Samsung's BD-P1400 Blu-ray player sinks below $300

With prices on HD DVD players in a perpetual state of free fall, it was only a matter of time before the slashings bled over to the other camp. Sure enough, Samsung's fairly well spec'd BD-P1400 -- which was announced at $549 and sold at $499 in late August -- has sunk to $298.76 at Amazon. In case you needed a refresher, this one's packing 1080p24 support, Dolby Digital Plug / True HD, DTS HD, HDMI 1.3, 1080p DVD upconversion and a pretty snazzy design, too. And hey, if you need extra incentive, there's always the five free flicks that come along with it.

[Thanks, Adam]

[Jim @ Dec 8th 2007 9:54PM]

Before the fanboy stuff starts from either side - they both will be but memories within 5 yrs, so give it up already.

[jitty @ Dec 8th 2007 10:35PM]

You act like 5 years is a negligible stretch of time. Do you live under a rock from time to time or something?

[Richard @ Dec 9th 2007 6:08AM]

one word: PWND

[bethel03 @ Dec 10th 2007 1:07AM]

Just an FYI to everyone looking to buy this player and has access to a local Costco store, I seen it there today for right around 250 (i do not remember the exact price) but it surely made me stop and look. It appears that its an in-store price only, but worth checking out!!

[boogie @ Dec 8th 2007 9:59PM]

why does this article sound more like an ad from the Blue side? I will tell you that I support both formats. But this was way to easy to point out.

[123 @ Dec 8th 2007 10:02PM]

Like Engadget didn't promote all the A2/A3 deals? I also support both formats.

[steve @ Dec 8th 2007 10:02PM]

Agreed. Certainly, the HD dvd side has gotten a fair bit of attention, but that was when it broke the 200 and 100 dollar barriers for any hd player. I don't see this as quite the same situation.

[Evan @ Dec 9th 2007 3:00PM]

I disagree. Personally I own an HD DVD player but I really enjoy seeing Engadget and other blogs for being on the ball with the deals.

Amazon really blows my mind sometimes with their prices. Had I not started reading Engadget and some other blogs I would have missed out on some nice prices. Last week I ordered Halo 3 Legendary for 60 bucks with free shipping from Amazon. Can't beat half off!

I don't care that its a Blu-Ray player because they also have chronicled deals on HD DVD players, 360's, PS3's, Zunes, iPods, etc. I don't see any bias in this post, that isn;t to say in some of the other format war posts there aren't.

[SteveMB @ Dec 8th 2007 10:00PM]

Pretty interesting that it only has a 3.5/5 rating on Amazon.

[steve @ Dec 8th 2007 10:01PM]

With a ps3 retailing at 400, I don't think there's any situation where you would want to buy a standalone player. I'm no ps3 fanboy by any stretch, but even games completely aside, the ps3 has a ton more to offer for the money. Video streaming, hard drive, possible pvr updates. Sure, it's a 100 dollar difference, but if you're spending that kind of money on a format that isn't quite secure and where content is 30-40 bucks a pop, you likely have the extra money lying around. If not, stick to a dvd player and wait for a better price.

[Rob @ Dec 8th 2007 10:32PM]

Actually Blu-Ray movies tend to be cheaper than HD-DVD because they only come with one version. HD-DVD fans are getting charged for two movies every time they purchase a title. Blu-Ray discs come with the HD movie version only. Where some HD-DVD's also come with the DVD compatible version on the other side of the disc. But, you have to pay for both versions of the movie, regardless. But, with Blu-Ray's constant BOGO on Amazon and other online retailers, people are making out like bandits. I can get Blu-Ray movies cheaper than their DVD versions.

I support Blu-Ray and it's about time stand alone prices were to start coming down on the Blu side. I think Toshiba is selling a lot of their HD-DVD players. But, we'll see what happens with WB in January. If WB goes Blu, this war may come to an end quicker than initially expected. If they go Red or stay neutral, we'd be in this war for an even longer time than expected.

[peestandingup @ Dec 9th 2007 12:09AM]

"HD-DVD fans are getting charged for two movies EVERY TIME they purchase a title."

Is that right?? Well, I guess I got gypped because all my HD DVD movies aren't combo discs.

Love those blu fanboys.

[AJ in the East Bay @ Dec 9th 2007 2:57AM]

None of the HDDVDs that I own are combos, and I think they were giving up on that anyway. Steve, do some research before posting inaccurate information.

[Oscar @ Dec 9th 2007 6:25PM]

Two words.

Universal Remote.

[Ben @ Dec 9th 2007 7:55PM]

Does the PS3 have an IR port yet, or do you still have to use the crappy blue tooth remote? Doesn't do me any good as I use my Harmony for everything. So that makes the PS3 not such a great player after all.

[Anton @ Dec 8th 2007 10:09PM]

But still not $100.

[dontlikeitmodit @ Jan 6th 2008 3:47PM]

Its 1080p. Show me a 1080p HD-DVD player for 100.

[Jon Doe @ Dec 8th 2007 10:14PM]

Meh. Got my HD DVD player for $170 with 10 movies. So not all that impressive.

[Nogami @ Dec 9th 2007 1:11PM]

But what were the 10 movies? Every "10 movie" pack I've seen has been 1 or 2 "a-list" movies, and a bunch of filler crap.

[Raphael @ Dec 8th 2007 10:24PM]

that's a great deal!

[john @ Dec 8th 2007 10:25PM]

Profile 1.0. No deal. I'm waiting for Profile 2.0 (they should just skip 1.1). Blu-ray is hurting because of this unfinished standard.

I have 2 HD DVD players (one is going to be a gift) because of the price. When Blu-ray finally gets their act together and can equal the features on HD DVD, I'll get one of those also (or a dual-format player).

John

[Jeff @ Dec 9th 2007 1:52AM]

Blu-Ray is "hurting" to the tune of a 72% high-def market share.

Face it - normal people don't care about "profiles". Hell, I'm a tech geek and I couldn't care less about profile 2.0. I just want to watch the damn movie with the best quality possible.

[Carbonize @ Dec 9th 2007 2:22AM]

Well for a start HD-DVD hardware sales far out weigh BluRay sales. You can't count the PS3 as BluRay hardware sales because a high percentage didn't buy it to watch films on. BluRay films outsell HD-DVD films consistantly but has there been even a single day when the BluRay camp weren't running a BOGOF offer and claiming each sale as two sales?

As for your quality comment. Both formats are just containers for holding files and both films use the exact same codecs for the audio and video they contain so how can you claim one has better quality than the other?

[Extinction @ Dec 9th 2007 4:46AM]

"You can't count the PS3 as BluRay hardware sales"

You can't NOT count the PS3 as BluRay hardware sales.
PS3 is singlehandedly responsible for a majority of Bluray movie sales.
To claim PS3 doesn't count is assinine.

[Carbonize @ Dec 9th 2007 6:35AM]

I'm sure the BluRay camp would love to count PS3s in their hardware sales figures but the truth is they cannot and they know it. Not everybody who buys a PS3 does so to watch BluRay movies on it. Some may have seeing how it is/was the cheapest method of doing so but not many. Some who bought it solely for gaming may have bought a movie or two to see what it's like.

The PS3 is primarily a gaming console and a media centre second. I doubt even 80% of PS3 owners have even tried a BluRay movie in it. I mean do they count PS2 sales into the global DVD player figures? How about the Xbox or the 360?

[primetime4 @ Dec 9th 2007 11:47AM]

Carbonize, The video bitrate can be higher on Blu. You are right if you use the same VC1 encoding on both, the PQ is going to be close to identical. But Bluray has the capacity for highter bit AVC which some prefer over VC1. On the audio side, Blu also has the capacity to include non compressed PCM audio which is definitely better than even the new Dolby or DTS formats.

[John @ Dec 8th 2007 10:29PM]

Why would you ever buy this over a PS3, which is a computer + entertainment system + Blu Ray player?

[Rob @ Dec 8th 2007 10:35PM]

I agree with you. People don't realize the amazing value of the PS3. I have the 60gig version and the PS3 has become my entertainment hub. I use it to watch movies, listen to music, surf the internet, look at pictures, and more. No I don't work for Sony. But, I'm very pleased with my purchase.

[Jeff @ Dec 8th 2007 11:10PM]

Actually you are right...I want to get a PS3 to go along with that HDTV that I'm gonna purchase soon. Its perfect really to play Blu-Ray movies and stream MP3s to my home theatre system. Not interested in the games but its a great piece of hardware.

Hmm...I wonder how much Sony loses if I use it that way.

[Irfan @ Dec 9th 2007 4:29PM]

most people still think of a PS3 as a gaming console. A lot of people dont want to buy a gaming console even if it plays HD movies. Most people probably dont give a rats ass about streaming media either. They want a BR player that works, and is cheap, can work with a universal remote without a dongle, and looks like a DVD player. hence this product and many similar to it. Why would they pay $100 more for features the generally dont care about?

[BBG @ Dec 8th 2007 10:40PM]

Awesome news! This is just one of the many cards Blu-ray can play which HD DVD has already tried and failed miserably at.

Best part is, this player is 1080P ... not like those lame HD DVD 1080i paperweights that got fire sold a month or so ago.

LOL - soon HD DVD will have to start paying people to take their machines ... will it ever come to that? Hehe

[BigDaddyM @ Dec 8th 2007 11:30PM]

There are also 1080i movies on Blu-Ray so both camps have players and movies in the "i" camp. "World's End" is 1080i whick was a shocker.

Most home users don;t even know what that is, call tell a difference, but will huges savings, it is a worthy purchase. Many people have 1080i TVs, or 720P TVs (Yes some are 720 and not 1080i.)

Blu-Ray has a while to go, but I am sure they know what they must do.

The PS3 is the best deal right now.
M

[BBG @ Dec 8th 2007 11:42PM]

World's End is NOT 1080i ... it was a typo ... do some simple search online and you'll see that.

ALL Blu-ray players are 1080p ... not so for HD DVD.

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater @ Dec 10th 2007 9:58AM]

Most HDTVs in homes today are 720pish (768p or whatever) or 1080i. By the time the existing HDTVs get upgraded, 1080p hi-def players will be $100 a pop.

[superklye @ Dec 11th 2007 10:23AM]

BBG, you dumbass...if you have a 1080p HDTV then it doesn't matter if the source is 1080i or 1080p: your TV deinterlaces and displays 1080p.

YAY FOR MARKETING BUZZWORDS AND UNFOUNDED HYPE!

[BBG @ Dec 11th 2007 11:29AM]

superklye, nice FUD. If you don't know the difference between a 1080i signal or a 1080p signal then I feel sorry for you.

The reason cable companies do not broadcast 1080p yet is because they don't have the bandwidth for it. 1080i is lower quality ... lower then 720p actually. Get your facts straight, and stop being angry that HD DVD is losing - just deal with it.

[superklye @ Dec 11th 2007 11:57AM]

I'm stunned, BBG. You truly are the dumbest person I've yet to encounter on the internet.

You're aware that 1080 = 1080, correct? Do you even know what the i and p mean and, more importantly, what the difference between them is? I'm assuming not since your ass is doing all the talking for your mouth and fingers.

i = interlaced, or the picture is displayed by alternately flashing half of the image lines once ever 60th of a second (that means it's a 60Hz signal) in a vertical fashion.

p = progressive, or the the picture is displayed fully from left to right with all 1080 lines showing on the screen 30 times a second (that means it's a 30Hz signal) in a horizontal fashion.

1080p HDTVs only have one resolution: 1080p. Whatever signal you feed it, it displays at 1080p. If you play a scene from a movie at 1080i and then again at 1080p THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN PQ BECAUSE IT'S 1080P REGARDLESS. This applies to HD DVD and Blu-ray. Maybe do a little research and understand how your TV and the technology behind it works before you continue to make yourself look like the uninformed shill of a n00b you obviously are.

And wtf does digital cable have anything to do with it? 1080p is not a better picture than 1080i. It's the _same_ picture displayed in a different way. And yes, the bandwidth required for a 1080p picture is far greater than what a 1080i signal requires, so why not let your 1080p HDTV do the hard work when the picture is going to be identical whether your cable provider sends a 1080p signal or your TV deinterlaces a 1080i signal?

[BBG @ Dec 11th 2007 12:33PM]

superklye,

1080p looks much better then 1080i.

720p looks much better then 1080i.

With 1080p you get all of the signal in 1 frame so it is clearer and with more detail - that is why it looks better.

There's a reason why all Blu-ray players are 1080p, that's because it is better.

Stop being angry, and sit back and watch as Blu-ray continues to go every week this year winning in media sales.

[superklye @ Dec 11th 2007 12:43PM]

hahahaha

My God, you are hilarious. How much does Sony pay you? Did you even read what I said?

No. Of course not. You're reading what you want to read and that's it. Then you reply to things I'm not even saying, making you look like a further idiot because not only are a mindless drone, but your reading comprehensive is that of a 4th grader. And that's insulting 4th graders everywhere.

I'm not going to bother replying to or reiterating it again because you refuse to see facts and keep spewing the ridiculous marketing hyperbole that Sony expects shills like you to lap up and regurgitate to the rest of the idiot masses.

[BBG @ Dec 11th 2007 3:45PM]

superklye,

You can't win, so yes, you should quit. The same goes for HD DVD.

[Masterj383 @ Feb 12th 2008 12:55AM]

This is crazzy how up tight PPL get over this Blu and Red stuff...and about the statement that 1080p is far better than 1080i ...NoT completely true for the reason's stated.. THE quality is identical(1080p and 1080i) if it were different it would be more (1080P and 1032i)or "vise versa". the only deference is that at 60hz the 1080p refreshes the 1080 lines in the fist 1/60 of and second and holds the image for 1/60 of a second giving the human eye an 60th of a secound to process a still image. where as 1080i is refreshes the odd lines in the 1st 1/60 of a second and the even lines (or other half )of the image in the other 1/60 of a second. Giving the human eye no time to render a solid image before the next image is being scaned on the TV set.


SO to the very very very every trained eye you may see a difference with the added 1/60 of a second every 1/10 of a second

subconsciously the mind is fast enough to see every line and process it perfectly but, consciously ...NOW THATS A DIFFERENT STORY!

BOTTOM LINE THERE JUST LETTERS AND EQUALLY LOOK GREAT!

[BBG @ Dec 15th 2007 3:14PM]

1080p gives you a richer image ... if you don't understand that then there's really no hope for you.

[joon @ Dec 8th 2007 10:40PM]

this is a bad deal for profile 1.0, it is already outdated. it won't be long before profile 1.1 is outdated. so why is blu ray better for consumer?

[BBG @ Dec 8th 2007 10:55PM]

1.1 is a software update. doesn't matter either ... it's about content ... which Blu-ray simply has more of ... and is selling more .. that is why Blu-ray is winning and why all the stats say so :)

[jonarogers @ Dec 8th 2007 11:08PM]

Actually no. Profile 1.1 is NOT a software update. It is a hardware update of a second video processor to allow for picture in picture.
http://hometheater.about.com/od/dvdbasics/a/bluhddvdinfo_2.htm

[joon @ Dec 8th 2007 11:59PM]

this BBG guy is stupid, do your homework first

[Static @ Dec 9th 2007 12:36AM]

Some players already have the required hardware, such as the PS3. So for a couple of players on the market it is just a software update away.

[Mark @ Dec 8th 2007 11:13PM]

If it isn't Dual Format, it isn't worth it..end of story.

[Morisato @ Dec 8th 2007 11:14PM]

Interesting story, but I wouldn't buy it. Why? The same reason why I bought an HD-DVD player when it dropped.

I know that I will buy a PS3 eventually... I'm a big FF fan. It has Blu-Ray on it already, so I chose to buy the HD-DVD player instead. There's no reason for me to buy a stand alone Blu-Ray player when I plan to get a PS3. Just waiting for FF to drop in... hopefully the PS3 will be cheaper by then. So in my situation... having Blu-Ray on the PS3 actually hurts BR because it delay's the numbers a bit. I'm assuming others are thinking like me as well.

[Dahk @ Dec 8th 2007 11:36PM]

Ai, you'll have to wait until around Spring 2009 for FF then lol.

But I'm not very certain it hurts the numbers. It seems to be sort of a niche category because usually those types of people rather just get the DVD versions, or get a PS3 and have it WHEN the certain games come out. Then again, lotsa people are waiting on MGS4 or FFXIII, so that niche category might actually be fairly large.