Dell now suggesting 3007WFP-HC in place of delay-ridden 3008WFP

It looks like Dell's on again, off again relationship with its top-end 3008WFP monitor has taken another turn, with the company now suggesting that customers may want to consider the previous 3007WFP-HC model if they don't want to face "extended lead times" (apparently on the order of 3-5 weeks). Given the $800 price difference, that may not actually be such a bad idea -- assuming you can make do without DisplayPort, that is.

[Thanks, Mert]

[Blaine Oliver @ May 21st 2008 1:51PM]

$800 for display port? Can someone fill me on if there is actually anythign else different? If not sign me up, thats a deal and a half.

[The Engadgeter @ May 21st 2008 3:21PM]

The 3008 has much better connectivity than the 3007. The 3007 can only connect via dual-link dvi, whereas the 3008 can connect via VGA, component, HDMI, DisplayPort, and more. The 3008 has better styling with a better pivoting system and an improved panel.

[vinegar @ May 21st 2008 1:57PM]

the 3008 has a hardware scaler, the 3007 has no scaler. this is good and bad - the scaler slows down the 3008 a bit, but makes low res sources (TV, and anything else you can plug into it) look good.

[Pochi @ May 21st 2008 2:02PM]

I don't get it...

"...slows down the 3008 a bit..."

The HARDWARE is slow!?

So if you had a really fast PC, wouldn't it be better to get the 3007 and use software scaling?

[Juaquin @ May 21st 2008 2:18PM]

Pochi: Software scaling is already done on PC's - the point is to scale other signals (like TV fed into it, your Xbox, etc).

Does anyone know if it's the same LCD panel, just different hardware?

[vinegar @ May 21st 2008 2:25PM]

Pochi: yes, putting a scaler in between a signal path where one didn't exist before has an effect on the signal speed. what's not to get?

[Pochi @ May 21st 2008 7:29PM]

@vinegar

I don't get a "slow" monitor. What exactly is going to be the "slow" part about it? The interface will slow down...? Where am I going to see the monitor itself being slow?

[vinegar @ May 22nd 2008 12:11AM]

Pochi: while lcds don't have a "refresh rate" like crts, they still have a slight delay called response time. it's a measurement of how fast a pixel can switch from black to white and back to black (or in the case of most modern number-fudging whitesheets, gray to gray) and the delay most commonly talked about when discussing lcds. slower response times can cause image ghosting and smearing in high motion graphics such as games and video. the 3008 claims the same 8ms response time as the 3007, but that's only response time, a function of the panel - the scaler introduces a different but additional delay which can be noticeable to some people, reportedly up to 30ms. this different type of delay can cause sync issues, such as people's lips in video being out of sync with the audio of their words.

[GTMoogle @ May 22nd 2008 8:42AM]

The name I've heard for the delay caused by the scalar/color balance hardware is usually "input lag".

Some LCDs have a terrible time because they buffer several frames to do color adjustment to make up for cheap old technology on the glass. The 3007's glass is top notch and needs no fix, and presumably the 3008's hardware should be smart enough to step out of the way (so to speak) if the resolution is correct, so there's a fair chance it could have no input lag problem. Needs testing though.

That said, the only people who should really care about input lag at all are top-tier twitch FPS players. That doesn't stop people like me from worrying about it thought. :D

(I <3 my 3007, so worth it. Even just for the people that fall to their knees in awe at lan parties. Yarly.)

[vinegar @ May 22nd 2008 8:55AM]

some hard numbers on the 3008's lag problem:

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=88&mo1=237&p1=2302&ma2=88&mo2=316&p2=3023&ph=12

[Brian @ May 21st 2008 2:00PM]

I really like that blue background on the monitor....yummy!

[bobartig @ May 21st 2008 3:17PM]

Yep, almost as attractive as the Mac OS X desktop patterns they styled it after. Now if only Apple would return the favor and copy Dell's monitor pricing...

[Visionep @ May 21st 2008 2:10PM]

Been waiting 8 weeks for mine and it finally shipped yesterday.

[phisquare @ May 21st 2008 2:27PM]

Hopefully you get one that isn't a defective piece of shit.

[Paul Rivers @ May 21st 2008 2:31PM]

Ok, what's with Engadet's love affair with DisplayPort? Any time they mention DisplayPort it's like it's the next incarnation of the iPhone that includes a psychic interface.

I looked it up, but DisplayPort seems to be nothing more than another way to hook my monitor to my computer, only with DRM in the chain. Now this would be good why?

[phanbouy @ May 21st 2008 2:38PM]

cuz it's got a dead SEXY name, yo!

[iofthestorm @ May 21st 2008 7:03PM]

Engadget seems to have a love affair with many useless things it doesn't understand. For example, they made it seem like Atom would be a performance boost for the EeePC and other subnotes when in reality if anything it reduces performance in favor of battery life. The recent article about how Atom is slower than the 900mhz Celeron was kind of stupid since that's been known for a while now. Although in this case, I don't think Engadget is really that enamored with DisplayPort, what makes you think that?

[MichaelP @ May 21st 2008 2:46PM]

Umm, the 3008 adds a lot more than just PaperPort.

Like VGA, DVI-D with HDCP (without requiring dual-link like the 3007 does), HDMI, S-Video, Component, and Composite, in addition to DisplayPort. The 3007 is dual-link DVI only.

Oh, and the picture on the 3008 is even brighter and with better contrast.

[GTMoogle @ May 22nd 2008 8:48AM]

Brighter? Sweet jebus, I have to turn my 3007 down a few notches to preserve my retinas as it is!

(imperfect blacks (but still fine) -> low contrast # -> insane brightness to compensate for a marketing sheet #. Meh.)

[phanbouy @ May 21st 2008 2:46PM]

3008WFP's publicist was quoted as saying that it's still "best friends" with Dell and that they've mutually decided to see other supply chains.

[MichaelP @ May 21st 2008 3:20PM]

DisplayPort and HDMI compete with each other. DisplayPort has the potential for lower costs because it is royalty-free, while HDMI is licensed. Similar to HDMI being electrically compatible with DVI (you only need an adapter), DisplayPort only needs a simple adapter to convert to either HDMI or DVI.

While such didn't used to be the case, both now support the same resolutions (2560x1600x75fps). HDMI 1.2 only supported 1920x1200x60fps. DisplayPort is supposed to be able to support much higher resolutions, but we don't currently have higher-resolution displays. DP can also support greater than 24-bit color, but again, that doesn't help with current displays.

Also, DP can drive the display directly, without needing much of the electronics displays normally use. Your software driver would then control the brightness, contrast, vertical/horizontal alignment, etc., directly. And it can use fiber optic cabling instead of copper for longer runs.

In short, DisplayPort may be seen as ahead of its time. We get technical advances, but they don't give us practical advantages. When Quad HD (3456x2160x120fps) or Ultra HD (7680x4320) starts being in consumer equipment, maybe DisplayPort will take off.

[Daniel @ May 21st 2008 8:24PM]

I don't believe it is true that DisplayPort uses a "simple adapter" to support HDMI. I could be wrong but I don't see how that works with the no licensing. I believe what they've done is created a spec for an adapter that signals the source that it should output hdmi signals. This is the way that the usb/ps2 mouse adapters work. All of the real conversion is done in the source hardware and if DisplayPort is really supposed to be royalty free I don't see how all hardware would possibly support this.

Furthermore DisplayPort talks about stuff like USB but it's apparently not implemented yet. Sounds to me like this is a new standard that's immediately going to go in a thousand different confusing directions.

[GTMoogle @ May 22nd 2008 8:52AM]

Daniel, not saying that this is the case, but DP can have compatible specs without full physical compatibility, that can be made up for with the adapter. The adapter itself would carry the licensing cost.

[Mert @ May 21st 2008 3:56PM]

I'm still waiting for 3007 WFP-HC to drop-off the face of the earth so that 3008's price tag can go down a little. I really dig all the extra ports but 3008 is just so sexy and despite the fact 3007 is way cheaper, I can't make my peace with that ugly design of 3007.

DisplayPort is an overkill for now but not the rest of the ports avilable. Especially HDMI, DVI and other inputs that you can use to hook-up other gaming equipment.

[rock99rock @ May 21st 2008 5:08PM]

You really dont notice the narrow band surrounding the 30 inches of love, when its in your face.


Thats what she said.

[harry @ May 21st 2008 4:02PM]

DisplayPort is cheaper so this monitor is $800 dearer?

I don't get it.

[FreshJulius @ May 21st 2008 4:11PM]

IIRC, the 3008 has the capability to display ~112% of the NTSC color gamut, making it superior in color rendering to most LCD monitors available today, certainly at this size.

Again, I'm only going from memory here...

[Mr. E @ May 21st 2008 4:37PM]

If I had the coin to throw at one of these 30" monitors, after all the bad press the Dell's gotten, I'd be getting the Gateway.

[billav @ May 21st 2008 6:44PM]

Why are 30" monitors so hard to come by? The only one you see in a B&M store is the Apple monitor, and it's been out for years.

[Tits @ May 21st 2008 10:08PM]

the 3007 is the best thing I have buy computer realated in my life! (maybe except my first 800$ 4x cd burner!) and im changing computer every year.

[knopfler19 @ May 22nd 2008 7:41AM]

At least you can buy the 3008 (waiting those 3-4 weeks). But there is no 3008 in dell's spanish website....

[knopfler19 @ Jun 18th 2008 12:57PM]

In Spanish website they have retired 3008, 3007, 2708 and 2709 (in fact, 2709 never was in this website). I can't buy nothing bigger than 24"... Why??

[fester @ Jul 5th 2008 10:55PM]

'delay ridden' is reffering to the delay in supply, not the delay in the actual screen. Why would dell advertise such a thing if it exists? It wouldnt be very smart of their marketing team thats for sure.
Anyone with a 3008 that can comment on the so called scaler delay? is it noticeable? im keen to get one.