Dell new 20" wide LCD 2005FPW. Has anyone seen this beast?

[amheck]

Everyone is buying these for around $550 plus tax from Dell. For the $30-$40 in tax, I can't see buying them on Ebay could be worth it in the least.

 

[Sadhu]

Originally posted by: Gizmotion
I got my 2005FPW at the beginning of the month and I'm sending it back because of the usual unacceptable backlight problem but I'm not getting another one because the 2001FP I got a few days ago is the most perfect LCD monitor I've ever had. No backlight problem and no bad pixels. Actually no bad pixels on the 2005FPW either. I'd choose the 2001FP over the widescreen anyway because it fits my work habits better. The only thing I'll miss about the 2005FPW is the brightness which I happen to like.

As an aside to the person interested in saving a little over $100 on eBay - it's worth the extra money to buy from Dell and be able to have a replacement sent if the one you get is defective, with no questions asked.

 

[sbcdivision63]

i cant find any $$ off so the cheapest i can get it is $599 +tax...i would trade an extra 25% off coupon for one that would get me down to 550 + tax with a 25% off

 

[ScottFern]

Originally posted by: Fr0zen2k4
Well since the 2005 has better brightness then the 2001fp what did you do to your fp to make it more tolerable to view without dis comfort. ?

I never adjusted the display setting with the 2001fp, first I can't really tweak anything on the monitor side because DVI won't let you in the setup screen, and the 2001fp is just not as bright as the 2005FPW. It has like 250c^2 nits (or whatever it is) compared to 300c^2 on the 2005FPW. I am sure you can turn down the brightness on the video card side however.

 

[nitromullet]

You have to check with coupn websites, like http://www.coupon-kingdom.com/dell.asp, daily to see if they have a stackable $$$ coupn listed. They usually expire the same day, so be prepared to use it when you get it.

You guys have me a bit timid about my purchase. I guess I'll go ahead and keep my order and see what I get. $554 is a nice deal on a widescreen flatpanel, but still a nice chunk of change to drop on myself this time of year. Hopefully I'll get one of the good ones.

 

[Sadhu]

Sorry ... meant to reply to Gizmotion's comments, but accidently hit replay before my comments were in!

I have three Dells, two with absolutely no dead pixels, and all three with extremely minimal backlight problem (though I believe too much is being made of this issue by some ... of course ... not all - some have it bad and some of those people play games and DVDs).

And even though I know most of you expect no dead pixels, and I agree it's nice to have Zero, it is the norm to have at least three to five, even on much more expensive top name brands. Apple and others won't let you return a laptop or monitor just because it has a few. And actually, the ability to see a few randomly scattered dead pixels is rather difficult. I have one 2001FP with a few, and one with absolutely none. They sit side by side. I am not aware of the dead pixels on the one that has it. I suddenly see a dead pixel once in a great while, but it's not something that I normally see. If it's not noticable, what's the big deal? In fact, I don't think that's quite sane to obsess on a few dead pixels that you hardly ever see, but then, that's just my humble opionion.

The fact is that some of you do (expect perfection) - why I don't know - but you do. So you should take both the advice of Gismotion, and Amheck and others(there are many others in this forum that will no doubt say the same thing ... because they have also returned monitors in exchange for another. They will undboutably agree that even if you pay more, the extra money IS worth the peace of mind that comes with knowing that you have 21 days to return your monitor if it arrives in a state that doesn't live up to your expectations.

Mine are great. In fact, I've had four monitors from Dell in the last month, and they were all great. I returned only the 19" because ... well, I'm hooked on the higher resolution. No doubt the 1280x1024 resolution is going to be more right for some others. It was also a new technology monitor with an 800:1 contrast ratio. It had no backlight problem. It's blacks were SOLID black, both in apps and on the screen saver or black desktop (on all four sides and at all four corners). It's a great monitor. With coupons, it can be had for $450 or so. Not bad.

I love BOTH the 2001FP and the 2005FPW. They have differenct strengths, and a few different weaknesses. Those of you who have gotten bad ones should know they aren't all that way. When they arrive looking good, they are quite good ... indeed.

For those that find the 2005FP too bright, try turning down the brightness. Also, for those that stil find it too bright, you should consider the 2001FP. The 2005FPW is NOT the better monitor. The 2005FPw is newer and different, and does SOME things better, but it's wrong to think of it as better than the 2001FP. I bought a second 2001FP for a dual monitor setup AFTER first checking out the 2005FPw. So, you can see, for some, the 2001FP WILL be the optimum choice, not the 2005FPw.

 

[RyBoy]

okay i don't know all the exact numbers, but when i saw the height of the 2005fpw, it appeared close to the height of a 17" lcd (actual screen size). Is the 2005fpw smaller, equal, or larger heightweise compared to a 17" lcd. thx

 

[ZombieJesus]

I am not sure if i want to get a 2005 or not i noticed that Samsung has the LTM210M1 tft panel ready for production q4 of 04. In my optinion S-PVA is far superior to S-IPS in image quality however i don't wanna wait forever for a monitor based on this panel to come out... Opinions?


http://www.samsung.com/Product.../LTM210M1/LTM210M1.htm

 

[Skylander]

Originally posted by: ScottFern

Originally posted by: Fr0zen2k4
Well since the 2005 has better brightness then the 2001fp what did you do to your fp to make it more tolerable to view without dis comfort. ?

I never adjusted the display setting with the 2001fp, first I can't really tweak anything on the monitor side because DVI won't let you in the setup screen, and the 2001fp is just not as bright as the 2005FPW. It has like 250c^2 nits (or whatever it is) compared to 300c^2 on the 2005FPW. I am sure you can turn down the brightness on the video card side however.

I have 2001FP and using DVI too. I am able to adjust the brightness by pressing the "-" button on your LCD panel. I believe 2005FPW should be the same.

I only need to use the default level (50) on my 2001FP. I think it's perfect. Otherwise, I feel discomfort to my eye too.

Before I got my LCD montor, I always think bigger contrast ratio is better. But now, I don't feel the same way. I think it might be true on LCD TV, Plasma TV or other TV product. I think it's not true on LCD monitor. For LCD TV or other TV product, we sit far during we use them. Bigger contrast ratio will help. However, we usually sit a lot closer during we are using LCD monitor. If the contrast ratio is too high, it won't help but hurt the eyes. Personally, I think 400:1 or 500:1 is enough.

 

[sbcdivision63]

it appears that the 2005 is virtually the same size as a standard 17" lcd but about 5 inches wider...i personally would go for the 2005 because im coming from a 17" lcd and a wide screen helps alot when editing videos and watching movies

 

[sbcdivision63]

woops meant to say coming from a 17" crt, the board wont let me edit posts for some reason...

 

[Sadhu]

Originally posted by: Skylander

Originally posted by: ScottFern

Originally posted by: Fr0zen2k4
Well since the 2005 has better brightness then the 2001fp what did you do to your fp to make it more tolerable to view without dis comfort. ?

I am sure you can turn down the brightness on the video card side however.

I have 2001FP and using DVI too. I am able to adjust the brightness by pressing the "-" button on your LCD panel. I believe 2005FPW should be the same.

I only need to use the default level (50) on my 2001FP. I think it's perfect. Otherwise, I feel discomfort to my eye too.

Before I got my LCD montor, I always think bigger contrast ratio is better. But now, I don't feel the same way. I think it might be true on LCD TV, Plasma TV or other TV product. I think it's not true on LCD monitor. For LCD TV or other TV product, we sit far during we use them. Bigger contrast ratio will help. However, we usually sit a lot closer during we are using LCD monitor. If the contrast ratio is too high, it won't help but hurt the eyes. Personally, I think 400:1 or 500:1 is enough.

Yes, Skylander is quite right on multiple points, I think. Firstly, you CAN turn down the brightness. But the results are not as useful as you might expect. Therefore , I think there might be a slight flaw in this trend to make monitors with greater and greater contrast ratios, and more and more nits of brightness. Brighter is not always better (as evidenced by these guys with the aching eyeballs). You can diminish the effects somewhat, but the BRIGHTness of the whites still bother some ... like my wife. I really think that the trend is not such a good thing. I certainly have to wonder that the new DELL 17" UltraSharp looks like, because I can't imagine being as happy with the 1000:1 ratio and the increase nits. There comes a point that all this brightness has a downside, and I think we are beginning to hear from those that are bothered by it. I can live with it on the FPW, but it's worth noting that I started using it at its default setting of 50% and after using the 2001FP, I noticed that I had turned it town below 40%. That's because it is certainly shouting ... WHITE WHITE WHITE at you. It's going to bother some people.

Here's another interesting side note. Some of you have may have seen a posting on the Internet about how Apple's 20 inch is bested by the FPw (I think some of you know posting I mean, and for those that don't .. it's http://forum.osnn.net/printthread.php?t=42348. In that posting it lists the pitch size of the 2005 FPW as being slightly smaller (.255) than the Apple's 20" dot pitch (.258). Well, it's not so!

The 2001FP dot pitch is .255, but the dot pitch of the 2005FPW is actually the same as the Apple monitor: .258

Interestingly enough, Dell doesn't quote the dot pitch of the 2005FPW on the main pages for the monitor ... under TECH SPECS. They use to list it, but someone must have noticed it was higher than the 2001FP. At least they are awake over there at sales and marketing.

 

[bjc112]

Scott Fern -

Any luck on the replacement>? ( Faster than 5 days or so ? )

 

[Hikari]

The Dell and the Apple use the exact same LG panel, anyway. I think the only difference is in the bezel and what goes along with it.

I agree about the brightness. It is just insanely bright. But, in my case, setting it to 0 makes it more than tolerable (still uber white whites though).

 

[ScottFern]

Originally posted by: bjc112
Scott Fern -

Any luck on the replacement>? ( Faster than 5 days or so ? )

Unfortunately no, I will check wednesday, thursday, and friday at my apartments front desk.

Will report back once I have the replacement.

 

[trikster2]

ZombieJ:
that looks like a sweet widescreen. Doubt it will be anywhere close to $600 , but 450nits? Talk about bright!

LTM210M1 21.0 Wide SXGA+ 700:1 450 89/89/89/89 4Q,'04

Regarding all the brightness problems, for the past year or so I have used a nec utility that sits in my system tray. The only thing it does is adjust brightness. I have a 300nit panel so at night it is blinding but in the daytime I need maximum brightness. The utility is a lot easier and quicker than using the monitor controls.....

 

[sbcdivision63]

to whoever sent me the pm about the coupon...sorry but i lost it trying to get this stupid board to work...for some reason the ONLY function on this board that works for me is the quick reply button...sorry about that

 

[imported_halcy]

Well I've noticed something disturbing on my 2005fpw, over the last week of use it has developed 2 more bad pixels, all green subpixels, bringing the total up to three. Has anyone elses developed bad pixels after use? Very strange. Also I noticed the front screen runs pretty warm to the touch, I compared it to my Samsung 710t and it is room temperature... strange

 

[andypress]

I just got mine after I bought it online on the 9th. I was amazed by the size of it coming from a 17" crt. Surpisingly, it has one stuck green pixel in the far top left corner. Anyways, I plugged it into my 9700 pro's dvi port and crap. The pictures colors were all off and it looked like there were red pixels all over the screen. So then I plugged it into the vga port and it works perfect. To make sure it wasn't my card, I tried my 8500dv, and had the same problem. Any Ideas???

 

[imported_halcy]

Try a different dvi cable, try a different video card's dvi port, then try both at the same time. If that doesn't solve it send it back.

 

[ponyo]

Originally posted by: andypress
I just got mine after I bought it online on the 9th. I was amazed by the size of it coming from a 17" crt. Surpisingly, it has one stuck green pixel in the far top left corner. Anyways, I plugged it into my 9700 pro's dvi port and crap. The pictures colors were all off and it looked like there were red pixels all over the screen. So then I plugged it into the vga port and it works perfect. To make sure it wasn't my card, I tried my 8500dv, and had the same problem. Any Ideas???

Go into your ATI Catalyst driver and select "Reduce DVI Frequency." That should solve the problem.

 

[ZombieJesus]

You know the 2005 may be cheap but to run any new game at above 60 fps u would need an sli setup... extra card = $ expensive sli board = $ .... but the high res is sooo niceee

 

[A8dr1aN]

You know the 2005 may be cheap but to run any new game at above 60 fps u would need an sli setup... extra card = $ expensive sli board = $ .... but the high res is sooo niceee

What's an sli setup??? Just curious.

I've noticed that, too. I have a PNY 6800 regular version on a P4 2.53 with 1GB RAM, and can't run many games at 2005's native resolution. Actually, the only FPS game I can think of that runs VERY playable at the 1680 x 1050 native res is Counter Strike: Source. It looks amazing and runs very smooth. Stress tested it aroung 63 FPS with all the eye-candy maxed out. Naturally, you would think Half-Life 2 would run just about the same, but unfortunetly that's not the case. I play that on 1024 x 768 and LCD scaling set to Aspect (stretches the picture vertically so you only have two vertical black bars at the sides) and even so, the mouse feels slightly lagged. This is not the case with CS:S.
And running FarCry in widescreen on this LCD almost makes you cry, it looks so good! As for the framerate, you'd need a fricking monster to run it at acceptable levels for multiplayer.

What really frustrates me is that even running FarCry in widescreen (1680 x 1050) would be playable with just a little more push from my card. This is a bit off topic, but I recently checked the requirenments of my PNY 6800 card. It states that a 300 W power supply is required. Mine is only 200 W max. Does anyone think that this could be a reason why my card isn't pushing some games as much as it should?
I've ordered a 300 W power supply which is on its way. I guess I'll find out soon enough.

Just out of curiosity. Does anybody else on here own a 6800 experiencing video stuttering (slide-show effect) while playing the Nalu NVidia demo that came on the install CD? I do.

Thanks in advance!

 

[imported_halcy]

SLI - is a technology currently used by Nvidia (created by 3dfx) that links 2 video cards together, so one draws part of the screen while the other draws a different part, or they alternate drawing frames. Very expensive but very fast.

Having a smaller powersupply would only effect your computer by causing lockups or something of that sort, it wont actually effect the speed of the video card at all as far as im aware.

 

[A8dr1aN]

Having a smaller powersupply would only effect your computer by causing lockups or something of that sort, it wont actually effect the speed of the video card at all as far as im aware.

DAMN!!!

I hope I'll be able to prove you wrong in a few days. And you better hope so, too!