Kameo: SDTV vs HDTV comparison picture


Recommended Posts

dont get ****ed off because M$ slanted the weight over to the HD side, that was their mistake. To be perfectly honest, the xbox 360 isnt that much of a JUMP over the xbox, nothing near calling next gen, and for the RECORD I OWN A XBOX not a ps2.. Im sure ps3 will have the same problem but then again, its not comming out next week is it?

When it all comes down to the wire, my computer will own this 360 3x over, thats where the "Next Gen" is..

ps1 to ps2 = OMG stunning worth every penny....

xbox over ps2 =  bragging rights but ps2 had games hands down.

ps2 to ps3 = we dont know yet...

xbox to xbox 360 = 20% improvement = not worth 300.00 and FOR DAMN SURE NOT WORTH A 2000.00 DOLLAR TV INVESTMENT!

586824257[/snapback]

Where are you getting this 20% figure from? Obviously first party games aren't going to look the best. Give the developers time, and then you'll see the real power that they bring out of consoles.

What about viewing your favorite shows in HD?  Is that worth it?

586824271[/snapback]

you have a good point but 2000 is steap enough, let alone another 300 for a game console..

my neighbor has hdtv, there isnt enough channels in hd yet for me to switch, our provider has like 120 and alot of them are news channels, who the hell wants to watch CNN in hd? lmao

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6139690/index.html

And ...... FIGHT!

586824084[/snapback]

Damn, definently hooking the 360 up to my cpu monitor.

HD-TV or not though I still think 360 is a great value. $400 bucks for a console that matches, if not surpasses high end PCs. Plus I take comfort in the fact that 90% of console gamers don't own an HD-TV.

And PS3 will have the same problem, so if anything this seems like an argument to invest in a high end PC.

Edited by Hipster

problem being is hd sets really still at this point dont have a point.. We still dont have movies available to us in 720p or 1080p for a optical medium.. The xbox 360 cant even play them, other than games.... Tv content providers only have tops of 100 channels, and theres not to many great things on these channels, sports, and news.. so realisticly here buying a hdtv set for that isn't worth it yet, and also the fact is if your going to buy one your best interest would be in either 1080i or 1080p since most movies that are in the future will be filmed in 1080p. The first movie I know of to be filmed in 1080p is star wars episode 3. Lucas Films did a hd version that is 1080p, but realistcly he cant put it on a dvd so a new optical medium is required.

So past my non-sense, to sum this up easier.. 100 channels of hd content, video games?, no personal video playback aka optical mediums. What would be the point of a hdtv set as of right now?

Looks like MS has made a bit of a blunder with this HD mess. If nothing else they're going to confuse their customers to high hell.

And that gamespot article makes me feel ancient! All they really so young to be outraged at artifacts when using an RF converter?

Also, I really have to call into question their suggestion of hooking it up to a computer monitor being a good idea. I do believe the monitor's signal is not actually digital, so there will be quality loss in the conversion. Also, there have always been tremendous color contrast and brightness issues for me when I've used TV formatted programming on a PC monitor or the other way around.. Maybe I'm just not enough in with this "higher resolution will solve your problems" gaming generation.

you have a good point but 2000 is steap enough, let alone another 300 for a game console..

my neighbor has hdtv, there isnt enough channels in hd yet for me to switch, our provider has like 120 and alot of them are news channels, who the hell wants to watch CNN in hd? lmao

586824329[/snapback]

You can get HDTVs for a lot less than 2 grand, just depends on what you're looking for. We've got a nice 34" Toshiba HDTV (just a flat screen CRT type one) and that was less than a grand, and we've got a 51" Toshiba HDTV that was around 1400 after bargaining with the guy. So sure they're expensive but I don't think they're ridiculously expensive considering the difference in quality you get with them.

im going to be 5 or 6 feet away from my tv , not 1 inch away. So will I see every blade of grass no, so sdtv is fine for me.

586822473[/snapback]

You must have bad eyes if you can't see that level of detail from 6 feet away :blink: My tv is almost 10 feet away and I can see that kind of detail.

dont get ****ed off because M$ slanted the weight over to the HD side, that was their mistake. To be perfectly honest, the xbox 360 isnt that much of a JUMP over the xbox, nothing near calling next gen, and for the RECORD I OWN A XBOX not a ps2.. Im sure ps3 will have the same problem but then again, its not comming out next week is it?

When it all comes down to the wire, my computer will own this 360 3x over, thats where the "Next Gen" is..

ps1 to ps2 = OMG stunning worth every penny....

xbox over ps2 =  bragging rights but ps2 had games hands down.

ps2 to ps3 = we dont know yet...

xbox to xbox 360 = 20% improvement = not worth 300.00 and FOR DAMN SURE NOT WORTH A 2000.00 DOLLAR TV INVESTMENT!

586824257[/snapback]

Xbox 1:

733mhz Intel proccer

64Megs 100mhz DDR shared system/video ram

GeForce 3/4Ti DX8.1 based graphics technolagy PS 1.3/1.4 233mhz clock speed

Xbox360

3x Cores @ 3.2ghz each

512 Megs 700mhz DDR shared video/ system ram

10Megs DDR Buffer ram

ATI 500mhz custume Directx is equale to and exceeds what we can excpect in Directx 10+

so anyways your telling me Xbox 1 cna do this quality

http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/741/741...mg_3113362.html

dont get ****ed off because M$ slanted the weight over to the HD side, that was their mistake. To be perfectly honest, the xbox 360 isnt that much of a JUMP over the xbox, nothing near calling next gen, and for the RECORD I OWN A XBOX not a ps2.. Im sure ps3 will have the same problem but then again, its not comming out next week is it?

When it all comes down to the wire, my computer will own this 360 3x over, thats where the "Next Gen" is..

ps1 to ps2 = OMG stunning worth every penny....

xbox over ps2 =? bragging rights but ps2 had games hands down.

ps2 to ps3 = we dont know yet...

xbox to xbox 360 = 20% improvement = not worth 300.00 and FOR DAMN SURE NOT WORTH A 2000.00 DOLLAR TV INVESTMENT!

586824257[/snapback]

I'd hardly call shifting the weight to the HD side a "mistake"... The industry is headed in that direction anyway, albeit a little slowly, Microsoft's just bringing that shift sooner.

Your computer right now can't come close to the 360, and likely never will for the same price (at least not in the 360's lifetime). Have you seen the prices for dual-core CPUs? And this one is atriple-core> with a GPU so advanced that only the newest chips come anywhere close. The entire architecture is something PCs won't match for years, and you're saying it's only marginally better than the current Xbox?

As for improvements from generation to generation, the original PlayStation was instrumental in the maturation of video games. It was a huge leap in terms of graphics, however, it wasn't exactly the best technology had to offer. Consoles at that time were so far behind PC hardware, and the PS2/Xbox generation brought the console hardware closer in power to the PCs of this generation (but not quite; consoles are definitely behind today's PCs).

This next generation should ensure that consoles remain competitive with PCs long after their release, and they'lldefinitely> be ahead in terms of power in the beginning of their lifetimes. Just wait and see...

Your words make it sound like the only reason to buy an HDTV is for games. How about DVDs? What about regular TV? You don't need to spend two grand on a HDTV, though it's very easy to do, and if/when you do, you'll appreciate it for more than just better looking games.

This is really stupid.

The only different between HTDV and SDTV is resolution.

586823767[/snapback]

Wow, people are so blind to the facts. First of all, I can't even believe this is a question. Of course HDTV is 5-10 times more visual than an SDTV. In HDTV watching a nature channel is like watching it in 3D. Everything is 3D and not only is the clarity nice, but so is the image and pixel rates. The motion on the screen is SOoo smooth. It's like a tottal graphics update on your TV. It saddens me that people are asking what the difference is. Trust me, I have one of the nicest looking HDTV's. Have you seen the mother nature shows on PBS HD in HD? My god, they look so real, so 3D. Really, I felt like I could walk up to the TV and touch the pretty womens nose. I could see goddamn camera image in her wet eyeball. I could see the weathermans sweat through his hair on his head, you can see it shining through. All the kids walked up to the TV like they never seen one before and put their hands right on the ladies nose too. Even the 7 year olds were like "WOW what is she doing here daddy". I had to tell him "Son, shes not inside the TV, this is just HDTV". That's the kind of difference it can have. Have you seen the 9 news (channel 92.1 I think) in HD? I've never enjoyed watching the news so much in my life. (Channels will varry in different states). The difference is so big, that it will disgust you in SDTV. I walk from the living room where the normal SDTV is into my room where the HDTV is, and I see both TV's are on the same channel.. after seeing mine, the one in the living room completely disatisfies me. The difference is VERY big. I'm very sad this is even a question.

Edited by Acro84

well over here we dont even get HD television channels, we have terrestrial (aerial) and digital cable which i think can do low end HD on very few channels and we are an advanced country compared to most (i am in the UK) so 80% of other countries (excluding USA/CAN) are going to be worse off with possibly just aerial in. The US and Canada are the only places that HD has really kicked off (i dont know about japan)

HDTV's therefore aren't a worthwhile purchase for the casual gamer and out of say 250 people i know, only three or so will know what HDTV is and only 1 would probably buy it.

I barely ever play games, i stick to a single game and just play that casually (like Halo 2) but I will be getting a HDTV for futureproofing anyway and getting the full out of X360 ;)

This next generation should ensure that consoles remain competitive with PCs long after their release, and they'll definitely be ahead in terms of power in the beginning of their lifetimes. Just wait and see...

Your words make it sound like the only reason to buy an HDTV is for games. How about DVDs? What about regular TV? You don't need to spend two grand on a HDTV, though it's very easy to do, and if/when you do, you'll appreciate it for more than just better looking games.

586824611[/snapback]

You can already get more powerful PCs.....dual core opteron, SLI 7800s, 4gb memory, don't tell me that wouldn't surpass the Xbox 360.

Of course not for $300.  That's not the point, he said that the Xbox 360 is more powerful than PCs and won't be surpassed for quite some time, and that is false.

586826802[/snapback]

Do pc's have 3 cpu cores or whatever?

Can pc's(not super computers which IBM/ Nasa has) run at the boasted 1TFLOP or 2TFLOP or whatever?

Do pc's have 3 cpu cores or whatever?

Can pc's(not super computers which IBM/ Nasa has) run at the boasted 1TFLOP or 2TFLOP or whatever?

586826848[/snapback]

FLOPS have "nothing" to do with gaming, Sony has proved that with Playstation 2 and now Playstation 3 :rofl:

It's a very good price for the components

FLOPS have "nothing" to do with gaming, Sony has proved that with Playstation 2 and now Playstation 3  :rofl:

It's a very good price for the components

586826953[/snapback]

they have not yet proved that with the PS3 since ther is no PS3 with retial quality games out now is ther. right now ther is only Alpha Kits out ther with those devlopers who have reached in to ther checkbooks and pokets to buy the costly thing

give me one reason why what is in the hdtv picture cant be done in the standard picture.?

Its done that way purposely to sell more hdtvs . there is nothing in the hdtv pic that cant be done on the other one except for the clarity.

also the character is not in the same position so its hard to tell the dif

586822435[/snapback]

You dont have nor have seen a HDTV before if you did and you still say this above... you werent watching it right

i played 360 on both and own a HDTV

huge difference - stop spreading rumors casue you obv. didnt have the opportunity to exp like it was ment

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!