English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

3 answers

its almost impossible to tell but read this, it mite help

read: "a rational review"

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B000M0FWM4/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/105-9632900-2770027?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

2007-11-03 07:28:33 · answer #1 · answered by Flash Funk 4 · 0 0

In terms of picture quality, I doubt that anyone can tell the difference, but you do get what you pay for. Cheap cables usually don't last as long as some of the more expensive ones. But don't break the bank by buying Monster Cables because you really don't get what you pay for. You're paying mostly for the name, and Monster Cable has done a great job of convincing people that they should spend 100 bucks on their cables.

Copper cables are cheaper and they're better at delivering the signal to your TV, but the downside is that copper isn't really durable, so it tends to break down sooner than silver or gold plated cables. Some companies will try to convince you that you need silver or gold plated cables, but you'll be fine with copper.

2007-11-03 14:41:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

From what I've heard. HDMI cables are supposed to be universal.
I have 2 cheap ones and 1 expensive one and I don't see ANY difference in quality.
The only thing I'm thinking might be a difference is how long the cable will last. if you are constantly pluging and unpluging the cable, the coating on the fitting might get worn off.

2007-11-03 14:31:40 · answer #3 · answered by Scorcho 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers