Actually, there's a significant divide among people on both technologies. Active does give you sharper IQ, but crosstalk is still a serious issue on LCDs. Active 3D projectors and Plasmas can conceal it better due to the way their tech works. Plasmas, for example, have extremely high native motion resolution. The faster the panel, the less crosstalk there is on active 3D. Unfortunately, that isn't the case with LCDs, since the standard motion resolution on LCD panels is 300 vertical lines.I would disagree. Active will always be better. There is no question of crosstalk in this generation as the technologyis more refined. eye strain that's person to person , never was an issue.
Eyestrain does vary from person to person, but a majority of people who watch a 2-3 hour movie will tell you that they did experience discomfort with active 3D at some point. On newer TVs, flickering has been reduced to the extent where it isn't visible or noticeable anymore, but the active shutter method still affects one's eyes on a subliminal level.
It depends on personal preferences, to be honest. The W900 does offer triluminous tech, but at the cost of poorer viewing angles.certainly W900 has an edge with its triluminous panel.
One area where the W800 gets the edge is in terms of input lag. This won't matter to most people, but to those who're into multiplayer games (especially fighting games), it's probably going to be the determining factor.
Online latency is a bigger issue, yes, but it adds up with input lag.Any input lag below 30ms is hardly noticeable , the 3ms or 10ms won't be an issue in real world when playing from Pakistan. That's what input lag really is for , online gaming.
So, online latency + TV input lag = the overall input delay you're getting.
Last edited: