Dell 2001fp

[The PIT]

Is this just a rebadged LCD and if so who makes it.

I'm thinking of getting one but Shoddy Dell support since they shipped the call centre of too India is putting me off a bit.

[Helevitia]

This is one of the best LCDs on the market. And it depends on what you mean by 'rebadged'. The LCD screen itself is made by someone else but the monitor was built from the ground up. There are several reviews around the net and the general consensus is that it is a kick ass monitor. I think the biggest complain about it is the black in movies shows up as a dark grey. But this is a limitation of all LCDs. The problem is, the bigger and brighter the LCD, the more noticable this problem is.

Personally, I don't think LCDs are worth the $$$ since they are inferior to a CRT in many respects. I'll relook at them in about a year and see where they are at.

Dave

[skinrock]

What "respects" would these be? I'm just curious because I think LCDs are a lot sharper and better looking than CRTs. Not to mention how thin they are, useful when you are trying to conserve space.

[borat]

i bought one of these a month ago,

the LCD panel is the LG.Philips LCD LM201U04, like helevitia said, dell take the panel and make the rest themselves. Very impressed with it, picture clarity is second to none and although ghosting is still present, i personally find i can play any game i want and watch any move without it being a noticable problem.

The only downside i would highlight is that im used to running a 20" CRT at 1280x1024, and find it a bit annoying to have a resolution of 1600x1200 on a 20" screen, makes the text a little too small for my liking, im happy to put up with it for the size and clarity it offers though.

Got mine from ebay, had it shipped from the USA, and ended up costing me £535 all in on myt doorstep,
i also found these people who were willing to sell me one for $850, but would accept no other credit card other than american express:http://www.isquaredinc.com/DELLUS2001FPinfo.html

Arrived with 3 dead pixels, which is'nt too bad, and is working like a dream. But warning, buying this screen is addictive, im certainly after another 1, to run dual head, and would love a 3rd would make surround gaming heaven, even if it would have to run from a PCI card in 2D.

[The PIT]

£535 not bad. You know I hardly see any LCD's with dead pixals these days. Can't remember the last time I saw one.

As for the CRT V LCD.

LCD
Geometry spot on
No Blurring for 2d work
Tend to Ghost for fast gaming/movies. Although the reviews I've seen for this one say it's not a problem.
Not the best for Photo work.

CRT
Geometry not spot on.
Can be blurry unless you're lucky. I've seen very few large displays without some focus problem.
Eye strain to the refresh rates.
Better for Photo work.

[Wombat]

Originally posted by skinrock
What "respects" would these be? I'm just curious because I think LCDs are a lot sharper and better looking than CRTs. Not to mention how thin they are, useful when you are trying to conserve space.

We've discussed it lots here, so a forum search is advised. Highlights:

1) Generally reduced color depth
2) Fixed resolution
3) Dead pixels
4) Cost
5) Viewing angle
6) Color vibrance

[The PIT]

Got to admit I don't notice the reduced colour depth although I'm not disputing it.
Fixed res can be a bit of bugger.
Viewing Angle doesn't bother me unless I'm trying to view the nude lady with the rest of the lads.

[Helevitia]

Originally posted by Wombat
We've discussed it lots here, so a forum search is advised. Highlights:

1) Generally reduced color depth
2) Fixed resolution
3) Dead pixels
4) Cost
5) Viewing angle
6) Color vibrance

Took the words right out of my mouth. I would add one more thing:

response time(ghosting issues)

[Helevitia]

btw, here is a great article about LCDs

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q1/lcds/index.x?pg=1

[The PIT]

Originally posted by Helevitia
Took the words right out of my mouth. I would add one more thing:

response time(ghosting issues)

Don't think you'll notice those problems under normal use. Most reviews I've seen have said the Dell is very good at this and shouldn't be a problem.

[Helevitia]

Originally posted by The PIT
Don't think you'll notice those problems under normal use. Most reviews I've seen have said the Dell is very good at this and shouldn't be a problem.

It depends on how sensitive you are to this. I am very sensitive to it and it would probably drive me crazy.

My co-workers think I hallucinate all the time at work because I am constantly fixing their refresh rates. They never see that their screen is at 60Hz all the time! I can't help them out on a problem if the screen is flickering. I'll end up tossing the monitor over the cube wall.

[spadnos]

Originally posted by skinrock
What "respects" would these be? I'm just curious because I think LCDs are a lot sharper and better looking than CRTs. Not to mention how thin they are, useful when you are trying to conserve space.

For one thing, you can use different resolutions without them looking like crap. LCDs look terrible (or fuzzy) when used in non-native resolutions).

The response time of a CRT is way better than an LCD. Makes game playing better.

LCDs are getting better, but the non-native resolution issue probably won't go away.

- Steve

[spadnos]

I guess I should hit "submit" before picking my wife up from work.

[Helevitia]

LMAO!

[skinrock]

LOL. I agree both ways I guess, I think it's more personal taste, obviously. I have a question though, since we are talking about LCDs and resolutions, I have a 15" LCD on my notebook, and it does 1024x768, now with the new Catalyst drivers I was able to obtain, thanks to a couple threads ago, I have the option of 1600x1200, but it makes my working area go off screen, and I have to move the mouse to the edges and scroll it like Red Alert, any reason why? My guess is the obvious, the monitor can't handle it. I just thought it was weird how it does that.