|
Deal: Dell 2007WFP 20.1" Digital LCD Display $367 at Dell Home
|
Click Here
|
|
|
Posted 4:53 PM PDT 6/27/06 by Ben
|
|
|
 Dell Home has their newly released Dell 2007WFP Flat Panel Monitor for $367 with free shipping. It has mostly the same features as the legendary 2005FPW. Response time has increased from 12ms to 16ms, contrast ratio is up from 600:1 to 800:1. Here are the specs:
20.1" Flat Panel LCD, 1680x1050 pixels and fast 16 ms response time
±89 degrees viewing angles, VGA / DVI-D / S-video / Composite / 4 x USB 2.0
300 cd/m2 Brightness, 800:1 Contrast, Height Adjustable Stand
|
|
|
# 1
Posted 5:05 PM PDT 6/27 by DVDtester Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 152.163.100.203
|
|
|
|
Too bad it doesn't have component input, which would far better utilize its resolution than S-video or composite.
|
|
|
|
# 2
Posted 5:10 PM PDT 6/27 by mrgee - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
too bad it is just a corroded piece of crap.
|
|
|
|
# 3
Posted 5:35 PM PDT 6/27 by necro joe Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 69.232.196.111
|
|
|
|
Since when has 16ms been considered "fast"? 2004? Gimme a break.
|
|
|
|
# 4
Posted 6:29 PM PDT 6/27 by berthajean - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
"coroded"?? Do you mean decroded like Napoleon would say??
|
|
|
|
# 5
Posted 6:45 PM PDT 6/27 by fawkes - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
#2 FTW...
lol! I wouldn't touch this with #5's weiner & #6 pushing.
|
|
|
|
# 6
Posted 6:50 PM PDT 6/27 by rt1111 Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 70.194.19.118
|
|
|
|
"Response time has increased from 12ms to 16ms," So if we can find 24 ms one, this one is much much better? Ok, tell me where could I get 24 ms one? :)
|
|
|
|
# 7
Posted 7:47 PM PDT 6/27 by winsome - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
quit playing with yourself, #5
|
|
|
|
# 8
Posted 8:25 PM PDT 6/27 by gu3st Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 72.174.77.93
|
|
|
|
fuck you all.
|
|
|
|
# 9
Posted 8:46 PM PDT 6/27 by dcm32 - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
If the response time is 16ms, does that make it comarable to a CRT's 60 Hz refresh rate? (60 Hz = 60 cycles / sec -> 1/60 = .0166 -> 16.6 ms... right?) And by the same logic, 12 ms would be about 80-85 Hz, yes? I know response time isn't the same as flicker, but seeing as 60 Hz CRT monitors drive me crazy, a 16 ms response time sounds like a bad idea...
|
|
|
|
# 10
Posted 9:12 PM PDT 6/27 by ryanpease - Email: ryanpease - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
Number 9 is a total tard and has no idea of even the basics of refresh rates and response times.
He should die in a fire.
|
|
|
|
# 11
Posted 9:31 PM PDT 6/27 by necro joe Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 69.232.196.111
|
|
|
|
http://www.necdisplay.com/support/css/monitortechguide/index04.htm
Basically, a CRT is constantly having to redraw every single line being displayed. The refresh rate, is now many times it redraws this in a second.
LCDs, however, only have to "redraw" the pixels that are changing.
A CRT has to tell each line "You are white now...you are white now...you are white now...you are white now..." 75 times a second. An LCD screen says "You are white, and stay that way 'til you hear different."
|
|
|
|
# 12
Posted 10:08 PM PDT 6/27 by F0ckUAll Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 24.255.84.147
|
|
|
|
And number 11 since you sound completely retarded, you are black until you can prove otherwise.
|
|
|
|
# 13
Posted 12:40 AM PDT 6/28 by Blondie Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 206.72.67.43
|
|
|
|
#8 should be tied up and brought to West Hollywood.
The big leather boys would have such a good time taming his mouth among other things.
Bubba would like to come see you in the flesh #8. Boys talking dirty gets him very turned on.
|
|
|
|
# 14
Posted 1:47 AM PDT 6/28 by froheke - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
25ms and less is completely acceptable for any gaming purpose. anything lower than 25ms and the naked eye won't even be able to detect it. so yes, 16ms is considered fast.
|
|
|
|
# 15
Posted 1:47 AM PDT 6/28 by froheke - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
i just wish it was true 16x9 ratio.
|
|
|
|
# 16
Posted 3:32 AM PDT 6/28 by Richard Lam Unregistered - Email: Jedi2155@yahoo.com - IP: 70.37.68.143
|
|
|
|
Actually, its still 12 ms if you rate it the same way as the 2005. I think its 16 ms from Black to Black rather than grey to grey. Or something like that.
|
|
|
|
# 17
Posted 6:29 AM PDT 6/28 by fooman Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 199.46.198.232
|
|
|
|
#14 ... <cough>ghosting<cough>
excuse me.
|
|
|
|
# 18
Posted 6:49 AM PDT 6/28 by cyberguest Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 12.105.72.130
|
|
|
|
i have both 2005wfp and 2007wfp, the construct of 2007wfp might not be as tough, but i don't see any difference in screen quality, same beautiful images, sharp text. one for home use, one for work, so that covers most usages.
|
|
|
|
# 19
Posted 7:21 AM PDT 6/28 by rdcollns Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 68.166.86.162
|
|
|
|
#18, I thought you were about to say you were running a dual display with those two monitors.... I was already turning green with envy before I got to the end of your message.
|
|
|
|
# 20
Posted 7:23 AM PDT 6/28 by Noob Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 70.113.197.133
|
|
|
|
So is this a deal or not? Any additional coupons, etc? Thanks...
|
|
|
|
# 21
Posted 9:00 AM PDT 6/28 by mrgee - Email: N/A - IP: Hidden
|
|
|
|
#12,
you are a complete idiot.
|
|
|
|
# 22
Posted 10:35 AM PDT 6/28 by coreyandj Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 72.161.4.19
|
|
|
|
And number 12 you're a racist biggot until you step into the 21st century. I bet you live in ARK-KAN-SAAAAW. To bad they don't have a special for chewinnnn Terbacahhh you'd be all over that one
|
|
|
|
# 23
Posted 3:27 PM PDT 6/29 by rdcollns Unregistered - Email: N/A - IP: 68.166.86.162
|
|
|
|
I think #21 and #22 misunderstood what #12 was saying. Reread it without reading any racist connotation into it and it means something completely different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright Ben's Bargain Center v2.5 2004
Page
generation by NewsPro >Archives
|
