Considering going 2560*1440

Been following this thread too. My Dell U3011 went BANG couple days ago, so im on the market too for a new monitor. I gamed at 2560x1600 on that one, awesome resolution.
However i may well go down the TV route as i want a big display for both my movies and PC gaming.
Loads of those Yamakasi's on the bay. Thought about getting one in addition to the TV but i dont know, even a few hundred £ on something with possible ropey warranty, returns etc is not worth the hassle.
 
I got the Dell U2713HM when it was on offer last month and I can say that I'm thoroughly impressed with it - great picture quality, nice aesthetics, good refresh rate and generally an excellent quality monitor.
 
I'm just about to sell my 2713 and go back to 1080p. I really stuggle to read text on the Dell. I tried a 27" 1080p screen and for me I found it much easier on the eye.

I think I'm jst getting old and knackered to quick.
 
Bah not something I wanted to hear. Will you be going for a 27" 120hz then or something different?

People say you need the bigger res for 27" so maybe I should go for a smaller screen and 120hz. Gah this is doing my head in. I need a shop where I can look at these screens but this is Cornwall. I can look at all the hay barrels I want but not technology.
 
I am buying a new monitor for graphics editing and have been looking at the ultrasharps. I have comparing the U2713hm and U2711.

I have come to the conclusion from the various arguements and comments about the two monitors to go for the U2711, I believe but don't quote me that the U2711 is a 10bit channel panel and the 2713 is only 8bit, meaning the 2711 has 1.07billion colours vs 16.7million, and for is a much better monitor for graphic purposes. It has a few less features, than the 2713 like connection ports and touch screen buttons.
The wider gamut vs standardd gamut is a argued point with people say you notice the difference and for about 50quid more, I am going to go for the 2711, as I cannot currently afford a Eizo or Lacie.

Though if your not concerned about colour depth then I would definitely get the U2713 as I think for 430quid its a bargain.
 
ChroniC said:
I am buying a new monitor for graphics editing and have been looking at the ultrasharps. I have comparing the U2713hm and U2711.

I have come to the conclusion from the various arguements and comments about the two monitors to go for the U2711, I believe but don't quote me that the U2711 is a 10bit channel panel and the 2713 is only 8bit, meaning the 2711 has 1.07billion colours vs 16.7million, and for is a much better monitor for graphic purposes. It has a few less features, than the 2713 like connection ports and touch screen buttons.
The wider gamut vs standardd gamut is a argued point with people say you notice the difference and for about 50quid more, I am going to go for the 2711, as I cannot currently afford a Eizo or Lacie.

Though if your not concerned about colour depth then I would definitely get the U2713 as I think for 430quid its a bargain.
Click to expand...

Can your budget stretch to a U2713H? This combines the best of both worlds for your uses. It has stronger contrast than the U2711 and importantly has a much lighter matte anti-glare surface. I work with several people who do computer modelling and need to manipulate various textured images. They simply cannot abide the U2711's screen surface as it essentially adds 'noise' to the image.

The wide colour gamut is really a workload-specific thing. It's a nice flexibility to have and I feel is the direction things are ultimately headed. You have to ask yourself what you are creating and who for. Ultimately sRGB is the current standard and is what most devices are limited to displaying. And for clarification the U2711 is also an 8-bit panel but uses additional Frame Rate Control (dithering) on top to knock things up to 10-bit. True 10-bit workflows are few and far between so this is not really a major issue. The extra level of processing (also offered by the U2713H) can certainly be beneficial if you are working with fine colour gradients.
 
Last edited:
It probably could, but I have purchased the U2711. I did read about the anti-glare annoying various different people but it seems to be a love hate thing, where a lot of people also say they don't have a problem with it. I am of course hoping I am one of those people, and for 100quid more I would rather find out. :D
I work on skin retouching, and gfx design, I don't honestly think half the stuff I do will ever be outside of the gamut you'd get with a a good tn monitor but I thought about future proofing and had a little extra cash to spare, and my decision was swayed towards the U2711 as it had the 12bit processor and 10bit (like you say 8bit FRC) channel.
I thought otherwise I was pushing towards the price of a low end Eizo.
 
Last edited:
Mike306 said:
Rusty how are you finding it now you have had it a few days?
Click to expand...

Sorry for the delay in responding - not had stable internet access to conduct a response :D.

Overall very, very good. 60 Hz is not something I can get used to again for fast paced games (like BF3 and other shooters I play) so I decided to have the best of both worlds and keep both my 120 Hz BenQ and the Dell U2717HM. My BenQ is calibrated and the difference in colour between the two is quite astounding really. The Dell is just miles better. This isn't unexpected but seeing them side by side really brought it home. I've played Tomb Raider, Hitman etc etc and the bump in image quality from higher resolution definitely overrides the lack of 120 Hz in these games. As above though, for BF3 120 Hz is too important for me to drop it.

Difficult one if you don't have either and are considering one or the other. I would say it largely depends on what you are going to do on the monitor. If you're really into your FPS games and spend a lot of time on them, for me personally a decent 120 Hz monitor like the BenQ is the better option. But for everything else, the Dell U2713HM is far better. Just the increase in resolution is what does it but when you consider the superior colours as well for me it's just better overall.

Tobes said:
Bah not something I wanted to hear. Will you be going for a 27" 120hz then or something different?

People say you need the bigger res for 27" so maybe I should go for a smaller screen and 120hz. Gah this is doing my head in. I need a shop where I can look at these screens but this is Cornwall. I can look at all the hay barrels I want but not technology.
Click to expand...

27" 1080p 120Hz monitors don't appeal to me in the slightest due to the pixel density being too low for that screen size. Some prefer them but for me 23/24" is the ideal size for 1080p. 2560*1440 120Hz monitors don't exist yet - or if they do they aren't commercially available - but yes, I will be looking to get one when they do arrive. Read what I've put above to Mike - it may help :).
 
Thanks for replying Rusty. :)

It sounds great and yes I do play BF3, I've not used a 120Hz monitor so I'm not too worried about that as I'd rather have 1440p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom