Originally posted by: L00PY
Below is a quick comparison to back up my comment about the 2001FP being a better monitor on paper. It is mostly based on aspect ratios. The 2001FP has more pixels / screen real estate -- so given the native resolutions, the 2001FP will do a boxed standard 16:10 AR better than the 2005FPW do a boxed standard 4:3.
2001FP:
Dimensions (HxWxD): 18" x 17.6" x 9.67"
Native Resolution: 1600x1200 @ 60 Hz (1,920,000 pixels)
Contrast ratio 400:1
Luminance output 250 cd/m ²(typ)
Response Time 16ms typical
Viewing angle +/- 88° (vertical) typ, +/- 88° (horizontal) typ
2005FPW:
Dimensions (HxWxD): 15.3" x 18.6" x 9"
Native Resolution: 1680 x 1050 @ 60Hz (1,764,000 pixels)
Contrast Ratio: 600:1
Brightness (typical): 300cd/m2
Response Time (typical): 12ms grey-to-grey, 16ms black-to-white
Horizontal/Vertical Viewing Angle (typical): +/-90°
Wide Screen LCD would be sweet.
If it comes out after I receive mine and is within return period, i'll try and have them swap.
