DCDi vs. HDMI

As best as I know, DVI-D and HDMI are merely two types of interfaces which can support HD video... DVI-D IS OR WAS AN INITIAL UPGRADE OVER COMPONNET, ALLOWING FOR hd CONTENT PROTECTION. hdmi IN IT'S LATEST ITTERATION ALLOWS FOR HD AUDIO AND VIDEO FORMAT TRANSMISSION.

Either will or should allow for the same video resolutions to be recreated on a display.

There are also adapters which convert DVI-D to HDMI... albeit only the video info is passed along that sort of device.

DVI also can be another interface which allows for HD video content transmisson. I use an adapter on a DVI connetor, and on a DVI-D to convert to HDMI interface. On my radeon HD 4870 I get the audio (HDMI 1.3) with the Nvidea FX 5300 i ONLY GET THE VIDEO INFO.

Video performance in either is first rate.

Go with HDMI 1.3 or later as the output if possible. It's far more cost effective and quite hard to surpaass performancewise too... there are other options inherent to HDMI as well.

I'd think there are adapters which convert HDMI to DVI-D, or DVI too if the situation requires it.

Component vs. HDMI ... at the same resolution things shouldn't be any different, apart from the cabling itself.

using component you can not upscale the image to a higher resoltuion facsimile. whatever the output of the disc/player, is all you will get.

With HD content this is not normally an issue as video upsampling usually isn't a consideration.

if no other reason, HDMI ought to be the least expensive path to provide excellent results. Some restrictions apply though, such as length. HDMI supposedly should not exceed runs of 30-35 ft. end to end... again, reportedly. Comnpnent can exceeed such lengths easily. Consequently, other than mere expense, and overall lengths, the only other consideration then is if you wish to upsample the SD video from standard DVDs to higher resolutions. Only HDMI supports that... and lest I forget, lip sync ability only applies to HDMI in my HT receiver.