Dell U2711 worth it for gaming?

[BHetrick]

Any of you guys have any experience with this Dell?

Right now I'm using 3 Acer GD235's, but I want a larger screen; 27".

So I've narrowed it down to
- Hanns G HZ281HPB ~$300
- Dell U2711 ~$1000

Yeah, there's a big price difference. But the cost isn't an issue. What I'm thinking is resolution at 27" The Hanns is 1920 x 1200 and the Dell is 2560 x 1440.

The main purpose is gaming. The higher res seems like a no brainer for graphics, but then I wonder about the effects of higher res with menus and huds.

And are the pixels going to really be that noticeable on a 27" 1920 panel? Enough to justify the massive price difference.


Moved from PC Gaming

Anandtech PC Gaming Moderator
KeithTalent

 

[Malak]

Well 2 things:

1. The higher res isn't gonna really help with gaming.
2. If cost isn't an issue, why not get a much bigger panel? For $1k you could easily get 40". Makes the res actually worth it.

I wish cost wasn't an issue for me

 

[ctark]

I use to have the same line of thinking as Malak, but I have since changed my tune. I had 3 40 inch tv's in Eyefinity, and I also just used a single 40 inch. I love my 30 inch screen MUCH better. The extra resolution is nice, 40 just isnt the right size. I think the sweet spot is 33-35 inches, with a large resolution, but they dont make them in that range. I just purchased a Dell u3011 and couldnt be happier. I also bought a Apple Cinema 27 inch display and its absolutely beautiful. You might want to take a look at it and compare it to the u2711.

Oh to answer your question, it does great with gaming.

 

[BHetrick]

Being for pc gaming, I'm going to be right in front of the monitor. So I don't want to go too large. Plus the few 30+" monitors I looked at had really high lag.

When it comes to gaming, I like the "eye candy". All high settings. So I'm assuming that the high res will give me nice clean graphics. Where as only having 1920 x 1200 on a 27" that's right in front of me, the pixels may be noticeable.

That's what I'm thinking/wondering. But I don't know if I'm worrying about something I won't notice or not. If I'm not going to see a difference, in game, then there's no need for spending the extra cash.

**edit**
I did look at the Apple 27", but it appeared to have more lag than the 2711.

 

[ctark]

The U3011 is suppose to have high lag, but it doesn't. Most people look at the number and say "oh thats gonna have high lag". But a lot of them today you dont even notice it. I see 0 ghosting on my u3011.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Well 2 things:

1. The higher res isn't gonna really help with gaming.
2. If cost isn't an issue, why not get a much bigger panel? For $1k you could easily get 40". Makes the res actually worth it.

I wish cost wasn't an issue for me

Have you even played with a higher resolution? I have and I completely disagree, I went from a 20" 1680x1050 screen to the Dell U2711 and the increase in screen size and resolution has me noticing things I didn't before. In FPS games I'll notice targets off in the bush that would otherwise be much harder to notice on my old monitor, the resolution and clarity really did help me with long distances target acquisition.

But I could see how some people wouldn't benefit from such things when considering how oblivious most people seem to be about subtle details (a major reason why gaming sound has taken a dump over the years, its amazing to me how widely accepted onboard sound is as anything more than passable)

The only thing that I warn against is that 2560x1440 required a lot of GPU horsepower to get the kind of frame rates I desire (a single GTX470 at stock wasn't cutting it). But if the OP has dual GTX480s then he should be set.

I think the sweet spot is 33-35 inches, with a large resolution, but they dont make them in that range. I just purchased a Dell u3011 and couldnt be happier.

you just contradicted yourself in consecutive sentences, obviously you could be happier if there was a U3311 or U3511, or else the sweet spot is 30 inches and not 33-35.

For instance I love my U2711 and it has more than exceeded my expectations, but I'm not going to say I couldn't be happier. I could. As great a picture as it is, it could be better, but that likely wouldn't exist without expensive RGB LED or OLED. Also I would love to have 120Hz, but that would rule out everything but Display Port 1.2 connections due to bandwidth limitations.

 

[skace]

Ugh, 2560x1440... is that 16:9? I've got a Dell 3007FPW, the original model with the best display they ever used. It runs at 2560x1600 and the resolution is a dream. However, I cannot stress this enough, 2560 resolutions are a double edged sword. You pay a lot for the monitor and then you have to pay a lot to keep your PC up to spec so you can actually play games at that res.

I certainly do believe the resolution is worth it, however I try not to run things lower than 1920x1200 when I have to step it down. If I have to go lower, I'll play in Window Mode.

I don't know how good the U2711 is, there used to be good websites to compare ghosting on all the various monitors, not sure if any of them still exist but I would assume so.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Yes, 2560x1440 is 16:9, although I consider it a plus for my purposes, however even for those who swear by 16:10, 2560x1440 is still going to be the 2nd highest resolution readily available on the market.

some of the "worst" reviews I've found of the U2711 still ended up awarding it with gold awards and what not, which convinced me to buy and I was not disappointed.

Another advantage/disadvantage to the U2711 (or Apple 27") is that its 2560x1440 @ 27" which means relatively tiny pixel pitches, smaller than just about any other desktop monitor (keep in mind that there are actually 27" monitors @ 1920x1080). This is an advantage for games as it reduces need for anti aliasing but it will make reading fine texts more difficult.

 

[Aikouka]

I have two of the older 2709, which has some annoying problems... like the monitor randomly losing its signal or the stands not being good and causing the monitors to lean. While the former probably isn't an issue since I hope Dell would have corrected it, but the stand problem could still exist. Note that while both of my monitors will randomly drop their picture, only one has the bad stand problem (which when reading up on it, Dell won't fix it... wonderful $800 quality control there ).

 

[JAG87]

Yes, 2560x1440 is 16:9, although I consider it a plus for my purposes, however even for those who swear by 16:10, 2560x1440 is still going to be the 2nd highest resolution readily available on the market.

some of the "worst" reviews I've found of the U2711 still ended up awarding it with gold awards and what not, which convinced me to buy and I was not disappointed.

Another advantage/disadvantage to the U2711 (or Apple 27") is that its 2560x1440 @ 27" which means relatively tiny pixel pitches, smaller than just about any other desktop monitor (keep in mind that there are actually 27" monitors @ 1920x1080). This is an advantage for games as it reduces need for anti aliasing but it will make reading fine texts more difficult.

What he says.

I have one, and I would buy it again.

 

[ctark]

Have you even played with a higher resolution? I have and I completely disagree, I went from a 20" 1680x1050 screen to the Dell U2711 and the increase in screen size and resolution has me noticing things I didn't before. In FPS games I'll notice targets off in the bush that would otherwise be much harder to notice on my old monitor, the resolution and clarity really did help me with long distances target acquisition.

But I could see how some people wouldn't benefit from such things when considering how oblivious most people seem to be about subtle details (a major reason why gaming sound has taken a dump over the years, its amazing to me how widely accepted onboard sound is as anything more than passable)

The only thing that I warn against is that 2560x1440 required a lot of GPU horsepower to get the kind of frame rates I desire (a single GTX470 at stock wasn't cutting it). But if the OP has dual GTX480s then he should be set.



you just contradicted yourself in consecutive sentences, obviously you could be happier if there was a U3311 or U3511, or else the sweet spot is 30 inches and not 33-35.

For instance I love my U2711 and it has more than exceeded my expectations, but I'm not going to say I couldn't be happier. I could. As great a picture as it is, it could be better, but that likely wouldn't exist without expensive RGB LED or OLED. Also I would love to have 120Hz, but that would rule out everything but Display Port 1.2 connections due to bandwidth limitations.

Maybe you should spend time at a philosophy and logic forum.

 

[BHetrick]

Well guys, I appreciate the input.

It seems like I am going to go the Dell route instead of the tn panel. Now to decide if I should bite the bullet and go with the 3011 (1600) instead of the 2711 (1440). I said price wasn't an issue, but $400 for 3", ehh.....

Like I mentioned, this is simply for gaming.

 

[mfenn]

Well guys, I appreciate the input.

It seems like I am going to go the Dell route instead of the tn panel. Now to decide if I should bite the bullet and go with the 3011 (1600) instead of the 2711 (1440). I said price wasn't an issue, but $400 for 3", ehh.....

Like I mentioned, this is simply for gaming.

Well, remember that area increases with the square of the diagonal, so 3" is still significant.

 

[Highmodulus]

Based on Mfenn's recommendation I picked up a U2410- set it up yesterday. No issues gaming with it- played TF2 without seeing any lag for me.

 

[BHetrick]

I decided to go with the u3011. Ended up getting it for $1350 with shipping. But they gave me an estimated delivery of NOV. 29TH. What's up with that. I'm hoping that's just worse case scenario as they did say it was in stock.

Being antsy, I also went and ordered the Hanns G 28" HZ281 panel. I'll either return it or sell it. It arrived Friday and man is it huge. It's 1920x1200 and 27.5" viewable.

Now I can see where you 1200 loyalist are coming from. Having the extra pixels is nice. Here's it next to one of my Acer GD235's.

For a 28" sub $300 monitor, it's nice. Now to see how it stacks up to the 30" Dell when it arrives.