This was posted 8 years 1 month 14 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • out of stock

Dell U2415 24" Monitor 1920x1200 16:10 IPS - $359.20 @ Futu Online eBay Store

540
Dell U2415 24" Monitor 1920x1200 16:10 IPS - $359.20 @ Futu Online eBay Store
Go to Deal
Cashback
fastnbulbous on 09/10/2016 - 00:20 ebay.com.au (1129 clicks)
Last edited 09/10/2016 - 00:48 by 1 other user
C20TEC

A good option if you are interested in a 16:10 monitor.
Well regarded for developers and dells build quality is really good (Still running my 24 Inch 2007FWP!)

Display Technology: IPS
Brightness: 300cd/m² Brand: Dell
Response Time: 6ms MPN: U2415
Contrast Ratio: 1000:1 Screen Size: 24"
Video Inputs: DisplayPort, HDMI Standard, Mini DisplayPort Max. Resolution: 1920x1200
Model: U2415 Maximum Refresh Rate (Hz): 60
Maximum Resolution: 1920 x 1200 Aspect Ratio: 16:10
Features: Anti-Glare, Anti-Static, Headphone Jack, Security Lock Slot UPC: 884116153061

Original 20% off Selected Tech Stores on eBay Deal Post

Computing 24inch Computer Peripheral Dell LCD Monitor

Related Stores

eBay Australia
eBay Australia
Marketplace
Shopping Express
Shopping Express

closed Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 01:10
    +7

    I love 16:10. Just gives you that much more height.

    • matt-ozb on 09/10/2016 - 14:53
      +1

      yes, but not at 1200p.

      way better 2560x1440p in a 24" ie Dell P2416D 24" QHD IPS Monitor

      perfect for running at native resolution.

      • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 15:17

        Agreed.

      • Gooky on 09/10/2016 - 18:52

        More height than 1080 though.

        Personally I wouldn't like that much resolution in 24", not a fan of such high pixel density. Makes everything too small.

        • matt-ozb on 09/10/2016 - 22:28

          1440p on a 24" is perfect, but my eyesight is fine.

          I agree that 4K on a 24" is too much at native resolution and scaling on linux still sucks at the moment, so I tried & returned this one about 12-18 mths ago …

          Dell 24 Ultra HD 4K Monitor – P2415Q 23.8" @ 3840 x 2160 resolution

          24" 1440p = perfect
          24" 2160p = too small
          24" 1200p = too large
          24" 1080p = mega large

          This is for typical home/office type work with no movies or gaming.

        • Gooky on 09/10/2016 - 23:01

          @matt-ozb: Not so much too small to be unreadable or anything (perfect eyesight too), it just feels uncomfortable to look at. Even the 1080p on my 23" screen I used to use as a secondry was annoying compared to the 22" 1680x1050 I used as my main. But it's probably just that I'm used to having that as my primary screen for the last decade and a half or something :P

          Currently a 1920x1200 at 24" (previous deal like this actually, U2410 popped up right after my 22" died on me), slightly more dense than what I was on previously but feels just right. From all the calculating I did at the time it seems like 95ppi is my threshold, with this falling just under and the 23" just over.

        • greatlamp on 10/10/2016 - 00:21

          @matt-ozb: for those of us with less than perfect vision, 1200p is a godsend.

          Until windows finally gets good at upscaling, I will have to stick with low resolutions

        • matt-ozb on 10/10/2016 - 00:25

          @rememberme:

          you guys should see the 320 DPI on my Nexus 6 phone! lol

          that is similar to 2160p on a 24", but at least my phone screen is like a full PC desktop :)

        • greatlamp on 10/10/2016 - 00:32

          @matt-ozb: actually I use an s7 edge ( 640 DPI ). It's not a problem on android

        • fastnbulbous on 10/10/2016 - 00:40

          @matt-ozb:

          Need to consider viewing distance as well.
          Maybe I am too far from my monitor!
          I cant read my phone very well when is 70 odd cm away

        • matt-ozb on 10/10/2016 - 00:42

          @rememberme:

          640 DPI … you see exactly half as much as me with my 320 DPI ;P

          when you get Nougat you'll be able to trim that right down to 320 DPI .. finally there are some cool settings to change the DPI without rooting, xposed, adb, apps, etc.

        • lostn on 10/10/2016 - 22:30

          @rememberme:

          actually I use an s7 edge ( 640 DPI ). It's not a problem on android

          S7 Edge is 534ppi (I presume ppi is what you mean by dpi).

        • Gooky on 11/10/2016 - 00:07

          @matt-ozb: Ha. My phone is a mighty Nokia 808, with 4" 320x640 screen at a glorious 184ppi :P

        • matt-ozb on 11/10/2016 - 00:24

          @lostn:

          yep .. I think there is some confusion here with DPI and PPI.

        • matt-ozb on 11/10/2016 - 00:27

          @rememberme:

          is 640 the default DPI, or did you root your phone and change to 640?

          your fonts and icons must be huge! lol

          you must see about 2 text messages on your screen with mega-huge fonts.

      • lostn on 10/10/2016 - 22:28

        16:10 version of that would be 2560x1600. i.e. more height.

  • Click_It on 09/10/2016 - 09:28

    I have the 2007FWP too. I had 2 and 1 died recently. I'd be scared to buy one of these to sit next to my almost 10yo 2007FWP (it'll display so much better).

    16:10 is awesome though. I could buy 2 but then for a bit more I could start looking at Ultrawide or 4K displays hmmm.

    • RedHab on 09/10/2016 - 12:09

      Actually, I have a 2015 27" U2713H next to my 2007 FWP and the 2007 model still looks good.

      • Click_It on 09/10/2016 - 16:08

        Oh that's positive news. I was worried mine would look terribly faded next to a new one after all these years.

    • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 13:10

      I'm tempted to get an ultrawide but many of them lack the height I'm after.

      It's not until you start looking at 34" ultrawide that the height kicks in. But at that size the price is pretty huge too.

      • Click_It on 09/10/2016 - 16:07

        Yeah exactly, not worth looking at anything less than the 34" (3440 x 1440) not the 2560x1080 versions.

        We're looking at $1000+ though.

        Alternatively, for the same $1000 price (often less) you can get the Philips BDM4350UC 43" 4K (or previous model 40"?) (res: 3840x2160). I'd love to use both types for a few days and see which my eyes like best. Many people say the sheer size of 43" isn't as bad as it sounds for a daily monitor, just set it a little further back. Obviously not talking gaming here.

        • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 21:40

          My TV is 40"!

          i can't imagine what it'd be like working in Office at 43".

  • lostn on 09/10/2016 - 09:54
    +3

    Is this the successor to U2413?

    i.e. is it a wide gamut monitor?

    Did my own research. It is standard gamut.

    Scaling supports 16:10 and 5:4 and 4:3.

    It does not support 16:9 or 1:1 scaling. The lack of 16:9 is baffling if you ask me.

    I don't recommend this unless you're using it solely for PC. If you're going to plug an external device to it like a console, it will stretch to 16:10.

    • Jabba the Hutt on 09/10/2016 - 10:39
      +1

      Previous 16:10 models have had the same shortcoming. Been baffling for a long time. Not enough noise about it, so care factor zero on Dell's end :-/

      Summarised the pros and cons of this model vs the U2414H (the 16:9 equivalent) here.

      • lostn on 10/10/2016 - 22:32

        I have U2413 which is 1920x1200 (16:10) and it supports 4:3, 5:4, 16:9, 16:10, and most important to me, 1:1.

        I just assumed they would all support these ratios.

        My U2515H (16:9) does not support 1:1, which is disappointing. I get a feeling if it was a 16:10 screen it wouldn't support 16:9 either.

    • 1bug on 09/10/2016 - 12:13
      +2

      Is this the successor to U2413?

      No. According to TFT Central, the U2415 replaces the aging U2412M (released in 2011 & still sold by Dell AU for $429)…

      http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2415.htm

      "This year [2014] Dell have updated their 16:10 aspect ratio offering with the newly released U2415. This screen is designed to be a replacement for the aging U2412M screen, sticking with the standard gamut backlight and more general features than the semi-professional grade U2413. As such, the U2413 will still be available alongside the new U2415 if you specifically need some of the advanced features offered there. Dell have however beefed up some of the extras on the U2415 compared with the old U2412M."

  • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 10:25
    +1

    $360 for a 60 Hz FHD monitor? Every single compony should start a monitor line in a corner of their factories! That is where the market is going.

    • terrys on 09/10/2016 - 11:10
      +1

      I thought Dell were overpriced. I then picked up a 'dying' 2008 2408WFPb for $50 [green line]. I'm still in two minds,the vertical green line that takes ~ 3 minutes to disappear as it warms up is still there and is worse when the temp is 6 degrees, and [after only 15 months] when it's that cold it occasionally has trouble with horizontal sync for a couple of minutes, but the colours are brilliant.
      Less than double the price of something like an Acer? Bargain.

      • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 12:18
        -1

        Monitors are very much overpriced no matter the brand. I work with 10 monitors a day, I am a bit happier with Dell but I would not pay more than $5 for that. It depends what you do, the market is full of hungry gamers and that's where it's headed, unfortunately. Comparing to other computer parts a 20"-24" 60Hz FHD should be less than $100, after all it is only a 30 years old panel and base plus a low-resolution screen as FHDs are not useful and outdated. I would say $200 would be fair for a basic 24" 4k. Maybe $300 for a 4k 29" 100Hz IPS.

        • terrys on 09/10/2016 - 12:41
          +1

          I see your point, I was comparing retail values, and would rather one like my "old" monitor than a newer one. This one still has the 99% sRGB and the thin bezel would make it a far better buy when compared to others out there, but for most users, my $340 Bauhn 39" 4K tv would be a far better bet. For working on photos and documents tho, I find a big difference between sitting 2-3 meters from the Bauhn, and 1/2 a meter from the Dell, whose colour gamut and stability is impressive. The former is good for consuming content, the latter far better for creating and interacting with it. They may be gouging as much as the others, but are doing a bit more work and research to justify it in the market. Capgate aside, their products do at least usually have a good long life, but it's probably cost less than a few dollars to put a sound-bar with it…

        • [Deactivated] on 09/10/2016 - 18:22

          @terrys: Good point. Would you please tell me more about using a 4k TV as a monitor? Looks like a 29" 4k TV would be cheaper than a monitor!

        • terrys on 10/10/2016 - 07:41

          @pal: So far I have only thrown a $40 4K android box on it to check out Youtube and view my 4k photos as 4k photos for the first time lol. My laptops throw up a 1080 screen but the text is clear and sharp. The only problem I hit was my nexus 10 only offers me a mirrored screen in the top right corner of a 1080 screen using HDMI [ maybe a HDMI 1.2 cable? I haven't bothered to play further] and will only offer 1080 via Chromecast - I haven't tried the android box's Miracast yet.

          When I get the lounge tidy enough to make a space to clear an area, I might move it to the lounge and try it as a desktop monitor :-)

  • charliebrownau on 09/10/2016 - 12:27
    +1

    AUD$350 for a 24" screen at 60hz …
    Sounds like outdated stock dell are trying to flogg off

    No wounder stuff like crossover and Qnix range of monitors (Qnix QX2710) sell in droves
    compared to overpriced junk

    I saw on amazon an 24" 144hz freesync acer for USD$200 on amazon us the other day
    and no surprise the same screen is AUD$400 here

  • fastnbulbous on 09/10/2016 - 12:41
    +4

    Yes the 16:10 is more of a niche market and attracts a premium.
    A major benefit of 16:10 is being able to use the monitor in portrait mode as it is just wide enough still while having a whole lot more length which works well for coding.

    The majority of the ozbagrain crowd are probably more interested in gaming and hence the skinnier 16:9 is good enough for that and you get all the high fps free,gsynch options as well. Bit most of those monitors are a bit too skinny for me!

  • cm712 on 09/10/2016 - 12:44
    +3

    I picked up the Dell U2515H last month for the same price, and that was a 2k panel.
    TBH does not sound like a great deal.
    U2515H - https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/266720

    • fastnbulbous on 09/10/2016 - 13:07
      +4

      16:10 is a key point of difference on this one and a key inflator of the price (and perceived value). 16:10 attracts a premium.

    • lostn on 10/10/2016 - 22:35

      Your deal is better.

  • ABA on 09/10/2016 - 12:46

    Does it come with a TV tuner built in?

    • misterpotatomato on 09/10/2016 - 13:05
      +2

      Why would it?

    • Agret on 09/10/2016 - 13:46

      No this is a computer monitor and not a TV

  • matt-ozb on 09/10/2016 - 14:52

    This one is way better for about the same price …. (unless you prefer the large text on the 1200p)

    2560x1440 = the perfect resolution for a 24"

    Dell P2416D 24" QHD IPS Monitor

    I paid $335 delivered in a recent 20% eBay sale.

    • niner on 09/10/2016 - 20:45

      1440p seems to be preferred on 27" screens.

      That dell monitor has excellent specs, but it's not the most popular monitor.

      • matt-ozb on 09/10/2016 - 22:24

        I only bought it because I needed another 24" @ 2560x1440.

        I think the same panel is in my BenQ 24" @ 2560x1440.

        Apart from the resolution, I thought the other specs were average, but never really checked too closely.

        1440p on 27" is not as efficient for me as it is too big - maybe if you're a gamer than 27" is better.

        But yea, most people think bigger is better, hence like the 27". I disagree.

  • hyatc on 15/10/2016 - 13:46

    bought it at the price $472 this March…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join