Dell U2412M - 16:10 IPS without Breaking the Bank
by Chris Heinonen on February 28, 2012 9:00 AM ESTConclusion: A Good 16:10 IPS Display
After using it, the Dell U2412M comes out with a lot of positives and no big negatives. The screen has a nice 16:10 aspect ratio that makes it feel roomier than a normal 16:9 display, and it has a nice adjustable stand that made it easy to fit on my desk. The contrast ratio was good, power use was low, and the response time for gaming was also very good. The overall dE values were acceptable but not fantastic, and the screen was relatively uniform.
The main negatives I can come out with are that the dE values get slightly high for blues, but they do that on any monitor that doesn’t display the full AdobeRGB colorspace. Similarly the frame lag numbers look bad in comparison to other displays, but this is our first attempt with a new testing method and I made sure to select the worst-case scenario numbers as well. I can criticize the black uniformity as the corners were a bit bad, though being a lot better in this area will likely require using something other than the current edge-lit LED system or the emergence of OLED displays for the desktop, which would definitely increase the cost (by a large amount in the case of OLED).
In the end, would I buy the Dell U2412M for myself? Yes, I probably would. The fact that you can find it for $300 or less on sale fairly often and that it calibrates to a decent dE value makes it easy for someone to use as a general-purpose desktop display. Viewing angles are good, I still like the adjustability of the Dell stand, and the larger work area made for a good combination.
The closest competitor seems to be the HP ZR24w, which features an S-IPS panel but otherwise looks remarkably similar. I haven’t had a chance to see that in person so I can’t elaborate further, but that was the only 16:10, IPS panel at Newegg that came within $75 of the U2412M. I really think Dell has taken everything out of the display that they can (e.g. reduced to a 6-bit panel, no LUT, no HDMI) to produce a panel that is affordable but still very good for most people, and far beyond the 16:9 TN panels that many people might be upgrading from. It’s certainly not perfect, but it’s good enough for most people, and it is what I would want as a bare minimum if I was in the market for a 24” monitor.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
143 Comments
View All Comments
bioffe - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
I find this article disturbing because it doesn't mention this monitor's predecessor U2410 which seems to be much better monitor for $150 dollars more. It's putty how Dell destroyed its high end model, and went to monetize its reputation. Dear Anand, I want to see how it measures to u2410.ImSpartacus - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
I think Dell still sells the U2410. The U2412M is complimentary.I agree that the naming scheme is weird, but both monitors can coexist.
Death666Angel - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
Considering the 60% price difference and that the 2410 is still being sold, I don't see why the 2412 is necessarily the successor. I think both monitors are targeting different consumers.cheinonen - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
There isn't a review unit of the U2410 available at the moment, as I checked, so I could compare the two. They do fit into different realms, and can easily coexist at the same time, but the naming scheme is very, very hard to understand.Touche - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
Much better for what? 2412 has better blacks, higher contrast, is sRGB which many find an advantage, has less input lag and is a bit faster. Head to tftcentral and prad for detailed comparisons.Oxford Guy - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
The U2410 is competing in a different space.It has better uniformity.
It has a better color gamut.
It has worse contrast ratio.
It has a higher price.
Sufo - Wednesday, February 29, 2012 - link
U2410 has an sRGB profile...sethsez - Thursday, March 8, 2012 - link
It does have an sRGB profile. It's very inaccurate, as sRPG profiles on 10-bit monitors tend to be. If someone is doing work primarily for web-based content, a 10-bit monitor isn't just a waste, it's potentially detrimental.vectorm12 - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
Greay review unfortunately I'm looling for something with higher resolution these days. For my kind of workload 2560x1440 have turned out to be the bare minimum. I recently bought 2x u2711 to replace 3x 1920x1080 Samsungs. I'd love to see some eIPs panels reach that size and preferably higher pixeldensities.cwolf78 - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link
Does this guy come off as a snobbish bitch to anyone else?