Hey guys. I've had a Samsung 213T for about 2 months (which, regretably, has one bad pixel near center-right of the screen), which I am selling on Ebay right now after ordering a Dell 2001FP.
The 2001FP has been here for about 3 days only (and after intensive testing I've noticed no dead pixels - very good! But I have a feeling I don't want to keep this monitor - read on to find out why!), but I've already done a number of gaming tests, video tests, and just 2D comparison. Let me give you my thoughts, and I hope it'll help.
Ghosting:
The Samsung 213T had VERY severe ghosting (or technically speaking, streaking; since ghosting actually refers to bad signals in the cable, and I was using DVI). No, it is actually NOT THAT BAD in most FPS games; really, during intense game play, you don't have time to check if there are trails on objects; and most of the time the trails aren't that noticeable (except for a few colors - I find black to orange, black to dark blue, and black to gray are very noticeable). There are special instances when the streaking is bad enough for me to turn my head, though. One of such is an ATI Demo I use fortesting LCD streaking: the ATO Dolphine Demo for Radeon 8500. The reason I pick this is because the dolphins' eyes are black, and on most LCDs (I've tested this demo on a Dell 1901FP, a 1800FP, and an Apple 23" Cinema display - surprisingly, the Cinema Display does NOT ghost!!!) they leave VERY long trails (about 1/2" on the 213T) on the dolphins' bodies, which are dark blue. Trails are also noticeable in fast-paced motion videos - most of the time you can't tell (since a lot of movies already have natural trails resulted from the camera), but in animations and such (like the intro of Wolf's Rain, where trails are evident when birds fly past the sky at high speed) it is noticeable.
The 2001FP has almost zero ghosting. There are, of course, slight motion blurring, but they are not noticeable in any sense. Even the AT Dolphin Demo ran smoothly - you can actually see that the eyes are traingular polygons, not trailing black dots. HOWEVER, there is a very major flaw in 2001FP's image quality in fast-paced video/games that defeats the whole purpose of the 2001FP's fast response time (and, I've noticed, that EVERY SINGLE review article of the 2001FP fails to address this problem, which seems to be an inherent problem in the design): there is a very strange, interlace pattern throughout the entire display when fast-motion video or game is being displayed. If you are just relaxed and not being very focused while you play, the interlace pattern is not very evident; but upon close inspection, it gets very annoying. The ATI Dolphin Demo, Final Fantasy XI, Lord of the Rings, The Matrix Reloaded all show this symptom (and this interlace-pattern is not something I've seen in any other LCD I've experienced so far - possible problem with the IPS display mode, may be? Or could it be a problem with the design of the Genesis Malibu chipset? I do not know). The interlace patterns do not appear when the video is still; so while you are taking screenshots and such, the picture looks fine. There is, however, one instance at which you can capture a glimpse of the interlace during still-video though: stare at a non-moving image (the desktop, for example), an move your vision rapidly from top to bottom of the display, and you'll see the strange interlace pattern on the display. It's gone as soon as your vision becomes still. I am almost ready to suspect that the 2001FP is using some sort of 2-field interlaced display mode (similar to that of the TV) to achieve its fast response time.
In short, the 213T actually has an edge on overall image quality, even in fast-paced motion videos. True, the 2001FP has no ghosting, but I think the interlace pattern just defeats the whole purpose of no ghosting - I consider it almost a more severe problem than ghosting.
Image Quality:
The image quality comparison can be summed up in one sentence: 213T stumps all over the 2001FP.
I read that someone in this thread mentioned 2001FP has te "graininess" in image quality. It is all too true. Even upon my first look at 2001FP's image, I immediately noticed two things: the colors are too warm (though corrected with the OSD), and the image is grainy. As opposed to the 213T, on which a block of gray looks like an uniform block of color, on the 2001FP, there are strange white lines across the color fields. It seems like the bottom of each pixel is brighter than its top - it sounds funny, but upon closer inspection this is what it seems like. The result is blurry lines - on borders between bright and dark colors, it is not evident. But on borders of adjacent, close color ranges, the lines are very blurry.
All in all, I am not satisfied with the 2001FP's image quality at all. The graininess bothers me, and, even if that is acceptable, the interlace pattern in fast-motion videos ust won't cut it either.
Frankly, I think PC users are stuk with no GOOD large LCD displays. The 213T is already crowned the best 21" LCD for the PC, but it ghosts. The 2001FP supposedly is the savior of PC's large LCDs with its no-ghost image quality, but then its image quality turns out to be mediocre at best.
I now have two choices: to buy another 213T, and hope the one I get this time won't have dead pixels, knowing that 213T will ghost severely, OR; try and find an Apple 23" Cinema Display for cheap. Price aside, I have reasons to hesitate from buying a 23" Apple - Apple has a very bad policy on dead pixels, some users are said to be stuck with 10 dead pixels and Apple won't even exchange that! But Apple's 23" is large and beautiful, has very brilliant, neutral colors, and from what I've tested, it doesn't ghost (surprise, surprise!).