Dell UltraSharp 27" or 30" LCD?

[gsulliva]

I'm looking for a new monitor for a computer I'm building. Think I've narrowed it to three monitors. They will not be used for gaming, mosting photography and streaming video.

The three are:

Dell 3007WFPHC 30"Ultrasharp (approx $900)
Dell 3008WFP 30"Ultrasharp (approx $1150)
Dell 2709W 27" Ultrasharp (Approx $600)

Price is not a major point but don't want to waste money either. One thing I like about the 3008WFP and the 2709W is they have HDMI, they are also have Image Contrast Ratio: 3000:1 vs 1000:1 on the older 30". Is that really benifical these days? Does it help future proof the monitor?

Also the 30" monitor are both 2560 x 1600 , while the 27" is 1920 x 1200 resolution.

How about overall picture quality.

Thanks in advance

 

[mozartrules]

I would go for the 27", the extra work involved in running 2560x1600 is going to limit your options.

 

[TemjinGold]

If price is not a major issue and you aren't gaming, I would go with the 3008 as that will give you more screen real estate to work with and the HDMI would help in future proofing.

 

[tdoran1]

There could be a "refresh" within the next month or two, for the Delll UltraSharp 2709W, as there some indications there will be a Dell UltraSharp 2710W real soon.

However other "details" are not to be found at this time.


Tim

 

[uclaLabrat]

I vote for the 30", 3007 if you game, as I think the 3007 doesn't suffer as much input lag as the 3008.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: TemjinGold
If price is not a major issue and you aren't gaming, I would go with the 3008 as that will give you more screen real estate to work with and the HDMI would help in future proofing.

Unless of course everyone moves to Displayport. I am not a supporter nor detractor of Displayport and it has it's pros and cons. It'll have a tough battle against HDMI though.

 

[mmnno]

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: TemjinGold
If price is not a major issue and you aren't gaming, I would go with the 3008 as that will give you more screen real estate to work with and the HDMI would help in future proofing.

Unless of course everyone moves to Displayport. I am not a supporter nor detractor of Displayport and it has it's pros and cons. It'll have a tough battle against HDMI though.

The 3008 has Displayport too.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: mmnno

Originally posted by: akugami

Originally posted by: TemjinGold
If price is not a major issue and you aren't gaming, I would go with the 3008 as that will give you more screen real estate to work with and the HDMI would help in future proofing.

Unless of course everyone moves to Displayport. I am not a supporter nor detractor of Displayport and it has it's pros and cons. It'll have a tough battle against HDMI though.

The 3008 has Displayport too.

Didn't realize that. Then again, I have no intention of getting a 30" monitor. Though the argument still stands. If we're talking consumer electronics, HDMI is definitely a must but considering how many computer related companies are on board with Displayport, getting a monitor solely for HDMI suport vs a similar monitor without doesn't seem like it should be a major deciding factor. Having it is better than not having it but I would list it far down the line of deciding factors.

For me, 24" is a really nice size. I might, though doubtful, move up to 27" but I think when we're getting above 26" or 27" it's getting a tad unwieldy for general usage in a desktop environment. You either have it further back and lose any size advantage or you have it so close that you swing your head back and forth to vie the whole monitor which can be irritating.

 

[dflynchimp]

I think some of you guys are missing the OP's needs

Originally posted by: gsulliva
They will not be used for gaming, mosting photography and streaming video.

If he's doing video/multimedia, he doesn't necessarily need an overpowered graphics system to do it. Any midrange ATI or Nvidia card would do his work just fine. So the real question is price and image quality.

If price is no object I'd put in a vote for the 3008, but shaving off $250 by dropping to a 3007 is pretty cool too. As for image quality both 30" monitors are pretty top notch (I've been review lurking for ages, despite not being able to afford 30")

 

[x3sphere]

There is not much point in getting the 27" ... it is still 1920x1200, so you are not getting more desktop real estate compared to a 24". It'll actually look worse close up because of the higher dot pixel pitch. I've never seen the 2709W, but the 3007WFP HC looks incredible. I own one. Also they can be had for $800 refurbished from the Dell Outlet. You still get a three year warranty on the refurbs so there's really not much reason to buy new. Plus, Dell has a zero dead pixel policy.

 

[dflynchimp]

actually no. desktop real estate is only referring to real world size, not number of pixels, so 27" IS getting mroe desktop real estate. However it doesn't gain any pixel count, and because the pixels are comparatively larger you will notice their presence more. 30" 2560X1600 on the other hand has a smaller pixel pitch than 1920 24" screens so you're getting better real estate PLUS overall pixel density.

 

[dflynchimp]

Urge my last post was double posted, so this is an edit (if the mods don't delete it) to the second post.

With a 2560X1600 screen some people complain about smaller text being harder to read, but of course with today's convenient technology you can always scale them up, negating that aspect of 30" displays, leaving only the good stuff.

As long as he has the budget and isn't worried about frame rates in games, he should totally go for the 30" screen. Which model is up to him.

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: dflynchimp
Urge my last post was double posted, so this is an edit (if the mods don't delete it) to the second post.

With a 2560X1600 screen some people complain about smaller text being harder to read, but of course with today's convenient technology you can always scale them up, negating that aspect of 30" displays, leaving only the good stuff.

As long as he has the budget and isn't worried about frame rates in games, he should totally go for the 30" screen. Which model is up to him.

there is no reliable method to scale up because most existing windows apps don't scale up well. in future it will be better, but not anytime near

it boils down to whether OP can read small text on 30" in the long run
27" - easy to read everyday
30" - super sharp text and images

 

[lopri]

It's really a comparison between apples and oranges. They serve different purposes. I can understand the second-thoughts of potential buyers, though.

To make your life more difficult, I can kindly offer another choice on the list. -> 32" 1080p LCD TV. They're down to $500 (for 60Hz) ~$900 (for 120Hz). So we now have;

1. 27" LCD monitor (1920x1200)
2. 30" LCD monitor (2560x1600)
3. 32" LCD TV (1920x1080, 60Hz or 120Hz)

Take your pick.

 

[dflynchimp]

Originally posted by: lopri
It's really a comparison between apples and oranges. They serve different purposes. I can understand the second-thoughts of potential buyers, though.

To make your life more difficult, I can kindly offer another choice on the list. -> 32" 1080p LCD TV. They're down to $500 (for 60Hz) ~$900 (for 120Hz). So we now have;

1. 27" LCD monitor (1920x1200)
2. 30" LCD monitor (2560x1600)
3. 32" LCD TV (1920x1080, 60Hz or 120Hz)

Take your pick.

yeah but LCD TV's have alot more noise compared to monitors...

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
there is no reliable method to scale up because most existing windows apps don't scale up well. in future it will be better, but not anytime near

it boils down to whether OP can read small text on 30" in the long run
27" - easy to read everyday
30" - super sharp text and images

That's why I own a 2709W.

Have used it every single day for the last eight months and love it. Text is easy to read in native font and games look awesome on a big screen at 1920x1200. Plus my video card doesn't have to work like it would to push 25x16 on a 30" which is a plus.

 

[gsulliva]

Few more questions. The 3007 I guess doesn't have a scaler chip while the 3008 does. Also the 3008 has a displayPort while the 3007 doesn't.

Are these real reasons to get the 3008 or is it not an issue.

Thanks for all the feed back so far.

 

[MrK6]

The scaler chip is the main reason I didn't get the 3008. I tried one out at a Dell store and the input lag was too much for me. If you're a gamer, the 3007WFP-HC is one of the best 30" monitors out there. It's just as responsive, if not more responsive, as my other monitor with a 5ms TN panel.