2005 fpw or 2001 fp?

TheBigTea · Jul 31, 2005

Hello all-

Just ordered a 2005FPW from Dell the other day when the coupon deal was ongoing. Package came in just a few days, but I was out of town for a bit. Wife set the monitor up and was telling me how great it was and all the happyness...I thought all was well in the world.

Well I get back home and I see that I am the proud new owner of a Dell 2001FP, not a 2005FPW. I emailed Dell the problem and they set everything up for an exchange etc etc..very good CS over there.

Well now my problem is....I really like the 2001! It was up and going and it is far far better than the Polyview 19" that I had and that is now on the wife's computer. Can anyone offer me advice on which monitor I should keep?

I mainly play World of Warcraft and surf the web and do Photoshopping.

Thanks
Ty

Busithoth · Jul 31, 2005

I'd keep the 2001, which I have. I'm also selling it to a friend to get a 2405, so...

I don't think you'll be unhappy with either, though.
unless you have a thing for widescreen, keep the 2001 (since you've confirmed there's no dead pixels, visual defects, etc.)

it's a really great monitor.

Acanthus · Jul 31, 2005

I prefer the 2005 :thumbsup: but many love the 2001 as well.

Im a widescreen fanboi.

bamacre · Jul 31, 2005

I bought the 2001fp since WS wasn't a biggie for me, and I'm very happy with it.

Schadenfroh · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: bamacre
I bought the 2001fp since WS wasn't a biggie for me, and I'm very happy with it.

Agreed and after seeing BF2's lack of official WS support, i am glad i did so.

bamacre · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: bamacre
I bought the 2001fp since WS wasn't a biggie for me, and I'm very happy with it.

Click to expand...

Agreed and after seeing BF2's lack of official WS support, i am glad i did so.

That's what scared me, lack of support for ws. I know you could probably mess around with this or that, but meh, too much trouble. I'm too lazy for all that crap, just want to double-click and play.

Busithoth · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: bamacre
I bought the 2001fp since WS wasn't a biggie for me, and I'm very happy with it.

Click to expand...

Agreed and after seeing BF2's lack of official WS support, i am glad i did so.

Click to expand...

That's what scared me, lack of support for ws. I know you could probably mess around with this or that, but meh, too much trouble. I'm too lazy for all that crap, just want to double-click and play.

that's where the 2405 triumphs, by non-scaling 4:3 aspect, you lose nothing.
I'd probably have gone for the 2005 had it had the same feature.

bjc112 · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: Acanthus
I prefer the 2005 :thumbsup: but many love the 2001 as well.

Im a widescreen fanboi.

Ronin · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Acanthus
I prefer the 2005 :thumbsup: but many love the 2001 as well.

Im a widescreen fanboi.

Click to expand...

Peter · Jul 31, 2005

The 2005 does do non-scaling mode. You can run 1400x1050 or 1280x1024 modes on it no problem, with a bit of black border left and right.

TheBigTea · Jul 31, 2005

Well the ability of the panel to run BF:2 means little to me. I get motion sickness playing on a 19" CRT, much less a 20" LCD.

The only games I am able to play without feeling ill are slower paced games without a lot of quick jerky movements.

Thanks

Ty

RollWave · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: Busithoth

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: bamacre
I bought the 2001fp since WS wasn't a biggie for me, and I'm very happy with it.

Click to expand...

Agreed and after seeing BF2's lack of official WS support, i am glad i did so.

Click to expand...

That's what scared me, lack of support for ws. I know you could probably mess around with this or that, but meh, too much trouble. I'm too lazy for all that crap, just want to double-click and play.

Click to expand...

that's where the 2405 triumphs, by non-scaling 4:3 aspect, you lose nothing.
I'd probably have gone for the 2005 had it had the same feature.

Can you explain what this means?

kylebisme · Jul 31, 2005

He means that while the display is a 1920x1200, you can run 1600x1200 on it and simply leave the 160 pixels on either side black. Granted, like Peter said, the 2005fpw supports non-scaling modes as well.

Busithoth · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: Peter
The 2005 does do non-scaling mode. You can run 1400x1050 or 1280x1024 modes on it no problem, with a bit of black border left and right.

Wow, I hadn't heard that. When shopping for the 2001FP, all I found were 2005 owners who didn't know about it either, and they weren't happy about it.

it seems like a no-brainer function to include, but then WTF do I know about the manufacturing?

CraigRT · Jul 31, 2005

I'd go with the 2005FPW, but that's just me.. I also prefer the fact that it's 12MS as opposed to 16 on the 2001FP.

Peter · Jul 31, 2005

It's one of the few things that are available in the OSD in DVI mode. You also need to set your graphics card to non-scaling mode, else a prescaled image will be sent out.

imported_Kensai · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: Ronin

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Acanthus
I prefer the 2005 :thumbsup: but many love the 2001 as well.

Im a widescreen fanboi.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I love my 2005FPW's. I may upgrade to 2405s though.

fstime · Jul 31, 2005

2001 is 16ms, yuck. If your coming from a good CRT, you'd probably notice ghosting, cant be sure though.

The 2005 is 12 ms.

If you game, get wide screen.

If you dont game, keep the 2001, it's a bigger screen.

Stangs55 · Jul 31, 2005

widescreen....no competition

ponyo · Jul 31, 2005

I mainly play World of Warcraft and surf the web and do Photoshopping

I would recommend 2005fpw then.

Now I'm used to 2005fpw brightness, I prefer it to 2001fp. It has really grown on me. I still haven't tried widescreen gaming. The only game I play on my wife's 2005fpw is Raiden 2.

Ronin · Jul 31, 2005

Originally posted by: BouZouki
2001 is 16ms, yuck. If your coming from a good CRT, you'd probably notice ghosting, cant be sure though.

The 2005 is 12 ms.

If you game, get wide screen.

If you dont game, keep the 2001, it's a bigger screen.

Actually, it's not.

Screen
Screen Type: LCD
Diagonal Screen Size: 20.1 in
Aspect Ratio: 16:10
Contrast Ratio: 600:1
Image Brightness: 300 cd/m2
Max Horizontal Viewing Angle: 176 Degrees
Max Vertical Viewing Angle: 176 Degrees
Refresh Rate: 60 Hz
Panel Surface: Anti Glare
Vertical Frequency: 75 Hz
Horizontal Frequency: 83 KHz
Response Time: 16 MS

And, 16ms is perfectly acceptable to game with. Anyone saying different is blowing smoke up your @ss.

fstime · Jul 31, 2005

16ms is DECENT, thats it.

Come from a good CRT to a 16 ms LCD and you will notice the difference.

12ms is good.

4-8ms is excellent.

Ronin · Jul 31, 2005

....

From Dell P1130's to the 2005 to the 2405. I'm not talking out my ass. You're a marketing person's wet dream.

fstime · Jul 31, 2005

I was talking about the 2001, NOT THE 2005.

I said coming from a CRT to a 16MS 2001.

Your 2005 is 12ms and newer tech, the 2001 is what, 2 years old?

Ronin · Jul 31, 2005

The 2005 is a 16ms monitor. Please look at the specs and stop spouting misinformation (hell, I even posted them above for you).

2005 fpw or 2001 fp?

Junior Member

Golden Member

Lifer

Lifer

Elite Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Elite Member

Junior Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Lifer

Elite Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member