorous test disc benchmarks showed the same flaws on both the HDMI and Component outputs. Jaggies That means the video processor between the older and newer Xbox is likely identical, or of identical quality. That's the processor, though. This isn't a high-end HD DVD player. As for the outputs and what I saw with my own eyes and confirmed with my camera. The HDMI's slightly better shadow detail showed itself. That detail might be lost on a lesser TV or the untrained eye. But remember that the component cables are limited to 1080i. So HDMI wins at full 1080p with no compromises, but with VGA cables you have a draw.

Then I moved to the standard def HQV tests, which is a moot test: The component cables can't upscale standard-def DVDs. They run at 480p, no matter what. The upscaling you'd see is being handled by the TV. We're really testing the TV, not the component output. HDMI wins, with another tie for VGA.

Playing games, Command and Conquer and Virtua Tennis yielded no differences between the 1080p signals of all three cables—except the strange washed out colors that the VGA cables sometimes show (GRAW and Gears of War, for starters). The HDMI again has that shadow detail boost that comes up over and over again. HDMI wins for a better picture, even though all cables do the 1080p dance with games.

Photos. I loaded up some 1920 x 1080 images onto a thumbdrive and did back-to-back testing of both color bars and vacation photos. This is where the HDMI's shadow details were most apparent. It's worth nothing that most LCDs and only some plasmas are going to have the great shadow detail that this Aquos does. So a lesser TV will either benefit from the low-end picture boost, or it'll miss it completely. Depends.

But between that little boost, the inability for the analog component cables to a) upscale DVDs b) do full 1080p output on HD DVDs, HDMI beats it. And while the VGA cables are capable of 1080p for HD DVD and are capable of upscaling DVDs, the reported color issues should give you pause. HDMI wins with no compromises.

*Caveats: For all tests, the TV, a Sharp Aquos 52-inch 92 series, had fixed settings on standard, dot-by-dot mapping, noise reduction off. The camera's exposure was the same for both side-by-side shots.
It's possible the TV had a different calibration for its component inputs versus its HDMI ones, but then that has to be the case on the plasma I tested it with for a bit.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/xbox-360-elite/fully-tested-the-xbox-360-elites-hdmi-video-is-the-best-255722.php

I can't really tell much from the first set of pics they have there. Although I can definitely see the difference in the second set.
 

Jim

Member
Breaking: The sky is blue!

Of course it looks better, but you really need to see the difference in person to appreciate the crispness (with 1080p native content, especially).
 

pr0cs

Member
thread title fix:

Fully Tested: The Xbox 360 Elite's HDMI Video is the Best for the Sharp Aquos 52-inch 92 series
 

Mmmkay

Member
Hah, what a shitty image comparison test. Not only are the camera positions different, but thanks to the shutter speed an unsteady hand HDMI is bloomed and blurred in both shots, easily accounting for the differences he is claiming to see.
 

FrankT

Member
Mmmkay said:
Hah, what a shitty image comparison test. Not only are the camera positions different, but thanks to the shutter speed an unsteady hand HDMI is bloomed and blurred in both shots, easily accounting for the differences he is claiming to see.

I don't think those color differnces in the second set can account for shutter speed. Then again I could be wrong.
 

jjasper

Member
man I really thought a black 360 would look a lot better than the white one but that thing looks horrible from that shot
 

Lo-Volt

Member
jjasper said:
man I really thought a black 360 would look a lot better than the white one but that thing looks horrible from that shot

It's not really black, it's this charcoal-like thing. Piano black, Microsoft, have you heard of it?
 

Shawn

Banned
Uh, the only way the Elite's HDMI would be considered "best", IMO, would be if the console could output video in 768p on 1366x768 displays.

In other words, 1:1 pixel mapping.
 

CAPCOWNED

Banned
jjasper said:
man I really thought a black 360 would look a lot better than the white one but that thing looks horrible from that shot

Seriously.

Hope they make white Elites the standard $399 sku after they've sold out all the black ones.
 

Emowii

Banned
got2bekidding said:
Pardon my lack of knowledge about HDMI, but would HDMI, in general, make 1080i and 720p look any better? Thanks.
You'll find a lot of debate on that very question. In other words, I think the difference is quite minimal. I have my PS3 hooked up with an HDMI, and I don't really think I could tell the difference when compared with component.
 

Gek54

Junior Member
got2bekidding said:
Pardon my lack of knowledge about HDMI, but would HDMI, in general, make 1080i and 720p look any better? Thanks.

Should be better since its a digital signal.
 

pr0cs

Member
Gek54 said:
Should be better since its a digital signal.
...but depends on the unit producing the signal, the type of TV you have and what sort of content you're looking at.
 
pr0cs said:
...but depends on the unit producing the signal, the type of TV you have and what sort of content you're looking at.
Yes, HDMI is just a small factor in image quality, buy a too cheap tv and you might find it looks no different to component wires.
 

watership

Member
Lo-Volt said:
It's not really black, it's this charcoal-like thing. Piano black, Microsoft, have you heard of it?

Have you heard of studio lighting? It's black. The charcoal grey is the debug units. When it's in your house (Unless you have SPOTLIGHTS trained on it)it will look black.
 
So wait, the article basically states that the hdmi on the elite plays xbox media the best? i think they just did this to have a eye catching headline. I thought they would compare hdmi of 360 to hdmi of the ps3.
 
Component is absolutely capable of delivering as much contrast and shadow detail as HDMI. Problem is that the quality of component outputs and inputs vary from device to device. The best thing about HDMI from a video perspective is that there is less wiggle room for weak implementation. It has other benefits (less prone to noise/interference, cable management, better bandwidth for 1080p, and so on), but depending on your setup and devices HDMI is not automatically an upgrade, especially for 720p/1080i and lower.
 
useless comparison. at the end he says he didn't calibrate the two inputs and just left them on their default settings.

lame.
 
Emowii said:
You'll find a lot of debate on that very question. In other words, I think the difference is quite minimal. I have my PS3 hooked up with an HDMI, and I don't really think I could tell the difference when compared with component.

Ok I understand. As Gek45 responded concerning it's digital signal vs analog, is the way I was leaning in my thinking. I didn't quite realize there are so many variables to consider in order to get the best picture out of HDMI (i.e. tv, type of HDMI cable, source, etc). But yes, it does seem like a mixed jury concerning HDMI which brings me to the conclusion that it's probably better to just have it than not, since the Elite comes with composite cables also. Thanks for the replies all.
 

HokieJoe

Member
plagiarize said:
useless comparison. at the end he says he didn't calibrate the two inputs and just left them on their default settings.

lame.


That says it all really. It's a meaningless comparison. I appreciate the effort though. It would be nice to have a proper test of this eventually. I suspect that HDMI vs. VGA (providing the Spring update fixes it) will be the most interesting test.
 

Woo-Fu

Banned
If HDMI looks significantly better than component at the same resolution, your TV has crappy component inputs, the 360 has crappy component output, or you're using an iffy component cable.
 

DrXym

Member
HDMI is the best picture quality?

Well duh. Of course it is. Or at least it should be for two perfectly functioning HDMI devices. That's what comes from sending a perfect digital representation of the image from the console to the TV set without having to convert in and out of analogue first.

There should be no way that analogue can be better.
 

Fireye

Member
The title of the article should be: Fully Tested by an idiot.


.... he took a picture, of his tv set, with a DSLR camera? And he thinks this is a well planned and executed test? The inputs aren't even calibrated properly, the reason you can see more dark shadow detail is because the contrast is all fubared! I mean, look at the bright colors/whites on the 300 shot. It's obviously brighter than it should be, as you're losing picture detail.

Get a PROPERLY calibrated tv (both inputs calibrated), and for the love of everything holy, at least get a tripod if you're going to use your DSLR.
 
Top Bottom