Of course my understanding may be off (again! ) but it seems to me that when people use the phrase "1:1 pixel mapping" what they usually mean is using an external video scaler (either a dedicated device or an HTPC) to scale an image to a resolution that precisely matches the resolution of the display. But that's not 1:1 mapping in any useful sense! Suppose we're playing a PAL DVD on a so-called high-def 42" plasma screen. If we feed the signal straight to the screen, the path is: DVD output (576i, analogue) -> A/D convertor (inside TV) - signal is now 576i digital -> deinterlacer (also inside TV) signal is now 576p digital -> scaler (inside TV) - 1024x768p digital -> screen If we use so-called "1:1 pixel mapping" then the path is: DVD output (576i, analogue) -> A/D convertor (inside scaler) - signal is now 576i digital -> deinterlacer (inside scaler) signal is now 576p digital -> scaler (inside scaler) - 1024x768p digital -> screen (via DVI) In other words, it's exactly the same process! Sure, the external scaler will quite possibly do a much better job of scaling and deinterlacing, but if the second case is no more "1:1" than the first is, why call it that? The only time it actually makes sense to talk about "1:1 pixel mapping" is if the source image resolution matches that of the screen. For example, a 720p high-definition signal being displayed on a 1280x720 50" plasma screen, or a 1080i signal on a 1920x1080 LC panel - that could legitimately be called "1:1 mapping".