Denon X1700H or Onkyo RX-RZ720 with Samsung Q90T

InitialPineapple

Novice Member
I realise that this may not be such a common comparison, however I'm in the process of setting up my first home theatre in a house that we're building and considering these two options. My current setup consists of a 75" Samsung Q90T, two Q Acoustics 3020i and two Q Acoustics ceiling speakers (will be completing a 5.1.2 setup in the near future).

I am still in need of an AVR, and so far I have been waiting for an upgrade to the Denon X1600H with HDMI 2.1 support in order to future proof the setup should I get a PS5. Unfortunately, now that the X1700H is out, it's slightly more expensive than I was expecting, and it's priced at €679 locally (which I can get at €529 using a discount I have from this store). At the same time, another local store has listed an ex-demo Onkyo RX-RZ720 for only €350. This is obviously a much older model, however from what I could tell (couldn't find a lot of information online, and I wasn't in the home theatre scene when this model was released) it should be more or less equivalent to the Denon X1700H, with the biggest drawback being the lack of HDMI 2.1 support, while Chromecast built in is actually a positive for the Onkyo as it's what I use in the rest of my house.

One thing that's bothering me about the Denon X1700H is that my Samsung Q90T has eARC on HDMI 3, and HDMI 2.1 only on HDMI 4. Does this mean that even though the Denon X1700H supports HDMI 2.1, I still won't be able to use it, since I'll need to connect the AVR up to the the TV through HDMI 3 for eARC?

Any advice would be appreciated. While I would love to go for the Denon receiver (I have a slight personal preference for Denon since it's what I've always researched, and never looked much into Onkyo), there's quite the difference in price so I would happily get the Onkyo if I'm not really missing out on much.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:

dante01

Distinguished Member
AS to the eATC dilemma and if wanting or needing to use eARC.

Yes, if you were to be connecting your 3K 120Hz sources directly to the AV receiver and if then connecting the AV receiver to the eARC enabled input on the TV, you'd lose the ability to pass 4K 120Hz encoded video through the AV receiver and out to said TV.

One solution would be to connect such sources directly to the TV using the HDMI version 2.1 compliant inputs while still leaving the AV receiver connected to the eARC enabkled input. You'd then be able to source the 4K 120Hz encoded video via the TV directly while passing the associated audio through the TV and out to the AV receiver via eARC. You'd be able to do this with any AV receiver and wouldn;t need an AVR that includes HDMI version 2.1 to be able to do this. You would want one that has eARC though.

Why do you need a new AVR? You current model is eARC enabled.
 

InitialPineapple

Novice Member
AS to the eATC dilemma and if wanting or needing to use eARC.

Yes, if you were to be connecting your 3K 120Hz sources directly to the AV receiver and if then connecting the AV receiver to the eARC enabled input on the TV, you'd lose the ability to pass 4K 120Hz encoded video through the AV receiver and out to said TV.

One solution would be to connect such sources directly to the TV using the HDMI version 2.1 compliant inputs while still leaving the AV receiver connected to the eARC enabkled input. You'd then be able to source the 4K 120Hz encoded video via the TV directly while passing the associated audio through the TV and out to the AV receiver via eARC. You'd be able to do this with any AV receiver and wouldn;t need an AVR that includes HDMI version 2.1 to be able to do this. You would want one that has eARC though.

Why do you need a new AVR? You current model is eARC enabled.
Thanks for the clarification on HDMI 2.1. At the moment I don't own any AVR, the Onkyo model is just available for sale as an ex-demo unit for half the price of the Denon (although with a discount I have, the difference between the two comes down to €179) which is why I'm not sure which model I should go for.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
I've no direct experience of either, but despite the absence of HDMI version 2.1 onboard the ONkyo, it does appear to be better equipped than the DEnon model.

What you'd lose is the DEnon HDMI version 2.1 capabilities, support for HDR10+ and Dolby Virtual Height processing.


The closest comparison I can give you is this:

or maybe this if you discount the HDMI version 2.1 capabilities of the X1700:


By the way, the Onkyo lacks eARC so maybe not the best option if wanting to connect HDMI version 2.1 sources to the TV and of wanting to then pass the audio through said TV. The Onkyo wouldn't really be the best option if wanting to use it in association with 4K 120Hz sources, either if connected directly to the TV or the AV receiver itself.
 
Last edited:

Jay53

Well-known Member
Any TV that only has one hdmi 2.1 port, is unlikely to have eARC on the same hdmi port.

The reason is where the largest majority of users resides.

IF you put eARC on a TVs single hdmi 2.1 port it then means for everyone who has a hdmi 2.0 eARC capable avr you can't benefit from eARC back to the avr and a hdmi 2.1 device connected to the TV.

Given most people are likely to upgrade their TV more frequently than their avr it means currently the majority will have an hdmi 2.1 TV but only have an hdmi 2.0 eARC avr.

In summary to cater for everyone, it needs TVs to have at least two hdmi 2.1 ports one of which is also eARC enabled i.e. avr isn't at fault, being in the transition zone where alot of TVs come with only one hdmi 2.1 port is the root of the problem. Getting an hdmi 2.1 avr to plug hdmi 2.1 devices into if you wish to use eARC with one of these TVs is pointless 🙂
 

The latest video from AVForums

Sony Bravia XR A80J OLED TV Review
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom