The 20" LCD Shootout: Dell versus Apple
by Kristopher Kubicki on April 27, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Subjective Analysis
For this portion of the benchmark, we will pit the Dell UltraSharp 2005FP and Apple Cinema 20" display against monitors that we have looked at recently. This is a subjective test that relies on our overall experience with the monitor after several hours of casual and thorough use. We also use test patterns and guidelines from the VESA FPDM 2.0 to rate each unit as fairly as possible.Generally, here is how we rate a category:
5 - Outstanding; we have not seen anything to date that could rival our impression of this monitor's performance.
4 - Good, but room for improvement. There are units on the market that perform better.
3 - Average; this monitor performs well enough to maintain the status quo, but does not excel.
2 - Improvement needed; this monitor performs poorly in performance of this category.
1 - Unacceptable; this product does not pass even basic performance requirements.
| DisplayMate / CheckScreen / VESA FPDM 2.0 | ||||||||
| Dell 2005FPW | Apple Cinema 20" | Samsung 193P | ViewSonic Q190MB | Dell 2001FP | ||||
| Intensity Range Check | 5 | 4.5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | |||
| Black Level Adjustment | 4.5 | 4.5 | 5 | 5 | 4.5 | |||
| Wide Angle Viewing | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 | |||
| Defocusing, Blooming, Halos | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | |||
| Screen Uniformity and Color Purity | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4.5 | |||
| Dark Screen Glare Test | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4 | 4.5 | |||
| Primary Colors | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | |||
| Color Scales | 4 | 4.5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | |||
| 16 Color Intensity Levels | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | |||
| Screen Regulation | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | |||
| Streaking, Ghosting* | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | |||
| *Note: the streaking/ghosting mentioned in this portion of the analysis refers to streaking and ghosting interference, not as a byproduct of poor response time. | ||||||||
Notes From the Lab
It is slightly unfair for us to give either 20" display only a rating of 4 for motion blur, but given some of the interesting technologies that we have seen in development over the last six months, we are fairly confident that single digit response times will start making more of a difference and, in fact, give that elite core of enthusiasts more reason to contemplate LCD over CRT. Both displays scored a 5 on streaking and ghosting, although this is slightly unfair as well, since we are not counting the score of the analog connector. Over analog, we had fair results on the Dell 2005FPW, although we could certainly notice artifacts when playing a game like World of Warcraft on higher resolutions. Apple does not have an analog signal.Apple deserves a slightly lower rating on the intensity range than Dell for the difference in contrast ratios. The 2005FPW began to wash out at very high intensities, but our Apple Cinema 20" washed out at low intensities as well. Measuring how far these intensities were from the extremes, we found the Dell to be just slightly ahead of the Apple with this respect.
Another Special Note about Gaming
Gaming on the Dell 2005FPW and the Apple 20" Cinema display was really a treat. We are bombarded by "low" response time LCDs constantly, so we feel the need to always put a little bit of a warning in each display review. Attempting to quantify response times subjectively for everybody is a dangerous practice - comments like "16ms response time is fast enough for anyone" are just opinions and therefore, we don't actively preach them. We recently took a look at the Dell 1905FP, which uses a 20ms 8-bit PVA panel, and we were on the threshold of experiencing little to no motion blur. With training, we can spot what to look for between two LCDs when comparing them head to head, and when we compared the Dell 2005FPW to the Dell 1905FP, it became very clear that these displays used different display modes and different response times. It may just be our personal opinion that the Dell 2005FPW (and Apple Cinema 20") display produced a crisper display during fast motion gaming, but we should be able to infer that from some of the other things that we know about LCDs as well. Traditionally, all Super IPS displays perform "faster" than their PVA or MVA counterparts - particularly on gray-to-gray transient times.Another critical note for gamers interested in these displays is the aspect ratio. 1680x1050 is not a very common aspect ratio (16:10). We can watch unscaled 720p inside a window on either display, or scaled 720p with black bars across the bottom of our screen, but it isn't native. Very few games support 1680x1050 as a resolution (with the exception Half Life 2 and Far Cry), so no matter what you play, you will be playing on a scaled signal. Scaled signals degrade play quality as one pixel becomes stretched or compressed to account for the screen size. Dell has an ace up their sleeve with the ability to unscale the signal and have it display as it truly should in native form in the center of the screen (the Dell 2001FP also did this). Apple's Cinema display does not have the circuitry to do this. Several games support a 1600x900 resolution, which on the Dell 2005FPW, only leaves a few pixels along each side uncropped.
If you don't mind the slight scaling issues, widescreen games become incredibly immersive. Unreal Tournament 2004 and World of Warcraft are two of our favorite games of all time, and both include widescreen display modes (16:9). As a not-so-odd coincidence, we have noticed that most cross platform (PC-Mac) games usually support widescreen formats.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Weezard - Wednesday, May 4, 2005 - link
Okay, sounds good.So if I buy this monitor, Ill just have to plug it in, and it will work with widescreen and all - on my Windows XP system with 9700Pro?
Thanks.
Pastuch - Wednesday, May 4, 2005 - link
"Does my Radeon9700Pro support this monitor?"A 9700pro is an excellent videocard for this monitor if you dont plan on playing games like Halflife 2 or WoW. The 9700pro's DVI signal will work perfectly, however you should install the latest ATI driver from ATI.com.
"but what about resolution options, DDC (or what its called - the function that delivers 16:10 widescreen). "
DDC or whatever you had in mind does not deliver a widescreen display. If you install the latest ATI drivers you will see that the standard windows graphics profiles in display settings have 1680x1050x32. The ATI driver has the ability to force 720p or 1080i but it is not necessary.
Weezard - Wednesday, May 4, 2005 - link
Hi, nice review.I do have a few questions about the Cinema Display.
Does my Radeon9700Pro support this monitor? It has DVI output, but what about resolution options, DDC (or what its called - the function that delivers 16:10 widescreen).
Is this a plug and play monitor, when running Windows XP and Radeon 9700Pro? Is any software needed before using it with a Windows OS?
Thank you.
wrack - Wednesday, May 4, 2005 - link
One thing I forgot to ask Kristopher,Which graphics card and processor was used to carry out this review..? I can't find 1680x1050 resolution option on my graphics card.
wrack - Tuesday, May 3, 2005 - link
#54 Electonic circuits always tend to attract fine dust.nortexoid - Sunday, May 1, 2005 - link
dust acts as an insulator? the monitor is standing vertically so the only place dust would gather is on the top, not on any of the electronics. or do you lie your monitor face down on a glass desk and work from underneath the desk? i know it's gaining ergonomic popularity, but i thought only in malawi.Spacecomber - Saturday, April 30, 2005 - link
This is the kind of review that I'd like to see become the standard for comparing LCDs. Pick an assortment of LCDs that are using the same type of matrice panel(TN, IPS, PVA/MVA) and compare these monitors to each other. They don't have to be using the exact same panel, as in this case, just one based on the same technology. This will provide the reader with something much more like an apples to apples comparison than the apples to oranges comparision that you will get otherwise. (Sorry, about the Apple pun.)With all three (or four) types of matrices having such distinctive strengthes and weaknesses, you pretty much have to decide which of these patterns of characteristics will best match how you use the computer and then go looking for that particular type of matrice in a panel.
The questions for the reviewers then becomes how well does a particular display cope with it's inherent weaknesses, as well as how well does it emphasize what should be its relative strengths.
For example, in this Anandtech review of IPS panel displays, one of the main problems for IPS panels to overcome is a relatively low contrast ratio, which can affect how well it reproduces black; so, this specification is one that should be given particular attention in the review, especially the subjective analysis.
Response times are always a point of emphasis in LCD reviews, and with IPS screens, as was noted in the review, you should expect to see the relatively modest black-white response time made up for by the fact that response times stay relatively consistent, even when changes in shade become smaller. (That is why I was confused by this statement, regarding motion blur, in the review, "...two states that are very close to each other take less time than two states further apart from each other, which results in pixels that are not just delayed in a uniform manner, but at several different speeds across the entire panel depending on the hue". I thought that it was with states that were closer together that you saw the slower response time, due to the voltage differential being so small in these cases.)
In sum, I'd like to see more LCD reviews start with what is known about the panel that is being used (such as is detailed in this very good xbitlabs analysis, http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/lcd... and use this understanding to provide a framework for comparing LCDs in terms of their strengths and weaknesses. Essentially, while there is no one LCD monitor that is as well rounded for many purposes as is a CRT, anyone buying a LCD will be looking for the one that imposes fewer compromises on the them and for compromises that impinge less on how the screen will be used by that particular buyer.
Space
KristopherKubicki - Friday, April 29, 2005 - link
nortexoid: Dust acts as an insulator. Wrapping your DSP in a warm cuddly blanket will probably make it fail prematurely.glennpratt: Unfortunately I cannot quite vouche for the fact that aluminum really acts as a heat sink on this display. The housing is completely smooth and does not really create additional surface area for heat dissapation. Aluminums ability to transfer heat well only helps if there is additional surface area for the sink to come in contact with air.
In reality, the reason why Apple can get away with a beveled design without any passive exhaust has more to do with the fact that the inverter is housed in a separate brick from the display. Samsung does this too in many of their high end displays.
Anyways - I think Apple just picked Aluminum for looks.
Kristopher
glennpratt - Friday, April 29, 2005 - link
The Apple is made of aluminum which may have affected their decision to leave out the vents (aluminum transfers heat much better the plastic.)nortexoid - Thursday, April 28, 2005 - link
What do you think damages a electronics more: dust falling on them or high temperatures?I'd rather vents in the back of my monitor to prevent higher temperatures than have it completely sealed to keep out that horribly destructive nuclear fallout.