I picked 2001FP

[jim1976]

After reading all these threads and reviews here in Anandtech and other forums and sites I had decided to go with 2005FPW.
But last night I changed my mind and decided to go with 2001fp.
The main reason was the severe backlighting effects that I heard from many users that frightened me.
The fact that I live in Athens and shipping here takes much more time than the ordinary time, made me reconsider my options and eventually go with 2001FP.
Do you think that I did a mistake purchasing 2001FP and possibly I made such a big issue out of a small problem with some 2005?
I still have time to reconsider my option about it and swap for 2005.What do you think that under these circumstances would be wiser to do? I know this is subjective to each individual but I would like to hear the opinions of some current users of both.
Thanks in advance...

 

[Tiamat]

there are pluses and minuses to both. Both have a good chance that you will not get a perfect display (perfect in the sense of no pixel defects, no backlighting issues). Since the 2005FPW is only WSXGA+ resolution, I would have done what you did and gone with the UXGA display. IF, however, the 2005FPW came out in WUXGA res, then hands down the widescreen baby!

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Tiamat
IF, however, the 2005FPW came out in WUXGA res, then hands down the widescreen baby!

Yeah that would be have been kicka$$
I mean I'm not regreting that I purchased 2001FP I just don't know If I overreacted with the 2005 issue...

 

[imported_magicp]

I wouldn't worry about going with one or the other. Both are awesome screens as far as I'm concerned. I bought a pair of 2005FPWs and so far they are both working wonderfully. I have a total of 4 stuck subpixels, but I'm not sending them back for that. I didn't run into the backlighting problem so I'm happy.

Considering the distance your monitor has to cover and the seemingly randomness in getting a decent 2005FPW, I would have bought the 2001FP too. They've worked out any bugs in that monitor by now and you are going to have a better chance of getting a decent monitor. Mine shipped from a warehouse within an hour's drive so for me getting a replacement will almost be next day.

 

[Bigg]

Either choice is a good one. I love my 2005FWP though. No dead pixels and no backlight issues with mine.

 

[Mackie2k]

I love my 2005FP....no dead pixels....minor backlighting issues.....but for normal use, it's not a problem at all.

I postedon Dell's forums and a Dell Rep said they are investigating the issue with their engineers and will let us know very soon...

I'm pretty sure that Dell will take care of the issue and either offer people money back, or new updated monitors....

Dell is pretty decent about caving into customer needs.

 

[NarcoticHobo]

Originally posted by: Tiamat
there are pluses and minuses to both. Both have a good chance that you will not get a perfect display (perfect in the sense of no pixel defects, no backlighting issues). Since the 2005FPW is only WSXGA+ resolution, I would have done what you did and gone with the UXGA display. IF, however, the 2005FPW came out in WUXGA res, then hands down the widescreen baby!

The 2005 resolution actually displays more pixels per square inch than the 2001, meaning that by real standards it looks like the screen is of a higher resolution. 1920 x 1200 on a 2005 would be rediculously small, whereas 1680x1050 is about the same size on the 2005 as 1600x1200 is on the 2001.

 

[Mackie2k]

That is true....

1680x1050 is really PERFECT on this monitor....it looks so damn good....

Add in the 6800 series Nvidia card and it's a gaming match made in heaven

The 2005 resolution actually displays more pixels per square inch than the 2001, meaning that by real standards it looks like the screen is of a higher resolution. 1920 x 1200 on a 2005 would be rediculously small, whereas 1680x1050 is about the same size on the 2005 as 1600x1200 is on the 2001.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Loving the 2001FP now. Best spent money in a long time.

 

[JBT]

Both the 2001 and 2005 are great monitors. I don't think you will feel the way you do once you get either one of them sitting in front of you. They are absolutly beautiful.

 

[ssvegeta1010]

The 2001 is better because of the UXGA alone. The backlight issue is just another (very good) reason to choose it over the 2005.

 

[Jaskalas]

Meh, if I look for it I see the backlight issue. It's so small though, it doesn't bother me.

I LOVE my 2005FPW

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
Loving the 2001FP now. Best spent money in a long time.

 

[Jeffyboy]

I hope my 2005FP looks good. I am going home after work to open the box I received this morning before I went to work. *giddy inside* Wish me luck Pray for me. I want a good monitor so bad...lol

 

[NarcoticHobo]

Originally posted by: ssvegeta1010
The 2001 is better because of the UXGA alone. The backlight issue is just another (very good) reason to choose it over the 2005.

*sigh*

The 2005 resolution actually displays more pixels per square inch than the 2001, meaning that by real standards it looks like the screen is of a higher resolution. 1920 x 1200 on a 2005 would be rediculously small, whereas 1680x1050 is about the same size on the 2005 as 1600x1200 is on the 2001.

One day people will understand that higher mhz, resolution, wattages, (insert computer device measurement here) are not always necessarily better and most of the time completely depend on the other factors.