Not to knock you, but if you read the article and my comment that you replied to, you will have read that I have tried many LCDs, and they all exhibit some level of lagginess.
I've tried Linux and Windows XP both on the monitor, and both show the same lagginiess.
First of all, thank you, everybody, for taking a look at this. I received a characteristically Slashdotty wealth of "you're an idiot" replies, and a good number of "I didn't read the full article and/or watch the video so I'm jumping to conclusions" replies as well. =) Those of you that read the article and offered your genuine insight, thank you.
It's all fine, though. I'd like to answer a few randomly culled questions here, and also summarize what I've found based on all the feedback so other potential LCD owners can get a better feel for what they're up against.
It's not the mouse. If you look at the video (which many of you probably couldn't), you'll see that I have a dual-head setup that includes a CRT. It's lightning-quick responsive on the CRT.
As I mentioned in the full article, even when I use a single head setup with just the LCD, the same lag is present. And to those that guarantee switching to a single head CRT on the system will show the same lag. I've tried that in the past, and, again, the CRT is lightning-quick.
I'm running at the native resolution (1600x1200) with things like ClearType off, running over DVI. For that matter, if I do switch it to a non-native res, it still exhibits the same level of lagginess. Same goes with switching it to analog. Same lag.
I've used this LCD with many different computers (laptops, other desktop machines) and the problem replicates itself on every machine, regardless of OS or drivers.
I've seen the same lag on every LCD I've ever seen or used, although the problem is not as great as this one. Examples are my laptop, work computers, family computers, etc. If you think that you don't have a lag, you probably do (compare with a CRT), but you're probably blessed with one that is minimal enough to not be immediately perceptible. My laptop is much more useable for things like games because the lag isn't nearly as bad.
People that use this LCD for gaming that claim they have no problems, I'd suggest you try switching back to a CRT for a comparison. The "feel" will likely immediately clue you in to the difference.
It's not the driver, as guaranteed as you'd like to say it is. I've tried every driver on the planet. Also, see #4 above.
Others recognize this to be an issue as well, with their 2001FPs and others. Some of the comments say that they hate LCDs for this very reason. A good number of people who primarily game have returned their LCDs because it messes them up on games like CS or Unreal Tournament.
To those that think I should have taken this to a troubleshooting forum on Dell or elsewhere, there was apparently an issue posted about it on Dell's site. Someone's solution was to bring it down to a 1280x1024. See #3. Other than Dell's site, I was unable to find mention of it anywhere else, even though, yes, GIMF.
The overall summary, which you may or may not agree with is: Most LCDs are laggier than CRTs (I'd be jumped in an alley if I went as far as to say *all* LCDs are, but I try to avoid sweeping generalizations). Do your own tests, and come to your own conclusions. If you're a gamer, be careful. And lastly, my Dell 2001FP may in fact be one of the laggiest LCDs in existence, *or* I just received a defective unit.
Thanks again, everybody, for the replies. I hope this helps some people. I know that I at least saw one person in the comments that learned something new, although it was, in fact, for something unrelated to the immediate post. =)
Slashdot Mirror
Not to knock you, but if you read the article and my comment that you replied to, you will have read that I have tried many LCDs, and they all exhibit some level of lagginess. I've tried Linux and Windows XP both on the monitor, and both show the same lagginiess.
First of all, thank you, everybody, for taking a look at this. I received a characteristically Slashdotty wealth of "you're an idiot" replies, and a good number of "I didn't read the full article and/or watch the video so I'm jumping to conclusions" replies as well. =) Those of you that read the article and offered your genuine insight, thank you.
It's all fine, though. I'd like to answer a few randomly culled questions here, and also summarize what I've found based on all the feedback so other potential LCD owners can get a better feel for what they're up against.
The overall summary, which you may or may not agree with is: Most LCDs are laggier than CRTs (I'd be jumped in an alley if I went as far as to say *all* LCDs are, but I try to avoid sweeping generalizations). Do your own tests, and come to your own conclusions. If you're a gamer, be careful. And lastly, my Dell 2001FP may in fact be one of the laggiest LCDs in existence, *or* I just received a defective unit.
Thanks again, everybody, for the replies. I hope this helps some people. I know that I at least saw one person in the comments that learned something new, although it was, in fact, for something unrelated to the immediate post. =)