M17x lcd

So far it has been confirmed that the Samsung LTN170CT11 model panel is being used for the 1920x1200 display. Chaz has also confirmed both 1440x900 and 1920x1200 panels are dual lamp.

Below are translations of the 1200p panel review by notebookcheck and notebookjournal
Added 7/12/09:

Ok got this info from the german website notebookcheck on their review of the M17x with the 1200p panel. Since it was in german I used babelfish so the translation isn't perfect. They described the lcd, some bad some good. Heres the snipit about the LCD:

"Our first brightness test of the notebook brought a maximum brightness of 263 cd/m ² in the lower central measuring quadrant to day. However we could observe both with free eye and confirmed by our measurements clear brightness waste within the range of the upper corners. Here the maximum brightness on up to 159.5 drops cd/m ². Accordingly low is therefore also the value of the brightness distribution: Only 60.6% create the WUXGA panel in this discipline. Top cuts the display off of our test candidate however with the maximally possible contrast. With a particularly low Schwarzwert of 0.24 cd/m ² the panel achieves a maximum contrast relationship of believe it or not 1058:1 - respect! Also subjectively the represented colors work very strongly and brilliantly. Point of view stability can be sufficiently described both in the horizontal and in the vertical range of vision and. With possible reflections and reflections, also in interiors one must make friends oneself however on a long-term basis."

So if I am understanding correctly it seems the bottom portion of the screen is the brightest and it gets dimmer towards the upper part of the lcd? The 263 nits definitely describes a dual lamp but then the brightness dips all the way to 160 nits near the upper corners apparently. So it seems the top bulb are duds in terms of brightness. It seems the contrast ratio is superb however at a 1058:1 ratio along with good color gamut. The dimness in the corners bother me though.


Here is notebookjournal's review. The translation for their review of the LCD too.

"In our test configuration a non coated for antireflection WUXGA display (type Samsung SEC5443) with a maximum resolution of 1920 x 1200 pixels. The panel achieves a very good average brightness of 222 in our test cd/m ². Really phenomenal are however the contrasts of the display. With a relationship of 1268:1 with maximum brightness Alienwares M17x sets up a new optimum in the editorship. Colors work brilliantly and intensively. Also point of view stability is without blames. Vertically there are first picture falsifications starting from a deviation from for instance 35°. The points of view remain horizontal still more stably. Only starting from a very strong deviation beyond the 50° the picture darkens. Despite the excellent values becomes difficult work in the free one or with direct beam of light. As is the case for the MacBooks of Apple and that have edge-to-edge glass the Glossy display protects 18" Clevo M980NU. Whereby reflections themselves with for example over 300 cd/m ² not to be faded out can. All in all the Alienware M17x offers up-to-date the best display under the Gamer notebooks."

 

Did anyone order one with the 1440x900 display and has received it yet? I don't mind the lower resolution if the only difference between the two is resolution.

 

I think almost EVERYONE ordered 1920x1200. A couple people have received theirs already, but I think they're all 1920x1200. I believe both are dual-lamp, and I've read only good things about the quality of the screen. As for specific models, I couldn't tell you, but you can check out other threads in this forum.

 

I thought any screen that size was 2 CFFL.

 

i didn't - i got the 1440 x 900

 

almost... and do you have yours yet? lol

 

Do you have yours yet? Does it have the same glossy/edge to edge look as the 1920x1200 screen? (all pics so far are of that res)

 

I don't have it yet but I can tell you that it is the same edge-2-edge display with dual ccfl's.

The only thing different is the resolution, of course

 

on a system with that much power and that size screen if strictly for gaming I'd want the wuxga resolution but if for other uses a wsxga makes more sense (the smaller text kills my terrible eyes)

 

i had 1440 and it was great for gaming or posting

its not that bad... the new laptop will have 1900 res

 

You will notice a huge improvement with the WUXGA Moo.

 

i know my friend has a m9750 with a 1900 res

i also play on the 52 inch plasma


i want it this time and since im paying i will get what i want

 

Looks like a SEC5443 samsung panel is confirmed to be at least one of the 1920x1200 screens being used not sure if there are anymore. I'm curious to know if dell/alienware has used any 1440x900 dual lamp panels in the past since the SEC5443 was also used in the m1730.

 

Those were all single bulb panels in the 1730 , i was surprised to see them using the same panel only with 2 bulbs though . Its a bummer some people have alot more washout then others but hopefully if they leave the screen on over a few days the bleed should come down quite abit.

If you go through the 10million posts on the XPS1730 forum youll see dell was using a few different panels and people had them replace the screen upwards of i think 5 times maybe more till they were happy, back then everyone wanted the LG screens as they are the best or were the best at the time. They call it the screen lottery and everyone is not a winner .

 

All the previews I've read said it the M17x uses a dual lamp screen. Wouldn't adding a second bulb change the hardware ID? Unless you can just stuff another bulb in a single lamp screen and not even give it another ID. What about the 1440x900? I'm more interested in that resolution anyway.

 

Well if you have ever taken one apart(i have, dont ask ) its just a super thin bulb along the bottom so i imagine they just put another one along the top , so i guess they didnt have to change the screen ID to do that (speculation) .Ill bet the 1449x900 screens are also a similar model from years past only with another bulb added as well.

 

yea im alot more curious if the m1730 screen will work ...

same connector etc

 

Im not sure it would mainly because a dual bulb screen has to use a different inverter for the second bulb . Z-factor knows alot more about this then i do but i do know he tried like heck to get a Dual bulb screen in his machine along with an LED hehe , i love a good screen but he takes that idea to the super extreme.

 

Well shouldn't the inverter have two connectors for both bulbs? Didn't someone take theirs apart?

 

the sec5443 is normally NOT a dual bulb screen. if i can get the actual model of the panel i can say for sure. but what i can say is everyone seems to report light bleed at the bottom but not at the top. imo these are not dual bulb screens and i think the 400nits is bs

 

The inverter will behind the Glass and i dont think anyone went that far YET .

 

it will actually normally have dual inverters one for each bulb, some had a single one with dual connectors though but most are dual boards. everest may tell us the actual model number if someone can run it

 

humm calling the bluff Z?

 

unitl someone can provide a actual model number yes i am.. i have full screen calibration tools here and i doubt very much with a few saying these look a bit washed out they are 400nits. 400nits is BLINDINGLY bright on a 17" panel

and no not all 17" panels are dual bulb in fact very few are

 

Well damnit someone run everest and post the results please

 

humm would love to have one .... dual buld that is im worried about incompatibility

 

just checked my samsung catolouge for panels and in wuxga 17" they do not currently make a dual lamp screen.. so unless these are old panels they are single ccfl, and lol the current sammy wuxga 17" is rated at only 200nits, in 18.4 they have a dual lamp model though

http://www.samsung.com/global/business/lcdpanel/product/note.html

 

lol imm give dell a ring tommorw and chew them OUT!!!!

 

yeah just like the 1730 was supposed to be 300nits. none were. i had every panel they offered for it and prob 10+ of them... the lg was almost there at just under 280 and the samsung was just under 200nits and the sharp was about 210 nits or a hair over that

 

well thanks so much Z if this screen fits i will order and let every one know !!!

 

Ya that 18.4 dual bulb sammy is supposed to be whats in the SAGER 9850.

 

im telling you i can almost bet money these are NOT dual lamp screens.

 

i would not be shocked but that could spell serious trouble for them . Major false advertising going on there. Ah well looks like ill be holding out even longer till i know for certain its dual bulb cause theres no way i can handle a dim screen and that glass infront of it , if the screen were bright enough that can somewhat negate the glare by blinding me but not on a dim screen .

 

i need the actual model of the panel which everest should give pref everest pro version. then i can for sure tell you if they are dual lamp or not. but remember quad everyone is seeing light bleed only at the bottom. if these were dual lamp you would for sure see some at the top, and a few mentioned how much darker the top was than the bottom and that the bottom is much brighter etc... that right there tells me no dual lamp, as i said though dell advertised 300nits with the xps1730 and none reached that. the sharp and sammy were no where near even close to that at 200nits.. even the bright as heck lg was not 300nits. and yes to everyone i actually measured them with calibration tools. including spyder, eye one display 2 and optic pro

i will even call samsung tomm and see if they even have a dual lamp 17" the guy i deal with will tell me and im sure they did not make a custom panel just for dell.. they never did before

 

Yes that was the first thing that came to mind when people started mentioning only bleeding from the bottom , if it were dual bulbs then they should have been bleeding from both ends (lol that sounds painful). For me its been hard to tell just how bright the screens really were since all the videos were takin in very dark rooms from a video camera which really brings out the brightness of a screen even if its not that bright .

 

well 400nits especially in a darker room would be BLINDING on a 17" notebook

 

off the dell site

 

I hope you can get some good info , im sure there may be a few dissapointed people if there not dual bulb.

 

i will demand a discount

 

Yes how the heck can they advertise that if its not true , i can see the nit rating being bigger and smaller between panels but not missing a bulb that would be fubar big time.

 

like i said though darker top and brighter bottom tells me not dual bulb

 

some one needs to run these test so that i can get my discount !!!

 

they will not give you a discount trust me. they never did for the 1730 for anyone who called and said it was not 300nits.. trust me i tried

 

Oh im not disagreeing with you i just cant believe they would lie like that , maybe they were short on panels and just shipped them with what ever they had laying around , so some people are getting dual bulbs IE the people who are happy with there screens while others are clearly dissapointed(single bulbs).

 

well brightness is alittle different then a entire bulb missing

 

Exactly my point. One you could get away with IE brightness not being equal across all panels but not having a bulb LOL.. NOT.

 

ill see what i can do

 

bad bulb? dead bulb?

 

Were thinking more like no bulb or i should say no second bulb .

 

yeah - read that too...
but while this person has bleeding, there was another that said his was just fine.