Thinking about a Dell Ultrasharp 2005FPW? Think again.

[Patrick Wolf]

I decided to compare my 2 year old CRT against a brand new Dell UltraSharp 2005FPW REV 00. These comparisons are mainly to compare the contrast between LCD's and CRT's, basically how good each can reproduce blacks. I also got a replacement monitor, the REV 01, it was identical to the A00.

The Specs
Dell UltraSharp 2005FPW 20.1" (Digital)
NEC Superbright Diamondtron MultiSync 19" FE991SB (2 YEARS OLD)
ASUS GeForce FX 5900 (I also did comparisons with an X800 XT PE, no difference to note)

Test Specs
Dell: 0% brightness, 75 Hz
NEC: SuperBright mode 2 - 71.5%, 85 Hz


VERY IMPORTANT, READ FIRST: This notice mainly applies to those of you who are using a CRT right now. If the "black" on the LCD looks just as dark as on the CRT, turn up your brightness until you see the LCD's "black" turn a lighter shade. I'd recommend 100%. You must do this to accurately view the comparisons.

Reference - This is just to give you an idea of what these two monitors look like. Also shows a difference in contrast.

Reflection - I turned on the camera flash to show the reflective properties of each monitor. The LCD wins here.

Blackout - As you can see from this picture, there is some backlight bleed through in the top corners.

These next two pictures shows you what you see if you look at a dark image on the 2005FPW at an angle. It's almost like a red aurora or something. Pictures are from the Doom 3 demo.
Picture 1
Picture 2

Now it's time for the game comparisons. I've took pictures from the Doom 3 demo and Far Cry demo. The Doom 3 ones are more for contrast comparison, and the Far Cry ones are more for colors, which seem to better on the CRT probably due to the 2005's poor backlighting: making colors look a little dull and "blended" or washed out.

NOTE: The 2005 makes things look stetched out slightly on both demos, this is only because the resolution is not set at 1680x1050. Some games do not support widescreen, but changing the scaling to aspect basically fixes this problem.

Loading Screen - Ok, nobody cares what the loading screen looks like, but I took a picture anyway. Contrast is better on the CRT, meaning the "black" is actually perfect black.

The Scientist - This is the best comparison picture in my opinion. The backlight bleed through is quite noticeable, and again the contrast on the CRT is awesome.

The Metal Box - Again you can notice the backlight bleed through as well as the poor backlighting on the 2005FPW.

The Door - This is truly pathetic. I must inform you that on this particular picture the brightness is at 53.9% instead of 71.5% on the CRT, so it's a bit darker than it should be.

Ahhh Foliage - The CRT displays more "vivid" colors on this Far Cry picture. Washed out colors are probably due to the 2005's poor backlighting also.

Enjoying The Water - Again, the colors on the CRT looks better.

These next three pictures show the 2005FPW running at it's native resolution of 1680x1050.
What Bird?
Ammo Shack
Dude, Are You OK?

My Conclusion: I didn't take any pictures of movies, I did preview some though, and movies also suffer from poor backlighting and backlight bleed through, but hey, it's widescreen, if that really matters. The Dell 2005FPW is not for a serious gamer. If you are a serious gamer, you'll demand the best, a CRT will provide you with the best gaming experience. I find it interesting that a 2 year old CRT beat out a new LCD. I can't image how good the newer Diamondtrons are.

Dell Ultrasharp 2005FPW
PROS:
- Crisp, clear, awesome for reading text.
- Very Bright.
- Refresh rate is flawless, perfectly solid image.
- Auto-Adjust
- Widescreen
- Small amount of ghosting at times, nothing I would worry about.

CONS:
- Poor reproduction of blacks.
- Good chance of getting backlight bleed through.
- Always a possiblity of dead pixels.
- Acceptable for gaming and movies.
- Colors are good, but not the best.
- There is a slight "redness" issue.

 

[mauiblue]

Thanks wolfman579 for taking the time in doing the comparison. I already committed myself in purchasing a 2005fpw (didn't receive it yet) and hoping for the best in regards to video performance. I know that others have tried them and they were satisfied. Looking for the same luck here

All the best.

 

[Insane3D]

Great post. I was recently in the market for a new display, and it was between the 2001FP, 2005FPW, and the NEC 2141. After much research, I went with the NEC CRT and I am very pleased.

Great post and thanks for taking the time to do a comparison.

:thumbsup:

 

[Insane3D]

Bump for a great thread...

 

[Matthias99]

I just wanted to make a note:

Under "Cons", you listed:

Lack of On-Screen Display options when in Digital mode.

I take it you're referring to the lack of a 'contrast' control, as well as the lack of ability to adjust the horizontal/vertical position/size when using DVI. This is normal using DVI on an LCD; the signal is digital, so all these are set to the correct values automatically. Since it's a fixed-pixel display, there's no need to adjust the positioning when using a digital input.

You don't happen to have a video calibration DVD like "AVIA Home Video Essentials", do you? That would be the best way to objectively show contrast/brightness issues.

 

[Boogak]

Nice comparo, I just got my new 2005FPW shipped here to work today, can't wait to get home to crack it open. I've always felt a good CRT is still the best option for gaming, hence why I still use a 21" Trinitron IBM P260 for my gaming rig. The 2005FPW will be for my "everything else except gaming" rig, I'm still debating whether I want to try triple monitor goodness with my existing dual 18" 1800FPs

Also under your PROS:

- Auto-Adjust in VGA mode, but not in Digital mode.

I don't think Digital mode requires Auto-Adjust? My 1800FP's are the same way, auto-adjust is only available with a VGA source. I read somewhere this is because it's not necessary with Digital (1s and 0s don't need any adjustment) while with analog VGA, the monitor will make a best guess at sharpening the picture...

 

[UlricT]

what are the resolutions you used? Both Far Cry and DoomIII looked stretched instead of in true widescreen mode....!!!

 

[jvarszegi]

Great post, and thanks! One thing that bothers me about the Far Cry picture I looked at is that the geometry is off signifantly on the 2005FPW. It's as I suspected-- all these people claiming widescreen support for games don't realize (or gloss over) the fact that many games can be configured to streeeeetch. That's not the same as supporting a widescreen native resolution; it's simple scaling, and it's crap.

Edit: I was just reading another thread, where someone said that since the screen's proportions are 16:10, content at 16:9 is slightly stretched unless you configure things so that there are small black bars on either side. I took a close gander at those pics, and the effect I say seems to be about a 1/10 distortion. I'm now assuming the game is running at 16:9, because a stretch from 4:3 would be WAY more noticeable and annoying.

 

[Dug]

Thinking about a Dell Ultrasharp 2005FPW. Think again.

That's why I bought the Sony HS94P/S.

I use to have a 21" Sony CPD-G520, a 22" Mits 2070, and a 19" Samsung. So I know what a good CRT can do.

The Sony HS94P/S is the only LCD that I would consider to replace a CRT with when it comes to gaming. The contrast, brightness, and no ghosting can't be beat. (At the moment)

 

[jer0009]

Seems to me as if this guy does not know how to set his games up for widescreen.
My 2005 is flawless...no backlight bleeding at all.
Just call dell and get your replacement

 

[jvarszegi]

Originally posted by: jer0009
My 2005 is flawless...no backlight bleeding at all.
Just call dell and get your replacement

Yeah, I think that that may be the source of that particular problem. My girlfriend's 2001FP in the other room has a little bleeding at the upper right, which I now know could've been fixed by a simple adjustment by Dell if I weren't so fricking lazy at the time I bought it over a year ago. The backlight's probably just slightly misaligned or something.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: jer0009
Seems to me as if this guy does not know how to set his games up for widescreen.
My 2005 is flawless...no backlight bleeding at all.
Just call dell and get your replacement

The fact is, the 2005FPW is a decent LCD, but it's nowhere close to a high end CRT. Just because you have one that doesn't have any problems, doesn't mean none of them do. The back light problem is well established, and your 1 LCD is statistically insignificant when compared to the amount Dell has sold.

 

[mircea]

The game is not on Widescreen mode, so that's why you see stretching. He's playing the game on PC, and just "miroring" the CRT monitor. I don't think a game can be set to send two types of frames, to two monitors trough the same card ;P epecially HL2 and Doom3

 

[Patrick Wolf]

I'm no expert on monitors, not by a long shot. I don't know if every person has contrast as bad as mine on their 2005, but mine was. And getting a replacement is too risky, cause if it's still has problems, i'll have to pay for shipping again to send it back. The fact still remains though, CRT's are the best for games.

I didn't see an option in the Far Cry and Doom 3 demo to set it to widescreen, maybe the full versions do have that option. However, I do have GTA: Vice City and the widescreen option is available. It looks really good, maybe even perfect, on the Dell.

The fact that it's widescreen and not many games are formatted for widescreen is not an issue in my opinion. It is possible to set the scaling on the 2005 to aspect, making it almost the same ratio as my 19" CRT, which is useful for those games that do not support widescreen and make things look stretched out.

And I'm not sure, but my graphics card may cause problems displaying both monitors at the same time.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Insane3D

Originally posted by: jer0009
Seems to me as if this guy does not know how to set his games up for widescreen.
My 2005 is flawless...no backlight bleeding at all.
Just call dell and get your replacement

The fact is, the 2005FPW is a decent LCD, but it's nowhere close to a high end CRT. Just because you have one that doesn't have any problems, doesn't mean none of them do. The back light problem is well established, and your 1 LCD is statistically insignificant when compared to the amount Dell has sold.

Right on....

I CAD and game a little bit...I still use CRT cause the 17" LCD I was using (my wifes monitor when her system was down) was crap...This is a Mitsubishi model with high contrast ratio, quick pixel refresh rate, etc....

I think the colors looked bad, My CAD drawings when rendered did not look as vibrant and clear. It cant do the resolutiions my 19" monitor can do. The screen get washed out with too much surround light.

My son is using it now for NFS U2 on his PC and we both play it and my wife even says it is like night and day.

She kept hounding me on getting a 19" LCD and getting this big CRT off of the desk. I kept telling here they dont look as good as the CRT for the things I do. i mean I used her LCD, got LCDs at work, friends LCD's, etc....ONce she saw the game she has stopped even mentioning it.

I have friends with Sony, Samsung, and even other Dell models. They all look like crap compared to my good old CRT.

LIke someone stated no dead pixels!!! My wifes has 1 with it being like red!!! One friend has 3 but return policy was 5 or 3 with them having to be in specified areas....

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: UlricT
what are the resolutions you used? Both Far Cry and DoomIII looked stretched instead of in true widescreen mode....!!!

Damn, I made a mistake. If you play Far Cry on the 2005's native resolution of 1680x1050, it turns into true widescreen! On the Doom 3 demo I didn't have the option of 1680x1050 and I don't know why. i thought Doom 3 was capable of widescreen.

I may add more pictures later.

 

[zainali]

op, get dell to RMA the monitor. it has backlight leakage.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: zainali
op, get dell to RMA the monitor. it has backlight leakage.

You mean in the corners or the whole thing has backlight leakage?

 

[CraigRT]

I've decided to stick with my monitor now for a little while at least... it's a Samsung 900IFT and its got the sweet Mitsu tube in it.. I love this monitor.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
Bump for a great thread...

 

[Simplicity]

I really think that any high end CRT will EXPECTEDLY outperform a 2005FPW, BUT, you gain so many more things. I myself do not have enough desk space to have a CRT (maybe I do, someone tell me what the depth on those things are?) and the slimness on those babies is just awesome.

Also, widescreen just adds SO MUCH more to games, it is unbelieveable.

 

[h3nG]

appreciate the time you took for the comparison...

this is just another example of the classic crt vs lcd debate though, not a true review of the 2005fpw. it's like comparing apples to oranges. but this is well needed since it suits a different kind of audience. what wolfman did here was take one of the best lcds around and compared it to a good crt.

in terms of overall quality...lcds are no where near crts. and if of picture quality is all you're after, you are a fool to pick a lcd over crts.

BUT...lcds does offer some benefits of its own:

size and space. you may not think this is a big deal. but at college you only get one desk, and you're required to lug a monitor down a few times a year. want to try taking on a 20" crt? F-no!

crisp and sharpness at high res. most crts choke at high resolution due to their response rate. lcds on the other hand, is optimum at high res (but sucks major on everything else not native).

EYE STRAIN! it's almost a FACT that lcds will preserve your vision much better than CRTS. i started wearing glass a year after using the computer. worsened every year. this year the degree is not as much as my previous prescription. and my eyes havent gone red for late night gaming yet since the switch.

in my opinion...if you are only looking at quality, crts pretty much nails the coffin of lcds. those pictures are good proof of it. no arguments needed. but for me, i will never go back to crts...because the last factor is more important to me than some unnecessary eye candle.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: Simplicity
I really think that any high end CRT will EXPECTEDLY outperform a 2005FPW, BUT, you gain so many more things. I myself do not have enough desk space to have a CRT (maybe I do, someone tell me what the depth on those things are?) and the slimness on those babies is just awesome.

Also, widescreen just adds SO MUCH more to games, it is unbelieveable.

Widescreen is nice, but not like I thought. I thought I would be able to see MORE horizontally, as compared to a non-widescreen, but you don't. You see just as much as on a non-widescreen, only it's formatted for your eyes better.

The depth of the CRT I used in my comparison is about 18", the 2005's depth is about 8". Yes, flat panel LCD's rule over CRT's in terms of exterior looks, and weight. But if the performance isn't up to par, than forget about it.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Originally posted by: h3nG
EYE STRAIN! it's almost a FACT that lcds will preserve your vision much better than CRTS. i started wearing glass a year after using the computer. worsened every year. this year the degree is not as much as my previous prescription. and my eyes havent gone red for late night gaming yet since the switch.

in my opinion...if you are only looking at quality, crts pretty much nails the coffin of lcds. those pictures are good proof of it. no arguments needed. but for me, i will never go back to crts...because the last factor is more important to me than some unnecessary eye candle.

Your saying your CRT actually made your eye-sight worsen to the point of needing glasses!?

 

[h3nG]

i am pretty sure crt monitors was to blame, i had used a little much. everyone else in my family has close to perfect vision. and i started needing glasses a year after i started using the computer. so i am adding the two together. staring into the light aren't exactly good for your eyes. i think both crts and lcds will ruin anyone's vision. crts and tube screens just do more damage than lcds.

anyways, even though i think the picture quality of crts are better. i think Windows look a lot better on lcds because everything is brighter and more crisp.