It is not the hardware (atleast it is not HDMI 1.4).

The companies had to put the restriction in for a reason.

When companies do anything in the corporate world, money should always be #1 on your list of why's (as Diso pointed out to me :) tho I still like to believe there are other reasons.

Do you really think the PS3 is capable of running ALL games at 1920x1080 @60 x 2?  Not even close.  We do not even get all 2D games in 1080p (actually we do not get many of them).  This limitation is GOOD for CONSOLE gamers.  At one point they were talking about 1080p games @30 x 2 (talk about a headache).  It also means that multiplat games will be reasonably easy to port back and forth, due to all of their "accepted" 3D resolutions do not exceed HDMI 1.2 bandwidth either.

@ Diso...you beat me to it!

@Ssenkahdavic

Check this out.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1247677

Second post -

"1080p60 Frame Packing video (full resolution 1080p60 per eye 3D video) requires 297 MHz of bandwidth (based on the bandwidth chart in the HDMI 1.4a 3D specification). The fastest HDMI chips I have seen are capable of 225 MHz so as far as I know there aren't any HDMI chips announced yet that would support it."

All I can say is that I love my DLP...8 MICRO second refresh rate (best LEDs have 2 miliseconds which is 2000 micro seconds)  and 300 hz screen processing. All these newer technologies are still playing catchup to the bluky old DLPs :)

Ill convert my numbers to cycles/s (from bites/second).  Those would be minimum required MHz numbers.   HDMI 1.3 is supposed to support 10.2 gigabites/s or 340 MHz to meet spec (HDMI 1.2 is 4.95gigabites/s or 165 MHz).  

EDIT: Found the answer to this.  they must be able to TRANSMIT at 340 MHz to meet spec, says NOTHING about receiving at the same rate (makes sense too, say the PS3 can transmit the right bandwidth but why have the TV receive that bandwidth if it does not have too?)

He needs to add to that the color depth (pixel count is not all of the bandwidth requirements).  Oh well everyone forgets this part of it :(

You and me both on the DLP side.  Mitsu has said before they plan on continuing DLP support for a good while.  Whether this means they will continue to manufacture their current models (with little changes here and there) or keep upgrading the current tech, who knows, but I am still a major supporter of DLP tech.

Yeah, I hope the DLPs stick around or even make a comeback. Their bang for the buck (size, pic quality, price ratio) , can't be beat.

Even with a 2 year old Samsung 3D DLp which is discontinued and not supported, I am better off than a new 3D TV.

I have 67 inches of screen for same price as 50 inch, can do PC gaming , bluray, have no ghosting what so ever and have same resolution for gaming as new TVs.

I can also do PS3 stuff with this kit... http://www.tru3d.com/products/view_product.php?id=31003

A little pricey, considering what PS3 offers 3D wise, but I will keep my eye on it and if the PS3 offers something turly amazing gaming wise, I may have to take the plunge  :)

Check this OUT.  Bandwidth calculator (appromation only of course).   This is run off a Sony run formula for Video Bandwidth (that does NOT include bandwidth cutting techniques, IE what you stated above).  The actual, uncut bandwidth number for 1920x1080x2x60hz = 373.2 Mhz (more than 1.3/1.4 can handle without a bandwidth cutting tech)  Taking that 373.2 Mhz down to 297 Mhz  (with frame packing) is around 20% reduction in bandwidth.  Thats pretty damn impressive.

I was getting my nomenclature a bit wrong. 

Bandwidth for video = Total Number of frames x hz (so for 3D its double 1920x1080xverticle refreshrate).  Bandwidth has no notion of data amounts (why the color depth does not matter)

I was finding BITRATE (gigabites/sec).  Just thought I would correct myself before someone else did :)  I was also assuming that they ran at a steady 60 frames per second.

Just to be thourogh: Here is the bandwidth formula (one of many but its the easist to approximate)

SF = [(TP x Vt)/2]3

SF = Signal Frequency (or bandwidth)

TP = total pixels

Vt = vertical refreshrate

Nice. This is pretty handy. You are quite a mathemaitician... :)

So the current scenario is:

- 3D 1080p@60 requires more bandwith than HDMI 1.3/1.4 offers (372 Mhz)

- But due to frame packing method which the 1.4 standard introduced to reduce bandwith, HDMI 1.3/1.4 chips can indeed do 1080p@60hz in 3D in theory (297 Mhz)

- However the 3D TVs currently on sale do not have fast enough HDMI chips to do 297 mhz of bandwith hence they don't support 1080p@60  hz in 3D

- Because 1080p@60 hz is not a manditory standard for these new TVs, and the TVs are able to do 1080p@24hz for bluray, they are able to get away with putting Full HD 3D on the box.

It looks like I dodged a bullet when decided to to buy these TVs yet. I say within a year max, we will have new 3D TVs which can do 1080p@60hz...

It is not the hardware (atleast it is not HDMI 1.4).

The companies had to put the restriction in for a reason.

When companies do anything in the corporate world, money should always be #1 on your list of why's (as Diso pointed out to me :) tho I still like to believe there are other reasons.

Do you really think the PS3 is capable of running ALL games at 1920x1080 @60 x 2?  Not even close.  We do not even get all 2D games in 1080p (actually we do not get many of them).  This limitation is GOOD for CONSOLE gamers.  At one point they were talking about 1080p games @30 x 2 (talk about a headache).  It also means that multiplat games will be reasonably easy to port back and forth, due to all of their "accepted" 3D resolutions do not exceed HDMI 1.2 bandwidth either.

@ Diso...you beat me to it!

I never said or thought that a PS3 could run ALL games in 1080 3d, don't put words in my mouth. StardustHD was the game I mentioned, and they did get it running in 1080 3d way back when they first started showing 3d games. 

Ssenkahdavic , 1080p, 60hz 3d is a Primary 3d format, not a secondary! Page 11 of  http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/specificationdownload.aspx?t=e1bcfddf-de4b-4bcc-ba78-96f50c86f565&f=3 Meaning, it's NOT OPTIONAL.

About table 8-15:

Table 8-15 shows the detailed timing of the 3D video formats for SOME VICs. 

ITs a secondary format.

You are probably confusing it with the primary format of 1920x1080p @ 59.94/60Hz (Top-and-Bottom)

That is 1920x1080p containing 2 images...hence its 720p per eye. Its what some broadcasts like Direct TV and Shy inEurope may use. 

The one you want is called frame packing and is listed under secondary formats and its found if you keep scrolling down on the next page:

1920x1080p @ 59.94/60Hz (Frame Packing, Side-by-Side(Half))

In any case, read on further in this thread. There are links to AVS forums and other stuff which pretty much explains why these new TVs don't do 1080p@60. They use slower HDMI chips to save costs which don't have the bandwith...