A Special Note about Gaming and Response Time

Every time we claim that the response time on a monitor is fast enough for gaming, we get four or five emails a few weeks later claiming that the monitor we had recommended was too slow for an individual's taste. 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. Given some of our previous works on response time, you should be able to draw enough conclusions to see if the 20ms TrTf response time on the Dell 1905FP is capable enough for your own gaming experience.

It's my personal belief that the transient time between two current generation LCD monitors is practically impossible in real world applications, but everyone has different levels of sensitivity on the matter. In general, through sampling our readers, we have come to the conclusion that readers upgrading from a CRT to an LCD for the first time are more likely to claim one LCD monitor as "slower" than another and at least "slower" than a CRT. However, in the same regard, we have also noticed that a growing number of readers who use LCDs with advertised low response times report no complaints even if that monitor has higher transient response times (particularly gray to gray) than the industry average.

That being said, the Dell 1905FP gaming experience was no different than that of the Samsung 193P. We spoke very favorably about that LCD's gaming experience back in April, so feel free to revisit those experiences.


Conclusions

In our opinion, it was very difficult for Dell to give us anything but a stellar product. Combining the excellent panel from the Samsung 193P with the brilliant user interface and Genesis signal processor was a sure-fire formula for success. To make the pie sweeter, Dell also made the monitor affordable and well constructed. The monitor boasted some cool revisions from the previous generation of Dell monitors, like housing the AC to DC inverter inside the monitor and eliminating the brick.

There is still room for improvement for Dell. We were not impressed with the analog connection on this display, for example. We noticed poorer than typical results when using the analog 15-pin D-sub connector with extremely bad streaking/interference errors. There isn't a large reason to use analog in our opinion, so this is not a huge issue in the long run. The DVI signal quality was superb, as expected on a digital connection.

Also, even though our Dell 1905FP supported pivot functions, Dell did not bundle pivoting drivers or software. Samsung and Dell do a great job of hooking their customers up with all the extra trimmings, but it looks like Dell dropped the ball to Samsung on this aspect. We are also slightly concerned about the exposed backlight issue that we mentioned on Page 2. We did not experience any issues in the lab, but this may be asking for trouble as dust can settle on the backlights over time.

The cost of the LCD is right in the middle of the pack for typical 1280x1024 19" LCD monitors. On the other hand, the primary distribution channel for the monitor is Dell's own website. For those of you who don't know, Dell.com runs incredible coupon and discount deals all the time - so finding a 1905FP for less than the $499 MSRP shouldn't be too hard at all. Once availability increases a bit, we should see much more competitive pricing on the monitor as well.

The 20ms typical response time on this particular monitor felt more than adequate enough while we performed our application analysis on the monitor, but that doesn't mean Samsung/Dell can't push the monitor further. We profoundly appreciate Dell's decision to stick with an 8-bit LCD for their flagship 19" LCD panel even though the current industry trend seems to lean more towards cheaper, "faster" 6-bit panels instead.

In general, our hats go off to Dell as they clearly built another winner.


Subjective Analysis
Comments Locked

66 Comments

View All Comments

  • hoppa - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    i hardly see the point in spending so much extra money going from 17" to 19" if you are not going to be afforded any extra resolution.
  • Thermopyle - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    "It's my personal belief that the transient time between two current generation LCD monitors is practically impossible in real world applications, but everyone has different levels of sensitivity on the matter."

    This sentence is confusing. I assume by transient time you mean response time, but I don't understand what the "transient time between two LCD monitors" means. Then you say the transient time is "impossible". Huh? What is impossible?

    The whole sentence makes me want to cry.
  • KristopherKubicki - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    It is 5:4 not 4:3 - this has been updated.

    Dell did not have any samples of the 2005FPW for us. I am guessing if they don't have samples for PR, they are probably changing something on the monitor.

    Hope that helps,

    Kristopher
  • drifter106 - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    I am somewhat puzzled by this statement...

    We were not able to get a sample of the 2005FPW in time for this review

    I am sitting here looking at one and I know they have been out for some time. I am disappointed that you would make a statement like that. Could a better choice of words been used to substantiate as to why you chose NOT to include the 2005? The last thing I would hope to hear from this site is something that makes me doubt your authenticity.

    jd
  • Fionavar - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    Thanks for the review. I do want to echo someone earlier - where is the long for and much anticipated review of the 2005FPW? This monitor is clogging others boards with discussions and it would WONDERFUL to have something definitive from AnandTech!
  • REMF - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    i wouldn't touch a dell box, but i will happily buy their excellent screens.

    i wouldn't buy any M$ software, but they make bloody good mice.

    even bad companies (subjective opinion) can make great products.
  • Mojo027 - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    I wish you guys wouldn't rip on the BenQ monitor so much, it's really a great monitor. You should be comparing the FP937 12ms monitor to these models, not the FP931 16ms...

    However, great article, and I'm sure the Dell models are great.
  • Gnoad - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    Why? Dell makes quality LCD screens and cheap basic computers for the average person. Just because we can build our own for the same price with twice the performance does't mean they're a bad company.
  • TwistyKat - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    I don't care how great it might be - I would never buy anything Dell.
  • Spacecomber - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link

    Like #11, I too found the sentence he or she quoted ambiquous.

    I'm glad to hear, as noted in the review, that there continue to be LCDs affordable monitors being produced that are closing the gap between a LCD that produces a full range of color and LCDs that are fast enough for gaming.

    It will be intresting to see if Dell can do a good job of keeping up with the demand for this monitor and resist the temptation to raise the price as its popularity grows. Anandtech's reviews no doubt carry a fair amount of clout when it comes to influencing consumers. I'm sure many others also noticed how quickly the NuTech L921G sold out just about everywhere and how the Viewsonic Q190MB went from being a bargain priced monitor to a premium priced model.

    My guess is that someone else is putting together the L921G for Nutech. It would be very interesting to know who this and who else they are providing monitors to.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now