Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why is this monitor so cheap?

We have several of these Dell LCDs in the lab, only the ultrasharp versions, and they look great. Yes they were cheap. :)

Edit: Ah yes, WildCowboy, I was wondering why we paid extra for the ultrasharp version. The WS 24" has the height, swivel, USB, S-video, and composite. For $409 USD, still pretty cheap. :)
 
the ws 24" is 899.99 in cdn :(

but

http://accessories.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=ca&l=en&s=dhs&cs=CADHS1&sku=320-4688

this one is 80 bucks more. And has a lower response time :(

I would like the composite though, its not great (component would be better) but at least i could use my PS2 as a DVD player. I kinda want this for my room and 300 bucks or so is better than spending 200 on a 20" regular old CRT tv. The small profile is nice, the resolution is nice, and the price is very nice.
 
Wow, that's a huge difference in response time, 5 vs. 16ms. Thanks for pointing this out as we can factor this into our future purchases from Dell. :)
 
no height adjustment sucks, but USB doesn't bother me in the least, i have too many USB hubs laying around as it is.

My 19" viewsonic is 5ms as well and i have never seen ghosting, whereas on my old 16ms one, I have a few times.

And does Dell do student discounts like Apple does? I see they havea Higher Education tab but it seems geared towards professors and stuff more then student.s
 
For what it's worth, and perhaps to help with your decision, the height adjustment on these Dell's are pretty great. You can bring the screen down to nearly touch the table. This design's flexibility is better than other LCDs that I've had experiences with. The 16ms really is a killer though. :(
 
yeah the 16ms sucks :( Another bummer is the resolution just barely isn't high enough. I would have loved to get 1080p out of it! Ah well... Not to mention $330 is really cheap for a monitor of this size and from what i hear, quality. I just worry about dead pixels and the ability to hook things up to it.
 
sikkinixx said:
yeah the 16ms sucks :( ANother bummer is the resolution just barely isn't high enough. I would have loved to get 1080p out of it! Ah well... Not to mention $330 is really cheap for a monitor of this size and from what i hear, quality. I just worry about dead pixels and the ability to hook things up to it.
Click to expand...
I've been using my Dell 2001FP with a 16ms response time just fine. :confused:
 
I'm in Canada so I don't think I can buy from Newegg :(

I would shop around a bit first before i buy. I just worry about the low price, and that it's new and that is isn't an Ultrasharp (whatever that means) Cheap normally means not as good I have found.
 
I use a 2007FP everyday and I love it. :) I have not noticed any problems with ghosting even with the 16ms response time. Which is supposedly the grey to grey time and quite adequate for all but the most hardcore gamers.

What was striking is the difference 16ms vs 5ms in panels that are both from Dell. It was also strange that the lower response time would come in the economy display. A little searching revealed that the E207FWP is new from Dell hence explaning the 1-2 week shipping times. It probably uses a different TFT panel thus making its true (overall) performance unknown.

I think that it is currently difficult to beat the connectivity of the UltraSharp 2007FWP series of flat panel LCDs having S-video, VGA, DVI, and composite ports again for the price point. The LCDs listed by thugpoet22 are indeed 200-300USD but are only VGA and DVI from what I can tell. However I am finding the Open Box samsung for $229 is quite tempting. :)
 
The E207WFP uses the TN panel that have faster respond time, but you sacrafices image quality, colors are not as vibrant when compared the 2007, and you don't have that much of a viewing angle. The 2007 uses S-IPS panels which have much better image quality, more color vibrance, and bigger viewing angle. In this case, you sacrafice with a slower respond time monitor and a little bit more expensive.
 
Reponse time is overrated. How quick do you need your screen to update if you are editing an image in Photoshop, or scrolling through emails? Unless you can scroll through 20 emails in a second AND read the titles as they scroll by you do not need that 4 millisecond refresh time monitor.

I'd gladly take a 25 ms S-IPS panel with better colour reproduction and viewing angle than a fast and cheap monitor.
 
iW00t said:
Reponse time is overrated. How quick do you need your screen to update if you are editing an image in Photoshop, or scrolling through emails? Unless you can scroll through 20 emails in a second AND read the titles as they scroll by you do not need that 4 millisecond refresh time monitor.

I'd gladly take a 25 ms S-IPS panel with better colour reproduction and viewing angle than a fast and cheap monitor.
Click to expand...

Gamers need it.
 
25 ms is a little high, i wouldn't want anything higher than 12. I currently have a 6 ms that i got for a great deal from newegg. Its a wonderful screen, if your going to game hard your gonna want a faster response time but if your simply browsing the internet high ms i guess is fine.
 
Well I would be playing a lot of 360/PS3 on this monitor so ghosting would bum me out big time. Meh, I will wait a little bit until i have some cash (PS3 is sapping $659 outta my pocket on friday....hopefully) maybe after xmas give it another look, once some reviews are out for it.

Thanks for all the advice though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back