2001, 2005 or 2405 FP(W)

[LikeLinus]

So which one should I get. I can get the 2001/2005 for $500 or the 2405 for $860.

Decisions decisions. I'd go for the 2405..but my only concern was gaming and what resolutions it supports. Not all games support WS and i'm not sure what that monitor scales down to. Also I play CS/CS:S and like to keep it around 1024x768 to keep things a little larger = easier hs's Thats why i originally wanted the 2001...but damn that 24" is so tempting. Is it really worth the money I wonder. Hmmm.

I've got a Geforce 6800 Ultra O/C

 

[SynthDude2001]

If you've got a 6800 Ultra (especialy the "OC" one), I'd just go ahead and get the 2405FPW. You will almost surely have to turn down some details in newer games at full 1920x1200 resolution, but I think you'll mostly be alright. And you can always scale lower resolutions; it's really not so bad these days (I have a 2005FPW myself).

Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say you like lower resolutions for CS:S...I always thought that if they were going to be the same size (1024x768 vs. 1600x1200 at Aspect with the side black bars), the higher resolution will be better because onscreen objects will have more detail and be easier to see - you have many pixels to aim for instead of just a few, when the target is distant.

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
If you've got a 6800 Ultra (especialy the "OC" one), I'd just go ahead and get the 2405FPW. You will almost surely have to turn down some details in newer games at full 1920x1200 resolution, but I think you'll mostly be alright. And you can always scale lower resolutions; it's really not so bad these days (I have a 2005FPW myself).

Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say you like lower resolutions for CS:S...I always thought that if they were going to be the same size (1024x768 vs. 1600x1200 at Aspect with the side black bars), the higher resolution will be better because onscreen objects will have more detail and be easier to see - you have many pixels to aim for instead of just a few, when the target is distant.

I guess that might be how it works for an LCD, but I'm currently using 21" CRT monitors. When you use a lower resolution on CRT the image is blow up and it makes things larger than they would be with a higher resolution.

Thats another concern is games in the future. While I wont have this card forever..I will atleast for a few years i think.

What does the 2405 scale down to? thats what i want to know

 

[SynthDude2001]

It will scale down to any resolution you throw at it. You can choose to display the pixels 1:1 (i.e. 1024x768 is a small box in the middle of the screen), Aspect (the image is blown up as far as it'll go while still maintaining its original aspect ratio), or Fill, which of course fills the entire screen (which sometimes looks a little off with 4:3 resolutions).

Future games...that is a real concern. I have a 6800GT at Ultra speeds myself, and I've had it since last July. I'm likely going to be upgrading to a next-generation card this summer, assuming they're out by then (and not $900+ :roll: ). Plus I'm overdue for an Athlon 64 to replace my XP anyway. But if you absolutely must run games at native resolution (I basically need to...scaling isn't bad, but native resolution is a lot better), then you might consider going with the 2005FPW (or 2001FP I suppose, if you don't want the 16:10 aspect ratio). But they're all pretty high resolution though, so there might not be too much of a difference - I can't say for sure because I have no first-hand experience with a 1920x1200 monitor. If you are really going to keep the video card for a few years (which is admittedly the more financially responsible thing to do ), either you'll have to play at lower resolutions, or get the smaller monitor.

I'm still a bit unclear on the resolution thing you're talking about - I used a 22" CRT for a while so I know what you're talking about (as it applies to Windows desktops) - but when rendering a game, if I'm not mistaken, the same scene is rendered either way, regardless of whether your resolution is 1024x768 or 1600x1200 (assuming your FOV is constant, which it should be). The higher resolution one is just rendered with more detail - if both are displayed on the same screen size (which you can do on any of these LCD monitors if you so choose), then the objects will be the same size in a game.

 

[halfadder]

$860 for the 2405 is too good of a deal to pass up.

Plus it'll be a great excuse to buy a new graphics card this fall!

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: halfadder
$860 for the 2405 is too good of a deal to pass up.

Plus it'll be a great excuse to buy a new graphics card this fall!

It's a vicious cycle, isn't it?

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: halfadder
$860 for the 2405 is too good of a deal to pass up.

Plus it'll be a great excuse to buy a new graphics card this fall!

hehe no kidding I just got my 2405 tonight it is AMAZING. I have a 6800GT and it doesn't perform that bad but I want morE!!! X850XT anyone or maybe an R520????

 

[Actaeon]

I have a 2001FP, and I love it! I had the choice between the 2005FPW, or the 2001FP. I decided to stick to a "standard" native res of 1600x1200 instead of the 1680x920 (or whatever it is) from the 2005FPW.

I think it is great. However, any of these monitors will suit you nicely. That 2405FPW is beautiful, tons of features, great specs. However, it is rather big, I'm not sure if I'd like a 24" monitor. I feel this 20" is more than big enough.

 

[JBT]

Actaeon you would LOVE a 24"...

 

[compusaguy]

Nothing beats a 2001FP, not even the 2405. 2001FP can rotate 90 degrees and do 1200 x 1600. That's what's so awesome.

 

[SKC]

All three of the monitors can rotate. 2405 --> 1200 x 1920. That's also awesome. Picture in picture, dual input mode, .. You just need to decide on whether or not you want the size.

 

[everman]

The 2405 is awsome, but it sounds like gaming may go better on the 2001fp. I'd go for the 2405 myself.

 

[JBT]

The 2405 easily scales to other resolutions... and the 2405's response time is 12MS compared to the 2001s 16ms time. Like the other guys said the 2405 also easily rotates 90 degrees if you actually want to look at stuff like that. This thing is HUGE compared to my old 2001FP. Dark colors on this are also MUCH darker than the 2001.

 

[ProUser]

2405FPW. Best monitor I've ever used. [Period]

 

[3NF]

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001

Originally posted by: halfadder
$860 for the 2405 is too good of a deal to pass up.

Plus it'll be a great excuse to buy a new graphics card this fall!

It's a vicious cycle, isn't it?

Tell me about it - now I'm considering going with SLI

I bought the 2405FPW last week and it's an awesome monitor. I'm currently playing UT2004 and HL2 at 1920x1200 with a BFG 6800GT OC - loving every pixel of it

 

[Pavarotti4]

Can anyone find a better deal on the 2405? If so please PM me..... do you just call dell and say, hey I'm a small business owner... etc etc... how does it work?

This is the deal I found... Please PM me! Thanks,

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/prod...&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4221&link_number=

Pete

 

[Fisher999]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus
So which one should I get. I can get the 2001/2005 for $500 or the 2405 for $860...

If you can afford the 2405, and apparently you can, go for it !!!

 

[bocamojo]

It's really only a question of money. If you've got enough, go for the 2405. You can't go wrong with it.