I am running the 3008wfp now and I am extremely interested to know how it compares to this new one? Any insight on it? Or maybe an update to include more 30" models that have been around for awhile? Thanks for the awesome review otherwise.
I'd like to know this as well but dont think that monitor was ever reviewed on here. Weird considering how popular it was.
I have the 3008WFP and also the HP ZR30w thats been reviewed on here before and also mentioned in this article. They say the HP's colours are slighter better than the new Dells when calibrated, well theres not even much difference between my HP ZR30w and my older Dell 3008... but it is better (i have them both colour calibrated too). And the HP also has more uniform backlighting with less bleed, and theres no noticeable lag. I couldn't even notice the lag on the Dell 3008WFP until i got the HP monitor, had them both running side by side, and dragged a window down the middle between them. On the 3008 it lags about half a centimetre behind and it seems the lag is still there on the new Dell...
Another thing is, the HP switches res a lot quicker.... the 3008 can take it's time to come back on when the resolution is changed, pretty annoying. I'd like to know if the new Dell also does this.
I've got a 3008WFP too and I agree that the res/input switching lag is rather high on it. It's quite annoying because it takes a lot of time for the display to come out of sleep. The OSD also seems much improved on the 3011.
However, I haven't noticed input lag on my A02 revision. I have a Sony HDTV that according to hdtvtest.co.uk has 0-10 ms input lag and running both displays in clone mode I saw no real difference between them.
Have you run into problems with colors on the HP? Since it has no OSD, things like games should reset colors to whatever is calibrated from the factory because they don't understand color profiles. At least the 3008WFP has terrible color presets before calibration so I imagine that would be an issue if there are no hardware controls for color settings.
I have an A02 revision too. The only way to really see lag is to have another display right next to the 3008 thats the same size/res, then have an extended desktop spanning across both displays, and drag a window down the middle, so half of the window is on the 3008, and the other half on the other display. Even then you can only just see it.
Colour with games isn't a problem much on the HP, it's default colours are pretty good, just a little cold. They're much better than 3008's factory default, and it's harder to notice with games compared to the desktop anyway.
If the HP had the Dell U3011's OSD and the card reader, then i think it would be the perfect display.
I think quality wise both are pretty close, and I've seen the U2711 for extremely cheap on slickdeals and other places occasionally. Granted, I did see the U3011 for $1045 last week as well, so it's one of those things that's entirely luck-bound.
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.
Comparing the Anandtech reviews, the U2711 seems much better designed. The minimum brightness level of the U3011 of 159cd/m^2 is well beyond a normal optimum brightness. (See http://www.eizo.com/global/support/wp/pdf/wp_08-00... )
It's as if Dell thinks their monitors are going to be used outdoors in broad daylight.
Also some photographers are suspicious of dynamic contrast - I haven't looked into this, but if you don't use dynamic contrast, the black level on the U3011 is going to be unacceptably high (as the figures in the review show).
The upper brightness is driven by a combination of sharing parts with TVs (if you're farther away the optimum brightness is higher than for a monitor right in front if you), stats inflation (idiots who think bigger numbers are always better), and to make it look good in show rooms that typically have ambient lighting cranked to excessive levels (it supposedly helps hide the crappy nature of cheap panels). The high minimum brightness is because CCFL backlighting can only operate over a brightness range of about 2.5x, so the minimum is always ~40% of the max.
I'm not sure what you're getting at with the dynamic contrast comment. The blackest black will be just as dark with brightness at minimum as with dynamic contrast turned on, and because of the standard overpowered backlight it will probably be near there most of the time to remain comfortable to use.
I don't fully understand the measurements of dynamic contrast. It does seem to me that if they advertise a 10x advantage in contrast ratio with dynamic contrast on, and getting their figures from 2.5* the lowest brightness setting, that the lowest black level is 10/2.5x less than it is without dynamic contrast and with minimum brightness. Unless there is some additional way to cheating on the figures?
Wondering if anyone can help me compare the coating on the U3011 vs the U2711. When I saw the U2711 (and the U2410) in person, I found in both cases that the screen had an obtrusive sort of matte anti-glare coating.
I'm normally a fan of matte displays, but there seemed to be something wrong at the interface. The effect was similar to my 2G iPod Touch with a matte screen protector (on top of a glossy screen). It created a cloudy appearance, and one can see a sort of rainbow effect around white pixels.
I'm interested in purchasing a new high quality display, but this coating seems like it would impair day-to-day usage. Can anyone comment?
This review actually talked about the coating on the u3011 being noticeably better in comparison to previous implementations. I think it depends on the environment you'll run this in, my computer room is dark and the blinds rarely come up so something like that wouldn't even be an issue to me.
the coating is VERY strong on this monitor... the coating makes the appearance of sparkles on any light/white areas of the screen. the fact that you are in a dark room means that you need coating even less.
I believe that with a price beyond $1k screens are in a range that can reasonably be compared to high end displays like those manufactured by NEC and Eizo. I'd be very interested to see how color deltas and such stack up against models like the NEC 2690/3090 (calibrated via SpectraView) as well in order to better place it in the range of available options. Thanks for your great reviews.
I completely agree actually, I'd really like to start reviewing some NEC and Eizo displays. We're working on getting those (I believe we'll see an NEC soon), but it's going to take a little bit.
Fantastic to hear, and I totally understand if it'll take a bit to expand your testing range. You've already got a solid calibrator at least (the i1D2, same as I've got with my LCD2690) so you don't necessarily need the -SV package, just the normal screen since SpectraView II can be gotten separately. But I'll definitely look forward to seeing how the continued evolution of screens changes the picture (har har) in the market. At some point my workhorse NEC will surely give out.
@GTaudiophile You mean 4 inches smaller (26"), 30" screens tend to be around $1800 as you say, but more to the point I don't think that's actually too big a deal. If you're in the market for something this nice at all, pretty much by definitely you're already way outside the standard, and very likely to be willing to spend an extra few hundred bucks here or there if the performance is justified. By the same token, continued advancement may actually allow Dell etc to compete straight up with higher end screens for all but the rarest applications, and thus let us save some extra money as well. Either way, it'd be useful, so I'm excited that it's in the cards eventually.
I dunno...looking at various prices for NEC and Eizo monitor, I have to conclude that DELL/HP are still fulfilling some sort of "value" niche when it comes to IPS monitors:
NEC LCD2690WUXI2-BK-R: $759.00 (26") NEC PA271W-BK: $1,399.00 (27") NEC LCD3090WQXI-BK-R: $1,399.00 (Cheapest 30" model)
For the price of the U3011, you can consider NEC's high-end 27" or low-end 30". I would like to see how the latter compares to the DELL, and I would like to see how that 27" compares to the U2711. The rest of the NEC 30" monitors break the $2K mark.
Eizo pretty much remains unapproachable for me.
My personal budget for a 27-30" IPS is between $1,000-$1500. Again, I want something for 1) General Office Use, 2) Digital Photography editing, and 3) Gaming.
For what it's worth, I am still using my trusty DELL FP2001 from a decade ago!!! I have been debating on what to upgrade to for the past two years! Reading monitor reviews is nerve-wracking. Nothing is perfect out there...for the price you want! It's like either a $300 TN or a $3000 Eizo with not enough in between.
Perhaps. Though you don't need to upgrade to astronomical levels - I bought an HP 2475w (24", IPS 1920x1200) that sits right next to my trusty Dell 2001FP. What's particularly nice is the vertical rez is the same in each monitor. The HP was around 600 when I bought it, but still very nice. Color consistency is a bit better, and brightness is certainly better, but they're calibrated to about the same level.
Granted, that does nothing to address whether you want more vertical resolution (which ultimately, as a programmer, is what I wanted).
Nothing will ever be perfect out there, BTW. Just get something that is "good enough" that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
The NEC 3090 is a 2006 (07?) design. I can't find it but I suspect the -R model you found for $1400 is a refurb (I bought one when they sold a batch for $1000ish a year ago). The standard model is still $2200, the pricier -SV model just bundles a colorimeter and their hardware calibration software into the package.
It's a refurb. You can tell because of the refurb Q&A link in the sidebar, and can confirm by going to the refurb section of their store. That said, NEC replaces teh backlight of their refurbs, and since the backlight is the part most likely to fail you've got almost everything you'd get from a new monitor except the extended warranty.
to your opening paragraph Brian. The lack of progress is frustrating as hell, there are a mix of interesting techs, but they're all tied up within their own (1080p for the most part) worlds. At the end of the day this is a less 'spec driven' market due to the lack of opacity for most people of the technology involved, but the effects are sad and very transparent.
I'm still stuck on a Samsung 2443 BW, I would love the colour improvement LED brings, and moreover I'd love as a gamer to have a 120Hz screen - but what I really dream of is a ~27", IPS, low input lag, 2560x1440, 120Hz LED backlit monitor. I'd be willing to pay for it, (or even perhaps a 2048x1152 ~24" variant) but all the dramatic improvements I see seem to be stuck in 1080p, and mutually exclusive of each other.
Grr - as you say, this is in stark contrast to the CPU and GPU markets. 2443 it is then, for the time being.
I myself don't care much for all these 1080 monitors out there for todays 23~27" monitors. I have one of the last Samsung 24" 1920x1200 screen. I still don't care much for the EXTRA-WIDE screen we have today.
When it goes... I too would love to have a 26~27" which 2560x1440, the text and everything should look crisp!
Isn't it low-screen instead of extra wide? 24" 1920x1200 is just as wide as 23" 1920x1080. Ya text is really nice at high DPI, check out the latest smartphones next time you are out shopping electric appliances.
Do the LED screens really have "better" color reproduction? I thought that was only true with the ultra-expensive multicolored LEDs, like the Eizo $3000+ dollar monitors, or the "HP Dreamcolor 2480" type displays?
The thing is, WLED backlighting is actually worse image quality than CCFL, and RGBLED is both expensive and still has problems with lifetime. All the lower end monitors love to advertise LED because it sounds great and new, and it's definitely the way to go if your goal is low power consumption and heat. However, for the absolute best display quality, CCFL is the way to go (unless you go to the insanely expensive RGBLED screens).
Have you placed a year old CCFL-Based laptop next to a brand new one? You'll see a large drop in brightness and a noticeable yellowing of the picture. The manufacturers use the cheapest CCFL tubes humanly possible with short-lived phosphors. Additionally they make them near impossible to access to replace, when they could easily place them behind a removable panel with a quick disconnect connector to replace them.
Yes, laptops use short-lived, cheap CCFLs. This isn't a laptop. High end IPS monitors use high end, wide gamut CCFL backlighting which is much better quality than any laptop backlighting (and also more power hungry, which is one of the reasons it's not good for laptops). Have you ever seen a high end CCFL backlit monitor? They absolutely blow away WLED (which is what the vast majority of LED screens use). RGBLED would be nice, but as I said before, it's both quite expensive and it still has a few unresolved issues.
Yeah would have been nice to see RGB back lighting on the latest, greatest and most advanced display of a company's lineup. This thing won't be replaced for the next 3 years at least I would imagine.
Anyway, I would prefer 3x 24" monitors instead of one or two 30" if I had the money to burn.
I have a 30" and 2 20" 1200x1600 panels on my main system now (all bought before eyefinity was an option). I don't think I could ever go back to a smaller main screen. I makes my 22 (1680x1050) and 19" (1280x1024) combo at work frustrating to use at times. For everything except eyefinity gaming I'd recommend one 30 over 2 smaller screens; and I suspect most people who can afford a 30 will also have at least one additional monitor hooked up.
The replacement time probably will depend on when a significantly better panel becomes available. The 3007 was followed by the 3008 when a wide gamut panel was available. Nothing major changed on the next few years, so Dell didn't do a refresh until this year. And at least on paper the only thing that really changed was the addition of 10bit color, and the addition of a 2nd HDMI port in place of several legacy connections; I suspect this refresh had more to do with 08 looking like an obsolete model year than anything else.
An RGBLED backlight that lasted long enough and that didn't break the bank would be grounds for a major update. A USB3 hub or Lightpeak support could trigger another minor refresh next year. If the memory card reader only supports SDHC an SDXC update could trigger a new minor revision as well.
I'm still debating myself with getting the U3011 or ZR30w, reason being I do game often. But lately photo and video editing has been in the picture more and more. And of course I'd be watching movies too ;) Decisions, decisions, it's a love hate thing,,, lol
Thanks Brian. I was just about to comment on the lack of NEC models in your comparison charts. I know I will be upgrading soon and a monitor is so important. I spend so many hours a day staring at this device that it makes all the difference when you have a high-quality display.
As the owner of a U3011, I have to say, the input lag isn't bad. Yes, it measures as worse than the HP, but 20ms is really not noticeable to the vast, vast majority of people. It's not like the old 2408 for example, which was ~60ms if I remember right.
I don't understand your problem with 1920x1080, it's slightly wider than 1920x1200 but that's it. There's no reason to be against it. Games on my Alienware OptX AW2310 look great.
Agreed. If you don't game frequently, then fine, higher pixel pitch is great (though text scaling can be a problem as other posters have mentioned). But, *BUT*, if you mostly game, then high res is, at best, counter-productive - it basically forces you to either 1) use a non-native resolution or 2) scale *way* back on the graphical "goodies" or 3) spend $600 a year on GPUs.
I'd really like it if there was some focus on stuff that *matters* for gaming:
- input lag - pixel response - refresh rate
resolution, color pallet, viewing angle etc are great, and I'll take em', but not when it sacrifices the ability of the display to resolve moving images quickly.
And, before you say it, I *would* just use a HDTV, except those are, on the whole, pretty junky, have terrible input lag, and are prone to "panel lottery" (where the manufacturer swaps out panels to save money but doesn't use a different model number. How is that even legal, btw?)
They write the specs for it to have the lowest value for each panel of the right size; that way all of them meet the described specs on the product sheet and they can swap without worrying about false advertising claims.
You're right, it's clear that what they are doing is legal. But as long as they don't specify stuff like input lag *at all*, even if you wait for a review to tell you this value, the manufacturer can, and often does, swap out a new, lower-performing panel.
You are both right, I think the extra 120 pixels is both useful *and* not a huge burden on frame-rate. I was mostly thinking of the 2560x[whatever] resolutions that are real frame-rate killers.
I guess I'm just willing to accept the loss since I really don't do a huge amount of work on this computer - mostly gaming as I said, so 1080p is an acceptible compramise.
I read the ZR30w review earlier and that's the monitor I'd like to purchase when I upgrade from my 24" screen.
Input lag matters as does colour.
I have a hp 24" and tried a dell 24" which was 100$ more expensive and the hp had better colours and better (lower) input lag. It feels like Dell is falling behind HP.
I agree, Dell is falling behind! I have owned three Dell Ultrasharp panels loved all of them, amazing color DisplayPort when no one else had it. I am looking for a 27" now and have no idea what to purchase. Anand says even the Apple displays are really not as amazing as their cost would dictate, and zero ports on those things. Does anyone make a glossy 27inch RBG LED with ports for $1200?
Oh, and if you buy chinese junk, you are also supporting extreme human rights violations, slavery, forced child labor, fascism, evil, environmental raping, and the downfall of America.
I have my Dell U2711, a pity it supports HDMI1.3 as 1.4 specification allows 4k resolutions.
1.3a only supports 1920*1080, which means display port or DVI is still required for PC connections. Can't blame U2711 of not having it since 1.4 wasn't ready back then, but not having 1.4 support on product that's just came out is not forward thinking enough
HDMI is designed by and for the TV industry, anything not needed for that is generally not included. 1.0 was a single link DVI interface. 1.1 and 1.2 just added additional audio formats. 1.3 doubled the bandwidth (to DVI levels) allowing higher resolutions (2560x1600), bit rates, more audio formats, and 100mbit ethernet over a sub channel. 1.4 added 3d and 4k support, but unless 2560 or 4k devices start moving towards high end consumer TV installations there really isn't any need for higher resolution support in the home theater market.
DisplayPort is aimed at computer users and goes higher end. In the short term though it's double bandwidth will probably be used mostly to multiplex displays. AMD's 6xxx cards take advantage of this for eyefinity by allowing you to connect 3 displays to a single DP port using a breakout box. This will also simplify cabling for large video wall type installations.
Everyone should have one of those Husky Torx drivers. They are extremely cheap, like $5-$6 and are super compact and easy to carry in any bag or toolkit. They come in handy all the time in the tech world, and no geek should be without one for the price.
Totally agreed, I've got that Husky Torx set and another with normal phillips/slot bits that have literally paid for themselves a thousand times over with how many things I've repaired using them. :)
In terms of pricing from Dell themselves, I'm seeing the U2711 at $849 CAD, and the U3011 at $1599 CAD. Considering they offer the same class of resolution (2560xSomething, although I'd rather see 2560x1600 on the U2711, at least it's still 2560), a similar set of inputs, and the U2711 is a bit better in calibrated colour accuracy (and way better uncalibrated), it really looks to me like the U2711 is the better buy.
Same class of resolution? The pixel pitch on the 30" is .2505, the pixel pitch on the 27" is .233 - clearly a much tighter image. They aren't in the same resolution class by a long shot.
I agree, I'd love to see a 2560x1600 .233 pixel pitch monitor - or better yet, a full 30",16:10 monitor with that pixel pitch. That would make my current 3-way conundrum - buy a U2711, a ZR30w, or wait for that 120Hz 30" monitor, a much easier decision. Especially if it were 120Hz. The dang 16:9 ratio of the U2711 is what makes it such a tough choice; I just don't want to support the industry using that format in any way - but I do want to throw in my vote for small pixel pitch as well as use a monitor with as fine a screen as I can get.
How are you supposed to get 2560x1600 .233 pitch on a 30" screen? That's physically impossible. May want to read up on what pixel pitch is, and the reason why a smaller screen with the same resolution will always have a lower pitch.
the OSD is the same as the Alienware 23" 120Hz LCD's, even copied the light up touch panel but went with blue instead of red. They may have considered the 120Hz option. Also the Optx 2310's have panel overdrive which mitigates the response time and removes the lag. I noticed on some reviews of the 2310's they are not doing this and reporting the panels have to much lag especially in 3D mode but if you set the panels to game mode and enable overdrive the visible lag problem goes away. I did that to all three of mine.
Dude, It's the same OSD because Dell bought Alienware a few years back. Same design group. Pretty sure all the 24in panels Dell/Alienware are assembled in the same little factory in Meheeco.
yup I know this, I was just saying, when I ordered my three 2310's they were from Dell. On a panel that is supposed to be their flagship they should have also stole the quality of design, the 120Hz, the overdrive engine and not just the OSD from the 2310's.
1) All LCDs these days use overdrive. Whether advertised or not. It's the only way that an LCD can get a response time better than roughly 15-20ms.
2) This is an IPS panel. The Alienware is a TN. TN panels are able to do 120Hz better than IPS. That's one reason why this isn't 120Hz.
3) 120Hz 2560x1600 is not doable with any current display connector other than possibly DisplayPort. Dual link DVI is only able to drive it at 60Hz, and HDMI can't even get up to native.
Ordered an Asus 6870 DirectCU from Newegg, it has 2 DisplayPorts regular not mini. Will I have to use both to run 120Hz 2560x1600? On this or HPs 30inch?
Neither is capable of 120Hz operation, so it doesn't matter how many connectors you hook up, it will never run faster than 60Hz. If someone were to release a 120Hz 2560x1600 panel, I believe that the newest DisplayPort standard could drive it with one connector. Other than that, no existing connector could pull it off.
I gitcha ;) and agree, Dell should have put so much more into this panel, or should offer another 30inch with full RBG and a remote for switching inputs and volume tied to the Soundbar.
What about the 10Bit color support? Where you able to test it during your review? I personally own a Dell 3011 but have never seen any option to enable it on my ATI/AMD GPUs (neither 5870 nor 6970) even through different connection options (DP, DVI, HDMI). It must be a professional-only feature, at least for the red GPU camp?! Maybe this is the way to gain access to a calibrated Delta-E below 1.0 ... ;)
Unfortunately, none available anymore at dell.com :(
I personally own the 3007WFP-HC basically for gaming and I can tell you lag is not noticeable at all (just as it was with the original 3007WFP). I'm not sure what method was used to measure lag in the U3011, but if it's similar to the older 3007WFP-HD I think we got a winner here.
As somebody else said, we would like to see this monitor's specs compared to previous Dell models. The ones I've personally tried are:
2408WFP (first revision) - Horrible Lag, no good for gaming at all. Average lag accordign to digitalversus: 69ms 3007WFP - Unnoticeable lag, good response for FPS gaming. 3007WFP-HC - same as previous. 3007WFP - I haven't tried this one but most reviews show terrible input lag.
What you'll find as common ground is that lag-free monitors don't have DSP (thus no OSD) and only DVI inputs, while the ones with more inputs and features (HDMI, OSD, monitor scaling) have noticeable lag. If Dell managed to cut lag while giving good features we surely have a good alternative in the U3011.
HDMI: No. I'll go light on the technical details, but it doesn't have enough bandwidth to drive 2560 at 120Hz (it has about half as much as necessary). Frame packing actually makes this really ugly - for 3D as defined by HDMI it only has enough bandwidth for 1080P 24Hz.
DP1.2: Yes. However this monitor has been out for a few months, which is to say that it came out before anyone had a DP1.2 display controller ready. DP1.2 displays won't be out until later this year.
2560x1600 would be a fine resolution for a 15.1" inch display— but at 30" it's just a continuation of the _joke_ we're seeing in the rest of the market place, it's even lower DPI than the 22" 1080p panels. Only this time its a more space consuming and expensive joke than prior editions. The manufacturers are going to keep peddling this low density crap so long as the high end market keeps buying it, which they're going to keep doing until the reviewers get a lot more critical of these decisions.
More reasonable densities are certainly possible— the T221 was initially released a decade ago. And since then we've regressed on density rather than going forward. By that standard a 30" display should have a resolution closer to 5760x3240. Even laptop displays are doing horrible as they lost significant DPI around the time of the switch from 4:3, though the (currently manufactured) screen on the Vaio VPCZ11Z9E/B is almost reasonable.
If you care about having decent display resolution you should vote with your wallet and refuse to purchase a >$1k display unless its at _least_ 150ppi (3840x2400@30").
Oh! I'd buy that as long as it would natively quadruple the pixels to 1920x1200 for gaming! And had low input lag. Er, also 120hz. Man, I'd pay just about anything for that thing.
Sold my 2008 model 46 inch Samsung lcd tv to get one and never regretted it last year. Went with a HP ZR30w Super IPS via display port that Anandtech reviewed the last time around. Got it for under $1200 also and never looked back. Using a single Asus 5870 it plays and runs everything just fine games included. Dell designs all sort of look the same with this stuff. I had a 24" 1920 x 1200 gateway panel long before most people did and then went to one of these. I can put 3 web pages side by side and can get so much for work done with the real estate that you gain. If your on the fence about going to this resolution do it you wont regret it. Just make sure you have the graphic muscle to push the pixels.
"Finally, the I/O ports on the U3011 are where they should be at the base of the display"
If they were where they should be you would niether worry about pinching cables or struggle to insert them.
Surely it is not beyond the capabilities of a monitor manufacturer to put the inputs higher up on the side and then provide some decent cable management to keep it all tidy rather than force user to lay the panel down to get everything wired up.
You see those plastic clips at the bottom of the box, yeah your supposed to release those then lift away the box and you will then have easy access to what is quite a large object without all the packaging getting in the way, but never mind, perhaps next time.
No monitor with this res will have 120Hz (or higher) anytime soon - the bandwidth just isn't there over DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort (though the latest DisplayPort might just about be good enough - I'm not completely positive). As for the VGA port, some people still have laptops with only a VGA output. Obviously, it isn't meant to be the primary input, but it is there as an option (among the enormous number of other inputs).
VGA is there because it costs next to nothing to add, but you can forget running native resolution over it. I tried once by accident (my GPU decided to send analog video over a DVI-I cable) to my NEC 3090, and the result was a ghastly mess. My initial reaction was to wonder if my monitor was DOA.
Well you keep on yawning my poor friend ill keep playing with maximum eye candy at 1600p. I have a 55 inch LED Sony 240hertz for everything else and a second 120hertz 37inch Samsung panel next to my 30 incher for double duty. Meanwhile you keep playing on your puny panel. You need to get educated on the tech or just keep showing your ignorance. You get what you pay for. If you want to play at the best res there is for PCs then get one otherwise just keep playing with TN panel garbage that keeps being churned out for the poor folk that think its good as it gets.
With do many tech groups claiming to be delivering exactly what their customers were asking for let's hope someone from Dell Monitor Design reads Anandtech or at least these many comments. Everyone seems to be in agreement on the lack of RBG LED and DisplayPort 1.4 for this flagship design. There is hope though, Dell is due to replace the U2410 this year with the U2412, and in the past has introduced it's latest developments on the 24in platform then later they appear on the 27 and 30. So let's hope the new 24inch Ultrasharp is everything we have come to expect from Dell panels, and hey throw in a remote to control all inputs and the OSD and volume on the Soundbar. For all that I would have no problem with a $699 or $799 pricetag, they already make three other 24inch monitors at very low price points. Give the rest of us what we want!
I currently have a 22" 1680x1050 monitor. Fujitsu Siemens. It's hard working with it. I use 3D software that really wants more screen real estate. Even 1920x1200 would be a step up for me.
However I struggle with readability of text and fear going for a really high resolution will make text harder to read.
So what I'm after is a monitor that is bigger than 24" (I do own a 24" Samsung monitor that I use in the living room and its 1920x1080 resolution just isn't that great. So screen size is the most important thing with a decent resolution and black level. I'm sick of watching videos against dark grey.
Anyone care to make a recommendation that's as cheap as possible? I'd even consider a TN panel if it was a fine example of how good TN's can be.
Also I believe my 22" monitor has 5ms and I can tell you scrolling web pages is horrible. I have a 20" CRT next to it and the difference is very noticeable for me. So perhaps I'm one of the few that are susceptible to higher latencies. Reading long pages is actually nauseating for me and that goes away completely on the CRT.
So to sum up
Bigger than 24" Very good latency Good but not necessarily amazing black level At least 1920x1200 Bargain price
Anything out there for lil ole me? You guys seem to really know your monitors.
There are some new 27" 1920x1080 120hz monitors supposedly coming out soon-ish this year. I know that's not quite the resolution you are looking for, but it sounds like you, like me, are very sensitive to moving image issues. That is something I'm really hoping the 120hz input will resolve. I really really *really* regret giving away my iiyama 22" diamondtron a couple years ago. What an idiot I was, best display I ever owned.
Other than resolution, the new Acer HN274H might be something worth looking at.
Thanks for the feedback. I know there isn't much between the 16:9 1080p 1920x1080 displays and the 16:10 1920x1200's but that extra height would solve a lot of problems for me with the 3D packages i use. One thing I decided I would stop doing years ago was window and panel shuffling. So its essential for me to have everything open on two screens. I can't quite manage that at 1680x1050 but believe I could at 1920x1200.
I guess I just have to live with the refresh rates for the next few years. Probably end up going for one of the 1920x1200 27"/28" displays or around that. 26" is probably as low as I'd want to look at 1920x Great for the youngins with 20/20 vision but I'm an old fart now and need more screen and less ppi hehe.
Would love to check out one of these 30" monsters in person but no shops near me carry them, so hard to make a judgement on the massive resolutions vs readability.
1. When all-black is displayed on the U3011, is there a white-haze on the left and right edges? Or are those blacks just as dark as the center black? I'm guessing there will be a haze, with no polarizer.
2. On max brightness, if you put your ear to the back vents do you hear any buzzing? The 3007-HC had a buzz problem by design.
3. No 120Hz is disappointing.
4. Lag is disappointing, and it makes this monitor not necessarily better than the old 3007. IMHO, 1 frame (16ms) should be the worst-case budget. And that's an eon for electronics.
For more vertical height - just move the start bar to the side of the screen and set it to auto hide, that must buy at least 30px right? so that gives true 1920 x 1080 as oppossed to 1920 x 1170 or 1150 depending on the setup (down from 1200) - so the vertical heigh argument becomes less and less significant.
For monitors, it just depends on what's effective for you?
Who cares about 1080p vs 1200p vs 1440 vs 1600 etc... It all depends what's effective for you to get more work done.
The Hazro HZ30Wi - uses a great LG IPS panel similar to the U3011. I have two of them in a dual 30inch setup in Work. This home setup is the Dell 3008WFP and a Eizo EV2333 (VA Panel).
I've disconnected one of the Hazro's in work and just use one 30inch screen. At home I primarily use the Eizo EV2333 (it's got a fantastic picture and easy on the eyes), which is a 1080p monitor and not the 3008WFP.
I always thought that more monitors = better, but In the 2 x 30inch setup with the Hazro's
1 I was staring directly at the bezels and couldn't see the end sides of both screens very well. 2. my eyes where getting sore and tired even - firstly the text is small, but it's also feels quite far away with 5120x1600 pixels - especially at the sides (I'm getting old I guess). 3. The world felt drowned out, I'm in professional services and it didn't help me focus on actual work and didn't make me more money or able to finish work quicker. 4. Even increasing DPI, it started messing up the dialog boxes on our ERP software (maybe bad programming - but I couldn't click into certain boxes in the software), which limited how high I could scale the text.
I found the Hazro better than the Dell 3008WFP but I don't think they will be reviewed here because Hazro's not very well setup to sell to the states, their main markets being the UK and Europe.
Eizo just released a new monitor that looks like the perfect setup
2560 × 1440 native resolution 850:1 contrast ratio 270 cd/m2 brightness DVI-D, DisplayPort, and Mini DisplayPort inputs
It looks to be a nice sweet spot between the expensive Colour Edge series and the high end Dell's. (My guess is this should cost around the same price as the U3011) but probably uses the same panel as the U2711 and 27inch Apple cinema display.
Would also love to see some Eizo's reviewed by Anandtech.
I think there is a big difference between 1080 and 1200. Giving advice like just move your taskbar works for both resolutions. I already have my taskbar on the left and still am always wanting more height in everything I do. From browsing to using 3d apps. Watching 16:9 videos is such a tiny part of my computing life that having a display designed just for that seems wrong to me.
I do hear you on the DPI settings though. Windows 7 promised such great things for scalability and delivered on none of it. Here's hoping Windows 8 allows for changing the DPI without breaking the UI.
I have found that using Firefox with a little addon called Theme Font Size changer
Really helps with readability. Those tiny tabs and hard to read urls can grow to any size you like without breaking the UI at all. It's made Firefox another reason to sit as my main workhorse browser.
Now I just need a tweak or hack of some kind that will let me change the default size of icons in the taskbar / quicklaunch from the tiny 32 point to something beefier like 64x64. It's another example of how Windows 7 promised so much on scalable PNG icons and delivered a half baked result. Sigh.
i had this monitor and had to return it... (not an easy task with such a big box) ... it was just too strong in terms of an anti glare coating. all I saw was glitter in any of the lighter areas of the screen (most web windows)... Put my macbook pro w/antiglare next to it and the macbook was preferrable.
I ended up preferring no anti-glare at all and went with the Apple cinema display, with a few less inches. I'm happy with my choice.
I guess I'm inclined when reading an article from AnandTech that has the word "Review" in it to see technical performance results as opposed to impressions and specifications. Can't we get specs on the web?
Dell outlet has these from time to time for $899. When they pop up, they go fast. I got one last week and it's top notch (coming from 2408WFP). I'm using it primarily for PS CS5. I calibrated it and I'm well pleased with my prints. Awesome display.
It's a pity they didn't go to LED backlighting instead of CFL.
The monitor is already over a thousand bucks, so a few extra dollars shouldn't matter much, and it would benefit greatly from a reduction in power consumption, as well as the reputed gains in picture quality that comes with LEDs.
LED is a benefit for power consumption, but it can actually be a detriment to image quality. This monitor's CCFL backlight allows for a wider color gamut than WLED would, which is why they chose it.
Great video showing the clear input lag winner. A shame... without the lag, and with the audio output, this would be a nobrainer for me. The limited inputs on the z30 make it less attractive, but still moreso I think.
As an aside, I did a similar comparison to this using my M6500 and a trusty dusty 2001FP I still have from 10 years ago. About 1/3rd of a window similar in size on that test behind for the old Dell.
Things have gotten better, but for $1300+, I think I'll sit the fence.
why do all the 30" monitors miss speakers? (the DELL speaker bar for the 3008 is worse than my worst notebook computer. I don't need much, but the DELL speakerbar is really bad.) and yes, many people just like having a one-in-all monitor. heck, I would even like a webcam in it, but I understand that this is not a common need. I would also not tuner while we are at it, but again, this is not needed.
but speakers?? come on.
for lack of speakers you should subtract a half-star.
I dont understand why 30" Monitor so expensive than usual 40" TV? Is it really worth buying a 30" TV than 42" or 46" high end TV at the same time? If resolution is not the priority or preference or use then better to go with TV than a monitor. Anyways we r still way behind the technology like how Anandtech rightly introduced us right at the start.
This U3011 is large enough to be appropriate for a wall mount. Yet, it seems nobody is asking about the problem with the screws for the mount being way too small and short. Because of the problem, I will need to replace those screws with longer ones just to be able to at least secure the screws most of the way through the holes after installing a thin wall mount onto it. It makes no sense for them to not give you any longer screws so you can mount the huge monitor. Specially after spending a small fortune for the monitor in the first place.
The review mentions some speckling on this screen. I have an NEC PA271 but the speckling is too annoying. Can anybody comment if it will be better on this screen, or on the HP ZR30?
After reading the reviews for the NEC, HP, and Dell 30" monitors, I decided to give the Dell a try. I currently have an older NEC 3090wqxi that's developing some blotchy gray areas along the upper left edge of the display, and I need a replacement (perhaps letting me get the old NEC repaired if the gray is perhaps a cleanable dust layer).
I found a price under $1K from Amazon and decided to give the U3011 a shot. It arrived today and as soon as I tuned it on I was disappointed. On my unit, there was an immediately obvious green shift on the left third of the screen, and that color inconsistency didn't improve at all after the display was warmed up. Nor is it affected by switching between the built-in profiles. Looking at a white screen, the Dell's luminosity is also very inconsistent; my old NEC is still dramatically better. I'm just here to weigh in as a professional graphic designer and photographer. If you care about color accuracy don't bother with the Dell U3011. There's a reason it's half the price of the current NEC PA301w. I suspect that a photographer or designer would be better off spending the price of the U3011 on the smaller 27" NEC PA201w.
Maybe I just got a bad sample, but I very much doubt that the average U3011 is much better and I'm not going to try exchanging it. Despite user reviews and relatively positive articles like this one, I don't believe the Dell U3011 is viable for professional level work. Dell's inclusion of a "calibration" report is really worthless, since it's obviously a spot calibration and doesn't demonstrate any level of consistency for color across the display.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
123 Comments
Back to Article
dymelos - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
I am running the 3008wfp now and I am extremely interested to know how it compares to this new one? Any insight on it? Or maybe an update to include more 30" models that have been around for awhile? Thanks for the awesome review otherwise.B3an - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
I'd like to know this as well but dont think that monitor was ever reviewed on here. Weird considering how popular it was.I have the 3008WFP and also the HP ZR30w thats been reviewed on here before and also mentioned in this article.
They say the HP's colours are slighter better than the new Dells when calibrated, well theres not even much difference between my HP ZR30w and my older Dell 3008... but it is better (i have them both colour calibrated too).
And the HP also has more uniform backlighting with less bleed, and theres no noticeable lag.
I couldn't even notice the lag on the Dell 3008WFP until i got the HP monitor, had them both running side by side, and dragged a window down the middle between them. On the 3008 it lags about half a centimetre behind and it seems the lag is still there on the new Dell...
Another thing is, the HP switches res a lot quicker.... the 3008 can take it's time to come back on when the resolution is changed, pretty annoying. I'd like to know if the new Dell also does this.
kasakka - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
I've got a 3008WFP too and I agree that the res/input switching lag is rather high on it. It's quite annoying because it takes a lot of time for the display to come out of sleep. The OSD also seems much improved on the 3011.However, I haven't noticed input lag on my A02 revision. I have a Sony HDTV that according to hdtvtest.co.uk has 0-10 ms input lag and running both displays in clone mode I saw no real difference between them.
Have you run into problems with colors on the HP? Since it has no OSD, things like games should reset colors to whatever is calibrated from the factory because they don't understand color profiles. At least the 3008WFP has terrible color presets before calibration so I imagine that would be an issue if there are no hardware controls for color settings.
B3an - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
I have an A02 revision too. The only way to really see lag is to have another display right next to the 3008 thats the same size/res, then have an extended desktop spanning across both displays, and drag a window down the middle, so half of the window is on the 3008, and the other half on the other display. Even then you can only just see it.Colour with games isn't a problem much on the HP, it's default colours are pretty good, just a little cold. They're much better than 3008's factory default, and it's harder to notice with games compared to the desktop anyway.
If the HP had the Dell U3011's OSD and the card reader, then i think it would be the perfect display.
PLZReggie - Sunday, January 23, 2011 - link
Hey B3an,Iahev a U3011 and I can say it DOES still take its time switching resolutions. No change there.
GTaudiophile - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
Brian,How would you subjectively compare the U3011 and the U2711?
I am personally on the fence, debating whether the price difference is worth the 3 inches.
For me, I would use it primarily for general office use, followed by Photoshop/digital photography, and then gaming last.
Thanks.
Brian Klug - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
I think quality wise both are pretty close, and I've seen the U2711 for extremely cheap on slickdeals and other places occasionally. Granted, I did see the U3011 for $1045 last week as well, so it's one of those things that's entirely luck-bound.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.
-Brian
CSMR - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Comparing the Anandtech reviews, the U2711 seems much better designed. The minimum brightness level of the U3011 of 159cd/m^2 is well beyond a normal optimum brightness. (See http://www.eizo.com/global/support/wp/pdf/wp_08-00... )It's as if Dell thinks their monitors are going to be used outdoors in broad daylight.
Also some photographers are suspicious of dynamic contrast - I haven't looked into this, but if you don't use dynamic contrast, the black level on the U3011 is going to be unacceptably high (as the figures in the review show).
DanNeely - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
The upper brightness is driven by a combination of sharing parts with TVs (if you're farther away the optimum brightness is higher than for a monitor right in front if you), stats inflation (idiots who think bigger numbers are always better), and to make it look good in show rooms that typically have ambient lighting cranked to excessive levels (it supposedly helps hide the crappy nature of cheap panels). The high minimum brightness is because CCFL backlighting can only operate over a brightness range of about 2.5x, so the minimum is always ~40% of the max.I'm not sure what you're getting at with the dynamic contrast comment. The blackest black will be just as dark with brightness at minimum as with dynamic contrast turned on, and because of the standard overpowered backlight it will probably be near there most of the time to remain comfortable to use.
CSMR - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
I don't fully understand the measurements of dynamic contrast. It does seem to me that if they advertise a 10x advantage in contrast ratio with dynamic contrast on, and getting their figures from 2.5* the lowest brightness setting, that the lowest black level is 10/2.5x less than it is without dynamic contrast and with minimum brightness. Unless there is some additional way to cheating on the figures?A black level 4x lower would be very acceptable.
Drag0nFire - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Wondering if anyone can help me compare the coating on the U3011 vs the U2711. When I saw the U2711 (and the U2410) in person, I found in both cases that the screen had an obtrusive sort of matte anti-glare coating.I'm normally a fan of matte displays, but there seemed to be something wrong at the interface. The effect was similar to my 2G iPod Touch with a matte screen protector (on top of a glossy screen). It created a cloudy appearance, and one can see a sort of rainbow effect around white pixels.
I'm interested in purchasing a new high quality display, but this coating seems like it would impair day-to-day usage. Can anyone comment?
Thanks!
niva - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
This review actually talked about the coating on the u3011 being noticeably better in comparison to previous implementations. I think it depends on the environment you'll run this in, my computer room is dark and the blinds rarely come up so something like that wouldn't even be an issue to me.optics261 - Monday, January 17, 2011 - link
the coating is VERY strong on this monitor... the coating makes the appearance of sparkles on any light/white areas of the screen. the fact that you are in a dark room means that you need coating even less.zanon - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
I believe that with a price beyond $1k screens are in a range that can reasonably be compared to high end displays like those manufactured by NEC and Eizo. I'd be very interested to see how color deltas and such stack up against models like the NEC 2690/3090 (calibrated via SpectraView) as well in order to better place it in the range of available options. Thanks for your great reviews.GTaudiophile - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
Problem with that is that the Eizo and NEC monitors in the same price class are 6 inches smaller. I think the 30" models from them break the $2K mark.Brian Klug - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
I completely agree actually, I'd really like to start reviewing some NEC and Eizo displays. We're working on getting those (I believe we'll see an NEC soon), but it's going to take a little bit.Completely agreed though!
-Brian
randomlinh - Thursday, January 13, 2011 - link
How about software properly scaling first? win7 works to an extent, but still looks wonkyzanon - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Fantastic to hear, and I totally understand if it'll take a bit to expand your testing range. You've already got a solid calibrator at least (the i1D2, same as I've got with my LCD2690) so you don't necessarily need the -SV package, just the normal screen since SpectraView II can be gotten separately. But I'll definitely look forward to seeing how the continued evolution of screens changes the picture (har har) in the market. At some point my workhorse NEC will surely give out.@GTaudiophile
You mean 4 inches smaller (26"), 30" screens tend to be around $1800 as you say, but more to the point I don't think that's actually too big a deal. If you're in the market for something this nice at all, pretty much by definitely you're already way outside the standard, and very likely to be willing to spend an extra few hundred bucks here or there if the performance is justified. By the same token, continued advancement may actually allow Dell etc to compete straight up with higher end screens for all but the rarest applications, and thus let us save some extra money as well. Either way, it'd be useful, so I'm excited that it's in the cards eventually.
GTaudiophile - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I dunno...looking at various prices for NEC and Eizo monitor, I have to conclude that DELL/HP are still fulfilling some sort of "value" niche when it comes to IPS monitors:NEC LCD2690WUXI2-BK-R: $759.00 (26")
NEC PA271W-BK: $1,399.00 (27")
NEC LCD3090WQXI-BK-R: $1,399.00 (Cheapest 30" model)
All prices, NEC.com.
Eizo ColorEdge CG303W (30" IPS): $5,035.00 @ BHphoto.com
Eizo ColorEdge CG243W (24.1" IPS): $2,346.00 @ BHphoto.com
For the price of the U3011, you can consider NEC's high-end 27" or low-end 30". I would like to see how the latter compares to the DELL, and I would like to see how that 27" compares to the U2711. The rest of the NEC 30" monitors break the $2K mark.
Eizo pretty much remains unapproachable for me.
My personal budget for a 27-30" IPS is between $1,000-$1500. Again, I want something for 1) General Office Use, 2) Digital Photography editing, and 3) Gaming.
GTaudiophile - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
For what it's worth, I am still using my trusty DELL FP2001 from a decade ago!!! I have been debating on what to upgrade to for the past two years! Reading monitor reviews is nerve-wracking. Nothing is perfect out there...for the price you want! It's like either a $300 TN or a $3000 Eizo with not enough in between.erple2 - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Perhaps. Though you don't need to upgrade to astronomical levels - I bought an HP 2475w (24", IPS 1920x1200) that sits right next to my trusty Dell 2001FP. What's particularly nice is the vertical rez is the same in each monitor. The HP was around 600 when I bought it, but still very nice. Color consistency is a bit better, and brightness is certainly better, but they're calibrated to about the same level.Granted, that does nothing to address whether you want more vertical resolution (which ultimately, as a programmer, is what I wanted).
Nothing will ever be perfect out there, BTW. Just get something that is "good enough" that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
DanNeely - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
The NEC 3090 is a 2006 (07?) design. I can't find it but I suspect the -R model you found for $1400 is a refurb (I bought one when they sold a batch for $1000ish a year ago). The standard model is still $2200, the pricier -SV model just bundles a colorimeter and their hardware calibration software into the package.GTaudiophile - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Here is that -R model:http://www.necdisplay.com/Products/Product/?produc...
DanNeely - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
It's a refurb. You can tell because of the refurb Q&A link in the sidebar, and can confirm by going to the refurb section of their store. That said, NEC replaces teh backlight of their refurbs, and since the backlight is the part most likely to fail you've got almost everything you'd get from a new monitor except the extended warranty.philosofa - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
to your opening paragraph Brian. The lack of progress is frustrating as hell, there are a mix of interesting techs, but they're all tied up within their own (1080p for the most part) worlds. At the end of the day this is a less 'spec driven' market due to the lack of opacity for most people of the technology involved, but the effects are sad and very transparent.I'm still stuck on a Samsung 2443 BW, I would love the colour improvement LED brings, and moreover I'd love as a gamer to have a 120Hz screen - but what I really dream of is a ~27", IPS, low input lag, 2560x1440, 120Hz LED backlit monitor. I'd be willing to pay for it, (or even perhaps a 2048x1152 ~24" variant) but all the dramatic improvements I see seem to be stuck in 1080p, and mutually exclusive of each other.
Grr - as you say, this is in stark contrast to the CPU and GPU markets. 2443 it is then, for the time being.
philosofa - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Amed = Amen ;) A very hearty one at that lol. Damn G19 (OMG look my KB pixel density is higher than my monitor's!)Belard - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I myself don't care much for all these 1080 monitors out there for todays 23~27" monitors. I have one of the last Samsung 24" 1920x1200 screen. I still don't care much for the EXTRA-WIDE screen we have today.When it goes... I too would love to have a 26~27" which 2560x1440, the text and everything should look crisp!
DarkUltra - Sunday, January 23, 2011 - link
Isn't it low-screen instead of extra wide? 24" 1920x1200 is just as wide as 23" 1920x1080. Ya text is really nice at high DPI, check out the latest smartphones next time you are out shopping electric appliances.erple2 - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Do the LED screens really have "better" color reproduction? I thought that was only true with the ultra-expensive multicolored LEDs, like the Eizo $3000+ dollar monitors, or the "HP Dreamcolor 2480" type displays?Pylon757 - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Unless it's RGBLED, I heard it's worse than CCFL at times because white LEDs are missing some parts of the spectrum.MeanBruce - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
When is Dell going to start offering LED backlighting for it's UltraSharp lineup? 24" 27" and 30" We are waiting!cjl - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
The thing is, WLED backlighting is actually worse image quality than CCFL, and RGBLED is both expensive and still has problems with lifetime. All the lower end monitors love to advertise LED because it sounds great and new, and it's definitely the way to go if your goal is low power consumption and heat. However, for the absolute best display quality, CCFL is the way to go (unless you go to the insanely expensive RGBLED screens).Pessimism - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
CCFL=FAIL.Have you placed a year old CCFL-Based laptop next to a brand new one? You'll see a large drop in brightness and a noticeable yellowing of the picture. The manufacturers use the cheapest CCFL tubes humanly possible with short-lived phosphors. Additionally they make them near impossible to access to replace, when they could easily place them behind a removable panel with a quick disconnect connector to replace them.
I'll take my chances with LED.
ClownPuncher - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
We aren't talking about laptop backlighting here.cjl - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Yes, laptops use short-lived, cheap CCFLs. This isn't a laptop. High end IPS monitors use high end, wide gamut CCFL backlighting which is much better quality than any laptop backlighting (and also more power hungry, which is one of the reasons it's not good for laptops). Have you ever seen a high end CCFL backlit monitor? They absolutely blow away WLED (which is what the vast majority of LED screens use). RGBLED would be nice, but as I said before, it's both quite expensive and it still has a few unresolved issues.semo - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Yeah would have been nice to see RGB back lighting on the latest, greatest and most advanced display of a company's lineup. This thing won't be replaced for the next 3 years at least I would imagine.Anyway, I would prefer 3x 24" monitors instead of one or two 30" if I had the money to burn.
DanNeely - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I have a 30" and 2 20" 1200x1600 panels on my main system now (all bought before eyefinity was an option). I don't think I could ever go back to a smaller main screen. I makes my 22 (1680x1050) and 19" (1280x1024) combo at work frustrating to use at times. For everything except eyefinity gaming I'd recommend one 30 over 2 smaller screens; and I suspect most people who can afford a 30 will also have at least one additional monitor hooked up.DanNeely - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
The replacement time probably will depend on when a significantly better panel becomes available. The 3007 was followed by the 3008 when a wide gamut panel was available. Nothing major changed on the next few years, so Dell didn't do a refresh until this year. And at least on paper the only thing that really changed was the addition of 10bit color, and the addition of a 2nd HDMI port in place of several legacy connections; I suspect this refresh had more to do with 08 looking like an obsolete model year than anything else.An RGBLED backlight that lasted long enough and that didn't break the bank would be grounds for a major update. A USB3 hub or Lightpeak support could trigger another minor refresh next year. If the memory card reader only supports SDHC an SDXC update could trigger a new minor revision as well.
ZoSo - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I'm still debating myself with getting the U3011 or ZR30w, reason being I do game often.But lately photo and video editing has been in the picture more and more. And of course I'd be watching movies too ;)
Decisions, decisions, it's a love hate thing,,, lol
bigboxes - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Thanks Brian. I was just about to comment on the lack of NEC models in your comparison charts. I know I will be upgrading soon and a monitor is so important. I spend so many hours a day staring at this device that it makes all the difference when you have a high-quality display.InterClaw - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
The Dell has input lag and the HP doesn't have sRGB... :( LG please save us prosumer/gamer types!Any word on a refresh of the not-so-pretty LG W3000H?
cjl - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
As the owner of a U3011, I have to say, the input lag isn't bad. Yes, it measures as worse than the HP, but 20ms is really not noticeable to the vast, vast majority of people. It's not like the old 2408 for example, which was ~60ms if I remember right.Phoenixlight - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I don't understand your problem with 1920x1080, it's slightly wider than 1920x1200 but that's it. There's no reason to be against it. Games on my Alienware OptX AW2310 look great.snuuggles - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Agreed. If you don't game frequently, then fine, higher pixel pitch is great (though text scaling can be a problem as other posters have mentioned). But, *BUT*, if you mostly game, then high res is, at best, counter-productive - it basically forces you to either 1) use a non-native resolution or 2) scale *way* back on the graphical "goodies" or 3) spend $600 a year on GPUs.I'd really like it if there was some focus on stuff that *matters* for gaming:
- input lag
- pixel response
- refresh rate
resolution, color pallet, viewing angle etc are great, and I'll take em', but not when it sacrifices the ability of the display to resolve moving images quickly.
And, before you say it, I *would* just use a HDTV, except those are, on the whole, pretty junky, have terrible input lag, and are prone to "panel lottery" (where the manufacturer swaps out panels to save money but doesn't use a different model number. How is that even legal, btw?)
DanNeely - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
They write the specs for it to have the lowest value for each panel of the right size; that way all of them meet the described specs on the product sheet and they can swap without worrying about false advertising claims.snuuggles - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
You're right, it's clear that what they are doing is legal. But as long as they don't specify stuff like input lag *at all*, even if you wait for a review to tell you this value, the manufacturer can, and often does, swap out a new, lower-performing panel.DanNeely - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
This is the 1st I've heard of input lag varying by panel make. I thought it was entirely due to the image processor used for overdrive/etc modes.DanNeely - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
The lower vertical resolution sucks for trying to do any real work on it.TegiriNenashi - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Slightly wider? It's shorter!snuuggles - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
@DanNeely and TegiriNenashi,You are both right, I think the extra 120 pixels is both useful *and* not a huge burden on frame-rate. I was mostly thinking of the 2560x[whatever] resolutions that are real frame-rate killers.
I guess I'm just willing to accept the loss since I really don't do a huge amount of work on this computer - mostly gaming as I said, so 1080p is an acceptible compramise.
IceDread - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Good review!I read the ZR30w review earlier and that's the monitor I'd like to purchase when I upgrade from my 24" screen.
Input lag matters as does colour.
I have a hp 24" and tried a dell 24" which was 100$ more expensive and the hp had better colours and better (lower) input lag. It feels like Dell is falling behind HP.
MeanBruce - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I agree, Dell is falling behind! I have owned three Dell Ultrasharp panels loved all of them, amazing color DisplayPort when no one else had it. I am looking for a 27" now and have no idea what to purchase. Anand says even the Apple displays are really not as amazing as their cost would dictate, and zero ports on those things. Does anyone make a glossy 27inch RBG LED with ports for $1200?misterjohnnyt - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Made In china = GARBAGE, sure to fail quickly.Oh, and if you buy chinese junk, you are also supporting extreme human rights violations, slavery, forced child labor, fascism, evil, environmental raping, and the downfall of America.
Alexstarfire - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Is that a joke? I only ask because I doubt you don't own or haven't purchased anything that was made in china.AnnihilatorX - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I have my Dell U2711, a pity it supports HDMI1.3 as 1.4 specification allows 4k resolutions.1.3a only supports 1920*1080, which means display port or DVI is still required for PC connections. Can't blame U2711 of not having it since 1.4 wasn't ready back then, but not having 1.4 support on product that's just came out is not forward thinking enough
DanNeely - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
HDMI 1.4 only supports 4k at 24/30FPS. To do it at 60 FPS you need displayport 1.2.AnnihilatorX - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Oh didn't know that. What a crappy interface :)I am not a big fan of HDMI to begin with, but all AV receivers nowadays uses HDMI.
DanNeely - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
HDMI is designed by and for the TV industry, anything not needed for that is generally not included. 1.0 was a single link DVI interface. 1.1 and 1.2 just added additional audio formats. 1.3 doubled the bandwidth (to DVI levels) allowing higher resolutions (2560x1600), bit rates, more audio formats, and 100mbit ethernet over a sub channel. 1.4 added 3d and 4k support, but unless 2560 or 4k devices start moving towards high end consumer TV installations there really isn't any need for higher resolution support in the home theater market.DisplayPort is aimed at computer users and goes higher end. In the short term though it's double bandwidth will probably be used mostly to multiplex displays. AMD's 6xxx cards take advantage of this for eyefinity by allowing you to connect 3 displays to a single DP port using a breakout box. This will also simplify cabling for large video wall type installations.
James5mith - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Everyone should have one of those Husky Torx drivers. They are extremely cheap, like $5-$6 and are super compact and easy to carry in any bag or toolkit. They come in handy all the time in the tech world, and no geek should be without one for the price.Brian Klug - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Totally agreed, I've got that Husky Torx set and another with normal phillips/slot bits that have literally paid for themselves a thousand times over with how many things I've repaired using them. :)-Brian
CSMR - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
High pixel pitch will increase legibility of text, and everything vector-based.Guspaz - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
In terms of pricing from Dell themselves, I'm seeing the U2711 at $849 CAD, and the U3011 at $1599 CAD. Considering they offer the same class of resolution (2560xSomething, although I'd rather see 2560x1600 on the U2711, at least it's still 2560), a similar set of inputs, and the U2711 is a bit better in calibrated colour accuracy (and way better uncalibrated), it really looks to me like the U2711 is the better buy.Sabresiberian - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Same class of resolution? The pixel pitch on the 30" is .2505, the pixel pitch on the 27" is .233 - clearly a much tighter image. They aren't in the same resolution class by a long shot.I agree, I'd love to see a 2560x1600 .233 pixel pitch monitor - or better yet, a full 30",16:10 monitor with that pixel pitch. That would make my current 3-way conundrum - buy a U2711, a ZR30w, or wait for that 120Hz 30" monitor, a much easier decision. Especially if it were 120Hz. The dang 16:9 ratio of the U2711 is what makes it such a tough choice; I just don't want to support the industry using that format in any way - but I do want to throw in my vote for small pixel pitch as well as use a monitor with as fine a screen as I can get.
;)
Iketh - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
How are you supposed to get 2560x1600 .233 pitch on a 30" screen? That's physically impossible. May want to read up on what pixel pitch is, and the reason why a smaller screen with the same resolution will always have a lower pitch.adiposity - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
If you read his comment carefully, he didn't say that. He said either:a 2560x1600 @.233 pitch
or
a 30" 16:10 monitor with .233 pitch
Hrel - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Dang, look at those response times! No guitar hero being played on this thing.AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
7ms GTG. How often does a PS3 refresh frames--24fps? That's 42ms.I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you only play Guitar Hero on PC emulators with a CRT @ >140Hz.
aguilpa1 - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
the OSD is the same as the Alienware 23" 120Hz LCD's, even copied the light up touch panel but went with blue instead of red. They may have considered the 120Hz option. Also the Optx 2310's have panel overdrive which mitigates the response time and removes the lag. I noticed on some reviews of the 2310's they are not doing this and reporting the panels have to much lag especially in 3D mode but if you set the panels to game mode and enable overdrive the visible lag problem goes away. I did that to all three of mine.MeanBruce - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Dude, It's the same OSD because Dell bought Alienware a few years back. Same design group. Pretty sure all the 24in panels Dell/Alienware are assembled in the same little factory in Meheeco.aguilpa1 - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
yup I know this, I was just saying, when I ordered my three 2310's they were from Dell. On a panel that is supposed to be their flagship they should have also stole the quality of design, the 120Hz, the overdrive engine and not just the OSD from the 2310's.cjl - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
1) All LCDs these days use overdrive. Whether advertised or not. It's the only way that an LCD can get a response time better than roughly 15-20ms.2) This is an IPS panel. The Alienware is a TN. TN panels are able to do 120Hz better than IPS. That's one reason why this isn't 120Hz.
3) 120Hz 2560x1600 is not doable with any current display connector other than possibly DisplayPort. Dual link DVI is only able to drive it at 60Hz, and HDMI can't even get up to native.
MeanBruce - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Ordered an Asus 6870 DirectCU from Newegg, it has 2 DisplayPorts regular not mini. Will I have to use both to run 120Hz 2560x1600? On this or HPs 30inch?cjl - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Neither is capable of 120Hz operation, so it doesn't matter how many connectors you hook up, it will never run faster than 60Hz. If someone were to release a 120Hz 2560x1600 panel, I believe that the newest DisplayPort standard could drive it with one connector. Other than that, no existing connector could pull it off.DanNeely - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
HDMI 1.3/1.4 have the same bandwidth as DVI, so they could drive a 2560x1600x60hz display.MeanBruce - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
I gitcha ;) and agree, Dell should have put so much more into this panel, or should offer another 30inch with full RBG and a remote for switching inputs and volume tied to the Soundbar.Breit - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
What about the 10Bit color support? Where you able to test it during your review? I personally own a Dell 3011 but have never seen any option to enable it on my ATI/AMD GPUs (neither 5870 nor 6970) even through different connection options (DP, DVI, HDMI). It must be a professional-only feature, at least for the red GPU camp?! Maybe this is the way to gain access to a calibrated Delta-E below 1.0 ... ;)Toshio - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
For those interested in this monitor for gaming, here's a comparison of Dell 3007WFP-HC and 3008WFP:http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma...
Unfortunately, none available anymore at dell.com :(
I personally own the 3007WFP-HC basically for gaming and I can tell you lag is not noticeable at all (just as it was with the original 3007WFP).
I'm not sure what method was used to measure lag in the U3011, but if it's similar to the older 3007WFP-HD I think we got a winner here.
As somebody else said, we would like to see this monitor's specs compared to previous Dell models. The ones I've personally tried are:
2408WFP (first revision) - Horrible Lag, no good for gaming at all. Average lag accordign to digitalversus: 69ms
3007WFP - Unnoticeable lag, good response for FPS gaming.
3007WFP-HC - same as previous.
3007WFP - I haven't tried this one but most reviews show terrible input lag.
What you'll find as common ground is that lag-free monitors don't have DSP (thus no OSD) and only DVI inputs, while the ones with more inputs and features (HDMI, OSD, monitor scaling) have noticeable lag. If Dell managed to cut lag while giving good features we surely have a good alternative in the U3011.
mac2j - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Should have been RGBLEDShould have been 120Hz which is totally supported by the current generation of graphics cards through displayport 1.2 or HDMI 1.4
Ryan Smith - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
HDMI: No. I'll go light on the technical details, but it doesn't have enough bandwidth to drive 2560 at 120Hz (it has about half as much as necessary). Frame packing actually makes this really ugly - for 3D as defined by HDMI it only has enough bandwidth for 1080P 24Hz.DP1.2: Yes. However this monitor has been out for a few months, which is to say that it came out before anyone had a DP1.2 display controller ready. DP1.2 displays won't be out until later this year.
AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
HDMI: yesDP: yes
DVI: yes
VGA: yes
No one said it has to be at 2560. In an FPS, 1680x1050@120Hz is better than 2560x1600@60Hz.
Toshio - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
not if you're a sniper ;)gmaxwell - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
2560x1600 would be a fine resolution for a 15.1" inch display— but at 30" it's just a continuation of the _joke_ we're seeing in the rest of the market place, it's even lower DPI than the 22" 1080p panels. Only this time its a more space consuming and expensive joke than prior editions. The manufacturers are going to keep peddling this low density crap so long as the high end market keeps buying it, which they're going to keep doing until the reviewers get a lot more critical of these decisions.More reasonable densities are certainly possible— the T221 was initially released a decade ago. And since then we've regressed on density rather than going forward. By that standard a 30" display should have a resolution closer to 5760x3240. Even laptop displays are doing horrible as they lost significant DPI around the time of the switch from 4:3, though the (currently manufactured) screen on the Vaio VPCZ11Z9E/B is almost reasonable.
If you care about having decent display resolution you should vote with your wallet and refuse to purchase a >$1k display unless its at _least_ 150ppi (3840x2400@30").
Toshio - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
running 2560x1600 on 30" for more than a year now, didn't regret the purchase a single day ;)snuuggles - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Oh! I'd buy that as long as it would natively quadruple the pixels to 1920x1200 for gaming! And had low input lag. Er, also 120hz. Man, I'd pay just about anything for that thing.AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Have fun voting with your wallet. I'll be enjoying my 30" as I have for 4 years.Toshio - Friday, January 21, 2011 - link
that was my point, if it suits your needs, get one. else, keep what you're using atm ;)i don't miss my Eizo 21"CRT a single moment
ClownPuncher - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Are we getting a U2311h/U2211h review?Soldier1969 - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Sold my 2008 model 46 inch Samsung lcd tv to get one and never regretted it last year. Went with a HP ZR30w Super IPS via display port that Anandtech reviewed the last time around. Got it for under $1200 also and never looked back. Using a single Asus 5870 it plays and runs everything just fine games included. Dell designs all sort of look the same with this stuff. I had a 24" 1920 x 1200 gateway panel long before most people did and then went to one of these. I can put 3 web pages side by side and can get so much for work done with the real estate that you gain. If your on the fence about going to this resolution do it you wont regret it. Just make sure you have the graphic muscle to push the pixels.lorribot - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
"Finally, the I/O ports on the U3011 are where they should be at the base of the display"If they were where they should be you would niether worry about pinching cables or struggle to insert them.
Surely it is not beyond the capabilities of a monitor manufacturer to put the inputs higher up on the side and then provide some decent cable management to keep it all tidy rather than force user to lay the panel down to get everything wired up.
Oh c'mon, everyone does that, right?
lorribot - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
You see those plastic clips at the bottom of the box, yeah your supposed to release those then lift away the box and you will then have easy access to what is quite a large object without all the packaging getting in the way, but never mind, perhaps next time.Sabresiberian - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Indeed! Thar's the thing I most want at this point; I hope manufacturers are reading your articles! Samsung? LG? Anyone listening?;)
mapesdhs - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
Can this new Dell display accept a sync-on-green signal? How well does it handle lower
resolution inputs such as 1920x1200 or 1600x1200?
Such large displays don't seem to be quite there yet wrt quality and sensible pricing, so I
went with a 24" HP LP2475W (HIPS version).
Ian.
flblws - Friday, January 14, 2011 - link
how much? $1300? and still has a VGA port? REALLY?AND
and no 120HZ or 240HZ ?
Really?
yawn....
cjl - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
No monitor with this res will have 120Hz (or higher) anytime soon - the bandwidth just isn't there over DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort (though the latest DisplayPort might just about be good enough - I'm not completely positive). As for the VGA port, some people still have laptops with only a VGA output. Obviously, it isn't meant to be the primary input, but it is there as an option (among the enormous number of other inputs).DanNeely - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
VGA is there because it costs next to nothing to add, but you can forget running native resolution over it. I tried once by accident (my GPU decided to send analog video over a DVI-I cable) to my NEC 3090, and the result was a ghastly mess. My initial reaction was to wonder if my monitor was DOA.AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
DP1.2 x4 has the bandwidth for 2560x1600, 30-bit, 120Hz. All techs have the bandwidth for 120Hz at lower res.Soldier1969 - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Well you keep on yawning my poor friend ill keep playing with maximum eye candy at 1600p. I have a 55 inch LED Sony 240hertz for everything else and a second 120hertz 37inch Samsung panel next to my 30 incher for double duty. Meanwhile you keep playing on your puny panel. You need to get educated on the tech or just keep showing your ignorance. You get what you pay for. If you want to play at the best res there is for PCs then get one otherwise just keep playing with TN panel garbage that keeps being churned out for the poor folk that think its good as it gets.Luay - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Everyone is comparing the HP to the Dell but has anyone heard of Hazro?I'm sure a little attention to this company and its products will encourage them to venture into other markets. review please!
https://www.hazro.co.uk/shop.html#ecwid:category=4...
MeanBruce - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
With do many tech groups claiming to be delivering exactly what their customers were asking for let's hope someone from Dell Monitor Design reads Anandtech or at least these many comments. Everyone seems to be in agreement on the lack of RBG LED and DisplayPort 1.4 for this flagship design. There is hope though, Dell is due to replace the U2410 this year with the U2412, and in the past has introduced it's latest developments on the 24in platform then later they appear on the 27 and 30. So let's hope the new 24inch Ultrasharp is everything we have come to expect from Dell panels, and hey throw in a remote to control all inputs and the OSD and volume on the Soundbar. For all that I would have no problem with a $699 or $799 pricetag, they already make three other 24inch monitors at very low price points. Give the rest of us what we want!MeanBruce - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Even $899, if it's Drop Dead Gorgeous!Peace Brothers!
3dbomb - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
I currently have a 22" 1680x1050 monitor. Fujitsu Siemens. It's hard working with it. I use 3D software that really wants more screen real estate. Even 1920x1200 would be a step up for me.However I struggle with readability of text and fear going for a really high resolution will make text harder to read.
So what I'm after is a monitor that is bigger than 24" (I do own a 24" Samsung monitor that I use in the living room and its 1920x1080 resolution just isn't that great. So screen size is the most important thing with a decent resolution and black level. I'm sick of watching videos against dark grey.
Anyone care to make a recommendation that's as cheap as possible? I'd even consider a TN panel if it was a fine example of how good TN's can be.
Also I believe my 22" monitor has 5ms and I can tell you scrolling web pages is horrible. I have a 20" CRT next to it and the difference is very noticeable for me. So perhaps I'm one of the few that are susceptible to higher latencies. Reading long pages is actually nauseating for me and that goes away completely on the CRT.
So to sum up
Bigger than 24"
Very good latency
Good but not necessarily amazing black level
At least 1920x1200
Bargain price
Anything out there for lil ole me? You guys seem to really know your monitors.
snuuggles - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
There are some new 27" 1920x1080 120hz monitors supposedly coming out soon-ish this year. I know that's not quite the resolution you are looking for, but it sounds like you, like me, are very sensitive to moving image issues. That is something I'm really hoping the 120hz input will resolve. I really really *really* regret giving away my iiyama 22" diamondtron a couple years ago. What an idiot I was, best display I ever owned.Other than resolution, the new Acer HN274H might be something worth looking at.
HTH!
snuuggles - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Woops, I just re-read your comment and noticed you already have a 24" 1080p monitor that is not sufficient.Sorry, I think that 120hz for you might really be good, but there is *nothing* higher than 1080p@120hz even in the pipeline.
Sophie's choice!
3dbomb - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
Thanks for the feedback. I know there isn't much between the 16:9 1080p 1920x1080 displays and the 16:10 1920x1200's but that extra height would solve a lot of problems for me with the 3D packages i use. One thing I decided I would stop doing years ago was window and panel shuffling. So its essential for me to have everything open on two screens. I can't quite manage that at 1680x1050 but believe I could at 1920x1200.I guess I just have to live with the refresh rates for the next few years. Probably end up going for one of the 1920x1200 27"/28" displays or around that. 26" is probably as low as I'd want to look at 1920x Great for the youngins with 20/20 vision but I'm an old fart now and need more screen and less ppi hehe.
Would love to check out one of these 30" monsters in person but no shops near me carry them, so hard to make a judgement on the massive resolutions vs readability.
Thanks again.
AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, January 15, 2011 - link
1. When all-black is displayed on the U3011, is there a white-haze on the left and right edges? Or are those blacks just as dark as the center black? I'm guessing there will be a haze, with no polarizer.2. On max brightness, if you put your ear to the back vents do you hear any buzzing? The 3007-HC had a buzz problem by design.
3. No 120Hz is disappointing.
4. Lag is disappointing, and it makes this monitor not necessarily better than the old 3007. IMHO, 1 frame (16ms) should be the worst-case budget. And that's an eon for electronics.
zappb - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
1080p vs 1200pFor more vertical height - just move the start bar to the side of the screen and set it to auto hide, that must buy at least 30px right? so that gives true 1920 x 1080 as oppossed to 1920 x 1170 or 1150 depending on the setup (down from 1200) - so the vertical heigh argument becomes less and less significant.
For monitors, it just depends on what's effective for you?
Who cares about 1080p vs 1200p vs 1440 vs 1600 etc... It all depends what's effective for you to get more work done.
The Hazro HZ30Wi - uses a great LG IPS panel similar to the U3011. I have two of them in a dual 30inch setup in Work. This home setup is the Dell 3008WFP and a Eizo EV2333 (VA Panel).
I've disconnected one of the Hazro's in work and just use one 30inch screen. At home I primarily use the Eizo EV2333 (it's got a fantastic picture and easy on the eyes), which is a 1080p monitor and not the 3008WFP.
I always thought that more monitors = better, but In the 2 x 30inch setup with the Hazro's
1 I was staring directly at the bezels and couldn't see the end sides of both screens very well.
2. my eyes where getting sore and tired even - firstly the text is small, but it's also feels quite far away with 5120x1600 pixels - especially at the sides (I'm getting old I guess).
3. The world felt drowned out, I'm in professional services and it didn't help me focus on actual work and didn't make me more money or able to finish work quicker.
4. Even increasing DPI, it started messing up the dialog boxes on our ERP software (maybe bad programming - but I couldn't click into certain boxes in the software), which limited how high I could scale the text.
I found the Hazro better than the Dell 3008WFP but I don't think they will be reviewed here because Hazro's not very well setup to sell to the states, their main markets being the UK and Europe.
Eizo just released a new monitor that looks like the perfect setup
2560 × 1440 native resolution
850:1 contrast ratio
270 cd/m2 brightness
DVI-D, DisplayPort, and Mini DisplayPort inputs
Full spec here:
http://www.eizo.com/global/iblick/spec/?id=SX2762W
It looks to be a nice sweet spot between the expensive Colour Edge series and the high end Dell's. (My guess is this should cost around the same price as the U3011) but probably uses the same panel as the U2711 and 27inch Apple cinema display.
Would also love to see some Eizo's reviewed by Anandtech.
3dbomb - Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - link
I think there is a big difference between 1080 and 1200. Giving advice like just move your taskbar works for both resolutions. I already have my taskbar on the left and still am always wanting more height in everything I do. From browsing to using 3d apps. Watching 16:9 videos is such a tiny part of my computing life that having a display designed just for that seems wrong to me.I do hear you on the DPI settings though. Windows 7 promised such great things for scalability and delivered on none of it. Here's hoping Windows 8 allows for changing the DPI without breaking the UI.
I have found that using Firefox with a little addon called Theme Font Size changer
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/the...
Really helps with readability. Those tiny tabs and hard to read urls can grow to any size you like without breaking the UI at all. It's made Firefox another reason to sit as my main workhorse browser.
Now I just need a tweak or hack of some kind that will let me change the default size of icons in the taskbar / quicklaunch from the tiny 32 point to something beefier like 64x64. It's another example of how Windows 7 promised so much on scalable PNG icons and delivered a half baked result. Sigh.
J3S73R - Sunday, January 16, 2011 - link
Your first paragraph expresses my thoughts exactly! I really wish they shouldnt have "stalled" at 1080p... I want more!optics261 - Monday, January 17, 2011 - link
i had this monitor and had to return it... (not an easy task with such a big box) ... it was just too strong in terms of an anti glare coating. all I saw was glitter in any of the lighter areas of the screen (most web windows)... Put my macbook pro w/antiglare next to it and the macbook was preferrable.I ended up preferring no anti-glare at all and went with the Apple cinema display, with a few less inches. I'm happy with my choice.
Steve M. - Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - link
I guess I'm inclined when reading an article from AnandTech that has the word "Review" in it to see technical performance results as opposed to impressions and specifications. Can't we get specs on the web?beachhead2 - Tuesday, January 18, 2011 - link
Dell outlet has these from time to time for $899. When they pop up, they go fast. I got one last week and it's top notch (coming from 2408WFP). I'm using it primarily for PS CS5. I calibrated it and I'm well pleased with my prints. Awesome display.godel - Wednesday, January 19, 2011 - link
It's a pity they didn't go to LED backlighting instead of CFL.The monitor is already over a thousand bucks, so a few extra dollars shouldn't matter much, and it would benefit greatly from a reduction in power consumption, as well as the reputed gains in picture quality that comes with LEDs.
cjl - Friday, January 21, 2011 - link
LED is a benefit for power consumption, but it can actually be a detriment to image quality. This monitor's CCFL backlight allows for a wider color gamut than WLED would, which is why they chose it.spilled - Thursday, January 20, 2011 - link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrjDbWU_43AGreat video showing the clear input lag winner. A shame... without the lag, and with the audio output, this would be a nobrainer for me. The limited inputs on the z30 make it less attractive, but still moreso I think.
As an aside, I did a similar comparison to this using my M6500 and a trusty dusty 2001FP I still have from 10 years ago. About 1/3rd of a window similar in size on that test behind for the old Dell.
Things have gotten better, but for $1300+, I think I'll sit the fence.
pkoi - Friday, January 21, 2011 - link
I really like seeing displays reviews benched with meaningful metrics.I want MORE,,,
iaw4 - Sunday, January 23, 2011 - link
why do all the 30" monitors miss speakers? (the DELL speaker bar for the 3008 is worse than my worst notebook computer. I don't need much, but the DELL speakerbar is really bad.) and yes, many people just like having a one-in-all monitor. heck, I would even like a webcam in it, but I understand that this is not a common need. I would also not tuner while we are at it, but again, this is not needed.
but speakers?? come on.
for lack of speakers you should subtract a half-star.
JonathanMEdwards - Monday, March 7, 2011 - link
DisplayPort has some problem with power management. Won't wake up after going to sleep. Too bad, it's a really sweet monitor visually.http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/periph...
http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/periph...
Manhar - Thursday, March 10, 2011 - link
The review states that there is no pivot mode.Are you sure that this has no pivot and cannot be used in portrait mode?
Dell have confirmed in writing to me that it can pivot and do the portrait mode!
voganville - Saturday, March 12, 2011 - link
I want to use two of these monitors side by side. I have an Nvidia GTS450. Will it work?ruzveh - Sunday, May 29, 2011 - link
I dont understand why 30" Monitor so expensive than usual 40" TV? Is it really worth buying a 30" TV than 42" or 46" high end TV at the same time? If resolution is not the priority or preference or use then better to go with TV than a monitor. Anyways we r still way behind the technology like how Anandtech rightly introduced us right at the start.dimensional - Wednesday, June 1, 2011 - link
This U3011 is large enough to be appropriate for a wall mount. Yet, it seems nobody is asking about the problem with the screws for the mount being way too small and short. Because of the problem, I will need to replace those screws with longer ones just to be able to at least secure the screws most of the way through the holes after installing a thin wall mount onto it. It makes no sense for them to not give you any longer screws so you can mount the huge monitor. Specially after spending a small fortune for the monitor in the first place.ab_ba - Tuesday, February 7, 2012 - link
The review mentions some speckling on this screen. I have an NEC PA271 but the speckling is too annoying. Can anybody comment if it will be better on this screen, or on the HP ZR30?bjnicholls - Monday, November 26, 2012 - link
After reading the reviews for the NEC, HP, and Dell 30" monitors, I decided to give the Dell a try. I currently have an older NEC 3090wqxi that's developing some blotchy gray areas along the upper left edge of the display, and I need a replacement (perhaps letting me get the old NEC repaired if the gray is perhaps a cleanable dust layer).I found a price under $1K from Amazon and decided to give the U3011 a shot. It arrived today and as soon as I tuned it on I was disappointed. On my unit, there was an immediately obvious green shift on the left third of the screen, and that color inconsistency didn't improve at all after the display was warmed up. Nor is it affected by switching between the built-in profiles. Looking at a white screen, the Dell's luminosity is also very inconsistent; my old NEC is still dramatically better. I'm just here to weigh in as a professional graphic designer and photographer. If you care about color accuracy don't bother with the Dell U3011. There's a reason it's half the price of the current NEC PA301w. I suspect that a photographer or designer would be better off spending the price of the U3011 on the smaller 27" NEC PA201w.
Maybe I just got a bad sample, but I very much doubt that the average U3011 is much better and I'm not going to try exchanging it. Despite user reviews and relatively positive articles like this one, I don't believe the Dell U3011 is viable for professional level work. Dell's inclusion of a "calibration" report is really worthless, since it's obviously a spot calibration and doesn't demonstrate any level of consistency for color across the display.