Thoughts on cost: 2407WFP-HC vs. 2707WFP

H

[H]eatpipe

n00b
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
22
I'm a new owner of a 2407WFP-HC, and I like it... a lot.
But, I can't help being tempted to send it back for three more inches of screen real estate.
So, I ran some calculations to compare (to change my mind) and thought that I would share since I see others weighing the same options.

Both monitors appear to have the same 1920x1200 resolution, connectivity, 92% wide-color gamut and USB card-reader.
The 27" gains three screen-inches and a groovy stand.

Cost (US, as of today):
$1019.00 2707WFP
$ 679.00 2407WFP-HC
$ 340.00 Difference

Cost per inch of screen (USD, minus shipping & tax):
$37.74/inch 2707WFP
$28.29/inch 2407WFP-HC

That's an extra $9.45 for every inch of the 2707's screen.
And that translates to an 33% price-premium for the 27".

On paper, if the 24" was stretched to 27", the 2707WFP would only cost (in my imaginary-world) $763.83.
Similarly, if the 27" was reduced to 24", the 2407WFP-HC cost would rise to (again, in lala-land) $905.76.

I do understand that, in the real-world, this is somewhat meaningless.
But I generally respond to arguments of diminishing-returns.
And this is fairly strong argument.
It seems the 27" is still just a bit pricey compared to the 24".
Of course, want is much more tolerant of pricing-gaps than I am.

Regards...
 
I wouldn't do it. I'd be comparing the 24"ers with the 30"ers- but resolution matters more to me. With the 27" you're paying for bigger pixels and/or bigger viewing area- if you need either of those, cool, if not, 24" is your thing. Otherwise consider jumping to 30".

--Might be nice to tell us what you're doing with it and what video card is driving it :)
 
Funny to read your post because I am in the same situation. Just received the 2407HC and really very pleased with the picture since I am coming off of a CRT. I have been thinking about the 3007 or 2707 too. Just wondering how they would compare to the 2407HC as far as picture quality.
 
I think it really is personal opinion. I've got a pair of 2707's that I'll be sending back to Dell in the coming week. I paid $1100 (including taxes), but I just can't seem to justify the purchase. The resolution in fantastic. The 3 inches really doesn't seem to affect the quality of the pixels. The BEST thing about the 2707 has got to be the frame design. From the OSD buttons, to the stand, and the back of the display, I'm 100% sure you will not find a hotter looking monitor on the market. Boy, if Dell only knew how many 2407's they would sell if they implemented the 2707 frame design on it.

As a student, the $400 difference in price between the two models right now is just outrageous. Go with the 2407wfp-hc, or, dare I say it, wait for a significant price drop.
 
[H]eatpipe;1031267168 said:
I'm a new owner of a 2407WFP-HC, and I like it... a lot.
But, I can't help being tempted to send it back for three more inches of screen real estate.
So, I ran some calculations to compare (to change my mind) and thought that I would share since I see others weighing the same options.

Both monitors appear to have the same 1920x1200 resolution, connectivity, 92% wide-color gamut and USB card-reader.
The 27" gains three screen-inches and a groovy stand.

Cost (US, as of today):
$1019.00 2707WFP
$ 679.00 2407WFP-HC
$ 340.00 Difference

Cost per inch of screen (USD, minus shipping & tax):
$37.74/inch 2707WFP
$28.29/inch 2407WFP-HC

That's an extra $9.45 for every inch of the 2707's screen.
And that translates to an 33% price-premium for the 27".

On paper, if the 24" was stretched to 27", the 2707WFP would only cost (in my imaginary-world) $763.83.
Similarly, if the 27" was reduced to 24", the 2407WFP-HC cost would rise to (again, in lala-land) $905.76.

I do understand that, in the real-world, this is somewhat meaningless.
But I generally respond to arguments of diminishing-returns.
And this is fairly strong argument.
It seems the 27" is still just a bit pricey compared to the 24".
Of course, want is much more tolerant of pricing-gaps than I am.

Regards...
Click to expand...

I think you need to compare the total viewing surface (square inches) of the 27incher to the 24incher for a better assessment of what you are paying for.
 
I did the calculation.

2707WFP ..... $3.11 per in^2
2407WFP-HC ..... $2.62 per in^2

Per square inch, that is 18.7% premium for 2707WFP.
 
And then there is the need for a larger video card. And then you have a larger screen but what will fill it?

In my case I bought an articulating arm (eBay, $20.00) and can put my 2407HC right against my nose or back to arms length. The resolution is at the max of my ATI video card. I can have two or three windows operating simultaneously. So the upgrade to 27 or 30 inches only gives me a wider picture with very little increased information. Im going to spend my money on other components.

Mac
 
Which is why I personally believe 27" are the worst buy you can make right now. So much more expensive than the 24" for barely anything more. Plus, add a couple hundred more bucks and you have yourself the 30" with way more resolution and S-IPS panel.
 
I wish my video card had dual link DVI, I would save up more and get the 30".. Gods that would be an awesome amount of desktop space!! It would be so much easier to keep track of shit while writing. Two of them would just be sick! Damn, I need to hit the Powerball. Or actually finish a writing project for once and sell it. :p

Neither one is likely to happen in the near future though. But, a man can dream.. and drool.. :D
 
To my way of thinking, if you don't have a HDTV capture card, then a good 24 makes more sense....but IMO, those extra 3 inches will help liven up HDTV recordings.

http://tvcalculator.com/index.html?0906fc016c9f147db208d2c97f218b48

http://tvcalculator.com/index.html?8c8f50fcb51332019a64891ebe2c4f39


Have a look here...a 27 does make a difference to the viewing experience.

In a few yrs, prices will have dropped, and no-one in their right mind would buy a 24 over a 27.....27 being a good size for most PC desks.
 
If you are thinking about returning 2407 for 2707, wait until August for Dell to start their back to school sales. Prices should drop enough to make it even more appealing switch
 
Thanks to Heatpipe and Yikes2000 for crunching the numbers. Interestingly, you both show the 2707wfp at a 18.6%-18.7% price premium. I think I'll stay with my plan to get a 24incher.
 
Yep, thanks Yikes2000 for the contribution.

Also, everyone keep in mind, as shown with the TV calculator link, that the image will be bigger but the resolution will be the same.
 
Not to beat a dead horse here, but...

I got some different figures than you Yikes2000.
Perhaps I've screwed up somewhere...

27"
Image Dimensions: 22.9" x 9.74"
Image area: 223.05 sq. in.
Cost = $1019.00
Cost per sq. in. = $4.57

24"
Image Dimensions: 20.35" x 8.66"
Image area: 176.23 sq. in.
Cost = $679.00
Cost per sq. in. = $3.85

So I get a 16% increase in cost per square inch on the 27",
translating to an extra 72 cents per sq. inch.
Which is half of what I originally calculated per diagonal inch at 33%.

Yeesh, that's more math than I've used for a while.
Back to playing games and sniffin' glue...
 
[H]eatpipe;1031272725 said:
Yep, thanks Yikes2000 for the contribution.

Also, everyone keep in mind, as shown with the TV calculator link, that the image will be bigger but the resolution will be the same.
Click to expand...

For HDTV that won't be a problem, and IMO most of the latest screen res are too SMALL for my liking, so a 1080 27 inch DELL/Samsung will rock if you're into HQ video playback.

All markets have different prices, but DELL 27 is only $300-$350AUD more than a 24......that extra amount over 4-5yrs of ownership will be quickly forgotten.....but let me stress, that really only applies if you want to watch HDTV on your LCD{and HDTV is still better at that screen size, I can see the difference between SDTV and HDTV on my 19in CRT}.

Otherwise, for most people, a good 24 would also be awesome if you can hack the text size....but 8bit only!!
 
I had thought about getting a larger 27" or 30" monitor but I am starting to enjoy having two 24" dual monitors...........BenQ241W and the Dell 2407WFP-HC.

 
solaris54 said:
I had thought about getting a larger 27" or 30" monitor but I am starting to enjoy having two 24" dual monitors...........BenQ241W and the Dell 2407WFP-HC.

Click to expand...

Do you prefer one over the other. If yes, why? Those two are on my short list. Thanks.
 
I am having a hard time deciding that myself. Both screens seem almost identical. The BenQ seems alittle sharper while the Dell has a softer image. I do like the convenience of the card readers that the Dell has built into the side of the monitor. I still need to calibrate both of them.
 
solaris54 said:
I am having a hard time deciding that myself. Both screens seem almost identical. The BenQ seems alittle sharper while the Dell has a softer image. I do like the convenience of the card readers that the Dell has built into the side of the monitor. I still need to calibrate both of them.
Click to expand...

I look forward to your opinion once you have calibrated them... got my eye on those 2 monitors...:)
 
solaris54 said:
The BenQ seems alittle sharper while the Dell has a softer image. I do like the convenience of the card readers that the Dell has built into the side of the monitor. I still need to calibrate both of them.
Click to expand...

How about some input lag comparison? One already showed that LG is better than Benq, but if the Dell has the same/similar panel, it would be nice to know whether its lag is comparable to LG's or Benq's..
 
[H]eatpipe;1031272809 said:
Not to beat a dead horse here, but...

I got some different figures than you Yikes2000.
Perhaps I've screwed up somewhere...

27"
Image Dimensions: 22.9" x 9.74"
...

24"
Image Dimensions: 20.35" x 8.66"
...
Click to expand...

That's incorrect. Geometry: a^2 + b^2 = c^2.

22.9^2 + 9.74^2 != 27^2

Ditto for 24".
 
W^2 + H^2 = 27^2 in^2
W/H = 16/10
=> W = 22.896 in and H = 14.31 in

A = W * H = 327.64 in^2
Cost = $1019
=> $3.11/in^2

W^2 + H^2 = 27^2 in^2
W/H = 16/10
=> W = 20.352 in and H = 12.72 in

A = W * H = 258.876 in^2
Cost = $679
=> $2.623/in^2

Thus for each square inch, the 27" costs 48.724 cents more than the 24", so the 27" has a 18.577% premium over the 24" per square square inch.
 
bilbo3660 said:
Heatpipe had it right. The area of a rectangle, ie. viewing area of a display, is its length times its width. http://www.aaaknow.com/geo78_x3.htm ;)

I think the formula you gave is for finding the length of the third side of a right triangle when you know the length of two of its sides.
Click to expand...

The formula is applicable in this case. Let H be the height of the viewable area, the width is 1.6*H for 1920x1200. Solve for H:

27^2 = (1.6*H)^2 + H^2
H = 14.31 inches.

And width is 1.6*H = 22.90 inches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top