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

[Sadhu]

Originally posted by: Xed
I'm glad yours are working well with minor/no issues. =)


I had my doubts if my 2005fpw "adventure" could get any worse. After about an hour and a half on the phone I finally got ahold of a supervisor who apoligized for the panel's problems and assured me they would ship me a replacement overnight. Fed ex pulls up in my driveway and drops it off and I cross my fingers hoping for the best.

Then I noticed the box was different than the original one mine shipped in. After examining it I noticed the lovely words "Refurbished" on the label. For kicks I opened it up and checked it out and wouldn't you know, it doesn't even power on.

Unbelievable.

Well, shut my mouth.

 

[dasgooch]

Xed,

I am sorry to hear about your troubles. I know the frustration that can come from buying a $600+ peice of hardware and it not working right.

I just recieved my 2005FPW this morning. After reading everything I could find on this LCD, mostly the Anand forums, I was a little nervous I was going to get a dud panel like some of the others. My sister got one of these for xmas and the thing is flawless, not one dead pixel. So I decided to take the plunge and get one for myself. I am releaved to say that mine is flawless as well. Not one dead pixel and only slight backlighting but not noticable unless I turn it to one of the unused inputs and just look at the black screen. For those of you that are having a rough time with your LCD's keep on Dell CS and make them keep sending you a new unit, you will get a good one. I am sure there are a lot of users out there that have recieved good ones and not said anything. I know I have seen two now.

 

[DaShadow]

Count me as another good one!

 

[dasgooch]

I have kind of an odd question maybe some of you guys might be able to answer. I am hooking an Xbox up to the lcd trying to get it to display in 720p (or any HD mode) and it isn't available on the xbox to put it into that mode. Will S-Video Support HD resolutions? Also will this LCD display those?

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: DaShadow
Count me as another good one!

Me too.

 

[Bigg]

Originally posted by: warchild123
BJC112,
you have a link to that background?
That's the same case I have

What case is that? I am looking for one and that one looks cool.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: Bigg

Originally posted by: warchild123
BJC112,
you have a link to that background?
That's the same case I have

What case is that? I am looking for one and that one looks cool.

:Q not even sure.. I know newegg has a few similar but i got this from a case specific site...

Sorry.

 

[typhon62]

Do any Matrox video cards work with the 2005FPW?

I have a G450 and 1680x1050 is not listed in the supported screen resolutions.

If Matrox does not support 1680x1050 what cards do (($100 to $150 range) ?

Thanks...

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: typhon62
Do any Matrox video cards work with the 2005FPW?

I have a G450 and 1680x1050 is not listed in the supported screen resolutions.

If Matrox does not support 1680x1050 what cards do (($100 to $150 range) ?

Thanks...

1680x1050 should show up when you connect the 2005FPw

 

[amheck]

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: typhon62
Do any Matrox video cards work with the 2005FPW?

I have a G450 and 1680x1050 is not listed in the supported screen resolutions.

If Matrox does not support 1680x1050 what cards do (($100 to $150 range) ?

Thanks...

1680x1050 should show up when you connect the 2005FPw

Or more likley when you install the drivers for the monitor.

 

[amol]

yay, i got the amex coupon code off of ebay . . .

though i paid $90 for it =/ still save $60 though

that brings price down the $496

will probably order tomorrow . . . i only have a debit card and i have to deposit $$ in the bank =/

 

[amol]

OMG, has anyone else seen the thread about the 24" 2405FPw?!

damn, i'm pretty much stuck with the 2005FPw . . . i keep trying to console myself that gaming at 1920x1200 is not going to work, but i just cant seem to . . .

 

[typhon62]

Originally posted by: amheck

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: typhon62
Do any Matrox video cards work with the 2005FPW?

I have a G450 and 1680x1050 is not listed in the supported screen resolutions.

If Matrox does not support 1680x1050 what cards do (($100 to $150 range) ?

Thanks...

1680x1050 should show up when you connect the 2005FPw

Or more likley when you install the drivers for the monitor.

I've done both and 1680x1050 does not show up as a valid resolution. 1600x1200 is the largest.
My son's machine has a ASUS 5200FX based card and it works fine there.

The folks at Matrox finally responded and siad the 450 does not support 1680x1050 out of the box. They sent me a link to download a utility called "Powerstrip" and instructions on how to get 1680x1050 to show up. I'll try it tonight and see if it works!!

Thanks for the reply's!!!

 

[Sadhu]

Originally posted by: typhon62

Originally posted by: amheck

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: typhon62
Do any Matrox video cards work with the 2005FPW?

I have a Matrox P650 in one of my computers, and that card certainly supports 1680x1050 as well as 1600x1200 with dual head DVI, and very well, I might add. List price is $169. It comes in both an AGP and PCI Express version.

 

[TantrumusMaximus]

I will insert a real dumb question here:

I have never owned an LCD except for the one on my laptop which is a very high end laptop screen so the ghosting is very low.

The question is:

How does this 20" 2001FP or 2005FP compare to the size of a 21" CRT?

If I run any other resolution than the native one won't it look like crap or emulated? I know that my laptop is 1600x1200 native and any other res looks pixelly.... or not nearly as sharp.

I am mostly a gamer so I don't know if I'd be ready to take a chance on one of these.... but they are awefully tempting because I can look at my laptop forever but if I use my PC for a long time... staring at a CRT gives me a headache.

Thanks.

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
I will insert a real dumb question here:

I have never owned an LCD except for the one on my laptop which is a very high end laptop screen so the ghosting is very low.

The question is:

How does this 20" 2001FP or 2005FP compare to the size of a 21" CRT?

If I run any other resolution than the native one won't it look like crap or emulated? I know that my laptop is 1600x1200 native and any other res looks pixelly.... or not nearly as sharp.

I am mostly a gamer so I don't know if I'd be ready to take a chance on one of these.... but they are awefully tempting because I can look at my laptop forever but if I use my PC for a long time... staring at a CRT gives me a headache.

Thanks.

21" CRT = 19" actual viewing area

so the 1600x1200 20" is bigger

the 1680x1050 WS is smaller, but its widescreen . . .

and yes, it will look like crap, because my laptop screen looks great at 1400x1050 and crap at 1024x768

 

[amol]

anything else i should know before i plop down 500 smackeroos on this here LCD?

 

[kreidel]

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
I will insert a real dumb question here:

I have never owned an LCD except for the one on my laptop which is a very high end laptop screen so the ghosting is very low.

The question is:

How does this 20" 2001FP or 2005FP compare to the size of a 21" CRT?

If I run any other resolution than the native one won't it look like crap or emulated? I know that my laptop is 1600x1200 native and any other res looks pixelly.... or not nearly as sharp.

I am mostly a gamer so I don't know if I'd be ready to take a chance on one of these.... but they are awefully tempting because I can look at my laptop forever but if I use my PC for a long time... staring at a CRT gives me a headache.

Thanks.

21" CRT = 19" actual viewing area

so the 1600x1200 20" is bigger

the 1680x1050 WS is smaller, but its widescreen . . .

and yes, it will look like crap, because my laptop screen looks great at 1400x1050 and crap at 1024x768

So would the 2001fp be better for gaming ? So you are stepping down from a 21" crt when you get a 205fpw?

 

[amol]

Originally posted by: kreidel

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
I will insert a real dumb question here:

I have never owned an LCD except for the one on my laptop which is a very high end laptop screen so the ghosting is very low.

The question is:

How does this 20" 2001FP or 2005FP compare to the size of a 21" CRT?

If I run any other resolution than the native one won't it look like crap or emulated? I know that my laptop is 1600x1200 native and any other res looks pixelly.... or not nearly as sharp.

I am mostly a gamer so I don't know if I'd be ready to take a chance on one of these.... but they are awefully tempting because I can look at my laptop forever but if I use my PC for a long time... staring at a CRT gives me a headache.

Thanks.

21" CRT = 19" actual viewing area

so the 1600x1200 20" is bigger

the 1680x1050 WS is smaller, but its widescreen . . .

and yes, it will look like crap, because my laptop screen looks great at 1400x1050 and crap at 1024x768

So would the 2001fp be better for gaming ? So you are stepping down from a 21" crt when you get a 205fpw?

haha, no, it'll be a new monitor since i have a laptop and i am going to be building a desktop soon

"stepping up" from 15" 1400x1050 to 20" 1680x1050 (i'll be keeping the laptop)

just ordered it now on dell.com for $494 after 25% off, $150 AMEX ( I USED A VISA DEBIT CARD, YOU DON'T NEED AMEX ), plus tax and CA environmental fee (free shipping)

but i paid $90 on ebay for the amex code, so $584 total

<========== waiting for the monitor, how long does it take to ship to CA on 3-5 day?!?!

 

[amol]

new post so i can bump this up??

anyway to avoid paying the sales tax?? its about $40 that i dont wanna pay, lol

EDIT: $45.06

 

[TantrumusMaximus]

So if I understand correctly both these LCDs are not good for gaming.

 

[imported_hyde]

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
I will insert a real dumb question here:

I have never owned an LCD except for the one on my laptop which is a very high end laptop screen so the ghosting is very low.

The question is:

How does this 20" 2001FP or 2005FP compare to the size of a 21" CRT?

If I run any other resolution than the native one won't it look like crap or emulated? I know that my laptop is 1600x1200 native and any other res looks pixelly.... or not nearly as sharp.

I am mostly a gamer so I don't know if I'd be ready to take a chance on one of these.... but they are awefully tempting because I can look at my laptop forever but if I use my PC for a long time... staring at a CRT gives me a headache.

Thanks.

21" CRT = 19" actual viewing area

so the 1600x1200 20" is bigger

the 1680x1050 WS is smaller, but its widescreen . . .

and yes, it will look like crap, because my laptop screen looks great at 1400x1050 and crap at 1024x768

I have to disagree on this. Running a lower resolution than the native doesn't necessarily mean it's going to look like crap.

My video card can't handle half life 2 at the 2005fpw's native res. I have to run it at the wide aspect res lower than that (i can't remember the exact numbers). It still looks great though. Same goes for any other games that support widescreen. I also have a few games that *don't* support widescreen but still look fine running under, say, 1024x768. It *would* look like crap if i keep the option to stretch the video on, but instead i have it on the aspect setting, which basically scales the image as much as possible while keeping the correct aspect ratio.

Running your desktop under anything less than the native res wouldn't look so hot though. Reading web pages, editing documents and other desktop applications would probably be alot more difficult if not running at native. But the original poster noted he was a gamer, so I'm assuming his or her concern has to do with games.

I'm very happy with my 2005fpw. Half-life 2 takes on a more of a cinematic feel. Counter-strike: source feels more natural and puts me at a slight advantage seeing more to the left and right. After playing games that support widescreen, I think it would be very difficult for me to go back to a 4:3 ratio. And I don't think I need to mention the benefits when watching movies.

 

[Sadhu]

Running your desktop under anything less than the native res wouldn't look so hot though. Reading web pages, editing documents and other desktop applications would probably be alot more difficult if not running at native. But the original poster noted he was a gamer, so I'm assuming his or her concern has to do with games.

I'm very happy with my 2005fpw. Half-life 2 takes on a more of a cinematic feel. Counter-strike: source feels more natural and puts me at a slight advantage seeing more to the left and right. After playing games that support widescreen, I think it would be very difficult for me to go back to a 4:3 ratio. And I don't think I need to mention the benefits when watching movies.[/quote]

I'm gong to stay completely out of the "games" issue entirely. I'm only commenting here on desktop applications. While I agree that the monitor looks its best at native (every LCD monitor does), let's be clear that dropping the resolution down is livable for some (though I wouldn't do it). I have a couple of clients who don't wear glasses (and maybe they should) that grew up using low resolutions monitors and video cards, and tney are very stubborn, and have changed their Dell 17" monitors from 1280x1024 to 1024x768. They live with it that way all the time, and think it's great. I don't think it looks as good, but lets be clear that it doesn't look like "crap." Some people just find it livable that way. I believe that it would be better to change the dot pitch from 96 to 120, before I'd drop the resolution down from 1680x1050 to 1280x1024 or lower). The same is true for the 2001FP. But dropping it down doesn't produce terrible or horrible results. It's just nowhere near as nice as native resolution.

I also don't know why you couldn't change the resolution back and forth as needed. It doesn't take all that long, especially when all the files are on your computer. Lower when you need to, and bump it back up when you need to.

As far as using either the 2001FP and 2105FPW at native resolution on the desktop, it's VERY nice and extremely sharp and crisp, definetly a CRT killer (and I had a 21" $3000 CRT from EIZO). I much prefer the Dell monitors for desktop, and I don't find it too small or difficult to read. I had been worried about this, as have others in the forum, and no one so far is sorry they got the 20" Dells on account of readiblity issues. The native resolution for desktop is superb.

Don't expect lower resoltions to look as good (on any LCD monitor). YOu could never like it as well as native because native looks so darn good. But don't let's say it looks like crap to run at lower resolutions. It just doesn't look as good. What would you expect. It's the nature of the LCD, not Dell per se.

 

[dpra]

i got this monitor a few days ago.
no dead pixels.
slight backlight bleeding on the upper right hand corner, but i can live with that.
(i don't see it unless i look for it).
two quick questions:
1)i have a ATI AIW 8500DV -- looking to upgrade for something that can show DVDs on this monitor without any trouble, and for basic apps (not gaming)
2) i want to connect a coaxial cable to the monitor to do PIP and PBP, what's recommended as a TV tuner that would connect with this monitor? - i am pretty new to this type of AV thing.
thanks,
dpra.

 

[Xed]

Well two more replacements later (last one priority overnight by 8 am was suprising) I finally got one with two dead pixels and no backlight issues. Since they are both off in the corners I don't notice them so I'm pretty happy with it.