Playstation 3D Display (Active) vs LG D2342P-PN (Passive)

[Battery]

Hello all!
I need some help deciding which 3D display to get as a computer monitor. I'm trying to decide between the Playstation 3D display and LG's 2342 passive display. Here's a quick rundown of the two to save you time:
Playstation 3D Display: 24" Active shutter glasses 3D 1080p display, can do 720p60 and 1080p24 (limited by hdmi 1.4, no dvi-d), comes with one pair of glasses.
Cons: 1080p24. My workstation isn't exactly built for gaming you see (4xOpteron 8356 + gts 450) so I doubt I'd be able to run (m)any games (Diablo 3 has some pretty damn low requirements) at decent frames at 1080p (unless they're heavily threaded)
LG D2342P-PN: 23" Passive 3D 1080p display, can do 720p60, 1080p24, and 1080p60. Hdmi and dvi-d, comes with two pairs of passive glasses.
Cons: Visibility of FPR filter(?), half vertical resolution per eye.

If anything in the above is wrong, please correct as this is the best of my knowledge about these two displays.
What I'm curious of is how well they will work with my video card - nVidia gts 450 1gb. I've read that people have gotten the playstation display working with nvidia 3d drivers (no need for tridef etc), but I have no information on how compatible the LG display is with nvidia drivers (I think I read somewhere it works if told it's a generic dlp display, needs confirmation).
What the depth and general 3d effect is like on passive vs active displays (or just some subjective opinions from anyone who has tried either of these).

Also, I'm planning on going to a bunch of stores tomorrow and trying the various demo units to try out active and passive tech (mainly passive as I've only seen one and it looked really interlaced); this is to say, I'm have no bias towards active or passive tech (both have their drawbacks..), I just want to get the best of the two.

Extra info, I'm in Canada and both of these displays are about $250, if you know of any other displays that are close (OR CHEAPER) please let me know!




tl;dr:
Which do you think is better (monitor and method)?
Do they work with nvidia's 3d drivers?
Your favorite dinosaur (or any other relevant info or suggestions)?

EDIT: Oh and I read some posts talking about Pageflipping 1080p24 and the use of checkerboard to 'get around' 1080p24. If someone can elaborate on that I'd greatly appreciate it (also if the PS3D supports that).

[WiredEarp]

I believe Nvidia has removed generic monitor support (F@#$ u Nvidia, the moment another 3D solution worth a damn appears I will drop you just for being assholes) in the latest driver versions, so that wouldn't be an option unless you wish to run older driver versions (shouldn't be a problem with an older card like you have however).

How much is the Playstation 3D one compared to 3D monitors that have DVI inputs? I'd personally go with a DVI based monitor, as that way you can use 1080P 3D @ 60hz. This might not be achievable with your current system, but monitors can last for years and this way you'd be able to use it at higher resolutions in the future (once you upgrade).

[cybereality]

If you are on an Nvidia GPU, maybe take a look at the 120Hz monitors that are supported by Nvidia. With those you can get the full 1080P 3D quality. With the PS display you will be limited to 720P for gaming, and the passive displays lose half the resolution. Also, I keep hearing that people are getting the wrong glasses with LG monitors and LG doesn't know what they are doing and aren't giving customers the correct replacements. So watch out. The PS display also has the advantage of working with PS3 or Blu-Ray players, a nice bonus. However there seem to be reports that it doesn't work out-of-box with Nvidia cards (you must do an inf hack). I personally like the full resolution 3D you get with active displays, but passive is not bad either (and has some advantages).

[Battery]

I believe Nvidia has removed generic monitor support (F@#$ u Nvidia, the moment another 3D solution worth a damn appears I will drop you just for being assholes) in the latest driver versions, so that wouldn't be an option unless you wish to run older driver versions (shouldn't be a problem with an older card like you have however).

I've noticed that too (dabbing in and out of 3D over the last few years), nVidia has a nasty tendency to pull support on things that once worked (like my DLP projector, used to use it for terrible 85hz 3D, needed time to find a work around).

How much is the Playstation 3D one compared to 3D monitors that have DVI inputs? I'd personally go with a DVI based monitor, as that way you can use 1080P 3D @ 60hz. This might not be achievable with your current system, but monitors can last for years and this way you'd be able to use it at higher resolutions in the future (once you upgrade).

The Playstation 3D display bundle (comes with Motorstorm apocalypse - means nothing to me since I don't have a ps3) is on sale for $279 (tax included) from EB Games, the LG display is available from BestDirect.ca for $287 (tax included, free shipping).
HDMI 1.4 sucks, had to get that off my chest. I found this post about overriding the PS3D's EDID to allow for greater than 60hz, but TBH it's over my head.
I do agree, the DVI-D port is a definite plus.

I just really need to know what they look like. Some of Sony's active tv's have no flicker - blew me away, I actually checked to see if they were on; in the same store another Sony pair were hell, worse flicker than my 85hz ghetto dlp set up I had a few years ago.
Hopefully tomorrow I'll be able to test out some similar LG tv's, and maybe the Playstation display.

As it sits I like the 3D 1080p60, but also need to know how noticeable the FPR. For the PS3D, I need to know how noticeable the PS3D's flicker is, and if I can push something greater than 24hz at 1080, even if it's checkerboard, etc.

[Battery]

If you are on an Nvidia GPU, maybe take a look at the 120Hz monitors that are supported by Nvidia. With those you can get the full 1080P 3D quality.

True but another think to keep is mind is price, I wouldn't say I'm hardcore enough to need 120hz (also the matter of not being able to generate such framerates in 2D..).

With the PS display you will be limited to 720P for gaming, and the passive displays lose half the resolution.

This would be my dilemma. In your opinion (and vastly greater experience), which would be better (720p60 active vs 1080p60 half res)?

Also, I keep hearing that people are getting the wrong glasses with LG monitors and LG doesn't know what they are doing and aren't giving customers the correct replacements. So watch out.

I've heard this too, but I can just raid my local theater for some glasses.

The PS display also has the advantage of working with PS3 or Blu-Ray players, a nice bonus. However there seem to be reports that it doesn't work out-of-box with Nvidia cards (you must do an inf hack). I personally like the full resolution 3D you get with active displays, but passive is not bad either (and has some advantages).

Well the LG monitor should also be able to work with bluray players, right? In any case, the roll of the display, whichever I end up getting, will be to act as a 3D monitor for my PC.
As WiredEarp pointed out, nvidia has a tendency to kill accidental support of unofficial or old products.

Any word on if the LG display can work with nvidia 3d drivers?

EDIT: LG D2342 is listed as a nVidia 3D Vision monitor, much to my surprise. I though '3D Vision' title was only for 120hz monitors that could be use the the nvidia vision kit/glasses. Anyway, +1 for the 2342.

[cybereality]

I don't believe the LG D2342 is a 3D Vision monitor, where did you read that? If you want to go with Nvidia, be sure to get something that is listed on their support page:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision- ... ments.html

But even without Nvidia support, an FPR 3D monitor can be used with both DDD and IZ3D drivers, as well as YouTube3D and lots of other programs. And, yes, it supports HDMI 1.4a so you can you the PS3 or Blu-Ray 3D, etc.

In terms of the Sony PS display, if they use the same glasses and technology as their high-end HDTVs, then this may be a nice kit. And certainly 3D Blu-Ray will look nice at 1080P. At the same time, I think that 1080P interleaved (FPR) looks better than 720P up-scaled on a 1080P monitor (ie HDMI 1.4a). The worst quality is probably side-by-side (SBS) which just tends to look blurry like a VHS tape. But really, either one of those displays will probably look good enough as an entry level 3D system.

[Battery]

I don't believe the LG D2342 is a 3D Vision monitor, where did you read that?

"Available NVIDIA 3D VISION Monitors": http://www.nvidia.com/object/buy_now_re ... DVISIONMON
Second entry on the page. It might just be a mistake on their end or they actually do support it, which I'm still very skeptical of. Not very nVidia-like.

If you want to go with Nvidia, be sure to get something that is listed on their support page:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision- ... ments.html

But even without Nvidia support, an FPR 3D monitor can be used with both DDD and IZ3D drivers, as well as YouTube3D and lots of other programs. And, yes, it supports HDMI 1.4a so you can you the PS3 or Blu-Ray 3D, etc.

In terms of the Sony PS display, if they use the same glasses and technology as their high-end HDTVs, then this may be a nice kit. And certainly 3D Blu-Ray will look nice at 1080P.

3D Vision system requirements: Money.
From what I've read DDD is actually comparable to nvidia's 3d vision. I remember back when they could only do DX9 while nvidia could do dx10. I'm really glad they pulled it together. I only play a few games occasionally (World of Tanks only really.. though my frames in it are pretty bad since it's not multithreaded [yet?]). I am interested in seeing what Diablo 3 will be like in 3D.

Is gaming in 24p hell?
I've never been one to need high frames to enjoy a game. I have a tendency to crank the setting and stack on AA till I was getting the most out of my system; achieving a framerate a hair above what I consider to be too low (<20). The Playstation display says the has a refreshrate of 240hz, ie tonnes of interpolation and dupped frames, but the effect may be enough for me. Alas, I cannot test it.

At the same time, I think that 1080P interleaved (FPR) looks better than 720P up-scaled on a 1080P monitor (ie HDMI 1.4a). The worst quality is probably side-by-side (SBS) which just tends to look blurry like a VHS tape. But really, either one of those displays will probably look good enough as an entry level 3D system.

As an update I went to several stores today trying out their demo units trying to get a feel for what the two are like. Short version (rather than going through everything I tested):
Contender 1: Playstation 3D Display: Like the high end Sony shutter glasses, no noticeable flicker, even when staring at a light source or window, BUT they're very dark. Heavy tint on them (as pointed out in some reviews), darker than all the other active shutter glasses I've tried. I only saw one demo loop, which only showed the 'Simulview' feature but I saw no (incredibly little, and very briefly) ghosting. Wasn't able to see what the 3D was actually like :[
Contender 2: LG D2342P, haven't been able to see what it's like as I have yet to even see it boxed in a local store. Newer (lw5600 and newer, have not tested older ones) LG tv's that have the 'Cinema 3D' feature have no discernible aliasing (which honestly rocked my socks off). The passive glasses block out significantly less light than active glasses (let alone the PS3D glasses).

Scaling tech really varies between displays. My xbox 360 outputting 1080i looked amazing through my Optima ??? 800x600 dlp projector, my laptop set to 1080i/p/anything-higher-than-800x600 looked awful.

What would absolutely make my day is if I (got an opportunity to test both blah.) could find some pictures of a video of the LG 2342 display or a testimonial from someone who has viewed the 3D of a lw5600 display and can, given this baseline, tell me what it looks like in relation.
I've found some unboxing videos on youtube but they're generally low res and don't analyze the display's uhh display in any real depth.
Seems the thing that's really holding me back is the fear a highly interlaced image, I've only seen one LG demo unit (no idea what model it was) that looked very interlaced and it bothered me, however every other LG 3dtv's I've seen had no sign of interlacing. Maybe the first one just wasn't set up correctly?

[cybereality]

Well I've never seen the LG, so I can't comment on the quality. But if its anything like the Zalman, then its not a big deal. I notice more now after getting a 120Hz monitor, but when I was using the Zalman exclusively it didn't bother me much. Sure if I looked for the lines I could see them, but it didn't effect just playing a game or watching a video. What did bother me, though, was the small viewing angles on the FPR sets. I suspect the new models are better than this old Zalman I have, but its still probably not great. So while the passive sets have a brighter image (usually) you are somewhat restricted on how you can sit or how you have to adjust the monitor. Not a deal-breaker, but something to note.

Also, I think the LG monitor listed on that Nvidia page is a mistake. Look on this page and you will only see a 120Hz LG model listed as supported:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-displays.html

[Battery]

Well I've never seen the LG, so I can't comment on the quality. But if its anything like the Zalman, then its not a big deal. I notice more now after getting a 120Hz monitor, but when I was using the Zalman exclusively it didn't bother me much. Sure if I looked for the lines I could see them, but it didn't effect just playing a game or watching a video. What did bother me, though, was the small viewing angles on the FPR sets. I suspect the new models are better than this old Zalman I have, but its still probably not great. So while the passive sets have a brighter image (usually) you are somewhat restricted on how you can sit or how you have to adjust the monitor. Not a deal-breaker, but something to note.

As a result of all this input and the reading I've done over the last few days I think I will get the LG D2342P. Like I said before, my only fear is horrible horizontal lines everywhere that detracts from the 3D experience (like the first passive demo tv I saw the other day). Some have said it's 'part of the technology' - I don't accept this. When I tried out the LG 55LW5600 at my friends place I was expecting some horizontal lines, there were none. I walked up to the 55" display, stood an inch away from it and only saw pixels - no distinct horizontal lines. This is what I'm expecting of the d2342p. I read in some other thread about the d2342p that fiddling with some options can reduce the visibility of the lines. In a few threads about it, horizontal lines weren't even mentioned; either they're not there like in the 55lw5600 (or the display was configured correctly), or the people assumed there lines were 'part of the technology'.

Also, I think the LG monitor listed on that Nvidia page is a mistake. Look on this page and you will only see a 120Hz LG model listed as supported:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3d-vision-displays.html

From what I've read it not 'officially' supported, but there are EDID's available to make it gel better with nvidia's drivers. According to one thread I found, nvidia recently added frame interleave for 1080p60 in the beta of v285.something.
Overall, user reports of the D2342P seem to say the 2D is clean (not blurry as some have said), the vertical viewing angle is very touchy (but I don't fidget too much while using my computer), you need to sit far back enough, the 3D is bright, can work with nvidia drivers*. Mainly, 1080p60 and passive.

*Ages 10+, some assembly required, adult supervision required, choking hazard for infants and small children.
I will break down and cry (metaphorically) if there are prominent horizontal lines. Online retailer provides cheapest price, I'd have to pay shipping to send it back :[

tl;dr: I've decided to buy the LG D2342P (or the new 25" D2542P if I can find it in Canada..). When I get it I'll be sure to do a, to the best of my abilities, review on it so that others can avoid the laborious hours spent scrounging the net for details on these two displays.

Thank you Cybereality, your input was greatly appreciated.

[cybereality]

Awesome! Let us know how that goes.

[splintercraig]

Hi all, long time reader, first time poster. I brought the LG D2342P-PN for $299 in March and returned it the next day. I was unsatisfied with the display 3d wise. The 2d was good although. The 3d, there is a lot of ghosting if your not in the sweet spot. Resolution is horrid in 3d. and there are these lines across the screen and if i remember correctly, getting in out of 3d was annoying.

Yesterday i brought the PlayStation 3D display and i am blown away. screen is vivid. PS 3D games are so immersive. This is really my first time using something made specifically for stereoscopic viewing. Previously i did some d.i.y's, a 19'' vizard and tried to make a parallax barrier. I,v read the entire forum at Sony concerning this display and decided to take the gamble. Im hoping i am one of the lucky ones that never had the blinking or red light of death. I don't need to do the modified eeid because i do not have a powerful enough pc to game in 3d. A g-force 260 max is all i have. Led is awesome, its interpolate 240 hz for ps3 only and 60hz max pc. I really like the ability for 1080p @24HZ for movies, gives it a theater fell.

Over all this monitor is tits. My 3d blu-ray and 3d movies on my pc works flawlessly. I am still in testing mode so now i am going to watch cybereality 3d uploads on youtube in side bye side 3d mode.

P.S The display is now only $199- $230 with taxes and 2 year warranty at best buy.

[lnrrgb]

gotta luv tits! now I'm stoked for mine to show up (or more stoked). Couldn't pass on that BB price drop. Hope I get a good unit, considering all the backlash this kit has seen.

[Archvilex]

Splinter, How exactly did you get the Display to work from your pc? I Cant seem to get 3d working with it.