Blu-ray.com Exclusive: Blu-ray Player Benchmarks

[mzab24]

Originally Posted by aiman04

The LG BD300 even beats PS3 for basic movie loading time.

PS3: 30 seconds
LG: 17 seconds

and according to the chart its the only thing it beats the PS3 at....

[Elizabeth]

Very useful information. Thank you.
But I have a question.

Why is there no "BD-J overall performance" result for the PS3 ?

Quote: "A "NO" rating does not indicate poor performance, but simply that the player in question does not support the form of media that the test disc is recorded on"

But the PS3 supports BDMV on BD-RE recordable media, and I'm pretty sure it supports it on BD-R too, so what is the problem ?

Thanks

Liz

[lokus]

Admins: This data is definitely something you want to in the player section so end users can always view the data there when looking at the players. Good job!

[thecardman23]

fantastic!! this thread can be very helpful to newcomer bd users or potential buyers out there in making their decision in switching to bd. looks like ps3 is the best one overall and lg in stand alone category. funny cuz i picked up my ps3 1 year ago now and its still the best rated after all this time passing. really shows you that sonys taking the time to put in the extra effort in their game systems.

[Cortiz]

Originally Posted by Hunter

Wow, 17 seconds to eject on the Panasonic.

I have the BD35 and it does not take 17 seconds to open the tray from when movie is playing.....It takes about 7 to 10 sceonds......Also, they are telling us that the new Panny players has the lower BD-J overall performance of all of the players liste including crappy models like the Olevia and Insignia? I don't buy that.......

[mikejet]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth

Very useful information. Thank you.
But I have a question.

Why is there no "BD-J overall performance" result for the PS3 ?

Quote: "A "NO" rating does not indicate poor performance, but simply that the player in question does not support the form of media that the test disc is recorded on"

But the PS3 supports BDMV on BD-RE recordable media, and I'm pretty sure it supports it on BD-R too, so what is the problem ?

Thanks

Liz

I'm wondering this as well.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by aiman04

The LG BD300 even beats PS3 for basic movie loading time.

PS3: 30 seconds
LG: 17 seconds

Thats crap, I tested close to 100 "Basic" Blu-rays on my 60gig PS3's & they were all under 17 sec's & as fast as 15.1 sec's. Try it...

[EWL5]

2 Questions:

1) How do I go about submitting numbers for my players (Denon 3800BDCI and 60gb PS3 if anyone wants to compare against the 40/80gb) or only admins in Blu-ray.com have that power?

2) How do I get access to the software that tests the various Java operations?

[boe]

Thanks for posting. This is one of the things I'd love to be on the spec page of any BR player.

The units I'd love to see these same specs for are the:
Sony BDP-S5000ES
Pioneer Elite BDP-09FD
Denon DVD-A1UCDI

And what firmware version as some firmware versions effect performance.

[Harvester]

Any way you can include the firmware versions used for the player in this test?

I have the Pioneer 05 unit and some of the times dropped like a pair of cement shoes in the Hudon with the 1.17 firmware.

[Spiza]

CNET tanked the BD300 on video quality.

[austin316gb]

For those of you wondering about the BD-J "NO" on the PS3.

BD-J functionality was removed from the PS3 by Sony in firmware 2.50 and has not been reinstated.

Sony's reasoning?

Some bright spark released a BD-J emulator that could be used to create/run Java based homebru. Said homebru that could be executed on a PS3 possibly leading hackers to being able to develop some sort of ISO loader. Instead of leaving a possible hole Sony plugged it hence the loss of BD-J from the PS3 capabilities.

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by austin316gb

For those of you wondering about the BD-J "NO" on the PS3.

BD-J functionality was removed from the PS3 by Sony in firmware 2.50 and has not been reinstated.

This relates only to BD-J homebrew.

A correctly authored BD will work with no problems with the latest PS3 firmware (from BD-R / BD-RE), so long as it has been correctly authored in a BD authoring application, e.g. ScenaristBD. BD-J continues to work perfectly on a PS3 in this case.

Liz

[MoPe]

Quick question:

How important is load times to the general consensus? I mean I guess it's soo important, you had to document all the load times, but didn't do any investigative work on PQ and AQ.

THAT's what we REALLY care about.. I think.. I hope.. well at least I do.

[jcs913]

Originally Posted by thecardman23

fantastic!! this thread can be very helpful to newcomer bd users or potential buyers out there in making their decision in switching to bd. looks like ps3 is the best one overall and lg in stand alone category. funny cuz i picked up my ps3 1 year ago now and its still the best rated after all this time passing. really shows you that sonys taking the time to put in the extra effort in their game systems.

I agree with the post above me and quote this one, because it is from a new member. OP, you should state that this is just a time test and that it has nothing to do with the PQ or AQ of the selected players. This info is helpful, but should be a 10% factor in their buying decision. The PQ, AQ and price make up the other 30% factors IMO. The PS3 is unfortunately, not the best overall value anymore, as its $399 price point doubles what most quality standalone players can be had for these days.

[aiman04]

It clearly stated that it's a time test, just by reading the results table. Nothing even remotely indicates that it's a PQ/AQ test.

I hope everyone can appreciate the effort that the Blu-ray.com have taken to make these tests. It was not intended as the ultimate guide, but in some way the info is very useful to have.

[EWL5]

Originally Posted by aiman04

It clearly stated that it's a time test, just by reading the results table. Nothing even remotely indicates that it's a PQ/AQ test.

I hope everyone can appreciate the effort that the Blu-ray.com have taken to make these tests. It was not intended as the ultimate guide, but in some way the info is very useful to have.

Any chance you can tell us what disc was used for basic loading, for Java, etc? Some of us would like to confirm the load times for ourselves.

[EWL5]

Originally Posted by jcs913

I agree with the post above me and quote this one, because it is from a new member. OP, you should state that this is just a time test and that it has nothing to do with the PQ or AQ of the selected players. This info is helpful, but should be a 10% factor in their buying decision. The PQ, AQ and price make up the other 30% factors IMO. The PS3 is unfortunately, not the best overall value anymore, as its $399 price point doubles what most quality standalone players can be had for these days.

I disagree that load times and responsiveness should only count for 10 percent. PQ is already nearly identical with 1080p/24 output and AQ only takes a substantial leap when you spend close to $2000. Since this qualifies 95 percent of standalones, the only thing left are loading and response times.

I tolerate the slowness of my Denon 3800 because it offers analog flexibility that sub $2000 players can't provide. My PS3 is pretty ideal except for the lack of IR and occasional fan noise.

[MoPe]

Originally Posted by aiman04

It clearly stated that it's a time test, just by reading the results table. Nothing even remotely indicates that it's a PQ/AQ test.

Right, I understand that. But I'm asking why do a test just on start up times. I mean to the general populous, is this even THAT important? It certainly wasn't in my decision.

I mean, crap, I'm going to have to wait 1 more minute than the PS3 users to load and play my BR. That's 1 minute I wasted of my life, waiting for a movie to play that's going to last hours. If it was a 10 minute ordeal, then I see why it would be important, but we are talking about seconds here..

What's more worthwhile, IMO, is seeing a test on PQ/AQ, reliability, etc. Is that something we can foresee in the upcoming future? IE:

http://www.hqv.com/benchmark.cfm

[MoPe]

Originally Posted by EWL5

PQ is already nearly identical with 1080p/24 output

Or IS it? Any fact's to back this up, or are you basing this upon an assumption?

Originally Posted by EWL5

and AQ only takes a substantial leap when you spend close to $2000. Since this qualifies 95 percent of standalones, the only thing left are loading and response times.

Hmm.. what model DAC's are in your Denon? And how many?

Originally Posted by EWL5

I tolerate the slowness of my Denon 3800 because it offers analog flexibility that sub $2000 players can't provide.

Like...?