If you're the type who spends hours each day at the computer (and let's face it, you are) then one of the most important pieces of gear in your internet arsenal is your monitor -- or
monitors as the case may be. Starting today, Dell's UltraSharp U2711 27-inch display is now on sale in the Americas and Asia (and "soon' in Europe). While the $1,099 US price tag might appear steep at first; remember, you're looking at a professional quality WQHD 2,560 x 1,440 pixel IPS panel with 12-bit internal color processing and 1.07
billion color palette. And that pair of DVI-D inputs accompanied by DisplayPort, VGA, composite, component, and HDMI 1.3 jack means that this beast is meant for much more than just sourcing spreadsheets and pie charts. 4x USB slots and an integrated 8-in-1 card reader rounds out what's destined to become an all-purpose hub at the center of your digital life. If you ask us, Dell's got another winner here based on our impressive
hands-on experience and rave, early reviews -- don't let its frumpy looks hold you back, ok?
posted February 10th 2010 2:03AM
It does sound like a beast, no doubt. But hit me when it gets its price cut in half.
@MegaJapan
You can't get a U2410 for under $500 - you'll be waiting at least a few years.
This looks like a great monitor, BUT, without 120Hz support, isn't it already obsolete? Why would anyone by a non 120Hz panel at this point?
Manufacturers; give me 120Hz, FULL HD, IPS panel and then we're talking.
@FrankTheCrank Why would I need 120mhz for photo editing and graphics design? Accurate colors and wide gamut are more important to me than smooth motion and nvidia 3D.
A handful of people have already received these. Flatpanelshd has a review up here - http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1265617565
@grumbles
I ordered mine two days ago on the 8th, I spoke to a sales person via their chat app, and they were kind enough to drop the price to $999.
Sweet...
I made the stupidity of buying an acer that the base barely turns.
I just love the quality and design of Dell monitors... Will be my next one for sure. (as soon as the price drops of course :P)
@Mr w00t
It's not going to drop that much, it's got an IPS panel which makes it a premium screen compared to the low-quality TN panels that Acer use in their monitors.
@Mr w00t
Same here... just bought an Acer last week :(
No worries though - I wasn't going to get this at that price anyway.
But damn!!
wow and i thought i spent too much on my $300 monitor. that beast is sick though.
Call me old fashioned but I'd still rather have a 30" monitor at 2560x1600 than a 27" at 2560x1440.
To me:
20" = 1680x1050
24" = 1920x1200
30" = 2560x1600
Thats just the way I like it.
Agree 100%
@Quu
not to mention dell's own 30" 3007wfp or something can be as low as $899 CAD
this is a cold deal!!
@Quu
16x9 vs 16x10 format.
@Quu You`re oldfashioned.
30" is too big for my desk and 24 has too small pixel density. :P
@substance90
Uh, a 2560x1600 30" monitor has higher pixel density than a 1920x1200 24" monitor.
@substance90
You're just small.
@kcmurphy88
16:10 is superior, extra pixels on the top and bottom ftw
@Quu
I like my 23" 2048x1152 monitors. Though if someone will buy me one of these, I'll take it.
@Quu Maybe you could pull it slightly further towards you than you would the 30" monitor.
@Quu
You know what would be sweet? A build-to-order monitor configurator that, much like building a computer, would let you choose monitor size, resolution, matte/glossy finish, etc.
@Quu
I'm with all you 16:10 fans... this monitor is a beauty and no doubt, but give me the full 1600 vertical pixels.
@Peytral This probably has better gamut and color accuracy. If entertainment is main concern, however, I'd go 3008WFP too; yes that is IPS.
@(Unverified) Absolutely! Another vote for 16:10. Extra vertical screen real estate is vital.
@Peytral
You clearly don't know much about the 3007WFP. The reason it's so much cheaper than say, the 3008WFP, is because it has no built-in scaler. It has ONLY DVI inputs and can be run ONLY at 2560x1600 or 1280x800 (which is exactly one quarter of its max resolution and thus requires no scaling hardware since it simply maps data for 1 pixel onto 4 physical pixels). That makes it less than ideal for any alternate applications such as cable boxes or Blu-ray players, which don't support either of those resolutions. The 3008WFP on the other hand has a built-in scaler and thus can support several more resolutions, includes alternate input methods, etc, and therefore costs significantly more. I think a better price comparison would be this display against the 3008, but again the 3008 is not an IPS panel, which (justifiably) adds significantly to the cost in order to deliver superior color reproduction.
@jamesstringer
I think that's exactly his point. I believe when he said "too small pixel density" he meant "too LOW a pixel density", not "too small pixels", in which case that would be the reason he would not want a 24" monitor.
My Dell E2310 monitor is quite the looker, and yet I know these UltraSharp models blow the socks off mine as well as most other displays out there. A bit pricey, but you certainly can't go wrong with one of them. Great monitors, would love to have a pair of these for the price of one. Impressive feature set that I could certainly use. I'll be keeping tabs on them.
wow, expensive. Real expensive.
Actually, perhaps overpriced is the term.
@arei lol sounds like Apple xD (Yes I do own a Mac and 3 Dells)
Having it LED backlit or even OLED backlit while keeping it at the same price would be insane. I can't really see that happening though, unfortunately.
@DeanS OLED is not backlit. That is the whole upside to OLED, each pixel is its own light, creating the ultra-thin display, and can be turned off to produce a true black.
@DeanS You sir are misinformed. There is no OLED backlighting.
Plus, as we've established, OLED wears out faster (and more unevenly) than LCD.
@DeanS LED backlight would be nice though... maybe next year...
cnet gave it an editors choice :)
CNET gives everyone a high rating. They get paid for this!
Finally, exactly what I am looking for. Its also competitively priced for an IPS panel.
Wow, the review at flatpanelshd says "U2711 uses the same panel as the new Apple 27-inch iMac," which runs $1700 for the slow(er) one.
That sounds like a better deal to me for just $600 more, assuming they fix the freaking drivers for it.
@tannerpowell
no it's not a better deal, this monitor has more connectivity than the imac
@tannerpowell With you on that one!
@tannerpowell
I would not like to use a imac as my monitor...sorry plus this is a much better monitor.
@Atkins: 600 can build you a PC that is faster than the slower iMac. For the price of the i7 version, you can build a pc that crushes it, with the added benefit of upgrading it in the future. The iMac gives you no such benefits.
@tannerpowell
Problem being, I can upgrade whatever I have attached to the Dell. The iMac's hardware is set in stone.
I can see myself using the same monitor for five to ten years. No way I can say the same with my processor, videocard, etc.
@Atkins
Because of the back light it is able to give better colours than the Apple. In terms of colour gamut it goes something like
RGB LED > (good) CCFL > White LED > (poor) CCFL
Apple use while LEDs in their screens and these aren't as good as a high quality cold cathode light. You shouldn't buy into the hype that LEDs are always better.
you can get a 52 inch plasma for that price lol
....
that is what we call a luxurious monitor lol
You're laughing out loud at that? Twice? Albeit in lower case...
You have a very low humor threshold.
@toco004
with that huge 52" swath of panel you only get 1920 x 1080 pixels.
Thats a prime piece of real-state Dell's got there.
Very. Very. Nice.
it consumes 113W
WOW that's impressive!
My gosh, you look sooooo HOT!