1000:1 is a very good CR.
However, it says little without viewing angles and measured black.
Last edited:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Dell U2711
- Thread starter evilsofa
- Start date
1000:1 is a very good CR.
However, it says little without viewing angles and measured black.
daveswantek
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,231
I have seen the iMac and it does have white glow, but it is much less then a 3008wfp. Not bad considering it does not have an ATW polarizer.
Here is the quote from the CNet artical and you are right they did not finish whatever they were trying to say.
We will know alot more when somebody actually gets there hands on one.
Dave
You've probably seen it in a store. Gloosy finish masks LCD glow with reflection that is massive in a brightly lit store.
worldsthatneverwere
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2009
- Messages
- 5
When will this be available? In February?
certainly for now at least.
Wiseguy2001
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Messages
- 3,470
You think that's bad? Try the UK, the U2410 is listed as £499 (ex tax & delivery), in the US it is $499 . Now with the current exchange rate of ~1.6 and Dells math's, that would make the U2711 go for the equivalent of $1678.
Thanks Dell but I think I'll just buy the bloody iMac or the Nec.
Ps: I refuse to take part in Dells panel Lottery
~ Andrea ~
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2009
- Messages
- 14
Hi,
are you sure that NEC will make an LCD with this panel? Do you know its price?
In this thread you are comparing the Dell with an hypothetical NEC that does not exist ..what's the point?
DELL prices changes during time, the new 27 will have a lower price than $1000 or EUR 1000, like the U2410 well find interesting offers for this monitor, its always the same.
Regarding the hypothetical Apple 27, please consider the actual price of the Apple Cinema 30 (same panel of the 3007WFP without HC: three or four years old) and tell me an hypothetical price of a brand new hypothetical Apple Cinema 27 (that does not exists).
So, Ill wait for some useful reviews and tests of this monitor before speak, moreover Ive never saw any official specification about the U2711.
Sorry but this is my point of view.
Bye!!
Yes, it has been confirmed. NEC released a pdf a month ago or so listing off one, or possibly two displays that are going to be using this panel. It was posted in a thread here, you can dig it up if you want to confirm.
~ Andrea ~
n00b
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2009
- Messages
- 14
There are no IPS monitors with a contrast of significantly > 1000:1. TN and PVA monitors can crack like... 1200:1. You know those 50,000:1, 100,000:1 to numbers you see? They are all 'dynamic contrast' marketing BS, the panel is still only capable of ~1000:1 (in most cases, less).
mathesar
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,590
Oh I know about all this I guess I'm just spoiled by the CR of my Plasma. (tested 2,700:1 ANSI contrast) but I could've sworn newer LCD's achieve 1,500 - 2,000 actual CR as well.
EDIT: Ok I found one, the Dell 2408WFP was tested @ 2568:1 CR / 0.06 Blackpoint using it's Dynamic Contrast ratio feature (auto adjusts backlight brightness) I guess this feature is sort of a "trick" to achieve these numbers but TFT Central says the feature works well with movies & games. But It's a shame the 2408 has the worst avg. input lag results of any monitor. (64ms!).
Dynamic contrast ratio is a crock. Static is what matters most. And the hard limitation of 1000:1 static is the ceiling even for top of the line current gen monitors.
Too bad this monitor doesn't pivot. I'll also be interested in seeing how the new NEC 27" compares to this one.
I wish they had actually run the input lag tests instead of saying it had no noticeable input lag. I'd rather have an objective measurement than a subjective statement.
Last edited:
daveswantek
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,231
This is true with all S-PVA panels; better blacks and worse input lag. The static CR of the Dell 2408 is still 1000:1. The static CR of the new U2711 will be the same, so the difference is minor at best.
Dave
PS: Try testing the input lag on your plasma...
Dave
PS: Try testing the input lag on your plasma...
The dynamic backlight dimming is very noticeable in normal computer use. The ANSI contrast is still close to 1000:1.
Anyways, you are right the newest LCD panels on LCD TVs can now crack 2500:1 ANSI, but these panels are not employed on monitors. Another reason why my next gaming monitor may be a 32" 1080p TV.
mathesar
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,590
I did when I first bought the plasma and it averages around 30ms lag vs. my CRT (clone mode). Not to bad, at least I haven't noticed while gaming on it over the last 2 years.
it can be handy for movies if you like the technology. some do like it, some dont at all. TFT Central do say "In office use, the changing backlight levels can be annoying and distracting, but in movies and games it can be handy to help bring out detail in darker scenes and brighten the lighter scenes."
assume you mean on the U2711 comments and early reviews rather than the 2408WFP review which did have input lag measurements?
I'm gonna go ahead and call it early. Best. LCD. Ever. Because I absolutely trust CNET reviews 100% But seriously, it's looking pretty good so far, isn't it? 27" IPS, highest res in a 16:9 (would prefer 16:10, but 2560x1440 softens the blow), matte, dual DVI and DisplayPort. It's like they reached into my brain and made almost exactly the monitor I wanted.
But seriously, it's looking pretty good so far, isn't it? 27" IPS, highest res in a 16:9 (would prefer 16:10, but 2560x1440 softens the blow), matte, dual DVI and DisplayPort. It's like they reached into my brain and made almost exactly the monitor I wanted.I'm gonna go ahead and call it early. Best. LCD. Ever. Because I absolutely trust CNET reviews 100%
Except for the price
? I hope in your wishlist at least, you were hoping for all that AND a sub $700 price.tronmaster
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2004
- Messages
- 482
Cool! Once the Dell U2711 is release please purchase it and do an awesome review for us with lots of pictures!
Actually, I plan on buying 2.Cool! Once the Dell U2711 is release please purchase it and do an awesome review for us with lots of pictures!
Joke.
Except for the price
Nah, I was hoping for it to be $2K+ to keep out all the riff-raff.
I agree, and I reckon I'll get the NEC version when it comes out, secondary display for my 27" iMac and primary for my gaming PC. The 27" iMac display is incredible, can't wait to multiply that goodness. It'll probably cost almost as much as an iMac by itself but it'll be worth it.
Took a look at a 27" iMac next to a 30" Apple Cinema Display at the Apple store the other day. The 30" still seemed to have significantly more screen size to me. The 27" didn't look much bigger than my 24" (Dell 2407). However, the 27" iMac with it's glossy display really blew me away compared to the matte Cinema Display. I can't imagine Dell's 27" will have a glossy display which has me leaning back towards the 3008. Sigh.
Its just your eyes doing funny things to your brain because the difference in screen size/screen real estate between the 30" and 27" is actually much smaller than the difference in screen size between the 27" and 24".
But I'll agree with you that the glossy imac displays really should be the poster childs for glossy displays in general, because hot damn they simply look amazing (provided you can control the lighting, and provided you're not using it for professional color work).
Nope, he is right. You are forgetting. The 27" is 16:9 and that makes it much smaller.
The 27" is barely bigger than the 24" except in width. While the 30" is a big jump in both dimensions.
And it just isn't in vertical, total area is +20% 24" vs 27", but +30% 27" vs 30".
Check it out:
http://tvcalculator.com/index.html?b6099e4f60a5ee33e7c6cec0278bdac0
Edit: Add image:
Last edited:
Thank you very much for pointing this out. My wife has the new 27" iMac and whenever I use it I always thought I was going a little crazy since it didnt seem that much bigger than my 24" Samsung 245bw. I was contemplating getting the new Dell 27" when it came out but now that I see the difference in size is not that big, I might hold out still for a nice 30" monitor.
Maybe Apple will re-release the 30" Cinema display with the new updated specs of its other monitors?
Clearly it has a lot more resolution, But I think it is pretty clear we are talking about physical size of the LCD panel itself as indicated by several posts so far. It isn't much larger physically than a 24".
IMO, the resolution is overrated at this density. You pretty much have to lean in, to resolve that resolution.
Even a 30" has a very small pixels (I had one for a while).
If anything I would much rather have 2560 resolution at 32", than 27".
The physical monitor dimensions. Another downside to bumping the resolution so high on the new iMac's without really increasing the screen space is that tiny dot pitch on the monitor. At first I thought I really liked how tight and accurate it looked, but it can start to wear on you through extended periods of use.
I think the 30" monitor is still the sweet spot in terms of size/pixel density.
Ho Lee crap! That link really put it in perspective, thanks!
Yes. I have a 27" iMac and a NEC 2490WUXi as its secondary display.
The 27" and the 24" are roughly the same physical height, with the 27" obviously being much wider.
The main difference is in pixel density. When I drag a window from the 27" to the 24" it gets absolutely massive. The 27" gives you much more desktop real estate due to the increase in pixel count. I actually don't need to run Final Cut Studio in dual monitor mode like I did with my old 24" iMac.
If you don't like the pixel density then it can be a problem, but then again it is very easy to resize text to be more comfortable for reading. I personally love it and look forward to buying NEC's 27" for my iMac secondary display and PC primary display whenever it comes out. A 30" would be just a notch too big for my desktop but another 27" would be perfect.