27" @ 2560x1440, or 30" @ 2560x1600 for $300 more

[Anubis]

is the extra 3" and 160px worth $300?

YES YES YES 1000000 times YES

 

[Baasha]

I jumped on the U3011 deal. 25% off with no tax and free shipping was too good to pass up. It should last me the next 4 years I'm hoping.

I just bought the 30" as well! However, I had to pay tax! CA I guess.

 

[nitromullet]

I found this thread via a google search, and decided to bring this back to life because I'm considering the same debate right now. My main contenders include:

Dell U3011 - 2560x1600
Dell U2177 - 2560x1440
NEC PA271W-BK - 2560x1440
NEC LCD3090WQXi (refurb) - 2560x1600

The price spread between the two 30" screens and NEC 27" is ~$100, with the Dell 27" being about $200-300 cheaper.

I can certainly get behind the argument that there is no replacement for displacement. A 2560x1600 screen is bigger than a 2560x1440 screen, period. No argument from me there. My main concern is that by going the bigger screen route does one exchange quality for quantity?

I've been researching this quite a bit lately, and I've seen quite a few pro reviewers actually say they prefer the 27" screens.

Anand from his Apple 27" review:

The problem with the 30 is that it’s just huge. It’s got an awesome resolution but I find that it’s more of a pain while gaming, particularly in first person shooters. I end up sitting too close and the display is almost too big.

Moving to the 27-inch panel I noticed several things. The display is much more compact. It doesn’t feel too small, and it doesn’t feel too big. Dare I say it’s just right. The change in aspect ratio is strange but not a deal breaker. Admittedly I wasn’t doing too much with the extra 140 lines of resolution I had on the 30” display.

The display feels a bit sharper than my old 30.

Brian Klug (in the comments on his U3011 review):

Honestly I'm a bit partial to the U2711 because of it's lower pixel pitch/higher PPI (I'm a fan of insanely high PPI). That can also be a downside if you have a hard time reading text without scaling.

Eric Franklin from cnet's review of the U3011:

The U2711 is still the best overall large-screen monitor, but if 27 inches just isn't enough, the U3011 is a fully capable alternative.

He also subsequently reviewed the NEC PA271W-BK, and indicated it has even better image quality than the U2711, but comes with less features and costs a whole lot more.

I was actually surprised to read this from these reviewers because I personally was of the opinion that 2560x1600 was always better than 2560x1440.

Anyway, I wanted to list the pros/cons of my above options as well. Maybe get some feedback from AT. All of my options have similar input lag numbers which aren't fantastic, but are what one would expect from an IPS screen with an OSD. The HP 30" LP3065 and ZR30w both have less input lag because of the lack of an OSD, but that is another debate entirely.

Dell U3011
Pro:

• Reasonably priced 30"
• Very good color/IQ
• Lots of input options

Con:

• Color/IQ not as good as U2711
• Custom color settings have a known issue that cause the screen to either display incorrect colors or a blank screen after resuming from sleep which has not been fixed (or even acknowledged) by Dell yet. The discussion on this starts on page 61 of this thread. The Dell thread on this issue.

Dell U2711
Pro:

• Reasonably priced 27"
• Very good color/IQ, better than U3011
• Lots of input options

Con:

• Not much cheaper than a U3011 for less real estate
• Less availability than U3011 and PA271W-BK, so not as many deals available, still cheaper though.

NEC PA271W-BK
Pro:

• Excellent Color/IQ
• Includes dual port KVM switch capabilities built in. (PDF) Note: a dual link DVI KVM is generally ~$150.
• Can purchase a fully compatible hardware color calibrator for ~$300
• Longest standard warranty - 4yrs parts/labor inc. back light.

Con:

• 27" screen for the price of a 30"

NEC LCD3090WQXi (refurb)
Pro:

• Very Good Color/IQ
• Decent price for a 30"

Con:

• It's a refurb. Although, customers seem to be happy them.
• No refunds from NEC (only replacement)
• Short warranty (1 yr).

Wow... Ok, this post turned out to be pretty long. I think the 27" vs 30" debate is going to be ongoing for a bit though as more manufacturers come out with 2560x1440 displays, so I think it's worth further discussion.

 

[thilanliyan]

well, hopefully it can hold up for a few months until the gtx570 comes out.
don't feel like dropping $500 on a video card.

GTX570 is already out. Or you mean GTX590? And you may not want to, but unless you intend to downscale everything to a lower res to play, you're going to HAVE to drop more money on a video card. 2560x1600 is not a mid-range resolution...gotta pay to play as they say. Mid-range cards are going to struggle with that res.

 

[nitromullet]

GTX570 is already out. Or you mean GTX590? And you may not want to, but unless you intend to downscale everything to a lower res to play, you're going to HAVE to drop more money on a video card. 2560x1600 is not a mid-range resolution...gotta pay to play as they say. Mid-range cards are going to struggle with that res.

I bumped an old thread, look at the date on his post.

 

[dawza]

What is your anticipated primary usage? For work/productivity, 1600 vertical pixels trump 1440 regardless of AG issues, IMO. I wrote my thesis in front of four S-IPS panels, one a 2650x1600, and according to some reports, I should be half-blind and still recovering from the terrible IQ due to the AG coating. Instead, I was able to split my 2560x1600 screen into two, three, or even four quadrants and not feel cramped, thanks to a guaranteed 800 pixel vertical resolution even with a 2x2 window arrangement. Another consideration (for productivity) is that with 1600 vertical, finding matching 1600x1200 20" S-IPS panels is easy and cheap, should you wish to expand without spending another $1K. I suppose one could argue that 1440x900 monitors are available to pair with 2560x1440, but TN + 900 pixels worth of horizontal real-estate in portrait...no thanks.

For gaming, I can't really offer much, having no experience with a 27" panel. But a 30" is ridiculously immersive compared to a 24".

 

[Concillian]

I think the 27 vs. 30 thing is very much personal preference. I prefer the smaller pixel pitch and have no issues with 16:9 when the screens are that large.

1600x900 -- 16:9 = OUCH
1920x1080 -- 16:9 = borderline acceptable
2560x1440 -- 16:9 = no problem

We have people with all kinds of screens at work, and for web browsing and general use I'd prefer a 27" if I could get one. 30" is too large to be very close to you, but works if you have it back a bit. At that point there really isn't so much of a difference between 27 and 30 anyway. There is such a thing as too large.

I've been looking at moving my home setup to one big screen instead of my current 2x17" displays (when I bought them, 30" displays were not prevalent at all,) and 27" 2560x1440 is what I will go to once I scrounge up $1200 (900ish for monitor and another $300ish for video card upgrade).

 

[thilanliyan]

I bumped an old thread, look at the date on his post.

Ah I see. My fault.

 

[n7]

It's ultimately up to you, but text is already small enough on the 30" that i have to increase it for comfortable reading.
Unless you've got fantastic eyesight, you'll be increasing it even more for the 27".

I have to vote for 2560x1600...not a fan of 16:9 at all.

 

[nitromullet]

Yeah, this really has become sort of a tough decision. I don't really have a problem with 16:9 with the sides being 1440, but the 1920x1080 screens are a bit too short nowadays IMO. I remember when I bought the 2005FPW I'm using for now I went from a 1600x1200 CRT to the 1680x1050 LCD, and the big debate at the time was 4:3 vs 16:10. Not to mention that you had to modify most games' config files just get 16:10 to work.

Anyway, right now I'm sort of leaning towards waiting for a coupon/sale directly from Dell on the U3011. I know they have a terrific 30 day return policy, so if I didn't like it for any reason that would take it back. Plus, it gives me more time to mull this over.

I posted the same question on HardOCP as well, and a few people mentioned waiting for the new Samsung SA850 to arrive before making a decision.

FWIW, I did check out an Apple 27" screen today at BB, and I don't think I'd have any issues with the pixel pitch. It's also pretty big, but it's definitely not 30" big. It would be a pleasant bump in resolution up from the 1920x1200 I'm used to, but wouldn't really be a massive jump in size.

 

[Grooveriding]

It's true that the 27" has a crisper image due to the smaller pixels. I still feel 30" is the way to go.

It's the only upgrade for your computer that is the end of the line so to speak. I like that thing alone about having a 30" monitor Newer models of 30" come out, but in general you're not seeing too much PQ difference from one model to another, unless you are forking out the $5000+ for the professional NEC and Eizo models.

 

[videoclone]

i got myself two 30" dells sitting on my desk and i still increase the DPI to 125% as its hard to read text if i dont.. works great if i got the 27" dell it would of been a downgrade in size from my 28" Viewsonic so wasnt going to get that

 

[Dadofamunky]

I would not buy a 27" anything if for a mere $300 more I could have the real deal sitting on my desk.

I actually prefer the smaller form factor because I cannot stand craning my neck up to see something near the top of the screen.

That being said, the link that was provided upthread - those are some stonking great deals!

Just as a general observation, having a TN panel at my other crib and two TN panels at work - my 24" Dell beats them all like a red-headed step child in sheer working quality. Reading text on this rather old 2407WFP is a dream compared to the cheap panels at work or the $230 LG panel I bought for my new rig. At some point, maybe towards the end of the year, I might bite the bullet and go for that Dell 27". 30" is too large for me, ergonomically speaking.

That Samsung looks like an interesting possibility too. Dell even has an IPS panel Dell UltraSharp U2211H 21.5" which I might swap in for the LG fairly soon...

Viewsonic has an interesting sub-$300 IPS panel as well.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16824116421

I'm REALLY happy to see reasonable IPS panels starting to come into the market, sold by the same companies pushing those crap TN panels...

 

[nitromullet]

I wouldn't suggest going from a 2407WFP to 1920x1080 screen. I tried that two years ago, and I really missed those extra 120px at the top. I don't see the jump from 30" to 27" as being as cramped though simply because 1440px vertical space is still a lot.

It's true that the 27" has a crisper image due to the smaller pixels. I still feel 30" is the way to go.

It's the only upgrade for your computer that is the end of the line so to speak. I like that thing alone about having a 30" monitor Newer models of 30" come out, but in general you're not seeing too much PQ difference from one model to another, unless you are forking out the $5000+ for the professional NEC and Eizo models.

I think you're right about the 30" screens. The main improvement it seems with the Dell U3011 are the sRGB and aRGB emulation modes over the 3008WFP. However, this is sort of what caused me to necro this thread in the first place because it seems like the 27" inch screens, while a little smaller, offer a better picture than comparable 30" screens.

If all things were equal it would be a no brainer between 30" vs 27", but that's the problem - all things do not appear to be quite equal. I'm wondering if anyone with experience with say both the U2711 and U3011 can chime in on that.

...btw, two of the screens I mentioned are high end NEC displays. One is their newest 27" and the other is a refurb of their current, but soon to be replaced, high end 30".

 

[wantedSpidy]

I'm in the same boat, although I'm thinking about going from U3011 to U2711.

My reasons,
1) I need the 2560px more than the 1600 vertical px
2) I'm planning to move from my desktop to a laptop, and I think the 160x2560 fewer pixels will be kinder to my weaker graphic card

The 30" is BIG, but trust me you will get used to it. And once you do, you're doomed

 

[Lee Saxon]

Even 30" 2560 is too small I'm going freaking blind trying to read my screen even at the 150% zoom mode. I think 27" 2560 would actually make your eyes burst into flames.

I'd pay so much money for 27" 1920x1200...

 

[wantedSpidy]

I'd pay so much money for 27" 1920x1200...

Well, those do exist

 

[endlessmike133]

Why would you buy an 1000$ + monitor for gaming when you have a card that wouldn't even be close to giving good performance at it's native res?

christ..

 

[Rubycon]

Everyone's eyes are different. For me the higher the res the better! I wish they had 2560x1600 17" laptop displays! I love 1920x1200 on a 15.4" display, for example. 22" at 1920x1080 is about my limit for pixel size. It just gets too coarse above that.

I usually sit about one meter from a 30" screen at 2560x1600 using small fonts.

Yeah I'm nearsighted.

 

[nitromullet]

Everyone's eyes are different. For me the higher the res the better! I wish they had 2560x1600 17" laptop displays! I love 1920x1200 on a 15.4" display, for example. 22" at 1920x1080 is about my limit for pixel size. It just gets too coarse above that.

I usually sit about one meter from a 30" screen at 2560x1600 using small fonts.

Yeah I'm nearsighted.

I'm still sort of adjusting to this. I decided to go with a 27" 2560x1440 screen, and it is very nice looking and most certainly a significant size upgrade over my previous 24" 1920x1200 screen. The pixel pitch is small though, and mucking with DPI and web page zooming is annoying. I'm at the point where I think I'm just going to run 100% and just get used to it.