Doesn't matter honestly and personally having just gone from a $500 Sony DN1080 to a $3K NAD M10 (integrated) and not noticing much difference in any two channel performance I'm becoming a firm believer that any name brand receiver will be fine for the majority of speakers especially when wattage specs are pretty much standard now and speakers are more efficient. Consumers are paying more for channels, room correction, and licensing fees as opposed to quality components. Hell, Marantz flagship models have "bronze" coated rear panels to make people feel like they are getting something unique. Additionally things like chroma subsampling don't do anything for movies or tv, has a minor impact on video games, and it's only major impact is for the PC (tested by Rtings.com). So yet again another wasted feature they promote as necessary.
IMO speaker selection is far more important than what's pushing them for HT. Find the features you want on an avr, pick the cheapest one with them from a reputable brand, and invest more money in quality speakers/subs.
For those that will argue this, look up the Denon AVR-A110 (110th Anniversary edition). Neither Denon or Crutchfield have descriptions that discuss how good the parts are or even the DAC. They primarily advertise 13 channels, 8K, and room correction. For a $5.6K piece of hardware they tell you nothing else really and when the x3700h has a very good signal to noise ratio for $1.3K then what's the point? The Bottom line, if you don't need or use a feature then don't pay for it and if the company doesn't advertise the quality of parts used then why should I care as a consumer?
