22" Acer AL2216WBD vs. Dell 2405fpw

[Elfear]

I know this may sound like a stupid statement, but I've been considering selling my 2405fpw and buying the 22" Acer that seems to be getting such good reviews. Before anyone tars and feathers me, let me explain my reasoning. Here are the pros as I see it:

2405fpw

Pros- Bigger, higher quality

22" Acer

Pros- Faster response time, puts ~$300 in my pocket for other upgrades

I use my computer mostly for surfing the net and gaming. I never watch movies on it. As I understand it the PVA panels have a slower response time in general than the TN panels (I know the contrast between the two may not be as stark as the advertised 5ms vs. 16ms), which would be nice for gaming. And, while 1920x1200 is nice, it requires that I have the most up-to-date graphics cards in order to run at that res with eye-candy. 1680x1050 is still a decently high res that can be powered by something less than the best.

Hopefully someone can chime in here who has had experience with both panels.

 

[crydee]

If you don't mind a no frills, good quality monitor the Acer will work fine. The pixels are a bit bigger in 1680x1050 then say the Dell 2007FPW which is a plus. The stand doesn't offer as much as the Dells do either though. IMO get the acer for the extra 300$.

 

[pkme2]

I agree on getting the 22" too.
I just got a 22" Viewsonic and my original choice was the 2405 or 2407.
The difference in prices made the choice easier. Money saved was used to upgrade CPU, and buy other necessary incidentals. Not too difficult in making those choices when Viewsonic cost $299.

 

[jiffylube1024]

I have the 22" acer. One of my good buddies has the 2405fpw.

If you can stand a drop in resolution, then by all means get the acer. It's still an excellent screen for gaming and isn't that much of a size drop. But it's still noticeable, and monitors are one of those things where you get used to a particular size.

Everytime I see his screen I think "that's a nice monitor" (though when I upgraded from a 19" to the 22", his screen stopped looking so gigantic to me ).


1680X1050 is still a nice res for gaming, and with Crossfire you can easily crank up the AA to get an even clearer picture.

For the money, it's one of the best deals out there (the Acer). I don't regret getting mine. And it is like half the money of the 24"...

 

[acegazda]

Here's a comparison of the ghosting between the dell 2007fpw and the acer 22". In my mind it is clear that the dell's S-IPS panel helps it a lot in real life ghosting, and the acer, despite it's low advertised response, sufferes from ghosting. I would get the $350 dell 2007fpw and get a kick @$$ vid card.

 

[brianmanahan]

I always thought that 20" Wides are too small -- they're shorter than a 19" 4:3 LCD. And I notice no ghosting whatever at full refresh on the Acer. This monitor + X1900XT = awesome.

I too was thinking 24" but 2" less for 50% of the price was too hard to pass up.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
I have the 22" acer. One of my good buddies has the 2405fpw.

If you can stand a drop in resolution, then by all means get the acer. It's still an excellent screen for gaming and isn't that much of a size drop. But it's still noticeable, and monitors are one of those things where you get used to a particular size.

Everytime I see his screen I think "that's a nice monitor" (though when I upgraded from a 19" to the 22", his screen stopped looking so gigantic to me ).


1680X1050 is still a nice res for gaming, and with Crossfire you can easily crank up the AA to get an even clearer picture.

For the money, it's one of the best deals out there (the Acer). I don't regret getting mine. And it is like half the money of the 24"...

Have you been able to compare your Acer with your buddy's Dell in terms of ghosting or input lag? I'm not talking anything really scientific, just the impression you've got when gaming on the two.

Originally posted by: acegazda
Here's a comparison of the ghosting between the dell 2007fpw and the acer 22". In my mind it is clear that the dell's S-IPS panel helps it a lot in real life ghosting, and the acer, despite it's low advertised response, sufferes from ghosting. I would get the $350 dell 2007fpw and get a kick @$$ vid card.

I realize a S-IPS panel would probably exhibit less ghosting than a TN but I imagine my PVA panel would be worse than a TN panel. If it's not that big of a difference than I'll probably keep my 2405fpw but otherwise the Acer is a serious temptation.

 

[nanaki333]

i have a 24" acer and my roomate has one of them 24" dell monitors. i like mine better overall. his base makes it sit higher, which is the only thing i like better than my acer. i spent a lot less for mine than he did his too.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: nanaki333
i have a 24" acer and my roomate has one of them 24" dell monitors. i like mine better overall. his base makes it sit higher, which is the only thing i like better than my acer. i spent a lot less for mine than he did his too.

Is the 24" Acer screen a 5ms TN panel too? If so, do you notice any difference in ghosting or input lag between the two monitors?

 

[bjc112]

GO 24" strictly for 1920x1200

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: bjc112
GO 24" strictly for 1920x1200

Ya that's one of things holding me back right now. I don't know if I'd miss the extra resolution or not. Trying to keep the rest of my system up to snuff to deal with 1920x1200 is getting a little old though.

 

[diabx0r]

I have had experience with a 22 and I believe 24" Acer.

I currently run the 24" Dell you're speaking of.

The Dell, IMO, spanks the Acer. Less ghosting and just an overall clearer picture.

It's a bit more pricey, but trust me, in the long run it'll be worth it... hell, even in the short run it'll be worth it.

 

[StinkyMojo]

I have the 22" acer and I love it.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Elfear

Have you been able to compare your Acer with your buddy's Dell in terms of ghosting or input lag? I'm not talking anything really scientific, just the impression you've got when gaming on the two.

Ghosting wise and input lag wise, the Acer is perfect. It's a 5ms screen with a new panel!

On my buddy's Dell, I only played Warcraft 3 which was fine (even with an old-ass cordless mouse). Supposedly the 2405 have some input lag, but I didn't notice it.

I will agree that if you're used to 1920X1200 resolution, taking a step down will be hard. Even using a 24" screen for a day makes anything smaller feel cramped.
---------


Re: Dell 2405 having a clearer picture and less ghosting: no way in my experience!

If you adjust the brightness/contrast settings on the Acer away from the washed-out factory defaults, you will see that it has excellent PQ. The Dell 2405, further, doesn't display quite as white whites as the Acer or the 2407 IMO. Colour accuracy is definitely better on the Dell. I like the adjustable height, nice stand, etc on the Dells, too.

Acer is what it is: a good quality TN screen on a small, crappy not very adjustable stand for cheap. Great PQ by DVI but definitely no frills.

 

[Arkitech]

Anyone know if its possible to connect gaming consoles to the monitor? I would like to use mine as a portable option for playing PS2 or Gamecube games anywhere in the house.

 

[Elfear]

Thanks for the responses guys. Sorry for the belated thank you. I've been too busy to check back on this thread.

 

[hans007]

i personally would not get a 24". i think its jus too big to sit in front of.

but that said , i'd say get a 21" or 20" 8-bit panel. the 6bit always looks kinda washed out. thought the acer is probably one of the better TN ones i've seen (friend has it)