Component or RGB?

[Richter X]

On game consoles not playing DVDs. Is the YPrPb connection just as good as RGB or worse?

[NFG]

It's worse, but the difference is more or less trivial.  Component video has all the benefits of RGB, except that it requires more pre- and post-processing, which can degrade the signal.  The quality of your TV will have a much larger effect on the quality than you'll ever find between component or RGB.

[Endymion]

I've recently bought a CRT component television. In my opinion, and mind this is coming from years of RGB gaming at this point, the image is VERY sharp. Even an interlaced broadcast looks superb on these TVs. With the recent consoles, it looks sharper than the RGB monitors I've used, with the older consoles it doesn't look as nice as my RGB monitors. Some Xbox games with insanely high-res textures and models, I have noticed some hatching effects on the edges of objects with my RGB monitors--these are much clearer and the interlacing effect that the RGB colour makes so obvious is gone, and yes, this is with a standard interlaced component signal.

That's the good news. The bad news is that the colour isn't as vivid or accurate as RGB. It doesn't suck but I notice colours aren't quite the same and aren't as bright. Generally these days I am playing my component-ready consoles on my TV, and my older ones on the RGB. I have two Dreamcasts and one is situated near the TV and computer, the other with RGB, that more or less covers it for me.

[Jeremy Pallant]

My two cents worth.

With regard to my PlayStation 2, I just switched from using an XRGB-2 and a Japanese RGB cable to a Sony D-Terminal (basically component video) cable and an XSELECT-D4 with the signal passed through to the D-Terminal port on an XRGB-2 Plus.

I'm hard pressed to detect any change in image quality. Frankly, I'm surprised.

(Yes, Lawrence, I am working on the review. Actually, I'm writing an evaluation first, large parts of which will go into the review)