Dell 22'' E228WFP

[InFeXiOn]

Well, the common complaints arise because it's a TN panel, but before making my mere $325 purchase on this 22'' behemoth I knew that, and could care less. I have a 32'' LCD TV for media/movie playback, so the backlight bleeding is fine. As for colours, brightness, contrast, everything looks bang on for my eyes. Of course, this is my first LCD monitor (minus the LCD TV I have) so I have nothing to compare against, but this completely satisfies the uses I have. I wasn't willing to play the lottery with the 20'' from Dell, and for the extra 2 inches and a lower grade panel for less money, I was all game.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

I just bought one of these after reading MANY reviews.

I am a pretty picky gamer, I play with 100hz in most of my games. I don't have the nicest setup but it's decent. The magnets in my viewsonic 19" CRT are jacked up, I'm losing around 2 inches of total real estate on it so it sucks 🙁

This will be my first LCD (for my home, I have dual 19's at work) so I'm a little skeptical.

The only thing I'm worried about is the blacklight bleeding and any ghosting that may occur during gaming. I am just used to 100hz gaming on a CRT so I think my eyes/brain have a high standard, lol.

My monitor will be here on wednesday. I'll be sure to post my thoughts about it (coming from a very picky gamer).

 

[Thor86]

As far as I know, anything over 19inch LCD sizes only support 60mhz max vertical refresh rates.

I've seen demos of 70+ LCD screen at 120mhz rates, but that is still a ways off before arriving to consumer levels.

Originally posted by: pyr0x
I just bought one of these after reading MANY reviews.

I am a pretty picky gamer, I play with 100hz in most of my games. I don't have the nicest setup but it's decent. The magnets in my viewsonic 19" CRT are jacked up, I'm losing around 2 inches of total real estate on it so it sucks 🙁

This will be my first LCD (for my home, I have dual 19's at work) so I'm a little skeptical.

The only thing I'm worried about is the blacklight bleeding and any ghosting that may occur during gaming. I am just used to 100hz gaming on a CRT so I think my eyes/brain have a high standard, lol.

My monitor will be here on wednesday. I'll be sure to post my thoughts about it (coming from a very picky gamer).

 

[InFeXiOn]

Yeah, the monitor has a maximum refresh rate of 60hz at it's native resolution of 1680x1050.

So far though I haven't noticed any ghosting what-so-ever.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

Thor86: I do understand that LCD's have lower refresh rate. But since the technology is very different from CRT's refresh rate isn't an important factor when it comes to LCD's (so I have heard).

Thats good to hear infexi0n. I'm just researching and dreaming about my monitor until it comes on wednesday. This is my first computer related upgrade since early 2003 so I'm a little TOO excited 😀

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: pyr0x
Thor86: I do understand that LCD's have lower refresh rate. But since the technology is very different from CRT's refresh rate isn't an important factor when it comes to LCD's (so I have heard).

Thats good to hear infexi0n. I'm just researching and dreaming about my monitor until it comes on wednesday. This is my first computer related upgrade since early 2003 so I'm a little TOO excited 😀

That's not my point though. You still get tearing in fast moving games when not enabling VSync in games. If you enable VSync, you're limiting your FPS to 60, which the biggest gripe I have with LCD's - at least until they come out with something above 100mhz. 🙂

 

[InFeXiOn]

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: pyr0x
Thor86: I do understand that LCD's have lower refresh rate. But since the technology is very different from CRT's refresh rate isn't an important factor when it comes to LCD's (so I have heard).

Thats good to hear infexi0n. I'm just researching and dreaming about my monitor until it comes on wednesday. This is my first computer related upgrade since early 2003 so I'm a little TOO excited 😀

That's not my point though. You still get tearing in fast moving games when not enabling VSync in games. If you enable VSync, you're limiting your FPS to 60, which the biggest gripe I have with LCD's - at least until they come out with something above 100mhz. 🙂

I'm just curious as to why you have a gripe with it being limited to 60 fps? That's all the human eye can see, the point in going above that would be?

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: InFeXiOn

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: pyr0x
Thor86: I do understand that LCD's have lower refresh rate. But since the technology is very different from CRT's refresh rate isn't an important factor when it comes to LCD's (so I have heard).

Thats good to hear infexi0n. I'm just researching and dreaming about my monitor until it comes on wednesday. This is my first computer related upgrade since early 2003 so I'm a little TOO excited 😀

That's not my point though. You still get tearing in fast moving games when not enabling VSync in games. If you enable VSync, you're limiting your FPS to 60, which the biggest gripe I have with LCD's - at least until they come out with something above 100mhz. 🙂

I'm just curious as to why you have a gripe with it being limited to 60 fps? That's all the human eye can see, the point in going above that would be?

Online multiplay. Higher the FPS the better.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

I agree with Thor86. Even though the human eye can only visibly see 60fps, I really can tell a difference between 100 and 60. IE. in CS you shoot your rifle and the crosshair expands then closes back to normal size: the time it takes for the crosshair to close APPEARS to be longer when playing at 60FPS vs 100FPS.

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: InFeXiOn

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: InFeXiOn
Alright, thanks in advance for the settings you're going to post.

Also, if it had a dead pixel why didn't you do an exchange/return with Dell within the 30-day-grace period? I wouldn't keep that if it had one, that's just not cool.

Pay shipping back to Dell? No thanks. I can live with it, as it is near the edge of the screen so I hardly notice it.

Here are some settings from someone with a Spyder2 colour suite calibration unit:

Con: 85
Bri: 60
Red: 91
Gre: 92
Blu: 93

This gave me a color temp of 6472K, with a Dab measurement of 0.00 (perfect).

You would have had to pay shipping to send it back to Dell? As long as it's within the 30 days why didn't you just do an exchange? Tell them that there's a bunch of crap wrong with it and lie, and you'll get yourself a new panel. My experience with Dell has been quite pleasant and their CS doesn't usually care, they'll issue a return under any circumstances and with a small conversation cover the fees.

If I were you I would've kept pushing it to get a new one. Dead pixels suck.

Well, I got a new unit being shipped to me this week as I considered about the 30-day no hassle service with Dell. And they said a way-bill will be shipped with the new unit, so the old one won't cost me anything to ship back to them. Kudos to Dell CSR!

 

[InFeXiOn]

Originally posted by: pyr0x
I agree with Thor86. Even though the human eye can only visibly see 60fps, I really can tell a difference between 100 and 60. IE. in CS you shoot your rifle and the crosshair expands then closes back to normal size: the time it takes for the crosshair to close APPEARS to be longer when playing at 60FPS vs 100FPS.

Maybe that's just what you're telling yourself, so you think you're seeing it. That would be about latency, unless you have special eyes?

 

[Sniper82]

so Dell offers a 1 dead pixel return policy and pays for shipping to them? If so when I get a 22" it will be a dell. Even though I prefer Viewsonic.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

True True...I've been playing CS since 1999 so I'm quite experienced with it. Maybe it's some stupid mental thing I've trained my brain to think 🙂

1......more.........day......!!!!

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: InFeXiOn

Originally posted by: pyr0x
I agree with Thor86. Even though the human eye can only visibly see 60fps, I really can tell a difference between 100 and 60. IE. in CS you shoot your rifle and the crosshair expands then closes back to normal size: the time it takes for the crosshair to close APPEARS to be longer when playing at 60FPS vs 100FPS.

Maybe that's just what you're telling yourself, so you think you're seeing it. That would be about latency, unless you have special eyes?

It's not about vision, it's all about frame-rates.

 

[chizow]

Posted my impression of this monitor in a different thread, but I'll link here since this thread seems to be the most active.

E228wfp impressions

Again, the monitor I received may very well be defective or it could've been a problem with the 8800GTS, so it had to go back. I just received my 2407wfp so I'll update with comparisons. Still, I think this monitor is an incredible bargain @$330 shipped (10% coupon floating around, I used it for my 24"). Those of you looking for your first LCD or looking to replace an older/smaller 4:3 LCD will be amazed at the size and brightness of a 22" wide aspect LCD.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

Damn DHL. Got delayed for an extra day...it wont be here until tomorrow 🙁

 

[LouPoir]

My review -

Pro's

Great value - This is a huge LCD - upgrade from a 2005WFP - 20" Dell Ultrasharp WS
No dead pixels - Dell name - no quibble returns due to dead pixels/quality

Cons
Some light bleeding - top and bottom - I can live with it
This is a value LCD - no height adjust or usb ports
Requires a lot af adjustments to get it to look good
For sure, this is not an ultrasharp panel

 

[ebeattie]

Chizow, how do you like your 2407WFP? In your opinion, was it worth the extra $350 versus the 22"?

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: ebeattie
Chizow, how do you like your 2407WFP? In your opinion, was it worth the extra $350 versus the 22"?

I received it yesterday and have been enjoying it ever since. 🙂 I think my first impressions would've been more profound if I had gotten this before the 22", but its still a very significant improvement over the 22". Is it worth it....for most people, probably not. The brightness, response time in gaming, sharpness and size are all there with the 22". The polished feel, color reproduction, panel uniformity, contrast/blacks and viewing angles are not though. The 24" also has the USB ports and vga/dvi/composite inputs, although I probably won't ever use the composite inputs.

The difference in price ended up being @$300, originally I paid 296+36 or so tax, on the 24" I paid 676 and applied a 10% coupon I got in the mail the day after I bought the 22" and the total with tax came out to $636 or so. If money isn't so much an issue and you want size and quality that will last you for some time, then the $300 is certainly worth it. If you were looking to get a budget panel or something to hold you over til you can afford better, then the 22" is an incredible value.

The first thing I noticed was no backlight bleeding at all on the 24". It didn't bother me that much on the 22" but its definitely there. The edges of the panel also have a finished/refined look vs. the 22" which just kind of ended (sometimes with mess of backlight bleeding). The next thing I noticed was the color reproduction. Windows desktop colors, especially the blues, looks much better and color uniformity is also much better. The difference in movies is pretty huge, the black bars are much blacker and the movies themselves look much more vibrant, colors more accurate. More of the same with 3D games, however, the 24" seems to lag a bit compared to the 22". Someone in the thread I linked mentioned this and it does seem to hold true. Also, although there isn't really any ghosting, 3D text (names above an avatar) blur and distort when you move or scroll around quickly. Not sure, but I think this is referred to as dithering? I do really like the 1920x1200 resolution on the 24" though, I felt that 16:10 on the 22" was a bit low for a panel that size but the 24" at 19x12 is perfect.

So for me, the extra $300 was worth it. Basically addressed all of my cons on the 22" and added a higher resolution, 2" to my screen size and some USB ports. The only thing that keeps me from being 100% satisfied is knowing there's a revision A04 out that does 1:1 mapping and I got the A03. 🙁 Great panel though, if you can budget another $300 I don't think you'll be disappointed, but if you were looking to spend @$300 total on a panel I think the 22" is more than most would've expected to get at that price point.

 

[ebeattie]

Im more looking at the 2407 to do gaming. Just got my 8800 GTX in and im looking forward to Crysis when it comes out. As far as the lag input during gaming, was it a significant lag minor did it happen all the time?

For 300 bucks, Im looking at the sceptor gaming edition, but Im not sure about getting a TN panel as I havent heard to many good things about it. I figure in the next coupla years LCDs will become faster, with better panels for a cheaper price. But if gaming on the 22 is sub par to the 24 Ultrasharp, Id get the 24 in a heartbeat.

Would you say the 2407 is a better gaming monitor than the 22"?

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: ebeattie
Im more looking at the 2407 to do gaming. Just got my 8800 GTX in and im looking forward to Crysis when it comes out. As far as the lag input during gaming, was it a significant lag minor did it happen all the time?

For 300 bucks, Im looking at the sceptor gaming edition, but Im not sure about getting a TN panel as I havent heard to many good things about it. I figure in the next coupla years LCDs will become faster, with better panels for a cheaper price. But if gaming on the 22 is sub par to the 24 Ultrasharp, Id get the 24 in a heartbeat.

Would you say the 2407 is a better gaming monitor than the 22"?

Depends what kind of game you are planning to play I suppose. If I were still heavily into fast-paced FPS games, the lag on the 2407 might be more of a problem. If you're into MMOs or RTS however, the lag shouldn't bother you much. I believe Crysis is an FPS though, so it might be something you can't stand. The amount of lag seems to vary though. Zebo in the thread I linked posted an article that explained it well. The end result is the game not feeling as if it responded as quickly as it should and 3D models feeling like they're sluggish when moving quickly horizontally or you're rotating your view. I didn't notice it as much in 3DMark05/06 and I currently only run 1 game really (FFXI). I'll try and load up the copy of Dark Messiah that I got with my GTS later today and see if its any better or worse.

Which one is better for gaming, again depends. Games look much, much better on the 24". Higher resolution, more accurate color reproduction, lower dot pitch, better viewing angles, and a bigger screen make games look amazing on the 24". However, response time is probably slightly in the 22" favor and the lag/delay is also lower. Having just bought an 8800GTX, you'll probably want to drive resolutions higher than 16x12 to do the GTX justice. 19x12 is a much better resolution for panels in this size range and the 8800s should be able to run most games within the year at their highest detail levels while maintaining great IQ and frame rate.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

Hey everyone. I got my monitor and so far so good, not any big problems.

I'm having this weird issue, just wondering if anyone had any idea's:

When I leave vsync ON and play games, it looks great, no tearing. BUT the problem is the reaction to my mouse movements are VERY delayed, its quite rediculous. Of course I am getting only 60FPS so I thought it may be that.

I tried disabling vsync and now the mouse reaction time is perfect, normal...how it should be. But there is some bad tearing of course. I even decreased my MAX FPS to 60 to see how that handled. My mouse movements were still being portrayed properly on the LCD.

So....you LCD experts. Any ideas? I'd like to play w/vsync on without it being so delayed.

I researched it some more and it looks like I may be experiencing "Input Lag"

I disabled triple buffering and that has actually helped a quite a bit but the input lag is still very noticable and annoying.

It does this at all resolutions.

And please dont tell me it's my mouse drivers or any crap like that I'm not a moron 🙂

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[chizow]

Try opening up the control panel settings for video and under advanced > troubleshooting, change the level of hardware acceleration from Full to 1 slider less than Full. The Logitech tech I spoke with when I had my MX700 replaced under warranty said this puts mouse cursor hardware acceleration fully on the GPU and not the CPU/Windows. At the very least, any input delays might be sync'd if you enable V-sync. May or may not work but worth a shot.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

hrmm ok. I wish I wasn't at work all day so I could try the suggestions im getting 🙂. I did a ******-ton of research last night on it and couldn't find anything that helped except disabling triple buffering.

I will try your suggestion when I get home.

by the way, I have a Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB and a logitech mx518 mouse. I used to play games competively for money so I have my mouse settings down.

LCD is connected via DVI.

 

[imported_pyr0x]

I tried that chizow, Didn't really notice a difference unfortunately. Thanks though

Any other ideas are greatly appreciated. I am, of course, doing my own research too.

Thanks.