I havent read so many conflicting arguments since i was trying to decide between a plasma or lcd television.
In the past i've generally accepted that a HDMI cable is a HDMI cable is a HDMI cable.
But recently finding myself playing 3D games on the ps3 on a full HD plasma and later reading a trusted pc magazine article telling me i'll need a decent hdmi cable for 3D, i'm starting to wonder if my viewing experience could be a bit smoother.
Ok so i've done some research and found out that there are currently two recognized categories in HDMI (standard and High speed). High speed being 10.2GBPS. High speed seems to be generally recommended for 3D. One salesman i've talked to has told me that he noticed a difference between a 10.2 standard highspeed cable and a 15 gbps Monster cable for 3D viewing, and my figuring thus far is that as long as my tv can support 600hz the higher i go the better? I mean sure, for movies its probably not going to make an ounce of difference but when your talking about framerate and motion in a video game its a different story, especially when its processing 3D, and especially when you've played pc games for years and have an eye for a smooth framerate. Compared to the average joe that seem to have trouble seeing the difference between a dvd and a blu ray.
Then again, whether there is any difference to the naked eye from 10.2gbps to 17gbps i have no idea aside from the salesmans word, which is never a good thing to go on. Not to mention the difference between the cables price difference being 200 bucks. Also as far as i know HDMI cables dont work like this at all, many opinions online seem to be that the cable makes no difference in quality at all aside from whether it actually works or not. While alot of opinions seem to say a more expensive hdmi cable wont get you any further, i figure alot of these people probably arent considering 3D video games either. When people are saying it makes no difference, i cant help but wonder if they are saying "it makes no difference to MY eyes." or "It makes no difference to my regular Bluray"
It's worth noting that the HDMI standards dont recognize any speed over 10.2, but does that mean a cable advertised as faster is not going to make a difference? Or is it all just words.
I guess the simple question at the end of the day is, will i see an increase in quality or framerate with a more expensive cord advertised to be higher speed?
Or are all hdmi cords rated for high speed identical?
Nothing i've read has been able to convince me enough one way or the other to make a decision, does anyone have any actual testimony to one of these "ULTIMATE HIGH SPEED" cables making a difference?
HDMI is HDMI is HDMI. The signal is digital: it's on or it's off. There's no in between. The difference is when you get to the revisions such as 1.3, 1.3a, 1.4. I *believe* you need one with the 1.4 standard in order to run a 3D signal but I could be wrong on that and 1.3a might be capable. But yeah, you've been reading and hearing a lot of BS.
EDIT: Here you go. It's regarding audio cable but people can't tell the difference between Monster cable and a coat hanger. There's also this article regarding their HDMI cables. But really, don't fall for the hype and incredible amount of terrible information out there. That $3 HDMI cable from Monoprice will perform exactly the same as that $300 Monster Cable.
@Rowr: I'm not familiar with the 2 different HDMI speed bracketings, but even if there is, equipment will not make use of anything above standard speed for that standard - ie a cable rated for 17gbps won't be useful for 17gbps if the standard is only rated for 10 - the equipment on either side of the device is going to limit the speed.
I'd guess that if a cable is v1.4 capable, then the cable is capable of 3D.
e: to answer your final question, all HDMI cables rated high speed will perform equally to one another. cables with throughput higher than the standard will not see a benefit in quality because the standard is just that.. a standard.
Thanks alot guys, you just saved me 200 bucks. I cant believe theres so much bullshit surrounding this. I talked to 3 different sales people today - all who seemed reasonably cluey and still couldnt get a straight answer on this.
yeah the real bottleneck in the performance of your gaming is the ps3 because if it has to show you your game in 3d it will have to work twice as hard to maintain the same frame rate as in 2d. At the same time I also highly doubt that your ps3 is capable of putting out 10GB a second.
Salesmen want to sell things, hence why they are called salesmen. I find it best to do the research on my own for such things. Because then, when I am at a store shopping for the product and the staff tries to talk me into extravagant expenses, I can use my studying of the product to talk to them, which usually shuts them up and gets them to walk away.
So, as long as you are running HDMI 1.4 you are getting the best 3D capable at the moment.