Print 44 comment(s) - last by VPN.. on Dec 30 at 12:59 AM

Samsung will provide the panels and will launch its own displays alongside

Samsung Electronics said that it has signed a long-term contract to provide Dell with 27-inch LCD panels, according to DigiTimes’ reading of a Korean publication. Both companies will launch 27-inch panels in 2007, and the panels can also be used as televisions.


Samsung’s projected specifications for its upcoming 27-inch panel features a 1920 x 1200 resolution, 1000:1 contrast ratio, 500 cd/m2 and a response time of 8 ms grey-to-grey. See the full specs here.


Dell last month introduced a 20.1-inch widescreen LCD for $289. Samsung has also been making strides in other display technologies, as it recently revealed the world’s thinnest mobile LCD screen and just before that a 12mm thick AMOLED display.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By abhaxus on 12/1/2006 2:29:47 AM , Rating: 2
I just got a 2007FPW, thinking that the 2407s would remain above 6-700 for the forseeable future. This will surely drive prices down :(

By Gigahertz19 on 12/1/2006 2:42:31 AM , Rating: 1
Prices will take awhile to go down on the 2407's. A 27" 1920x1200 display sounds like the sweet spot. Current 30" LCD monitors are too expensive and the native resolutions are so high you need a top end GPU or SLI to play games on them. A 27" 1920x1200 would be perfect, not to big and the native resolution is not so ridicously high that you don't need a high end GPU just to play modern games.

I wonder how much $$$$ for this 27"? I would estimate around $1,000 for the dell and after awhile with coupon codes maybe $800-900.

By B166ER on 12/1/2006 2:46:13 AM , Rating: 3
I agree, 27" will be a nice spot, though my boys 27" TV was a bit ridiculous for computer work unless you were sitting some 4 feet away. I can forsee a large amout of "bedwork" being done. You can lay down and surf and work in the nice confines of your bed! MMmmm, toasty!

By mino on 12/1/2006 11:59:50 AM , Rating: 2
but back then those TV's did not have 1920x1200 resolution...

By B166ER on 12/1/2006 3:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
My bad, I meant that it wasn't that great due to the fact that it was 1366 x 768 or whatever that res is..

By masher2 on 12/8/2006 9:08:35 AM , Rating: 1
TV resolution is close to VGA -- 640x480.

By glennpratt on 12/8/2006 4:23:30 PM , Rating: 1
1366 x 768 is very common resolution for 720p capable LCDs.

By robladdish on 12/1/2006 2:58:49 AM , Rating: 2
I have one of the apple 30" lcd monitors. While the native 2560x1600 resolution requires a high end video card, many games play fine on 1/2 resolution or 1280x800. I wouldn't use the "fast video card" requirement as a must for game playing.

By ButterFlyEffect78 on 12/1/2006 4:36:27 AM , Rating: 2
This is true. I also read that the dell's 30inch also supports more then 1 native resolution, which is also 1280x800 just like the apple's 30 inch.

By therealnickdanger on 12/1/2006 9:09:23 AM , Rating: 2
So long as a monitor has good scale processing, any non-native resolution can look just fine. Usually, anything that moves looks fine, it's text and static images that usually scale poorly. I really like 1920x1200, it's perfect for HD-content and just about any upper-midrange to high-end graphics card can run most games at that res with all eye candy. My laptop has a 17" 1920x1200 display and I love everything about it.

By bunnyfubbles on 12/1/2006 1:10:10 PM , Rating: 2
the 30" is known to scale down better than other screens, and the 2560x1600 resolution is so large, it can scale down to 1280x800 and retain a perfect 4 to 1 pixel ratio with no need for interpolation.

So in a sense, the 30" Dell is actually more versatile for gaming than a smaller screen in terms of producing an ideal high IQ.

However response time is isn't the greatest on the large screen, so there is still that trade off.

Who cares about resolution?
By TheRequiem on 12/1/2006 8:37:42 AM , Rating: 2
What they need to do is start making better technology. I don't care if the resolution is 1080p, 1200p or whatever it is. What I WANT to see is better color accuracy at same cost value. They just added WCG-CCCFL's tot heir 30 inch dislay, why aren't they doing this to other monitors? The cost difference is relatively very little difference and the color gamut goes up 20%+ which makes a far more impressive visual update then simple resolution upgrades. Or what about faster progression pixel technology so there is no ghosting at all because it tricks your eyes? Come on people...

RE: Who cares about resolution?
By SLI on 12/1/2006 9:30:33 AM , Rating: 2
Looking at Samsung's spec sheet, it looks like its going to need dual DVI inputs (just as the 30" does) I run crossfire (with the dongle) so I dont think I can use this. Dell's 24" only needs one so I guess thats what I will go with early next year.

RE: Who cares about resolution?
By dice1111 on 12/1/2006 9:47:28 AM , Rating: 2
I haven't looked at the spec's but just to reply to your post; if anything it will need a single dual-link DVI connection, not dual (two) DVI ports. There is a big difference.

RE: Who cares about resolution?
By Hyperlite on 12/1/2006 9:57:11 AM , Rating: 2
What you are referring two is Dual Link DVI, which is supported by all modern video cards, not two DVI cables. Dual link DVI uses only one cable.

RE: Who cares about resolution?
By Thmstec on 12/1/2006 10:25:38 PM , Rating: 2
lets not confuse them now

What you are referring to is Dual Link DVI, which is supported by all modern video cards, not two DVI cables. Dual link DVI uses only one cable.

And most video cards only have 1 Dual-link dvi, even if there are 2 DVI, one is single-link only. All of the Avivo cards from ATI support 2 Dual-link, and I think most 7900s do, but 7800s and lower do NOT.

RE: Who cares about resolution?
By SLI on 12/2/2006 9:48:26 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks to both for the clarification. One other small oddity is I cannot seem to get the viewable area measurements (WxH) of the 24" or the 27" Seems the specs are referring to overall dimensions (including bezel) I'd like to know if the 24" (at a minimum) is more than 12" vertical viewable height, and the 27's as well...

RE: Who cares about resolution?
By Motley on 12/5/2006 2:28:00 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, a 2405FPW is approximately 12.8" (h) x 20.4" (w) viewable screen space.

Again with the resolutions...
By Runiteshark on 12/1/06, Rating: 0
RE: Again with the resolutions...
By ss284 on 12/1/2006 3:13:00 AM , Rating: 3
Its 1080p with a few pixels padded on for productivity reasons. I dont see why 16:10 is a junk ratio/resolution.

By Runiteshark on 12/1/2006 3:47:03 AM , Rating: 1
Mostly because for a computer monitor at that size it would be nice to have something at a higher resolution then 1920x1200.

Something along the lines of the 30" res.

RE: Again with the resolutions...
By robg1701 on 12/1/2006 11:08:08 AM , Rating: 2
He said nothing of aspect ratio, hes complaining quite rightly about the resolution. This is the same resolution as the 24" panels use. You can buy 15" laptops with this resolution if you want. Thats crap.

27" demands a higher resolution damnit ! :)

RE: Again with the resolutions...
By mino on 12/1/2006 11:58:41 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, only reason I have not bought >20inch yet are those bogus resolutions you are asking for.

.303 dot pitch is proven to be the sweet spot from ergonomics point of view.

We have only one pair of eyes for thi lifetime...

RE: Again with the resolutions...
By masher2 on 12/8/2006 9:11:20 AM , Rating: 2
> ".303 dot pitch is proven to be the sweet spot from ergonomics point of view... "

There are six billion people on the planet...and each of them has a different pair of eyes. I have a Dell 2405 now, and I plan to upgrade when this panel becomes available.

By MuskBassist on 12/1/2006 5:21:24 PM , Rating: 2
At least as far DPI, this vs. a 23" or 24" panel would be similar to the difference between the more common 19" and 17" 5:4 LCDs that have 1280x1024 resolutions, and both of those seem to have their place in the market.

The 17" notebook LCDs that come in 1920x1200, I personally find to be borderline-unusable (in the neighborhood of 130 DPI), and I know a lot of adults who struggle with even 100 DPI using standard-size fonts.

As long as this means the price on 24" panels will come down, I see it as good news.

you're missing the big picture...
By DragonReborn on 12/1/2006 3:56:08 AM , Rating: 2
sorry for the pun but I have been meaning to go into a dual display setup and these 27'' beauties look perfect for the job. they will have to be hdcp compliant of course.

i have the 2405 and it has been the single greatest computer upgrade i have ever purchased. just thinking about having more than twice the screen-estate makes my mouse drool.

RE: you're missing the big picture...
By Fluppeteer on 12/1/2006 7:09:43 AM , Rating: 2
They're perfect for the job if you've got a *very* large desk.
And you don't mind your two monitors being different sizes.

This makes a nice television, but I really don't think 27" is helpful for a desktop monitor, especially with the same resolution as 22" panels (or 15.4" laptops) from a couple of years ago. I bet it won't be as cheap as a 22" WUXGA would have been, either.

Bring back 22" WUXGA. I was cross enough about the 25.5" screens...

RE: you're missing the big picture...
By TomZ on 12/1/2006 8:13:07 AM , Rating: 2
Bring back 22" WUXGA

Ditto that - for a computer monitor, especially a dual-monitor setup, that is a great size and resolution.

RE: you're missing the big picture...
By RamarC on 12/1/2006 9:24:56 AM , Rating: 2
Bring back 22" WUXGA

What happened to 22s"? I got one of the black friday 22" specials from BB and I love it. A friend has a 24" and it makes my eyes wander too much.

I want to get another one to replace a 26" tv so please don't say they've stopped producing 22" panels.

RE: you're missing the big picture...
By Doh! on 12/1/2006 10:58:45 AM , Rating: 2
There are still many 22" widescreen monitors in the Asian market. Several newer models were introduced this month in Korea, for example. They're priced around $300. I hope to see them in the N. American market soon.

By GameManK on 12/1/2006 2:19:36 PM , Rating: 2
The 22" you got is WSXGA+ (1680x1050). They are talking about ones they used to have that were WUXGA (1920x1200). It's really too bad they've pretty much stopped making high resolution displays, for both desktops and laptops.

I didn't actually know there used to be WUXGA 22" LCD's. Sounds pretty sweet.

1080p HDTV use
By MrBungle on 12/1/2006 4:14:24 PM , Rating: 2
I'm new to HDTV so please forgive my ignorance.

Might a display like this support 1:1 pixel mapping, so that full-res 1080p HDTV input would appear in its normal aspect ratio, letterboxed on the screen? Or would it likely be stretched vertically as on some 16:10 displays currently out (so I've heard)?

RE: 1080p HDTV use
By Thmstec on 12/1/2006 10:28:16 PM , Rating: 2
Any decent display supports 1:1 pixel mapping. And when the display doesn't, normally you can change a setting in the drivers of your video card to force 1:1. Not sure about dvd players etc...

RE: 1080p HDTV use
By Thmstec on 12/1/2006 10:28:20 PM , Rating: 2
Any decent display supports 1:1 pixel mapping. And when the display doesn't, normally you can change a setting in the drivers of your video card to force 1:1. Not sure about dvd players etc...

RE: 1080p HDTV use
By Motley on 12/5/2006 2:41:08 AM , Rating: 2
They typically support three modes (The 2407FPW does all 3):

1:1 mapping (A 640x480 signal will sit right in the middle of the screen with black borders all around).

Aspect mode - A 640x480 signal will be stretched as much as possible while keeping the aspect ratio the same. In this case it will be stretched 2.5 times to 1600x1200 with black bars on the left and right.

Fill mode - A 640x480 signal will be stretched as much as possible and won't keep the aspect ratio. In this case it'll always be 1920x1200 with no black bars anywhere.

Depending on what you are viewing, some modes work better than others. Some games look good in fill, while others look better in stretch.

On the 2405FPW using DVI, it's always 1:1. The video card handles the image manipulation. With component cables (I have mine connected to my DVR), I normally have it set to fill.

I'd prefer a 20" 1920x1200, or a 27" 2560x1600
By PrinceGaz on 12/1/2006 9:36:30 PM , Rating: 2
Same 1920x1200 resolution, but in a 27" panel instead of 24". The dot-pitch on the 27" panel will be over 0.30mm which is not going to look good unless you move the monitor further back (defeating the object of a larger monitor), or you have poor eyesight.

Now if it were a 27" 2560x1600 panel, then I'd be all in favour of it, but a larger 1920x1200 panel is pointless. Personally I'd like to be able to buy a smaller 1920x1200 desktop display, perhaps 20" or so, rather than having to go for a 24" panel, and certainly not a 27".

RE: I'd prefer a 20" 1920x1200, or a 27" 2560x1600
By Odeen on 12/3/2006 11:02:18 AM , Rating: 4
I'm going to disagree with you on a few points.

First off: Most people over the age of 30 have a hard enough time reading normal 10- or 12-point font from a 19" screen running 1280x1024. .29mm dot pitch is too small.

Take a look around any modern workplace - you'll see people using 17" and 19" 1280x1024 flat panels at 1024x768 resolution simply because 1280x1024 is illegible to them.

Large fonts are not a solution because they do not work with some software and some controls. For instance, AOL warns you straight out that it doesn't work with large fonts. Norton Internet Security has fixed window sizing, and controls simply disappear off the page with large fonts.

.30mm or higher dot pitch would let more people run their screens at sharp native resolution.

The other point you mention is about having to sit further away negating the effect of a larger screen. This is also incorrect.

The human eye is built in such a way that focusing muscles contract to focus on objects close by, and relax when focusing on faraway objects. That's why one of the easiest (and best) things you can do to relax your eyes is to stare off into the horizon. Focusing on infinity lets the eyes relax completely.

By putting the monitor further away, you ease the load on the eye muscles that no longer have to focus quite up close.

A side benefit of larger dot pitch is the reduction of pixel borders size. If you look closely at the screen, you'll notice that each pixel is surrounded by a black border. But, if you grow the pixel sizes, you don't have to grow that border. So, a monitor with larger pixels will have comparatively less black grid between the lit up pixels, reducing the "screen door effect" that some LCD's suffer from.

So, big screens = good
Bigger panel sizes with same resolution = good, to a point.
High resolutions: Useful in limited cases. I upgraded from a 20" 4x3 1600x1200 monitor (.255mm dot pitch) to a 24" 16x10 1920x1200 monitor (.27mm dot pitch) and it made things easier on the eyes.

By VPN on 12/30/2006 12:59:30 AM , Rating: 2
Well you should wait for Windows Vista since then you can scale the GUI at will and thus use 300dpi LCD if you wish.

By Wwhat on 12/3/2006 2:09:04 PM , Rating: 2
No doubt they will sell it for $500 in the US and $2800 in europe, isn't Dell darling.

BTW, when will they finally retire LCD technology already?

RE: nm
By Kyanzes on 12/4/2006 1:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, it won't be cheap in Europe. The 3007WFP costs $2300 in Hungary (best price I've found, didn't buy it ofc), and about $1700 in the UK. Now even the $1700 is a lot compared to the 1K pricetag in the US. Would cost me $1850 from the UK with shipping. My yearly salary is about $25K.

By Enoch2001 on 12/1/2006 3:32:29 PM , Rating: 2
HDCP anyone?

This news is bogus
By SammySung on 12/1/06, Rating: -1
RE: This news is bogus
By AppaYipYip on 12/1/2006 7:26:06 AM , Rating: 1
Provide proof of your statements.

RE: This news is bogus
By BlizzardOne on 12/1/2006 7:40:53 AM , Rating: 5
You're absolutely right, neither will be releasing a 27" this year, that's why the article says 2007.

"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki