Is it necessary for a laptop having an HDMI port if it has no Blu-ray drive

[coody]

Is it still good for a laptop having an HDMI port if it has no Blu-ray DVD drive or the HDMI port is not necessary unless the laptop has a Blu-ray DVD drive?

[redwudz]

I play HD video all the time with my computers (1920 X 1080 resolution) from the hard drives over the HDMI port and rarely use my BD drive for that. But a DVI port will work the same as HDMI for HD, just no audio with it and that's another option. You can run a separate audio cable.

If the the laptop is fast enough for HD video and you need a single cable for audio/video to your TV, having a HDMI port is still convenient. The laptop I'm using at present can play HD video but just has a VGA port and no BD drive. I would have liked a HDMI port for it, even without a BD drive.

Another minor advantage is that you may still be able to use the laptops analog VGA port for other displays at the same time.

[edDV]

As said a DVI-D port can be used with a DVI-D to HDMI adapter for HDMI video. Audio must be run separately.

The typical DVI-I computer ports have pins for DVI-D and VGA, so you can also use a DVI-I to VGA adapter. HDMI ports do not support VGA.

Another major consideration is provision for analog composite, S-Video and analog component out. This requires the circular 9 pin "TV port" that seems to be missing on many laptops and display cards that have HDMI connectors. This is a serious loss IMO.

[coody]

If the the laptop is fast enough for HD video and you need a single cable for audio/video to your TV, having a HDMI port is still convenient.

By the way, what processor should the laptop have at least to play the HD video or movie, the ADM Athlon Dual Core, Intel Core i3 or higher?

[edDV]

If the the laptop is fast enough for HD video and you need a single cable for audio/video to your TV, having a HDMI port is still convenient.

By the way, what processor should the laptop have at least to play the HD video or movie, the ADM Athlon Dual Core, Intel Core i3 or higher?

That depends on the codec used for the HD video you want to play. If AVC h.264 you ideally will have a display card with h.264 hardware decode support (e.g. NVidia Purevideo HD or ATI AVivo HD). Otherwise the CPU needs to take up the load. Most laptops with an i3 should have an HD certified display chipset available. Make sure it does. Don't cheap out on this.

If the display chipset handles the MPeg decode, the CPU is free for other tasks.

[coody]

Thanks for the info. Do you think which processor is better to play the HD video or movie, the ADM Athlon Dual Core or Intel Core i3? Laptops with those two processors seem in the same price line. Which processor do you prefer and why?

[redwudz]

I've been a AMD fan for some time, though my present laptop has a Intel CPU, a Pentium dual core T4400 at 2.2Ghz. That's about minimum speed for decent HD playback with a laptop, IMO. It has a mobile express 4 chipset from Intel. My main PC uses a onboard ATI chipset GPU, a Radeon 4290. AMD has done a good job integrating GPU chipsets with CPUs, so look around and see what's available. Both companies have chipsets capable of HD playback in a laptop, but you need to check all the specs.

[edDV]

Thanks for the info. Do you think which processor is better to play the HD video or movie, the ADM Athlon Dual Core or Intel Core i3? Laptops with those two processors seem in the same price line. Which processor do you prefer and why?

You missed the point that the display chipset is more important. As for mobile CPU benchmarks, see Tom's Hardware or Anandtech. Or here

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/mobile-cpu-charts/benchmarks,19.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

You will see there is no clear winner unless you can name a specific CPU or display chipset.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/mobile-cpu-charts/HDTV-Playback,470.html