Dell U2410 Vs. U2412

[spincut]

I was going to start off with a "halp! help me catch up on monitor stuff" post, but I'm not quite there yet.

In the mean time, I was hoping to at least figure out the major differences between Dell's 2410 and 2412. Is the newer model definitely better? Seems like IPS is used a lot more than it was a few years ago, but it's largely e-IPS now, which is newer and updated but also less "fancy" ??

 

[dremic]

I was going to start off with a "halp! help me catch up on monitor stuff" post, but I'm not quite there yet.

In the mean time, I was hoping to at least figure out the major differences between Dell's 2410 and 2412. Is the newer model definitely better? Seems like IPS is used a lot more than it was a few years ago, but it's largely e-IPS now, which is newer and updated but also less "fancy" ??

Here is a review of the u2412m that gives lots of direct comparisons to the u2410.. honestly it's more about funds and usage. Personally I play games so the u2412m is more suited to me due to the higher refresh rate and the cons that come with it don't really apply much to me because I don't edit any photos.

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2412m.htm

E-IPS is just a cheaper way to produce IPS screens and make them widely available to more people.. Honestly the biggest difference between the 10 to the 12 is the color gamut.

Again I am using it for gaming and some school work and maybe some programming so honestly I cant spend 500 on a 2410. the 300 is a pretty high price point for me but my girlfriend split the cost with me for my birthday .

anyways... theres a giant thread here on the forums that you can look at along with 10e who can help you out with more detailed information he knows his stuff and owns a u2412m.


I will vouch for this screen; I LOVE IT. I even got a co-worker of mine to purchase one it's that good. m

 

[Geolith]

U2410 has wide gamut colors. Stay away from it unless you desperately need wide gamut for professional photo work. For anything else it's useless.

Yes, it simulates standard sRGB color space, but does it badly. Without calibration you'll get crappy colors. Calibration is also problematic on this monitor, because it doesn't have hardware LUT and depends on video card's LUT, which means you need 10 bit DisplayPort to calibrate it properly, otherwise you'll get terrible gradient banding.

So, unless you crave for some serious head-banging, stay away from it.

From these two, the U2412M is clearly the better choice as an all-rounder. It may be cheaper, but in reality you'll get even better visual quality than U2410, minus all the pain in the buttocks caused by U2410's wide gamut.

 

[NCX]

The U2410 also has 30-50% less contrast than the U2412 (and most other monitors) depending on if you get a get unit or not (U2412 contrast ranges from 800-1100:1 while the U2410 caps out around 600:1, which could be considered good if this was 2006).

If one needs extra inputs and resolution scaling go with the HP ZR2440w. In this day and age there is 0 reason to buy a U2410 since the Asus PA246Q is better and is similarly priced if one needs a wide gamut display..

 

[spincut]

So wait, why is the 2412 better suited for gaming?

 

[Geolith]

So wait, why is the 2412 better suited for gaming?

I wouldn't say 2412 is better suited for gaming. 2410 has faster response time (not only on paper), and it has Game Mode which reduces the input lag twice. The Game Mode has horrible colors, but there's a workaround for this (a bit clumsy, though, but still).

But in the big picture 2412 is still a better all-rounder.

 

[Geolith]

And don't forget that games use sRGB color space, not wide gamut, so in-game colors will never look as intended on U2410, unless you meticulously re-calibrate its sRGB preset, which looks simply miserable in the factory calibrated state. And even in this case you won't get a 100% match.

 

[spincut]

And don't forget that games use sRGB color space, not wide gamut, so in-game colors will never look as intended on U2410, unless you meticulously re-calibrate its sRGB preset, which looks simply miserable in the factory calibrated state. And even in this case you won't get a 100% match.

Granted, it's a bigger size, but is that what they fixed in their 27" monitor, which appears to have been released in between years of these two due to the "11" moniker.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...-na-_-na&AID=10440897&PID=3891137&SID=rewrite

Seems to add an enhanced special color gamut without doing it "wrong". Since this whole thing confuses me and it's rare that more is worse.

 

[Geolith]

Seems to add an enhanced special color gamut without doing it "wrong". Since this whole thing confuses me and it's rare that more is worse.

Yes, they have supposedly fixed the sRGB emulation and overall color issues in that model, but I, personally, find 27" nowhere as comfortable as 24".

I really can't say anything for sure, unless I see this "fixed" wide gamut in action.

 

[NCX]

The U2711 suffers from similar issues as the U2410. There is simply no reason to buy either when there are superior and often cheaper sRGB alternatives with better sRGB image quality.

The Samsung S27A850D, ACD and HP ZR2740w are all superior choices over the U2711 for games and movies.

 

[dremic]

I wouldn't say 2412 is better suited for gaming. 2410 has faster response time (not only on paper), and it has Game Mode which reduces the input lag twice. The Game Mode has horrible colors, but there's a workaround for this (a bit clumsy, though, but still).

But in the big picture 2412 is still a better all-rounder.

what?

u2412m has less input lag compared to the 2410.

anything below 10 you wont notice anything.

2410 has 15

 

[Geolith]

u2412m has less input lag compared to the 2410.

I guess I have confused some review data in my head. My bad.

All the better then. This definitely makes the U2412M a better all-purpose monitor of these two.

 

[Geolith]

My only real complaint about U2412M is the lack of HDMI port. But it's subjective -- most people don't need it.

 

[NCX]

Tft centrals input lag measurements are wrong. The 2412 has around 2ms of input lag (prad.de) and the U2410 should have similar input lag when game mode is enabled.

 

[techpriest]

Shouldnt have looked at this thread... Now I'm getting that itch. Would this be an upgrade from a U2311h (ignoring the size difference)? Is my u2311h as bad as the u2410 for gaming?

 

[NCX]

The U2410 is a downgrade from the U2311 except in terms of size, inputs and viewing angles which are a bit wider.

The U2412 is an upgrade in terms of size and image quality if you get a good unit.

 

[dremic]

My only real complaint about U2412M is the lack of HDMI port. But it's subjective -- most people don't need it.

yeah it's definitely not for console gaming.

it's important to note that it doesn't have a 16:9 mode.. so even if you manage to hook up a ps3 for instance ( which doesn't have a 16:10 mode) the image will stretch

 

[Geolith]

it's important to note that it doesn't have a 16:9 mode.. so even if you manage to hook up a ps3 for instance ( which doesn't have a 16:10 mode) the image will stretch

I don't know about U2412M, but U2410 should be able to map 1080p content properly, without stretching. It has hardware 1:1 pixel mapping and it really doesn't care where the source comes from, console or TV.

 

[dremic]

I don't know about U2412M, but U2410 should be able to map 1080p content properly, without stretching. It has hardware 1:1 pixel mapping and it really doesn't care where the source comes from, console or TV.

I was speaking about the u2412m I should have been mor clear..thats why they didn't include an HDMI slot on it does not have that ability.

 

[Geolith]

I was speaking about the u2412m I should have been mor clear..thats why they didn't include an HDMI slot on it does not have that ability.

Oh, I see. So I was right when choosing U2410 over U2412M in that regard, but the U2410's messy wide gamut implementation and stupid factory gamma really spoiled the fun.

 

[Geolith]

Just wanted to stress: without calibration U2410 is a real mess in terms of color fidelity, gamma, white point accuracy, contrast ratio, etc. And normal calibration is practically impossible due to the absence of hardware LUT. Although, a video card with 10 bit DisplayPort helps in that regard. Still, for a casual user this is a very tough monitor to tame. U2412M seems a lot friendlier out of the box.

 

[f1n]

My U2412M was great out of the box.

 

[spincut]

Yes, they have supposedly fixed the sRGB emulation and overall color issues in that model, but I, personally, find 27" nowhere as comfortable as 24".

I really can't say anything for sure, unless I see this "fixed" wide gamut in action.

Ah, good to know then, I was starting to get rather confused about this whole issue, since back when I got my 2007wfp and I was still paying attention and dell came out with that updated 2407HC, I always took a higher color gamut as a good thing, so good to know when done right it generally is.

The U2711 suffers from similar issues as the U2410. There is simply no reason to buy either when there are superior and often cheaper sRGB alternatives with better sRGB image quality.

The Samsung S27A850D, ACD and HP ZR2740w are all superior choices over the U2711 for games and movies.

"suffers'? Is it really that bad? Seemed to be very well reviewed and received.

Also doesn't the Samsung model only come in glossy? Glossy screens are terrible, they're like mirrors, and if I recall correctly Samsung displays tend to have a problem with input lag (although this could be more the TV's). Also, I am not a huge fan of the gimicks they use to get that super good response rate.

 

[NCX]

The Samsung is semi-glossy=non grainy matte coating unlike the coating on the Dells. Input lag is the same on the Samsung and U2711. The U2711 is essentially just a bigger U2410 with a few minor improvements.

You seem to really a wide gamut display, so go for it.....

 

[spincut]

The Samsung is semi-glossy=non grainy matte coating unlike the coating on the Dells. Input lag is the same on the Samsung and U2711. The U2711 is essentially just a bigger U2410 with a few minor improvements.

You seem to really a wide gamut display, so go for it.....

Yeah I have always fancied getting a superior color gamut, but as one should know, it's obviously not that simple, I don't want a flawed monitor after all.

Also, I don't think I've ever seen "semi-glossy" before but all the Samsung's I've seen seem to behave like mirrors, and I'm not a fan of some of their gimmicks to "smooth" stuff out (although thus far I have mainly witnessed that on the TV end, I just have no idea why anyone would like that).

As I said, I have a 5+ year old Dell monitor, and I don't see this grainyness anyone's talking about, so unless it got worse since then, I think this is a new nitpick that may just not affect me.

 

[NCX]

I don't see how a wide gamut display is superior since games and movies are sRGB and pretty much all of the wide gamut displays have poor contrast.

Many people thought the grain was fine on their old displays until they tried a 1440p display, but hey it is your money....

Why are you talking about Samsung TV features which their monitors don't use? I'm confused. It is optional to use the motion smoothing on pretty much every TV any way.....

 

[Geolith]

Yeah I have always fancied getting a superior color gamut, but as one should know, it's obviously not that simple, I don't want a flawed monitor after all.

Unless you're a professional photographer or a dedicated connoisseur of professional photo images stored in Adobe RGB or ProPhoto color spaces, wide gamut is of no real use for you. It seems that only Eizo, LaCie and NEC are capable of producing really superior wide gamut monitors with decent sRGB emulation, but they are, predictably, quite expensive. Everything else seems to have various degrees of flawed implementation.

By itself, the idea of an extended color space, closer to the actual human perception, is really attractive and possibly represents the future of all monitors, but in today's reality we mostly get "wild gamut" instead of wide gamut.

 

[austinpike]

Yeah I have always fancied getting a superior color gamut...

another voice here for skipping the wide gamut. Basically, when your video card says "display 100% red," on a wide gamut monitor it will be much more intense red, to the point of burning your retinas. It is just completely out of balance with the rest of the display. Other primary colors are very over saturated as well.

Also, the Dell 2711 has not fixed anything in terms of sRGB emulation - I tried one and returned it, it seemed like sRGB mode just kills the saturation across the board - primaries look more correct, but everything else just looks washed out.

 

[Geolith]

Also, the Dell 2711 has not fixed anything in terms of sRGB emulation - I tried one and returned it, it seemed like sRGB mode just kills the saturation across the board - primaries look more correct, but everything else just looks washed out.

I guess their idea of emulating sRGB boiled down to simply desaturating the colors, which resulted in the washed out, gloomy, bluish-greenish (probably because they overdid in killing reds) and overall unpleasant looks. Most likely, the idea of re-mapping the gamut carefully in order to achieve more accurate emulation didn't even spring to the minds of Dell's engineers. Very sad.

 

[dremic]

well if you have the wide gamut color you need to be using a program to calibrate in my opinion or it just will not give you proper color reproduction.. but believe me there is a reason wide gamut exists

 

[austinpike]

well if you have the wide gamut color you need to be using a program to calibrate in my opinion or it just will not give you proper color reproduction.. but believe me there is a reason wide gamut exists

Sure, it makes sense in a high-end workflow, where every step is managed from photography to printing. My guess is that isn't the case for 98% of the people on here. Even on professional photography forums there is plenty of debate on the usefulness of wide-gamut.

I think the wide-gamut monitors became popular in part because if you wanted to "go big" you had no other choice (other than the ACD.) Now in the 27" size at least there are a few options, so unless you are firmly in the Pro category, there is really no need for it.

 

[spincut]

I don't see how a wide gamut display is superior since games and movies are sRGB and pretty much all of the wide gamut displays have poor contrast.

Many people thought the grain was fine on their old displays until they tried a 1440p display, but hey it is your money....

Why are you talking about Samsung TV features which their monitors don't use? I'm confused. It is optional to use the motion smoothing on pretty much every TV any way.....

Actually from what I can tell there is some crossover feature wise between the Samsung televisions and LCD models, and I find it a little unnappealing personally.

 

[spincut]

I don't see how a wide gamut display is superior since games and movies are sRGB and pretty much all of the wide gamut displays have poor contrast.

Many people thought the grain was fine on their old displays until they tried a 1440p display, but hey it is your money....

Why are you talking about Samsung TV features which their monitors don't use? I'm confused. It is optional to use the motion smoothing on pretty much every TV any way.....

I'm confused, what does 1440p displays have to do with anti glare coating? As far as I'm aware modern monitors come both ways, not really the same thing as comparing "old" technology to new.

Glossy screens by and large seem like they're for suckers. Don't put it near a window? Yeah, sorry, I don't live in a cave, and even if I did, the level of ambient reflections I have seen those things give off is inanely crazy, moreso than the standard CRT's I used to use even.

 

[NCX]

Actually from what I can tell there is some crossover feature wise between the Samsung televisions and LCD models, and I find it a little unnappealing personally.

Such as?

I'm confused, what does 1440p displays have to do with anti glare coating?

Everything is smaller on a 1440p display. When the pixels are covered with grainy coatings sharpness is lost, thus text is harder to read VS. 1200p displays.

The top part of the image, which is focused on is soooo much clearer and there is no sparkle where as the other display looks like it has been covered with Vaseline.

 

[spincut]

Pixels are trash? What?

 

[gglenn]

If it helps, the U2412M is on promotion for $299 now. I was even able to stack an additional 5% EPP discount on it for a total of $284.

 

[alike]

Pixels are trash? What?

I don't think he is referring to the pixels, but the grainy AG coating. The first photo has that crystallized effect from the heavy AG coating. It is a lot less pronounced on the second photo (S27A850D).

PS: The resolution itself has nothing to do with the anti-glare coating, but a 27" 2560x1440 monitor will have a dot pitch of 0.233, compared to 24" 1920x1200 with 0.269 and therefor the monitor with the smaller dot pitch will suffer more from the heavy AG coating.

 

[yourmom]

The U2410 also has 30-50% less contrast than the U2412 (and most other monitors) depending on if you get a get unit or not (U2412 contrast ranges from 800-1100:1 while the U2410 caps out around 600:1, which could be considered good if this was 2006).

If one needs extra inputs and resolution scaling go with the HP ZR2440w. In this day and age there is 0 reason to buy a U2410 since the Asus PA246Q is better and is similarly priced if one needs a wide gamut display..

again wrong you cant play with the u2412 consoles because it can't do 16:9 and has very few connections if he gets the u2410 for the same price or less it is better overall