Why different speed HDMI? How about 240Hz?

 

Bronze Member
Username: Bozobyte

Where Micky mouse lives, CA Good Ol U.S....

Post Number: 19
Registered: Mar-09
I have a Samsung A750, and bought an in-wall 1.3 rated HDMI cable from Monoprice.com. I never looked at the transfer rate thinking it didn't matter, since nothing is broadcast in 120 or even 240 yet anyway,so why the difference?
My brother, trying to up one on me, just purchased a 52" B750 with 240Hz and wanted to know if he now has to buy a High, Advanced, or Ultra speed rated cable.

My Brother was at best Buy and the dude told him to get the highest Speed Monster Cable for the most high Definition possible. 4' for 150.00!!!!!! R U CRAZY

I just bought the 1.3 in-wall rated HDMI not knowing any difference.

He was also looking at BluRay Players, maybe that's why the speed differences,since I think that's where you might see the Hz resoulution kick in.

My TV is fine. I have no issues with my HDMI or the Sony BD-P350,but maybe I should take another look in case i'm not getting all the bells and whistles I should with my normal HDMI cable.

Thank you.
 

Silver Member
Username: Mccambley

BREEZY POINT, NY USA

Post Number: 658
Registered: Jun-05
Boz what is 120Hz, 240Hz? It's the refresh rate of the TV. LCD TV need this faster refresh rate to help produce a smoother picture. The HDMI cable delivering the cable signal has nothing to do with the refresh rate of the TV. Spending more money on HDMI cable may get you a better built cable or a fatter gage of copper (22 vs 24) but a faster cable is only snake oil bull#%@t and unnecessary.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_s

Columbus, Ohio US

Post Number: 2482
Registered: Feb-04
From Blue Jeans Cable's site. While not specifically named in this article, "the vendor" is Monster Cable.

quote:

The ironic thing about the "speed-rating" sales pitch is that it is a sort of self-deprecation-marketing in which the misrepresentations about the vendor's own products are mostly negative. All of this vendor's cables, if they are not very badly produced, are capable (at the tested length of 2 meters) of supporting all of the protocols, features, and bitrates which the marketing materials would suggest require the very most expensive cable. By implicitly speaking ill of its own lower-priced product and suggesting that the product won't do things it's perfectly capable of, the vendor manages to "up-sell" the customer to a costlier product. In other words, it's all about niche marketing and price-points; it is all about figuring that someone buying an $800 television might be willing to pay $75 for an HDMI cable, while someone buying a $3000 television might be willing to pay two or three times as much; it is all about the hard-sell approach of "gee, that's a nice TV; you wouldn't want to hook it up with just any old cable now, would you?" in which a salesman tries to eye-roll and shame the customer into buying costly accessories.



http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/speed-rated-hdmi-cables.htm
­
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us