Component Video cables vs HDMI

Hi all:

I just upgraded to Hi-Def cable TV and the provider gave me a set of component video cables at no extra charge. I've got the box connected and the Hi-Def channels look terrific (Sony Bravia LCD HDTV). Just wondering if anyone feels I would improve the video even greater if I went with an HDMI interconnect instead using of the component video cables?
Depending on the quality of cable you may or may not experience a better picture. Source material can also make a difference.
The component cables are good for everything up to 1080i, but HDMI is required for 1080p (blu-ray). I think some HD Cable broadcast at 1080p, but I don't know this for a fact. Just get an HDMI from Fry's online. You can get three cables for under $20 most of the time.
The pros of HDMI are 1080p video and digital sound are transferred through the cable. The con is the HDMI connection is slightly fragile and is more prone to damage than other connections. The importance of cable quality increases along with the length of the cable. For cables less than 2 or 3 meters focus on the quality of the connectors. I use three (no affiliation) premium HDMI 1 meter cables, Product ID: 3991 @ $5.17 each, in my home theater with very satisfactory results.

Hoever, since you are replacing several video and audio / digital cables with one cable you can still save money with moderately priced HDMI cables.
I have been told that either can surpass the other depending on which the TV was configured for to begin with.

I did not know that component could not reproduce 1080p.

I presume these days it would be hdmi and that component is being phased out - just a guess...
The early high end gear did use component cable for 1080p, before HDMI was around,and adapted for the standard.Vidikron and Faroudja are good examples.It makes you wonder,how many HDMI versions,plus how long will it be around.
When the HDMI cable can be had for less than $10 there is no reason not to get one. You get the convenience of one cable carrying all the video and audio signal. More often than not HDMI video will look better than component video.
Agreed that if your system and TV can utlilize HDMI might as well use HDMI (v. component).

However, the quality of the HDMI cable does matter. I too used a Monoprice HDMI and thought it was fine. Until I replaced it with a Wireworld Starlight 5.2 HDMI cable. BIG IMPROVEMENT in all areas - color, detail, holographic imaging etc.

And, I would hope there would be improvement with the difference in price: $250 for 2m for the Wireworld (but available now for $95-$99 or so because of new models out) v. $8 for Monoprice.

Note: A friend also got the Wireworld and thought there was reasonable improvement, but less than what I experienced.

I used the Wireworld on both cable box and Blu-ray player.

Thanks everyone for the excellent replies. Appreciate it.
HDMI will improve the picture quality. Saw it for my own eyes when I first acquired a bluray player and went from analog to digital interconnects. A test was to pause the disc and flip between inputs on the television. Close-Ups with hair in the shot really showed a difference in detail
On use as a cable box signal transmitter Comp video is fine as nothing is 1080P, some may have SELECT PPV movies in 1080p but if any at all it will just be a few. There are increasing attempts to pass off a upsampled 1080p as a game changer, its a con.
I have actually seen better results when going Comp video over HDMI, it may come down to length and quality of cable all told. But on the average size home display wich is usually less than 50in your not likely to resolve any change in detail, pixels are simply too small. On projectors and monitors around 60in you may be able to but I still doubt it. HDMI is a simple route to go just DONT go to RadioShak, Bestbuy or retail for cables, and others listed above sell good cables at good prices.
But just like in audio if you want to see a improvement you will talk yourself into it, such is life.