New 27" monitor Dell IPS or Samsung 3D ?

[matts-uk]

Looking for some help making a difficult buying decision.

After many years of doing serious stuff with Windows, OSX and Linux using Apple hardware, while restricting my gaming to a PS3, I have rediscovered FPS on PC courtesy of Battlefield 3. So I recently built myself a gaming PC, with twin GTX670 SLI cards, which is currently connected up to an Apple 24" LED Cinema Display.

A customer has just paid up and I have some cash to spend on a 27" monitor My dilemma is whether to go for the gaming and wallet friendly 120Hz 3D Samsung SA750D (£300 ish) or a work friendly Dell 27" Ultrasharp (£500 ish) :confused Unfortunately, in these days of internet shopping, I have not been able to find a shop where I can compare monitors directly

The PC is not just for gaming. I am also using (justifying) my new PC for Windows dev and other work related stuff. My work tends to involve having many windows open at the same time and I never have enough desktop real estate. Whatever I buy will need to sit next to a 27" iMac and I will be sitting in front of both of them at least 8 hours a day.

The Apple displays are the best I have ever seen and I am concerned that in comparison, the Sammy's 1080P resolution and picture quality might leave me dissatisfied; in which case even the bargain price would be a waste a money.

So my questions are.
+ Is 120Hz likely to make much real difference to (my) gaming performance in BF3. Whatever I do with the screen, I am stuck with a crappy (5Mb) ADSL internet connection until next year.
+ Is the Sammy's inferior resolution and picture quality likely to be a real World barrier. I realise it's a subjective question.

There are plenty of sites I can read specifications and reviews short on critique. I value all opinions offered but would be extremely grateful to hear from anyone who might have experience using both large IPS and 3D monitors.

Thanks in advance.

[dangel]

Sounds like you've already made you mind up - was it the new U2713HM you were looking at?

I'm umming and ahhhing about 27" too - and i'd probably go for that dell based on my extremely positive experience with the 24" version I have now. Apple just repackage panels so I wouldn't pay the premium for the pretty box they come in.

I couldn't deal with such a low res at 1080p personally - i'm at 1920x1200 now which is great.

EDIT: just noticed you can get 10% off at dell today bringing it down to £549.72.. Must Resist. Argh and there's 11% quidco..

[matts-uk]

I was thinking of the U2711, which is now available for significantly less than the U2713. Apart from USB3 and a tiny increase in gamut on the new model, I don't see a huge difference in performance. Generally speaking, I have always found the Ultrasharps very good.

We might have to agree to disagree on Apple. I would say the point of buying Apple is you don't just buy components, you are buying a solution - a thing with 'synergy' values, beyond the specifications of the individual parts. For instance, despite the plethora of 27" LED monitors now available, few have resolutions above 1080P and none at all have an integrated web cam, speakers and microphone, like the Apple Cinema Display.

Sorry, I get bored with the simplistic, Apple is too expensive, argument. I have some very clear reasons for owning Apple stuff generally. My original Macpro cost £1500 when a comparable Dell Work Station would have cost me £2000+. Allowing £500 for a monitor comparable to the panel on my iMac, the Apple price is not quite so high as common perception would have you believe and I expect it will retain a resale value in 3 years time. I bought the 24" LED Cinema Display at a time when few but Eizo were building monitors anywhere close to the same picture quality but with higher price tags. Yes, all these things come in a pretty box too

Anyhow, I can't justify £900 for a 27" Cinema Display when I already have a 27" iMac. So it really is a genuine question of resolution and quality over refresh. I am leaning towards the Sammy, just to see what the 3D fuss is about but I hear what you are saying. I am seriously worried I could not put up with a lower resolution or a dimmer picture than I am used to.

Thanks for your input. Very useful.

[GeorgeStorm]

Not wanting to get into a Apple arguement, but I hardly think speakers webcam etc are a) any good and b) even wanted?
Surely if you're spending that much on a monitor you're going to actually have decent speakers etc?

But regardless, it depends on how much gaming you're doing I think, a friend has 120hz and he will never go back, I recently got a U2711, and I think it's awesome, even for gaming.
Worst comes to worse you get the Sammy, don't like it, so sell it and then try and buy a DELL.

[dangel]

I was thinking of the U2711, which is now available for significantly less than the U2713. Apart from USB3 and a tiny increase in gamut on the new model, I don't see a huge difference in performance. Generally speaking, I have always found the Ultrasharps very good.

It might not suit you - it has far more input lag for a start and worse responsiveness by comparison - worth reading up if you're actively considering the two as it's far from just the gamut that's different. http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713hm.htm

We might have to agree to disagree on Apple. I would say the point of buying Apple is you don't just buy components, you are buying a solution - a thing with 'synergy' values, beyond the specifications of the individual parts. For instance, despite the plethora of 27" LED monitors now available, few have resolutions above 1080P and none at all have an integrated web cam, speakers and microphone, like the Apple Cinema Display.

Synergy? No, I just want a good screen - I don't give a stuff about fluff like webcams and sound as I have far better external solutions for that sort of thing. The panel itself is king and Apple are no different to Dell in repackaging a panel and often Dell provide a better range of inputs/electronics/settings to drive it (as do other manus). I'm not sure why you think they're aren't many 27" non-1080p displays as I've found many (2560 x 1440) even ignoring the low end A- displays from catleap and the like.

Sorry, I get bored with the simplistic, Apple is too expensive, argument.

My needs are simple - the best panel, good range of connectivity and best price. Apple miss the mark here - sorry - especially for £400 pounds more! Similarly in the past I went for a Dell 20.1 ultrasharp because it was actually the very same panel Apple used and yet had better electronics and connectivity and cost less to boot. Each to their own - but it's interesting you wouldn't buy the Apple display - because in this case Apple are far too expensive and I agree.

Thanks for your input. Very useful.

No worries - but don't mistake me dismissing Apple as an option as some anti-Apple tirade - they simply don't even come close in terms of specification and price to the alternatives (for me). I'm not talking about Mac versus PC or anything else, i'm considering a single component - a monitor. Choose for yourself

I'm leaning toward sticking with my U2412M because it's a fantastic monitor for the price and i'm terrified that of two things - first, that the U2713M isn't as good (which is probably paranoia) and second that I find that driving that many pixels might force me to sub 60 fps rates in certain games (the experience of a modded Crysis 2 never dropping below vsync was quite wonderful last weekend). I'm stupidly picky about screens (TVs and Monitors) and the U2412M has been one of the few i've ever used that has been perfect out of the box (twice, i've got one at work too) for me.

[scaryjim]

Given you've got GTX670s, have you considered a multi-monitor solution as an option? It sounds like desktop space is a key driver to your decision, and multiple screens will always give you more desktop than one large one. A GTX670 will drive three monitors out of the box, so you could go for e.g. 3 20" 1680x1050 monitors and end up with more screen real estate and higher pixel resolution at a similar price...?

[matts-uk]

Not wanting to get into a Apple arguement, but I hardly think speakers webcam etc are a) any good and b) even wanted?

:smile:

The speakers, web cam and mic in my iMac and 24" Cinema Display are, I would say, surprisingly good. Certainly good enough for SIP and Teamspeak VOIP, video chat, bar code scanning, internet radio, soundtrack scrubbing and any other multi-media duties I might want to do at my desk. I no longer have a telephone headset on my desk. I only turn my 5.1 amp on for gaming but still use the internal speakers for Teamspeak (voice is clearer without the bass booming).

The 'synergy' point is, I am not restricted to what someone else thinks I should want. The Apple displays provide all I could want and leaves me to decide and to discover for myself. Being Apple, it's easy to go about the discovering too. Even on Windows, there is just the one driver and no messing with incompatible input levels, poor quality audio connectors and dubious video encoders.

Surely if you're spending that much on a monitor you're going to actually have decent speakers etc?

Surely if I am spending that much on a monitor, the manufacturer could think to integrate a set of speakers. The additional cost during manufacture is trivial. Buying separate components at retail, the vast majority of my money ends up paying for margins, packaging and shipping costs, multiple times.

But regardless, it depends on how much gaming you're doing I think, a friend has 120hz and he will never go back, I recently got a U2711, and I think it's awesome, even for gaming.
Worst comes to worse you get the Sammy, don't like it, so sell it and then try and buy a DELL.

I am sort of leaning the way of a punt on the Sammy. I am a bit rubbish at selling stuff 2nd hand though.

Direct request. Have you seen your mates 120Hz monitor and can you give a description of how you 'feel' it's different. I know it's subjective but it would be really useful.

Thanks for your time.

[GeorgeStorm]

:smile:

The speakers, web cam and mic in my iMac and 24" Cinema Display are, I would say, surprisingly good. Certainly good enough for SIP and Teamspeak VOIP, video chat, bar code scanning, internet radio, soundtrack scrubbing and any other multi-media duties I might want to do at my desk. I no longer have a telephone headset on my desk. I only turn my 5.1 amp on for gaming but still use the internal speakers for Teamspeak (voice is clearer without the bass booming).

The 'synergy' point is, I am not restricted to what someone else thinks I should want. The Apple displays provide all I could want and leaves me to decide and to discover for myself. Being Apple, it's easy to go about the discovering too. Even on Windows, there is just the one driver and no messing with incompatible input levels, poor quality audio connectors and dubious video encoders.

Surely if I am spending that much on a monitor, the manufacturer could think to integrate a set of speakers. The additional cost during manufacture is trivial. Buying separate components at retail, the vast majority of my money ends up paying for margins, packaging and shipping costs, multiple times.



I am sort of leaning the way of a punt on the Sammy. I am a bit rubbish at selling stuff 2nd hand though.

Direct request. Have you seen your mates 120Hz monitor and can you give a description of how you 'feel' it's different. I know it's subjective but it would be really useful.

Thanks for your time.

Haha, clearly two different mindsets, since if you're looking to spend so much on a monitor, I would assume you'd have decent quality speakers already etc, and just for the record, I don't have issues with drivers etc, just install, and you're done

Why would they? They're a monitor company, not a speaker company?

But back on point.
I have, and it did seem rather smooth, but I haven't spend enough time with it to really get a feel for the differences. I game on my U2711 and I've not had a problem with input lag btw, it also probably depends what kinda games you play.

[dangel]

..except Dell do - it's called the soundbar and it's optional when you buy most of their monitors (which is nice if you don't want to pay for something you don't need..)

[GeorgeStorm]

I don't get your point?
Yes they do them, but my point about them not being as good as getting proper speakers still stands?

[matts-uk]

It might not suit you -

Thanks. Just checked in a bit more detail. The U2711 appears to be CCFL, which won't suit me.

Synergy?

I'm a systems engineer at heart :smile Sometimes the beauty is in looking at the wood rather than comparing the individual trees. I am not attempting to justify the current 27" Cinema Display though. There are still too many questions (in my mind) over Thunderbolt take up.

I'm not sure why you think they're aren't many 27" non-1080p displays as I've found many (2560 x 1440) even ignoring the low end A- displays from catleap and the like.

I probably needed to slip generally available and affordable in there somewhere. Looking at Scan and similar online retailers, the choice is far from huge, compared to 1080P. I just checked again and turned up the HPZR2740w I hadn't considered.

Similarly in the past I went for a Dell 20.1 ultrasharp because it was actually the very same panel Apple used and yet had better electronics and connectivity and cost less to boot.

Better electronics...Hmm...Debatable. I was using one of those 20.1 Ultrasharps (still have two) when I bought my wife her first iMac, with the allegedly equivalent Apple flavoured panel. The backlight on the Dell was never as strong or consistent and the colour matching was all over the place. The two Dell 20.1s I have, the colour temperatures are noticeably different and can not be made to match. My 27" iMac looks the same as my wife's (current) 24" iMac, which looks the same as my 24" Cinema Display.

Each to their own - but it's interesting you wouldn't buy the Apple display - because in this case Apple are far too expensive and I agree.

Yes but I already have a 27" iMac running OSX. The Windows PC is secondary use, strictly games, dev and systems support.

Shall we move on to some common ground. I think we should

I'm leaning toward sticking with my U2412M because it's a fantastic monitor for the price and i'm terrified that of two things -

What I found with my iMac is. OSX is fantastic at 2560x1440. At the same resolution in Windows, I find the standard fonts can be a touch too small and a little wearing - Turning up the DPI on font scaling screws up list boxes, edit boxes and button labels in some applications. In Battlefield 3 at 2560 x 1440, I found objects so small they were difficult to spot and aim at. Same problem with my 24" at it's native 1920 x 1200. So for gaming, I drop down to 1080P. My mate games on a laptop and is used to being able to focus on the whole scene. He found using my 27" a bit of a struggle, as the scene spreads into peripheral vision. We both agreed, he would probably get used to it given time and boy does it look good.

I picked up Crysis 2 last weekend. Graphics are gorgeous but not so sure about the game play. With twin 670s I don't have too much trouble maintaining 120FPS at 1920 x 1200, even on Ultra.

I'm stupidly picky about screens

I don't know whether I am stupidly picky but I have spent enough time in front of them (screens), I value picture quality and don't immediately get scared off by what might appear to be a high bottom line price. I don't suppose we are too far apart in our opinions. Perhaps I just prioritise build quality, aesthetics and usability, slightly higher than the bottom line price.

[matts-uk]

Given you've got GTX670s, have you considered a multi-monitor solution as an option?

Thanks for the suggestion.

Let me describe my desk. To my left I have a Dell 20.1, connected to a Macpro which is due to be shuffled off for server duty when I eventually wean myself off it. In front of me is a 27" iMac. To my right is my 24" Cinema Display connected to my PC, which is connected to another Dell 20.1 at my far right, sitting on a filing cabinet.

The Dell (TFT/CCFL) screens are 7 years old and next to the Apple (IPS/WLED) displays, my eyes struggle to adjust to reading text on them, reducing their usefulness to showing system monitoring graphs. As I have some cash to invest, before it gets frittered away on mundane things like VAT bills, I am looking to retire at least one of the Dell screens. The 24" Cinema Display will initially be shifted to the Macpro and eventually become a second monitor for the iMac. Which leaves the PC needing a primary screen.

+ I know I want a 27" monitor.
+ I know I want steady, clear, text at smaller font sizes, on bright (cool) white background.
+ I don't need accurate colour matching or even the absolute best picture quality - I have a Mac for presentation oriented work.
+ I am intrigued to know what practical effect 2ms response and 120Hz might have on my Battlefield 3 and similar gaming.
+ I am worried even the very best 3D monitors have to offer, might be too dim or warm, next to the Apple displays.
+ I am concerned dropping resolution to 1080P might prove unworkable.

What I would like to read before committing, is an open and honest account from someone with experience of directly comparing a decent IPS with a decent 3D monitor. Which is not to say I don't appreciate the rest of the discussion, which is forcing me to review my priorities in more detail.

It sounds like desktop space is a key driver to your decision,

More a worry than key driver, I think. The last time I was regularly working with a display under 1920 x 1200 was four or five years ago. I am far more concerned with avoiding a (3D) monitor, which might well have a great looking picture viewed in isolation, but still looks a bit rubbish next to my Apple screens.

Hope that explains it better.

[dangel]

I probably needed to slip generally available and affordable in there somewhere. Looking at Scan and similar online retailers, the choice is far from huge, compared to 1080P. I just checked again and turned up the HPZR2740w I hadn't considered.

There's a fair list that are both generally available and affordable (from the face of it) to someone like yourself. And for those less well off there's a set of A

Better electronics...Hmm...Debatable.

They were reviewed as such and had far more connectivity too - YMMV - I had two that appeared the same and had I had a fault or wasn't happy i'd just of returned one (Dell make this very easy). Same panel, different box.

What I found with my iMac is. OSX is fantastic at 2560x1440. At the same resolution in Windows, I find the standard fonts can be a touch too small and a little wearing - Turning up the DPI on font scaling screws up list boxes, edit boxes and button labels in some applications.

Yes sadly some devs don't deal with DLU/DPI scaling because they know that most people don't bother changing it. It has improved over the years but it's still an issue. I run media centres at higher font sizes and have found very little wrong there but it really comes down to the software you run.

In Battlefield 3 at 2560 x 1440, I found objects so small they were difficult to spot and aim at. Same problem with my 24" at it's native 1920 x 1200. So for gaming, I drop down to 1080P. My mate games on a laptop and is used to being able to focus on the whole scene. He found using my 27" a bit of a struggle, as the scene spreads into peripheral vision. We both agreed, he would probably get used to it given time and boy does it look good.

I'm surprised that you found 24" that bad - I get the opposite effect whereby the greater res allows me to see further/more detail. I'd never game at 1080P! Ouch. 27" I can believe but I'd definitely have to try it myself (and i'd hazard it's down to your own vision/preferences more than anything else).

I picked up Crysis 2 last weekend. Graphics are gorgeous but not so sure about the game play. With twin 670s I don't have too much trouble maintaining 120FPS at 1920 x 1200, even on Ultra.

Note I said - modded - HD texture pack + the texture mod posted elsewhere here (with all it's settings maxed). I haven't turned off vsync on my system so i don't know how much headroom i've got but i'd suspect even the 670's will struggle with 1440p with everything maxed out and if I can't hit that magic 60fps it's a very different experience (to me) and that's what I worry about (1920x1200 works fine). Hopefully I'll get to test further at the weekend but my watercooling system is in bits as I upgrade it to dump heat better (Crysis 2 really pushes the system) and I discovered a collapsed pipe too..
OTOH when SLI doesn't work then i'm down to one card and then 1440p could be more of a problem - although i'd wondered on a 27" what 1920x1200 measures as (does it equate to 24"?). I can't stand scaling/image distortion so I wouldn't be happy with either the monitor scaling or the gpu.

Perhaps I just prioritise build quality, aesthetics and usability, slightly higher than the bottom line price.

heh, not enough to go for the Apple display though Anyway, I'm willing to pay for quality but for monitors my chief concern is PQ above all others and I'm happy with Dell gear quality wise (backed by their zero dead pixel warranty).

I've never seen a 3D display so I can't help you there but good luck in your shop - i've stayed away because they're all too low res for consideration (for me, but I appreciate you like/use 1080p). Thank you for backing off the Mac vs PC thing which wasn't relevant - I could of equally dismissed a Dell on stratospheric price too.

I don't get your point?
Yes they do them, but my point about them not being as good as getting proper speakers still stands?

I wasn't disagreeing with you (apologies if it read that way) - in fact I was merely pointing out that if you do want speakers for a dell monitor (built in effectively) then the soundbar is a good option (and scores well in user reviews) as it neatly clips on and takes it's power from the monitor directly (like built in speakers would). Absolutely prefer speakers proper myself without question it's just that Dell don't do it by default because they know few people actually want it (which isn't to belittle those who do it's just pragmatic).

[matts-uk]

Haha, clearly two different mindsets,

Clearly, I agree. One side of this debate claims there is a value in integration. The other, breaks everything down to the Nth degree, until there is no value in integration!

I would assume you'd have decent quality speakers already

Well I have a pair of these in the front room but they won't fit on my desk

Why would they? They're a monitor company, not a speaker company?

Have we slipped through a worm hole, are we back in 1990? Outside of niche applications, they are all consumer electronics companies. Linn make network players these days you know

But back on point.
I have, and it did seem rather smooth, but I haven't spend enough time with it to really get a feel for the differences. I game on my U2711 and I've not had a problem with input lag btw, it also probably depends what kinda games you play.

Thanks. Appreciate it.

[GeorgeStorm]

My point was actually driven by people wanting to buy a corsair/cmstorm keyboard over a filco purely because they know corsair make good stuff.
Despite Filco being far better at making keyboards, because that's what they do.

In my mind obviously they'll be able to make speakers, but they won't be as good as getting a proper set from a company who really know what they're doing.

[matts-uk]

To close this one off, I eventually bought a Dell U2713HM. After using it for a month, it's a fine monitor. It doesn't quite match the brightness/sharpness/consistency of my Apple displays but it is really, really, really close. The non-reflective coating and height adjustable stand sort of makes up for it though. Am I happy with my purchase, oh yes.

I bought a Logitech C310 webcam to go with it and that's a disappointingly different story. The drivers in the box were outdated and the current drivers filed under a different model number on Logitech's website. When it works it's fine. Too often it decides I need to sound like Donald Duck and only a relaunch of Team Speak will convince it I don't. There may be some setting in the driver I have yet to find but for the moment it is completely useless for SIP based VOIP (because it can not be trusted).

Not having integrated speakers is an annoyance I can live with. I am using my 5.1 set up for everything but having every blip, bell and youtube clip fill the room is not really ideal for me. I don't want any more wires or clutter on my desk, so that's how it's going to stay.

Thanks for the opinons, even the ones I disagreed with.