Resolution Support and OSD

While the ideal solution is to run your LCD at the native resolution, there are times when you might want to use something lower. With the fine 0.233mm dot pitch and 2560x1440 native resolution, running at something lower becomes even more likely. We tested the VGA, HDMI, DisplayPort, and DVI connections to see how the U2711 would handle non-native resolutions (note that we didn't test component or composite video). The OSD provides three aspect ratio options: Fill (use the entire LCD, with stretching), Aspect (fill as much of the LCD as possible but avoid stretching), or 1:1 (no stretching at all).

The vast majority of resolutions work exactly as you would expect. 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x800, 1280x960, 1280x1024, 1440x900, 1600x1200, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, and 2560x1440 showed no problems at all. Also, when using a VGA connection, every resolution we tried worked properly. Shift to the digital connections and we did encounter a few minor issues.

Starting with DVI, both 720p and 1080p filled the whole LCD regardless of the aspect ratio setting. This isn't terrible, since the image will still maintain the correct aspect ratio, but it does mean that the 1:1 setting failed to work in this instance. We also encountered some oddities with 720p and 1080p using an HDMI cable at times, but those problems appear to be more of a laptop driver issue than something in the U2711. On one laptop, 720p output always looked blurry, and the 1:1 setting didn't actually map to 1280x720 pixels as far as we could tell. In general, though, these common widescreen resolutions still worked well.

The resolutions where we had the most problems are all less common resolutions. On DVI, 1280x768 didn't have the correct aspect ratio, with black bars on all sides. 1360x768 stretched horizontally but not vertically on "Fill", making for a very skewed result, "Aspect" left borders on all four sides, but "1:1" worked properly. 1792x1344, 1800x1440, 1856x1392, and 1920x1440 all did an "aspect" stretch, regardless of OSD setting.

HDMI didn't show as many resolutions, probably because we had to use a different computer as the source (a laptop). Again, "odd" resolutions caused some incorrect behavior, but we don't really fault Dell. 1152x648 and 1776x1000 (underscanned 720p and 1080p, respectively) have a black border at all times, and like the DVI connection 1360x768 was squashed vertically unless you use the "1:1" setting. DisplayPort behavior was the same as HDMI. Note also that the HDMI connection didn't allow us to select resolutions above 2048x1152 (a 16:9 resolution). 2048x1152 was also the maximum resolution we could use on a VGA connection. We're not sure if the limitation was with our test laptop or if it's inherent with the U2711, as we don't have any HDMI connections that we're sure will properly handle 2560x1440.

In general, all but a few uncommon resolutions worked well. Something else we really liked was the "Sharpness" setting when we were using something other than the native resolution. The default setting of "50" appears to pass the signal on without molesting it, but as you move towards 0 the display becomes a bit blurrier and increasing towards 100 will apply a mild to moderate sharpening filter. Running at 1680x1050 with sharpness set at 70, you have to look very closely to notice that the LCD isn't running at its native resolution. Other LCDs have a similar feature, but on many displays the sharpness setting is only active if you use an analog connection (i.e. VGA).

The OSD

For the sake of completeness, here's a gallery of all the OSD settings. Yes, there are a ton of options. We like that Dell allows you to customize the "quick jump" buttons, but we wish they had allowed us to make one of the settings "Aspect Ratio" rather than limiting the choices to "Preset Modes", "Brightness/Contrast", "Input Source", or "Mode". There's really not much to say about the OSD: it works as expected.

Brightness, Contrast, and Power Most Impressive
Comments Locked

153 Comments

View All Comments

  • karielash - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link



    Yes the resolution is worth it, although I went for a 30", the difference between 1080P and 2560x1440 is huge.
  • jigglywiggly - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    Haha, you guys are making me feel bad, I have 3xs2409w in a triple monitor setup. They are all tn panels, but they look gorgeous to me. Then again I have had nothing to compare them to.
  • cactusdog - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    I hope you guys test Samsungs new cPVA monitors F2370H and F2380MX. It supposedly has a true 3000:1 contrast ratio, TN response times and 100% color gamut.
  • MadMan007 - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    How can you knowingly write the title 'New Samsung IPS' then go on to say they are cPVA in the post?? Did you forget the title by the time you wrote the post?
  • cactusdog - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    Hahaha, i know. I wrote the title but i thought i better check what kind of monitor it was. I wrote it right in the post cPVA then i forgot to change the title. lol anyway its cPVA
  • MadMan007 - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    hehe, sorry, I didn't mean to sound trollish. A review of those monitors would be nice, sure, if just to see how good 'c'PVA is but they aren't really competition for IPS in the professional market because fwir they still have the typical PVA horizontal angle-dependent contrast shift.
  • Zebo - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    Correct PVA actually shifts more than TN on horizontal axis (who cares about vertical unless you shift from sitting to standing in front of your desk) PVA is also slowest tech. In sum IPS>TN>VA
  • strikeback03 - Monday, January 25, 2010 - link

    Sorry, having owned and used all three I disagree about putting TN over *VA. And I definitely could see the TN vertical problems just sitting at a desk looking at a 17" 5:4 panel, just the few degree shift in angle from top to bottom caused issues.
  • FlyTexas - Friday, January 22, 2010 - link

    This is a nice panel for those who really need it, however...

    The Dell 3008WFP 30" LCD would be a better choice for most gamers and casual users however, if you're looking to spend this much money.
  • mespejel - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - link

    you need more information myself, i have the 3008WFP and i'm actually selling this monitor to buy the new U2711.. the technology is simply superior:

    U2711 use H-IPS 3008WFP use S-IPS (H-IPS is much better)
    U2711 use 80000 dynamic contrast ratio.. 3008WFP use 3000
    U2711 have 6ms.. 3008WFP have 8ms

    also the 3008WFP is not really good for movies and you know that (if you own one).. U2711 is amazing for movies

    CNET rate U2711 as much superior as the best 27 inches better.. and they don't rate 3008WFP that high..

    the only advantage of 3008WFP is the size of course, and that is 1600p.. but this monitor is 1440p.. not much difference there!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now