Dell Launches New UltraSharp 3008WFP 30-Inch LCD

MojoKid writes "Dell has taken the wraps off their new 30" LCD monitor today and launched the UltraSharp 3008WFP. You'll note that there are more than a few upgrades provided with this newer 3008 version. Specifically, the panel now has a 117% color gamut, in addition to having a 3000:1 contrast ratio, versus the 1000:1 performance of its predecessor, the 3007WFP. The panel also comes with the same pixel response time of 8ms but now has enhanced brightness capability at 370 nits. Also, Dell finally saw fit to add significantly more connectivity options to the panel, with not only two DVI-D inputs, but also HDMI, Composite, Component, S-Video and the new DisplayPort interface. In short, anything you could want to hook up now or in the future, can be hooked up to this new Dell 30" panel."

Comments

Anything?

[darkhitman]

In short, anything you could want to hook up now or in the future, can be hooked up to this new Dell 30" panel.

So how many Slashvertisements can it be hooked up to?

Synesthesia?

[Sponge Bath]

"... audio signals with 16-bit color per channel"

Man, give me some of what they are smoking.

Re:Does it hdcp?

[The Ultimate Fartkno]

YA RLY!

FTA:

Ports: Analog, DVI-D (dual link) with HDCP x2, S-Video, Composite, Component, HDMI, DisplayPort
USB 2.0 (4), 9-in-2 Media Card Reader, Kensington security port

I love the Dell WFP Series

[gsmalleus]

I've got two 2007WFP (20") monitors and they are awesome. If I had the money I would probably upgrade to the 3007WFP. The only complaint I have with the 2007WFP is that when the monitor goes to sleep, the USB ports lose power. The USB ports on the side of the monitor are very convenient. Last night I was copying some large files to my thumb drive and turned off the monitor so I could go to bed. I forgot that the files wouldn't copy if the monitor was off.

Re:I love the Dell WFP Series

[Haeleth]

I have the 2407 WFP (the pre-HC, they released the wider color gamut HC model two months later). Best monitor I have ever used.

You got lucky. The HC model has nasty issues. I had one briefly. Even after calibration, the ghosting was incredibly distracting just dragging icons across my desktop, and games were all but unplayable.

(And frankly I was glad I had the ghosting as an obvious reason to return it. It also suffered badly from the colour shifting problem that all PVA displays have: the contrast decreases where you're looking at the display head-on, so there's a kind of circle in the centre of the screen where you can't see any detail in dark pictures. Not a problem for office work, but very annoying in games and movies. The 30" models have generally used IPS panels which don't suffer from this problem.)

Re:30 in LCD monitor?

[HTH NE1]

HDTVs tend not to include Dual-link DVI and its resolution of 2560x1600.

I already run my 21" VGA-connected 4:3 CRT at 2048x1536 (the limit supported by my KVM switch).

What this Dell display is missing is a stand that supports easy switching to portrait mode.

I'll wait for the behardware review.

[eddy]

Happened across these guys a few days ago while hunting for a clue on what LCD to get in the 22-24" range. I was very impressed by their deep analysis of different monitors; actual measurements of color gamut, response times (ghosting), etc. Good shit. Yes, you'll have to 'suffer' their english. Big deal.

The first thing I learned was that it's like that old saying of "Fast, Good, Cheap -- Pick two", only with "colors, response, ergonomics". Secondly: It's hell to actually be able to know what the hell monitor you're getting since producers swap in different quality panels under the exact same model. Typically the good panels go out in the first batch (which reviewers will get), and then if there's high demand, or in other territories, they'll put in the cheaper panels instead. Their flippant attitude about it makes me not want to buy a monitor at all. Maybe with Dell this isn't a problem, but on the other hand, they're not cheap, as measured globally.

Re:I'll wait for the behardware review.

[Orphaze]

Unfortunately, Dell is well known for swapping panels. It's referred to as the Dell Panel Lottery on forums across the internet.

In short, Dell has been known to swap S-IPS panels (a kind of TFT technology known for particularly accurate color representation) with various other kinds of cheaper panel technologies, all within the same model number. This is why many manufacturers, including Dell, refuse to list what technology they're using in the monitor specs, in order to reserve the right to use whatever cheapest panel they can find as they become available.

I purchased a Dell 2001FP a few years back that had a genuine S-IPS panel. When it started to have problems (specifically, a piece of tape or insulation began migrating onto the screen underneath the plastic of the panel) they sent me the newer model of the same line. It looked awful in comparison, despite having virtually the same specs. (It was a PVA panel, from what I found out later.) Luckily, after spending 2.5 hours (persistence is key in these situations; eventually it's cheaper to give in than to continue dealing with you) in a chat with a Dell support tech, and her manager, I eventually convinced them to refund my money in its entirety, despite the fact I had purchased the monitor about 5 months ago.

In any case, it pays to do a fair amount of research on a monitor before making a purchase. In the end, I ended up going with an HP LP2065, another S-IPS based monitor, which I have been very happy with. Things may have improved more recently though, so it may not be such a big deal these days.

Re:I'll wait for the behardware review.

[entrigant]

It's funny you mention that. I'm not sure about PVA, but if I got S-IPS instead of S-PVA I'd be pissed. The original S-IPS is worse at color reproduction, has over twice the black level, and much smaller viewing angles than a S-PVA or S-MVA screen. Some of the extremely high end IPS types (AS-IPS and H-IPS) come pretty close to a good S-PVA/MVA in black level and color gamut, but still not quite there. You also still get bad viewing angles.

A great S-PVA w/ led back lighting will exceed sRGB with near perfect color fidelity down to the point where the typical LCD black level interferes, and with such a panel that is as low as 0.24 lumens (some even lower with specialized filters). They do as well with CCFL's within the limitations of a CCFL. The viewing angle is so good you can hit 170 degrees and still get great color both horizontally AND vertically.

Perhaps you had an old school non S PVA (those aren't quite as nice), perhaps dell didn't bother to calibrate it, or perhaps your subjective definition of good differs with the quantitative definition (hey, some people prefer some things that aren't technically accurate, and that's cool with me). I own a Samsung 204t which is a 20" S-PVA that I calibrated with a colorvision spyder, and I am extremely pleased with it.

Re:yeah, but how much?

[HTH NE1]

I'd really like to know how much this thing is gonna cost. It's like trying to solve a cryptex looking for a price tag anywhere. Last page says MSRP US$1999.

Re:so, how high?

[Anonymous Coward]

With this new monitor, your computer can correctly display many new, previously unaccessible colors, such as bleenish-grue, hooloovoo, ultrabrown, octarine, light black, dark white, and none more black.

Re:OK, now 120Hz?

[sexconker]

120 HZ is good because of the whole video vs film thing.

Film (movies) is usually done at 24 fps (23.976).
Video (tv, some movies) is usually done at 30 fps (29.97).

So if you've got a 60 Hz display, you're getting 2 frames of display per frame of video.
With film, half of the frames of film will be displayed for 2 frames, and half will bd displayed for 3 frames.

This causes a jerky display.

With a 120 Hz display, each frame of video can be displayed for 4 frames (4 * 30 = 120).
Each frame of film can be displayed for 5 frames (5 * 24 = 120).

It also allows us to drive our computers at 120 Hz, which is good if you want to play Quake II.

Don't buy the soundbar

[owlstead]

I've got a 21" Wide Screen Dell display. It took some getting used to (about 5 days) before I came to terms with some back-lighting issues. But I also bought the sound-bar. What a piece of crap that is. I should have returned it just after testing it, but I thought it would be a nice addition to the otherwise feature packed screen. Even the connectors to the headphones were junk, no one should do that to a couple a pair of Sennheiser headphones.

After a while I have fallen in love with the screen. It's got *very* good scaling and the VGA connector performs brilliantly. Very good value for money. But, as said, DON'T BUY THE FREAKIN SOUNDBAR.

Monitors can be too big

[hirschma]

I just upgraded to two Gateway 24" displays (BTW, they're great for the money. I got two for under $800).

The truth is that once you get past this size, monitors become un-ergonomic. Bigger monitors make you have to swivel your head up and down; they also will exceed the limits of your non-peripheral vision if you sit at a "normal" viewing distance.

My $.02.

jh

DisplayPort

[HTH NE1]

Do we really need another video interface? How many does that make now?

There's wireless NTSC, PAL, SECAM, and ATSC.
There's RF cabling to carry those as well.
There's RCA-composite and S-Video. (Let's not get into all the audio options.)
You can get composite and audio on a 4-conductor headphone jack too on portable DVD players and some SlingBoxes.
IIRC Betamax had a monaural 3-conductor version too.
There's SCART.
There's component video.
There's VGA as well as 5-BNC (R,G,B,H,V).
There's ADC for Apple users, and that DB15F connector Apple used to use.
There's Sun's 13W3.
There's DVI-A (also carries VGA), DVI-D (digital-only), and Dual-link DVI.
There's HDMI, latest version being 1.3b (follows 1.3 and 1.3a, not "beta").
There's Firewire 400, and even USB 2.0 gets used for video. Multiple sizes too.
There's Unified Display Interface (UDI).
And now there's DisplayPort.

Did I miss anything? I'm sure there's lots more in just the streaming video area.

Makes HD DVD vs. Blu-ray seem like nothing, doesn't it?

Oh yeah, there's the TVs with players built into them too, so you could add VHS and DVD to the list so far. (UMD is opening that window too far.)

Re:DisplayPort

[Facegarden]

Yeah, but most of those are terrible for displaying computer output - most of what you listed are analog, which we obviously used for a long time, but analog video is obsolete now, so when you ask "do we need another interface?", if you're suggesting the analog methods are suffient, i'd say you're on crack. As for the new digital methods, i really only see DVI-D, HDMI, UDI, and DisplayPort for the dedicated display connections (sure there's USB and firewire, but until we get a universal connection method that is truly fast enough, and create video cards that can crunch high quality video while relaying it to said universal ports, i don't count those as viable formats for mainstream display connections). There's also wireless methods, but they're not there yet either.
My point is this: Do we need another format? Well, unless there is a current method that is sufficient for every possible current and forseeable future use, then the answer is yes, yes we do need another format. Since the analog ones are all terrible for today's digital displays and pixel-perfect (compared to analog) world, they're useless. Since the dell 30 incher's at least used to require TWO dvi connections, it seems like that's not good enough. I don't know enough about HDMI, UDI, or DisplayPort to judge between them, but if we've only got 3 possible connection methods that MIGHT even be ideal for today's technology, do we really have too many connection possibilities as you implied?
-Taylor

Re:Waiting for 24"

[Runefox]

I demand to know why you posted as an anonymous coward. I have mod points, and if I were to use them on you now, that would be wasting them.

Curse you, Red Baron! >=|

Of course...

[Runefox]

It's only a matter of time before a less restricted version of this native 24Hz mode is made by a standards body and everyone's favourite whipping boy goes into marketing mode. I can see it now:

TruSpeed, Sony's 24Hz mode found on Sony TV's and those of several other licensees, offers superior image quality than the industry standard High-Definition Synchronization, or HDSync because its name also functions as a market buzzword. Both standards provide perfect film-quality frame-by-frame synchronization of the display, but only TruSpeed offers a two-syllable solution, making it faster and lighter than its tri-syllabic competition.

Beware: Some "WFP" models have 6-bit TN panels

[MojoStan]

Subject: I love the Dell WFP Series

Comment:I've got two 2007WFP (20") monitors and they are awesome.[snip]

Buyer beware: not all "WFP" models are created equal. The WFP models that have an 'E' or 'SP' before the number (e.g. E207WFP and SP2008WFP, both 20") use inferior 6-bit TN panels. TN panels can only display 262,144 colors and only "support" "16 million+" colors through dithering. A TN panel's viewing angles are also inferior. (I wish manufacturers would make this information more clear for their TN panels.)

In contrast, the UltraSharp 2007WFP models you've got are awesome. They are true 8-bit panels that can display 16,777,216 colors and have superior viewing angles. They either use S-IPS or S-PVA panels. Of course, they are also significantly more expensive than the 6-bit TN models (but good value for 8-bit).

Just yesterday, I noticed a disturbing new (to me) model name for a Dell LCD. Dell recently released a 22" model called the "UltraSharp 2208WFP." In the past, having "UltraSharp" in the model name and no 'E' or 'SP' before the model number hinted that it was an "awesome" 8-bit panel. Not anymore. It's a freakin' 6-bit TN panel.

That said, TN models are probably good enough for most buyers. Most of today's 6-bit panels probably look better than 8-bit panels from 5 years ago. I just wish manufacturers were required to disclose the type of panel in their specs.

Re:Waiting for 24"

[Pete (big-pete)]

I demand to know why you posted as an anonymous coward. I have mod points, and if I were to use them on you now, that would be wasting them.

I think you're misunderstanding what mod-points are for. Their main use is not to "reward" people - that is a secondary effect. The main use of mod points is to highlight a good comment, regardless of author. This will bring the comment up into the visibility of more viewers.

For example anyone browsing at "1" and above will miss the comment you failed to moderate now, due to your failure to correctly moderate the comment up from 0 to 1. I personally only view comments rated "2" or higher, as there used to be (and I assume still is) a lot of junk at "1". There are one or two good posters who post without their karma bonus, and to avoid missing these people I try and friend them when I realise who they are, and grant friends an additional +1 to make them visible.

If there's a good comment that you think more people shouuld see, mod it up - even if it is an anonymous coward.

-- Pete.