Right, looking a getting a new display... Been looking around (and based on previous advice given to others here) NRG have some interesting deals. I have been looking at the Dell U series, ideally at 27" but would happily settle for a 24" due to budget constraints. My primary choice at the moment is: Dell U2414H But the following are definitely interesting... Dell S2740L Dell P2714H FYI budget is £150-£200 max Cheers,
Those 27" models are 1080, which might be just fine for you, but some people don't like the lower pixel density of that res on that size panel. Something to think about, though Dells are pretty bloody great all round - I have a 3007 at home and a P2314 on my desk at work. I'd have no worries about buying from NRG IT either - excellent people to deal with.
I have a Dell S2740L, which replaced a U2311H. Assuming that the 2414H is roughly similar in quality to the 2311H, I'd pick the 27" for gaming every time. However, the 24" will have smaller pixels, which will make work more palatable. The S2740L is the screen with greater impact, as the colours and brightness are right up there along with the additional size. The glossy coating is brilliant if you are in a correctly lit room, but I can imagine it causing headaches in an office environment. I would also argue that this contributes to the pixellated look of text etc, as there is no dithering like you'd get with a matt finish. The other main disadvantage of the S series over the U series is the lack of height/rotation adjustment, but again for me that was not an issue. I might add that I've never noticed an individual pixel standing out when gaming, and it's absolutely fine as an all round family screen too, but perhaps not one for pixel purists...
I agree with Shirty that bigger screens are generally better suited to gaming, irrespective of the resolution. Pixel density (as Spreadie says) is a matter of personal preference; all you have to do is decide what is more important to you: a sharper image or a bigger image. For me, it's always been the latter.
True that, but for me it's the former. If you want your image bigger you can select a lower resolution or get windows to display bigger characters etc. But you can't go back from there. For me, a 1080p on a 22" or a 24" is the same. It's just a function of how far I need to put the monitor. For laptop screens, over 1080p it's a bit of a gimmick tbh. I understand your budget is limited, but I would try to get a 1920*1200 24" like the U2412M that is closer to your budget. Even if you have to get it second hand.
Thanks for the input guys! Please forgive my ineptitude the original link/display/monitor should read U2412M not H. Copy paste failure! The Dell U2412M can be found "new" on the bay for ~£200, or refurbed for less. Its looking rather tempting
The posts in this thread perfectly demonstrate the difficulty of the decision that the OP has to make. Lower pixel density = easier to play games, cheaper, a bit pants for productivity. Higher pixel density = more GPU grunt required OR smaller display, noticeably sharper static image, relatively much more expensive. How you use your display along with budget will determine your ideal choice, but you'd do worse then to take a trip to your nearest DSG store or department store and compare the two If they are brave enough to have a 1440p screen on display that'll asssist you as well. Oddly enough I only use 1080p screens in the house: a OnePlus One, a Surface Pro 2, the S2740L and a 37" Sony TV
I recently got a U2412M and it's brilliant. Much prefer it over putting my pc through my 43" tv. Ha ha
I'm definitely leaning towards sacrificing real-estate for pixel density, as there is nothing that I hate more* than a fuzzy display... * disclaimer: this statement may contain excessive exaggeration, for that matter so may this disclaimer :S
It wouldn't look fuzzy, or really any different at all, if you're sitting at an appropriate distance from the display. I have a 100ppi Eizo monitor right next to my NEC and whilst icons appear slightly smaller on the Eizo, it certainly doesn't seem sharper despite the ~10% higher pixel density. @Shirty, productivity and pixel density are unrelated - you're confounding pixel density with resolution. I used to have the 24" version of this NEC and I love the 26" version so much more because it's more immersive and images are still nice and sharp whilst being that little bit bigger. I totally agree that the best thing for OP to do would be to try before buying. Find a 1080p 27" TV, sit a reasonable distance from it, and be honest with yourself about the pixel density.
Your current primary choice in the original post is a solid monitor. You won't go wrong if you decide on it. However, the other 2 are good too. So, either way, you are in pretty good shape.
IMHO pixel density is not a serious issue at these sizes/res. I would want 27" to be 1400p purely because of the screen real estate. A 1080p image will not look fuzzy or significantly less sharper on 27".
27" Acer Monitor from Acer Direct 1080p http://www.acerdirect.co.uk/Acer_69...RO-UK_EMEA_M_UM.HW3EE.001/version.asp?PID=575
I think it's a very personal thing, I had a 28" 1200p monitor, and am now using a 27" 1440p monitor and I liked them both. There's no doubt the higher resolution is better for work, being able to have multiple documents open more easily etc, however for watching things, playing games and whatnot it doesn't matter as much.
Having spent two years with dual U2412Ms at work, and (singly) they just fall within budget; so that is the route I will be taking. If I could afford the 27" equivalent Dell, I would fall over myself to get one, but as all my gaming up 'till now has been on a 19" (or less) 4:3 monitor I think the 24" will suffice! thanks for all the input!
