Home / Computing / Peripheral / Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit

Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit review



1 of 5

Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit
  • Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit
  • Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit
  • Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit
  • Asus BR-HD3 Wireless HDMI Kit
  • BR-HD3/UK Video Extender/Console (1 x 1 - 30 m)


Our Score:


We're in 2009, with 2010 approaching fast and if you don't know what that means let me elaborate: we are in the 21st century. The future has already arrived, people! So why is it, therefore, that the communication between my oh-so-modern high definition Blu-ray player and my high definition television is still a decidedly old fashioned cable? HDMI might well be a modern connector, that can transmit an almost inordinate amount of data but I still can't shake the feeling that, at some level, we're still tying tin cans to opposite ends of a piece of string. It’s all so… archaic.

Luckily, as you'll have already gleaned from this article's title, a solution is available. Wireless HDMI transmitters are slowly filtering onto the market. We've already seen examples integrated into televisions, such as Sony's Bravia KDL-40ZX1 but the problem with such integration is twofold - the TVs are expensive and, by dint of being integrated, they can't be used with a replacement screen should one be required down the line.

This is where Asus' HD-BR3 Wireless HDMI Kit steps in. The simple transmitter-receiver setup is fairly simple, in that it only has a single input and output. Further, because it uses 802.11n wireless, there is insufficient bandwidth for full 1080p, so 1080i or 720p is the best quality you'll be getting using this kit; alas that's the sacrifice you'll have to make to eschew the physical connection between your TV at its source, or sources.

On the plus side, although the kit uses 'normal' wireless, it does at least operate in the 5GHz band. In the UK this is particularly useful as it keeps the signals separate from the almost too prevalent 2.4GHz band in which most wireless gear operates in the UK. The upshot should be interference free data transfer, which I'm sure you'll agree is pretty important with a video signal.

Asus claims a working range of 30m, which sounds plausible. If you live in a cave in the middle of a desert, that is. In the real world constraints such as walls and humidity have to be considered. Nevertheless, I was able to get the kit working with a separation of about 10m, through a single wall which should prove more than enough. I think this is more useful for keeping your sources separate from a TV or projector in the same room, than for streaming Blu-ray movies to a bedroom TV wirelessly; but maybe that's just me.

The biggest issue the BR-HD3 has is its price. At £400, it's not cheap by any stretch of the imagination. As such, this is one of those products that you'll really have to 'need' to invest in. Hopefully as the technology matures we'll see prices dropping to more pedestrian territory. For now, though, this is decidedly not an impulse buy.

You'd be hard pushed to tell from looking, but the two boxes are slightly different with one working as a transmitter and the other a receiver. That's entirely logical, but it would be nice if there was more indication than just the different placement of the HDMI port and power switches for differentiation. On the transmitter the HDMI port is placed on the rear, whereas the receiver has it placed at the side. Place them the wrong way around and you'll be treated to a blank display on your TV.


December 5, 2009, 7:21 am

I don't see why this can't do 1080p24/25 that doesn't require any more bandwidth than 1080i50/60. The only time there would be a bandwidth problem is on a 1080p60 PC input or from a couple of PS3 games.

Then again if you can afford this stupidly expensive HDMI transmitter then you will probably have a TV which can deinterlace and convert 1080i60->1080p24 just as well as the blu-ray player itself.

Then again... again.. if you have a home cinema with a projector system (which might make this device worthwhile), the fact you have to cover a wall with a screen and break apart the ceiling to mount the thing and run an extra power point to power the transmitter... a single HDMI cable isn't that much of a problem. Also you'd be finicky enough about PQ that you'd never consider feeding a big screen compressed wifi video.

All in all, it's a massive waste of time.


December 5, 2009, 9:48 pm

For 400 quid I bet a plasterer would 'chase' quite a few wires in for you.


December 6, 2009, 12:10 am

"For 400 quid I bet a plasterer would 'chase' quite a few wires in for you."

Quite. I can't help feeling there's a little bit of common sense lacking here. With the kind of range the review is quoting, it's not even as if this would get you round the usual limitation of 10m long hdmi cables. I guess at a push the 10m limit here would be direct, rather than following wall, but I'm pretty sure I would go option of plasterer + HDMI repeater...


December 6, 2009, 4:08 pm

I agree with the above comments, but here's my big problem with it:

Who wants a wireless HDMI kit? Someone who has their AV gear in a cabinet away from their tv. Maybe even in a specialist AV closet.

Who has an AV closet? Someone who likes their AV gear A LOT. Someone who likes watching their Blu Rays and other 1080p HD stuff. Oh wait. This thing can't do 1080p...

So who would buy this? It solves one problem for it's target market, while not allowing them to do what they would do normally!

Mark Johnson

December 6, 2009, 6:14 pm

You have forgotten the cost of the cable; it is likely that the cable length will be 15m if the direct path is 10m. A 15m HDMI cable that will work without affecting visual quality is likely to be £200, and the price rises fast the longer the cable. Basically, you're attempting to push the cable past the maximum design length of HDMI so either special care is required in selecting materials and manufacture or a signal regenerator has to be incorporated every so often. Low volumes and high expertise means high prices.


December 7, 2009, 5:28 am

Flatwire for the win!



December 7, 2009, 6:48 pm


Flatwire does indeed win, but it's not available in the UK dammit! I think if they brought it over here, (including the power carrying version) I might finally by able to sneak a surround sound system past the wife!

comments powered by Disqus