Dell U2413 / U2412M / U2410 / U2312HM?

[wildest_jjk]

Hi guys,

I'm looking to upgrade my single monitor which I bought as a temporary solution. Basically I know Dell IPS monitors are highly rated but since I last looked into these they have introduced some new models.

From the four models I am looking at: U2413 / U2412M / U2410 / U2312HM, it's clear that I first need to distinguish between 23 or 24 inch. What would people recommend?

I will be using the monitor for web browsing/web design/gaming and creating office documents.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

 

[Baddass]

Probably best to establish first of all if you need or want wide gamut support as that will have an impact. The U2413 and U2410 are wide gamut, but come with a higher price tag as a result. The U2413 also carries a few higher end features which may be overkill for your needs and will just bump up the cost unnecessarily (hardware calibration support, 10-bit support, card reader etc).

The U2412M and U2312HM are probably more "accessible" for a mainstream user. Have a read of the reviews at TFTcentral of all of them, especially the new U2413 which covers the comparison with the U2410 and U2412M in more detail

 

[LukieBoy007]

I have a U2312HM and it's colour accuracy is really nice imo.
I game on it as well and can't notice any ghosting.
However, the 1920x1200 resolution of the 24 inch model may be better, as you are designing web pages.
You can't go wrong with any of them tbh. The U2413 does look a lot more expensive than the U2412M though.

 

[wildest_jjk]

Thanks for the responses

Probably best to establish first of all if you need or want wide gamut support as that will have an impact. The U2413 and U2410 are wide gamut, but come with a higher price tag as a result. The U2413 also carries a few higher end features which may be overkill for your needs and will just bump up the cost unnecessarily (hardware calibration support, 10-bit support, card reader etc).

The U2412M and U2312HM are probably more "accessible" for a mainstream user. Have a read of the reviews at TFTcentral of all of them, especially the new U2413 which covers the comparison with the U2410 and U2412M in more detail

I see what you mean, the difference in price is quite substantial. I don't think a wide gamut is really necessary for me. So the other two models would probably be more ideal. Are these likely to be upgraded this year though with a new model? That's another thing that concerns me.

I have a U2312HM and it's colour accuracy is really nice imo.
I game on it as well and can't notice any ghosting.
However, the 1920x1200 resolution of the 24 inch model may be better, as you are designing web pages.
You can't go wrong with any of them tbh. The U2413 does look a lot more expensive than the U2412M though.

I am leaning towards a U2312HM at the moment as I did briefly own two U2311's (I think that's the right model). It's just I am not sure whether 24 inch would be a better alternative. Everytime I tend to think it is I then realise that video's etc are widescreen. So I don't know if the black borders would annoy me.

It's quite a tough decision!

Thanks

 

[Gammawolf]

In the end I went for the U2312HMs, they've been out for about a year and a half i think, so they might be due for a refresh but i'll be keeping mine until they die. Best monitors i've ever owned and at OCUK's this week only at £149 i grabbed a 3rd for triple screen

 

[wildest_jjk]

Thanks for the response.

I am considering them but the thing that worries me is if they are replaced in the next couple of months or so. I am probably leaning towards 16:9 but what I don't understand is why Dell make so many 24in ultra sharp models.

Thanks

 

[PCM2]

Thanks for the response.

I am considering them but the thing that worries me is if they are replaced in the next couple of months or so. I am probably leaning towards 16:9 but what I don't understand is why Dell make so many 24in ultra sharp models.

Thanks

To give you some background on the series...

The 24" UltraSharp at 1920 x 1200 was the original baseline for the series before they even started using IPS panels (2407wfp, 2408wfp). The U2410 has been their main 24" model for several years now and has not been given a true successor until this year (U2413).

The 21.5" 2209WA and later 21.5" U2211 and 23" U2311 started off a new trend of more affordable models for the UltraSharp Series. These were new fangled things but something that many consumers appreciated for the price-performance ratio being offered.

Dell realise(d) that 16:10 models are now fairly unique and increasingly rare - but still in demand. The U2412M was released alongside some new versions of these affordable smaller models (U2212HM and U2313HM). The big change now is a change to more efficient LED backlighting.

The U2412M was by far the most affordable 24" IPS monitor out there at the time. The panel producer LG Display was and is still using the 1920 x 1200 resolution for their IPS panels of this size so that's a nice bonus. Problem is, these new LED-backlit models use 'White' LED backlights (WLED) that yield an sRGB colour gamut only. Unlike the U2410, they don't support wide colour gamuts such as Adobe RGB.

Now LG Display have created a new type of backlight called GB-LED which is the first affordable wide-gamut LED solution. The U2413 is the first 24" model to use this new-fangled backlight and given the capabilities THIS is the true successor to the U2410. The TFT Central review gives an excellent comparison of these two models and concludes that the U2413 is a worthy successor.

As far as replacements for the U2312 go it would certainly make sense given the new light matte AH-IPS panels available in 21.5" and 23" sizes. They're ripe for Dell to use and are already being used by other manufacturers including AOC, ASUS and LG. It's difficult to say when though - nothing has been announced yet. Their next big launch is the U3014 probably in March but it could be summer until we see other smaller models.

 

[wildest_jjk]

Thanks for the detailed response.

Colour gamut is a bit confusing but how I understand it is a wider gamut provides more realistic colours. Is that along the right lines?

In your opinion and based on my circumstances what do you think I would better going for?

Thanks again

 

[Baddass]

No if anything wide gamut will cause you more unnatural colours. The thing you need to think about is that most content is based on a certain colour range which is the sRGB space. If you view that content on a wide gamut screen it will lead to oversaturated, bright and unrealistic colours. Have a read about wide gamut in the FAQ

The U2412M or U2312HM won't be replaced this year I don't think so don't worry about that too much

 

[Baddass]

Ps I think you'd be best with the U2312HM or U2412M for your needs and to save a fair amount of money. Just depends if you want 16:9 (probably if you're watching more movies, using a console as well and gaming more) or if you want 16:10 ( if you are doing more office type work I'd say)

 

[wildest_jjk]

Thanks for the response.

Can games just be played at 16:9 on a 16:10 screen? In other words couldn't I just have a 24 inch screen and do that?

Thanks

 

[Baddass]

In some cases yes but you'd have to control the aspect ratio. From a pc not normally an issue as you can normally do via the graphics card software. If not, or for external devices like games consoles / DVD players, the screen would need to support the relevant aspect ratio at a hardware level. In the case of the U2412M it only has options for 16:10, 5:4 and 4:3. So wouldn't support 16:9 for any external devices if needed

Keep in mind also that you'd have black bars top and bottom if you did do that so a native 16:9 screen can sometimes be easier for viewing a lot of 16:9 content that's all

 

[wildest_jjk]

The only reason I need 16:9 is for gaming, movies I watch on my TV only.

It's a really hard decision!

Thanks

 

[wildest_jjk]

So for gaming I can set the game to run at 16:9 on my 16:10 monitor and just suffer the black bars? I can't see it would be that annoying anyway.

If the game supports 16:10 then I would just run in that.

But surely it's better to have 24inch for everything else? I'll be doing other things more than gaming anyway.

Is this right?

Thanks

 

[Baddass]

Yep 24" probably better then as it's better for office, general use etc. if only playing games from your pc then graphics card should be able to handle the aspect ratio control if the game doesn't support a 16:10 format

 

[wildest_jjk]

Thanks again for the response.

What do you mean about the aspect ratio control by the graphics card? Does it not depend on the game then? Sorry this is all quite confusing

Thanks

 

[Baddass]

Some games will support the full res of the screen fine. Others might not feature the full res but may support something with a similar aspect but at a lower res. eg 1680 x 1050 is still a 16:10 aspect so the images wouldn't appear disproportionate.

The issue comes if you have a game which doesn't run in a 16:10 aspect. For example one which only ran in 5:4 or 16:9 or something. In those instances within your graphics card driver settings there should be an option which controls how the resolution is displayed including options to maintain the right proportions but add black borders where needed. So the graphics card in that example is handling the aspect ratio

The other option is that the graphics card just outputs the res without any corrections and you let the screen control the display and add the borders. For that the screen would need to be able to do that through the scaler so you'd need the corresponding option

So for the U2412M you can let either the graphics card OR screen handle anything at 16:10, 5:4 or 4:3 as those are the modes the screen can handle. Then anything different including 16:9 would nEed to be controlled by the graphics card as the screen can't handle that ratio at a hardware level

 

[Darg]

Most PC games will give you the 16:10 aspect ratio option. I'd be surprised if any game built on the bigger game engines (UE, Cry, Unity) wouldn't support the resolution. I've had a 22 inch 1680x1050 monitor for the last 5 years and not found a game that doesn't natively support the res.

I also find that 16x10 gives you far more screen size for your money. If you do the maths a 16x10 24 inch display gives you 259 square inches and a 16x9 gives you 246 square inches.

Got myself a U2412M last week, just waiting for delivery

 

[Baddass]

should be fine then for PC games. If intending to use any external console or Blu-ray player you'd be reliant on the screens capability of controlling the aspect ratio, so any 16:9 source from an external device would be a problem. if you're only PC gaming then shouldnt be a problem

 

[wildest_jjk]

Thanks for all the responses.

So if two 24 inch monitors (16:10) are connected only to my PC. There shouldn't be many problems with aspect ratios? Any game that does not support it will just have black bars on the top and bottom?

The other option could be to go to a 27inch but I don't think just one monitor would be suitable for me. The whole reason I want two is so that I can run two maximised windows side by side.

Thanks