Xbox 360 Elite ripped open and examined

Looks nice - I'm still in two minds about the processor though, I'd say it's just a revised die, with a new mobo version. If it were a 65nm part, I suspect, as you guys thought, that it'd be a lot smaller.

I've just this week purchased a Premium XBOX 360 (white) as I didn't see the point in waiting any longer for the Elite version.

Interesting to see it ripped apart though!

I'll be getting one in September.

Its the black that does it for me, oh and when they finally crack it properly that 120gig hdd will come in handy.

if they could get an XMBC-type media player working on the 360 I would buy one tomorrow, my xbox1 struggles with some of the HD content that can be dl nowdays

when its assured its a 65nm version i will get one in the summer

Sorry, stuck at work and most game sites are blocked., so - what's the UK release on the Elite edition? Plan to sell the old and get the new, merely for the 1080p. Sad huh? ;)

I believe the release date for the elite in the uk is sometime in november. Seems you guys have to wait a little while for the elite across the pond huh?

In any event this is a good move by microsoft. It is almost like releasing a totally new console but rather they are just updating an existing one. Though they are used to just 'updating' things instead of starting from scratch anyway.

I dont see why whether or not this is a 65nm core would influence whether or not you buy one. Running cooler and taking less power are two great reasons. But the market for the elite seems to be a higher status and more involved gamer than just your average joe. So either you benifit from HDMI and the 120gb HDD or you don't. Either you think the new elites won't ring of death or you don't. The 65nm core wouldn't have added any new features or options.

Also have to comment on the inclusion of the HDMI cable with the elite. WOW. Finally some console stepped up to that plate. We all know the feeling of buying a new console and not having the right cables to hook it up to the tv. Composite, Componet, HDMI... Sounds good to me.

Just as a side note about the ring of death. Such a small percentage have that issue while a good many of those are covered under warranties. But what a cool feature for the xbox to almost diag itself and display some sort of problem code on the front. Think of earlier consoles that would just sit and stare at you with a blank screen. Nothing is perfect, but at least microsoft put in something to deal with problems and failures.


One question though, am I right to assume that the extra audio dongle that is included with the elite will mean that plugging in the other a/v cable set will disable the hdmi port? Or is it just there to save space by not having a million wires everywhere.... but who's home theatre doesn't.

Last I heard we were getting it in August...

Thanks to CostCo's very generous return policy, i will probably get one.

plugging the audio cable in to the analog port does not disable the hdmi. It just allows you a diferent audio output sorce insted of the hdmi audio, but you with it pluged in you still get video out from hdmi. there fore i would guess that pluging one of the analog video outs in would also not disable the hdmi output

Originally Posted by Warrior_Rocker
The 65nm core wouldn't have added any new features or options.

Also have to comment on the inclusion of the HDMI cable with the elite. WOW. Finally some console stepped up to that plate.

Just as a side note about the ring of death. Such a small percentage have that issue while a good many of those are covered under warranties. But what a cool feature for the xbox to almost diag itself and display some sort of problem code on the front. Think of earlier consoles that would just sit and stare at you with a blank screen. Nothing is perfect, but at least microsoft put in something to deal with problems and failures.

Of course 65nm would add new features. It's going to run cooler, which would first off allow for higher clock speed or more set instructions per clock or who knows maybe Microsoft would just run it as same clock speed and keep fan speed to a minimum for people to watch their movies. I can't stand watching movies on my friend's 360, it's just too loud for me, especially when it gets to the talking scenes or the quiet scenes, but then again it's like 10 feet away, but still....

As for the HDMI cable, Sony should have made it come standard on the PS3, maybe they'll catch on and understand that people expect it, so good job Microsoft.

For the system diag for the Elite, I think that it will help troubleshoot problems that could easily be resolved. My friend's 360, on certain games, will just freeze up when it's trying to load or when it's saving, and I think it's a HD issue, but I don't know when all it does is freeze up, so with this new diag feature, that would really help.

Originally Posted by mmorgue
Sorry, stuck at work and most game sites are blocked., so - what's the UK release on the Elite edition? Plan to sell the old and get the new, merely for the 1080p. Sad huh? ;)

The current 360 does 1080p just fine, unlike many people think, you don't need HDMI for 1080p, and the 360 has been 1080p capable for quite some time via component cables.

Originally Posted by Veles
The current 360 does 1080p just fine, unlike many people think, you don't need HDMI for 1080p, and the 360 has been 1080p capable for quite some time via component cables.

That is true. Sadly, only certain games will be able to offer 1080p due to the size contraint on the DL DVD-R's, but there is no reason to buy an Elite just to use HDMI. Component can easily do 1080p.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Of course 65nm would add new features. It's going to run cooler, which would first off allow for higher clock speed or more set instructions per clock or who knows maybe Microsoft would just run it as same clock speed and keep fan speed to a minimum for people to watch their movies. I can't stand watching movies on my friend's 360, it's just too loud for me, especially when it gets to the talking scenes or the quiet scenes, but then again it's like 10 feet away, but still...

MS won't be changing clock speeds anytime - why bother? Normal X360 games run at one speed perfectly well. Why waste dies by trying to enforce higher clock speeds which will just produce more heat and be wasted by the software?
The fan speed will probably be the same too, in fact, reading the article linked in the news post, it's exactly the same, but with a 3-pin connector instead of 4.

The real reason for switching down to 65nm is to create a cooler-running console (so less heat-deaths), with a cheaper die.

Originally Posted by Krikkit
MS won't be changing clock speeds anytime - why bother? Normal X360 games run at one speed perfectly well. Why waste dies by trying to enforce higher clock speeds which will just produce more heat and be wasted by the software?
The fan speed will probably be the same too, in fact, reading the article linked in the news post, it's exactly the same, but with a 3-pin connector instead of 4.

The real reason for switching down to 65nm is to create a cooler-running console (so less heat-deaths), with a cheaper die.

Who says newer games wouldn't be able to take advantage of higher clock speeds? Secondly, I do agree that Microsoft will keep the same clock speed because of the heat-death issues. Also, changing clock speeds would only piss off developers, especially when they do all they can to make the game look/play as good as possible on one specific configuration, but still... increasing the clock wouldn't be a bad thing would it? I mean it's just like 65nm to 45nm: more headroom for overclocking due to the lower running temp on 45nm.... do you see the connection here? Because I can tell you it needs it for Oblivion because whenever I walk out into the open from inside a building or cave, my friend's 360 is really taxed and there is some noticable lag. That's all I'm saying.....

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Of course 65nm would add new features. It's going to run cooler, which would first off allow for higher clock speed or more set instructions per clock or who knows maybe Microsoft would just run it as same clock speed and keep fan speed to a minimum for people to watch their movies. I can't stand watching movies on my friend's 360, it's just too loud for me, especially when it gets to the talking scenes or the quiet scenes, but then again it's like 10 feet away, but still....

As for the HDMI cable, Sony should have made it come standard on the PS3, maybe they'll catch on and understand that people expect it, so good job Microsoft.

For the system diag for the Elite, I think that it will help troubleshoot problems that could easily be resolved. My friend's 360, on certain games, will just freeze up when it's trying to load or when it's saving, and I think it's a HD issue, but I don't know when all it does is freeze up, so with this new diag feature, that would really help.

The issue your friend is having isn't a hard drive issue. It's a graphics issue, or a DVD drive issue. There are quite a few people with the same problem. It comes down to either too much heat, or a dirty / faulty DVD laser.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Who says newer games wouldn't be able to take advantage of higher clock speeds? Secondly, I do agree that Microsoft will keep the same clock speed because of the heat-death issues. Also, changing clock speeds would only piss off developers, especially when they do all they can to make the game look/play as good as possible on one specific configuration, but still... increasing the clock wouldn't be a bad thing would it? I mean it's just like 65nm to 45nm: more headroom for overclocking due to the lower running temp on 45nm.... do you see the connection here? Because I can tell you it needs it for Oblivion because whenever I walk out into the open from inside a building or cave, my friend's 360 is really taxed and there is some noticable lag. That's all I'm saying.....

Who says newer games wouldn't take advantage of it? The millions of consoles already sold. Microsoft would have to recall EVERY Xbox360 they've sold, and replace them with the faster models. There is no point at all in doing that to increase the speed a couple MHz.

The 'lag' is a graphics related issue. The decreased processor die size will have nothing to do with how well the graphics processor works. The processor speed on the 360 is more than enough to handle what games throw at it. Think about it this way... Does a dual core processor in a computer ever get 100% used up by a single game running at a max of 1920 x 1080? I've not found one yet that uses so much CPU the game lags. The 360 has a triple core 3GHz+ processor, which is better than most PC's these days, and it's ONLY used for games.

If you're getting more lag once the console heats up a bit, then more than likely you've having heat related issues. Be glad it's only lag though, as most people with heat issues get the 3 red lights.



For the record, the three red lights is caused by the X clamps used to hold the heatsinks down putting pressure on the motherboard, making it want to arch. When the graphics chip overheats, it melts the solder connecting the chip to the motherboard, and due to the pressure put on the motherboard by the clamps, the chip partially separates from the motherboard.

There are some home remedy fixes for the problem that can be found on Xbox-Scene.

I was extremely excited when they first came out with the Elite details but that has since been blown away. I'm in Australia and I went to pre-order the x360 Elite and I was quoted $AU1,000 which is the same price as the PS3...

So i'm really in two minds now, it's not like Microsoft have really ADDED that much to the Elite, HDMI, 120gig HDD and black casing... that's hardly bringing it into competitive line with the PS3.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
That is true. Sadly, only certain games will be able to offer 1080p due to the size contraint on the DL DVD-R's, but there is no reason to buy an Elite just to use HDMI. Component can easily do 1080p.

If your TV accepts a 1080p signal over component, which is quite a big if.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
increasing the clock wouldn't be a bad thing would it?

It isn't happening. In fact, it would be a very bad idea. The worst thing you can do with consoles is having several different specifications and requirements for games. It's one thing to have or lack HDD, but having games that run worse (or don't run at all) in older SKUs it's a recipe for disaster.

Originally Posted by Iago
If your TV accepts a 1080p signal over component, which is quite a big if.



It isn't happening. In fact, it would be a very bad idea. The worst thing you can do with consoles is having several different specifications and requirements for games. It's one thing to have or lack HDD, but having games that run worse (or don't run at all) in older SKUs it's a recipe for disaster.

As of right now, most people that own an HDTV can display 720p, but once HD becomes the standard for TV, everyone is going to buy one and every one of those TV's will do 1080p which is a good thing that PS3 allows every game to support it. Of course, I own a 720p HDTV, but my friend does own a 1080p and VF5 looks phenomenal.

As for the clock increase, I didn't put much thought into it, but it's true that it will never happen and that most lag problems are from heat or they're from the graphics card. I never really expected anyone to agree with me on that anyway so....anyways, back to Guitar Hero II

Originally Posted by devdevil85
That is true. Sadly, only certain games will be able to offer 1080p due to the size contraint on the DL DVD-R's, but there is no reason to buy an Elite just to use HDMI. Component can easily do 1080p.

You are correct that component can do 1080p, and that only some X360 games support it. However, this has nothing to do with the capacity of dual layer DVD, everything to do with games being written with support for 1080p and hardware with enough power to render approximately twice as many pixels as 720p/1080i.

Because X360 originally offered only 720p and 1080i, with 1080p support being added later by a firmware update, few early games support 1080p. However, I'd expect it is more commonly supported now. I don't know if X360 is capable of internally upscaling 720p and 1080i to 1080p, but if not, your 1080p TV will happily do so.

Originally Posted by mclean007
You are correct that component can do 1080p, and that only some X360 games support it. However, this has nothing to do with the capacity of dual layer DVD, everything to do with games being written with support for 1080p and hardware with enough power to render approximately twice as many pixels as 720p/1080i.

Because X360 originally offered only 720p and 1080i, with 1080p support being added later by a firmware update, few early games support 1080p. However, I'd expect it is more commonly supported now. I don't know if X360 is capable of internally upscaling 720p and 1080i to 1080p, but if not, your 1080p TV will happily do so.

I can most assuredly tell you that I couldn't find any new upcoming 360 games that will be supporting 1080p. If I'm wrong please correct me. Also, regarding the rendering power of the 360, tell me why friends of mine on Xbox Live, who have been running Virtual Tennis 3 in 1080p, notice substantial lag whenever there is a lot going on. For example whenever they do the cone challenges: when they all fall the FPS is dropped to a very low count and you can visually see lag. The lag doesn't happen whenever they run it in 720p. Honestly, Idk what the reasoning for it is......

Originally Posted by devdevil85
I can most assuredly tell you that it is the capacity of the DL DVD that is hampering 1080p support on the 360.

Okay I'll bite, how is it hampering 1080p?

Originally Posted by whisperwolf
Okay I'll bite, how is it hampering 1080p?

I edited it....sorry

I must admit though that 1080p is a little impractial right now for games and it would only hit a very small target audience that can even afford such a TV. Also, idk how hard it is to develope a game to support 1080p from a developer's standpoint, but either way 1080p right now is really just for bragging rights, but at the same time the key term for any person buying an expensive game console is this : "future proofing".

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Also, regarding the rendering power of the 360, tell me why friends of mine on Xbox Live, who have been running Virtual Tennis 3 in 1080p, notice substantial lag whenever there is a lot going on. For example whenever they do the cone challenges: when they all fall the FPS is dropped to a very low count and you can visually see lag. The lag doesn't happen whenever they run it in 720p. Honestly, Idk what the reasoning for it is......

As I said above, to produce a 1080p image you need a compatible output (which Xbox 360 now has) and a display capable of receiving a 1080p signal, but in order to achieve smooth animation you also need graphics processing hardware that is capable of processing that many pixels. 1080p is 1,920x1,080 = 2,073,600 pixels per frame, so if your graphics hardware (in this case the Xenon chip inside the X360) can't produce that many pixels, many times per second, you will get a stuttering image. Now, I haven't got an X360, but it may be that in some highly detailed scenes in VT3, the Xenon chip hasn't got enough processing power to achieve smooth frame rates at 1080p. Certainly that is what it sounds like from your friends' experience.

Compare this to 1080i, which only renders half the pixels with each frame, or 720p, which requires only 720 x 1,280 = 921,600 pixels per frame, and you can see that the chip doesn't have to be as powerful to produce a smooth frame rate at these resolutions as it would need to be to produce a smooth 1080p image.

Hope this is clear - think of it like your graphics card and monitor in your PC. Just because you might have a 30" LCD capable of displaying 2,560 x 1,600 pixels, doesn't mean you can play STALKER smoothly at that resolution, unless you also have a monster PC with GeForce 8800 GTX SLi. Both X360 and PS3 now have the capability to output a 1080p signal, but if X360 doesn't have the graphics processing power to keep up, it will be limited to upscaling 720p or 1080i images instead.

devdevil85]I must admit though that 1080p is a little impractial right now for games and it would only hit a very small target audience that can even afford such a TV. Also, idk how hard it is to develope a game to support 1080p from a developer's standpoint, but either way 1080p right now is really just for bragging rights, but at the same time the key term for any person buying an expensive game console is this : "future proofing".

It's not that it's technically hard to develop a game at 1080p, it just requires careful balancing to ensure that it will play smoothly at that resolution, given that X360 seems to be at the limit of its capabilities with VT3 at 1080p.

Why is it just for 'bragging rights'? PS3 over 1080p looks awesome, and you can get that experience now for a reasonably affordable sum - 1080p TVs are now available under £1,000. And as for future proofing, X360 will still look decent on a 1080p screen even with upscaled games that only support 720p. It will still be compatible, so I wouldn't worry if I were you.

mclean007, thanks for the reply. All I was meaning by my VT3 example was that if the 360 is having trouble with a game like this now, how are most games (such as GOWII, GTAIV, Madden '08, NBA '08, etc). supposed to support 1080p. I do agree with you that 360's way out will be through upscaling. I haven't seen 720p or 1080i upscaled to 1080p yet, but I can bet that you'll notice artifacts especially from1080i to 1080p, but that is just my opinion. Of course it will always depend on your TV's ability to upscale.

As for the "bragging rights". As of right now, how many people own a 1080p TV? Like 5% of all HDTV owners, and how many of these owners own a 360 or a PS3? Like maybe 2-3%, so as of right now it's just for bragging rights to say, "Oh! Well I can run COD at 1080p instead of 720p". Yes, I do agree 1080p looks twice over what 720p looks like, but as of right now it's more of a novelty (in the eyes of most console owners) due to the cost of the TVs, but once 1080p TV's are the mainstream, 1080p will be a huge feature that consumers will be expecting.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
mclean007, thanks for the reply. All I was meaning by my VT3 example was that if the 360 is having trouble with a game like this now, how are most games (such as GOWII, GTAIV, Madden '08, NBA '08, etc). supposed to support 1080p. I do agree with you that 360's way out will be through upscaling. I haven't seen 720p or 1080i upscaled to 1080p yet, but I can bet that you'll notice artifacts especially from1080i to 1080p, but that is just my opinion. Of course it will always depend on your TV's ability to upscale.

I would expect that, if you have a TV capable of accepting a 1080p signal, the upscaling would be done internally by the X360. All 1080i LCD TVs internally upscale images to 1080p anyway, as LCD is, by its very nature, a progressive scan technology.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
As for the "bragging rights". As of right now, how many people own a 1080p TV? Like 5% of all HDTV owners, and how many of these owners own a 360 or a PS3? Like maybe 2-3%, so as of right now it's just for bragging rights to say, "Oh! Well I can run COD at 1080p instead of 720p". Yes, I do agree 1080p looks twice over what 720p looks like, but as of right now it's more of a novelty (in the eyes of most console owners) due to the cost of the TVs, but once 1080p TV's are the mainstream, 1080p will be a huge feature that consumers will be expecting.

Cool, I get what you're saying. I thought you meant bragging rights in the sense that a 2kW PC power supply is just for bragging rights, in that there is absolutely no reason why you would need one or see any benefit from one.

I've always wondered where the upscaling was done with this. I have a 1080p TV and I've run it both with component at 1080p and with VGA at 1920x1080. I realize those are the sam resolutions, but does changing the resolution on a 360 effectively do the same thing as changing it in a PC game?

I always figured it wasn't so simple because of all this talk of games being natively 1080p or 720p, but I suppose that could be some kind of marketing scheme. I mean if the resolution scales the same way as in a PC game, is there any point to saying the game is 720p or 1080p since you could just run it at the higher res anyway?

Originally Posted by Vash-HT
I've always wondered where the upscaling was done with this. I have a 1080p TV and I've run it both with component at 1080p and with VGA at 1920x1080. I realize those are the sam resolutions, but does changing the resolution on a 360 effectively do the same thing as changing it in a PC game?

I always figured it wasn't so simple because of all this talk of games being natively 1080p or 720p, but I suppose that could be some kind of marketing scheme. I mean if the resolution scales the same way as in a PC game, is there any point to saying the game is 720p or 1080p since you could just run it at the higher res anyway?

Good question. My opinion is this: raising the resolution over the VGA on 360 to equal that of HD formats such as 480p, 720p & 1080p will (and I am almost 100% on this) not allow the same affect when the connection is carried over Component, DVI, HDMI, Display Port, etc., due to VGA being an analog connection. I would expect progessive scanning to need higher bandwith and to have a true digital connection. Someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, but that's how I understand it; the connection needs to be a true digital connection for the image to be displayed progressively.

I'm happy with 720p, it looks fantastic, good enough for me. I just want the games to look purty, not perfection.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
Good question. My opinion is this: raising the resolution over the VGA on 360 to equal that of HD formats such as 480p, 720p & 1080p will (and I am almost 100% on this) not allow the same affect when the connection is carried over Component, DVI, HDMI, Display Port, etc., due to VGA being an analog connection. I would expect progessive scanning to need higher bandwith and to have a true digital connection. Someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, but that's how I understand it; the connection needs to be a true digital connection for the image to be displayed progressively.

Actually, both component video (an analogue connection) and VGA (also analogue) are quite capable of carrying a progressive scan 1080 line image (i.e. 1080p), or at the other, lower, resolutions you list (480p, 720p).

Consider yourself corrected! :D

Originally Posted by mclean007
Actually, both component video (an analogue connection) and VGA (also analogue) are quite capable of carrying a progressive scan 1080 line image (i.e. 1080p), or at the other, lower, resolutions you list (480p, 720p).

Consider yourself corrected! :D

Damn it, I should've known to include Component as an analog. I thought it had to do with total bandwith. I guess the only reason why VGA isn't used for Home Theater is that it doesn't have HDCP. Anyways, crap!, I think my dad's HDTV (which can only do 480p) has a VGA port on the back of it that can do 1024 X 768 or something like, which I think is better than 480p (again correct me if I'm wrong), so I may go ahead and try that cause 480p just isn't cutting it, hopefully whatever the VGA can put out will look better.

One question arises: Why does Component exist if VGA can still put out 720p & 1080p? Is it cost? Is it size? What is it?

Originally Posted by devdevil85
I think my dad's HDTV (which can only do 480p)

480 isn't HDTV, it's standard definition. 1024x768 is better than 480p (640x480) but I think you need to re-read the specs on his 'HD'TV.

I believe the only reason VGA isn't solely used is the lack of HDCP.

Originally Posted by devdevil85
I guess the only reason why VGA isn't used for Home Theater is that it doesn't have HDCP.

But neither does component, which is used for home theatre. HDCP (high-bandwidth digital content protection) is only applicable to compatible digital interconnects (principally HDMI for home theatre and DVI for PCs with compliant graphics cards and monitors). This could lead to problems for people using component video as a high definition interconnect, because the HD disc formats provide for a so-called "image constraint token", which instructs the player to degrade its output over non-HDCP connections to SD definition. AFAIK no content currently applies the image constraint token, but it may happen in future, when the studios deem it appropriate. At that point, bye-bye to HD content over analogue or non-HDCP digital interconnects.

One question arises: Why does Component exist if VGA can still put out 720p & 1080p? Is it cost? Is it size? What is it?

Remember that not all analogue connections are born equal and resolution is not the only factor. With a digital connection, provided there is sufficient bandwidth, you stuff bits in one end and the same bits (in theory) pop out the other, so you should see no difference in quality between (say) HDMI and DisplayPort. In contrast, there can be a HUGE difference between two analogue signals of the same resolution. Cable length, shielding, conductor material, positioning etc. can all lead to tiny changes being made to the electrical signal in the cable, which degrades the picture. This can cause picture noise, cross-talk between colour channels, ghosting, image stability problems and all sorts.

The point is, both VGA and component can carry signals in RGB format, where the red, green and blue signals are carried separately. As such, you can get adaptor cables that will pass a VGA signal to a component display and vice versa. However, I would suggest that true component to component will give the best picture over the longer cable runs often used in home cinema because they will typically have thicker conductors and better (e.g. gold plated) terminals and it is possible to keep the three signals physically better separated to minimise cross talk.

Finally, the advantage of digital over analogue (other than its support for HDCP and its massively higher tolerance to signal interference) is that, with a digital source (digital cable, satellite or terrestrial TV, DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, PC or games consoles) and a digital display (most commonly LCD), using a digital interconnect keeps the signal in digital format all the way to the screen, while an analogue interconnect introduces two unnecessary conversions - one from digital to analogue in the source, and a second from analogue to digital in the display. This is a further source of image degradation, as the digital image recovered will always be slightly different to (i.e. by definition worse than) the original digital image transmitted.

Hope this helps.

Originally Posted by Lazlow
480 isn't HDTV, it's standard definition. 1024x768 is better than 480p (640x480) but I think you need to re-read the specs on his 'HD'TV.

I believe the only reason VGA isn't solely used is the lack of HDCP.

Bear in mind that in America you can call just about anything HDTV, and they've ended up in a whole mess of confusion with terms like "HD compatible", "HD ready" and "HD compliant". Here in Europe things are much more stringent - a TV can only be labelled "HD ready" (the only recognised label) if it has a resolution of at least 720 horizontal lines in wide aspect, has component AND HDMI/DVI connections, supports HDCP over its digital connection and will accept at least 720p and 1080i inputs.

The US definition requires only that the TV accept a 720p or 1080i signal over either component or HDMI/DVI. It doesn't have to support HDCP, and it doesn't have to display the image at the input resolution - it can, for example, receive a 720p image and display it at 320 x 240 and still be a US HD Ready TV.

Originally Posted by Lazlow
480 isn't HDTV, it's standard definition. 1024x768 is better than 480p (640x480) but I think you need to re-read the specs on his 'HD'TV.

I believe the only reason VGA isn't solely used is the lack of HDCP.

Oops. For gaming I only game in Progressive so that's why I said "only 480p" not 720p or 1080p. My dad's TV can do 1080i which it had to do before Mitsubishi could label it "HD". The thing that sucks about his TV is that it is 4:3 instead of 16:9 so HD is pushed down. I can't stand it! Anyways, sorry for the confusion.

Well I will need to try out VGA since 1024x768 is better than 480p. Thanks Lazlow for the reply, and also mclean007 for the VGA vs. Component vs. Digital information!