Detailed Guide Assessing LED WXGA+ vs CCFL WUXGA To Help Assist Potential Buyers of M1530 [MUST READ]

I have an LED WXGA+, it is very nice and the display is really the perfect display. I just wish I had a bit more real estate like I had with the WSXGA, I really do. I have seriously considered the WUXGA since it gives the ultimate screen freedom, but I really don't like the fact after being with it for about a week that I always had to be about 1 to 1.5 feet in front of the screen in order to see it and I always had to hunch over to see some things clearly. Though the text on WUXGA is sharp, leaning back a bit makes it too small to read so.. yeah.

LED is the best for VELB (Vibrant Efficient Lightweight Bright) displays.
Comparing my LED WXGA+ to WUXGA, though the WUXGA does have a lot of screen space, the colors and brightness of the screen really don't give much justice to the resolution.

Sure turning up font size is an option, but it ends up making WUXGA much smaller like a 1440x900. Another thing I noticed is that when developing graphics on photoshop, the graphic though may look nice on the screen, but being a web designer, the text looks way too weird on smaller resolutions which kinda makes it a disadvantage.

So really for me, the LED WXGA+ outweighs the WUXGA. Now if they came out with an LED WUXGA, yeah I'd probably go for it, but... for now its nor really great. Sure WUXGA has more pixels, but it doesnt matter if the colors arnt bright enough and the movie your watching doesnt have as great color reproduction when your watching it.

Pictures unfortunately vary between camera to camera, though the pics you do see that are available of LED screens vs CCFLs, have a clear advantage.

Pros and Cons of LED WXGA+ vs CCFL WUXGA

LED
+ Lightweight as it shaves 100 grams off M1530
+ Less strain of GFX card and processor allowing me to run programs and do things much more efficiently, Vista OS feels faster
+ More battery life increase of about 20-25 minutes.
+ Better Viewing Angles with minimal discoloration
+ Brightness is perfect and makes all other computers look like they are in the dark. Once I Laid eyes on it, I cant believe I could use CCFLs. Some say brightness is TOO bright to use, but really, it is perfect and will make you feel like the other laptops youve used with CCFL displays were really really dim in comparison.
+ LED Bulbs have a lifespan of 50,000 hours or more whereas CCFLs last around 20,000 hours, plus CCFLs dim over time whereas LED bulbs dim very minimally and usually dont at all until they reach the end of their lifespan.
+ Color reproduction is much better, no grain whatsoever, display is very vibrant and feels like you could reach into your screen and gram everything thats there
+ I can lean back and type as I wish from about 2+ feet away from the screen. excellent for lying down on the couch or reading from farther distances.
- Less Screen Room limited by resolution

WUXGA
+ Real estate. Can have internet, word processing, and watch a video at the same time
+ More pixel density
- Greater chance of getting a grainy display compared to LED, though some say it doesnt matter due to the pixel density, there are others who say it feels like looking through silk. Its there, but you don't really pay too much attention to it, but if you do, its there.
- Viewing angles good, but yellowish discoloration appears
- Heavier compared to LED, by 100 grams on M1530
- More strain on GFX Card to Maintain Resolution
- Have to raise DPI which makes it look like a smaller res and everything looks weird
- Takes more battery life being a CCFL display
- More Screen Room
- Have to lean into the screen often to make sure your seeing something right and you are unable to lean back or sit properly. Expect to hold it much closer to you 1ft when your around the couch. Of course you may think that you will always be using your comp up close and some people argue that unless you had very long arms, its really not an issue. But the truth is, for many people, even those who can adjust to WUXGA on a 15.4 inch screen, you really have to lean in even if your sitting down at an office space.

- Photoshop development with anything that requires text makes font very very small to read for WUXGA and oftentimes the resulting image looks too enlarged on the screen.

Theres my list of pros and cons for you that I compiled to help me decide. Though I didnt include WSXGA+, it would be perfect if they offered that resolution with LED, but they dont. Unfortunately Dell seems to think that it must be similar to the macbook pro in speccing and since mbp doesnt have 1680 native res, XPS M1530 shouldnt either. Though what Dell doesnt understand is that if they did, Im sure it would be much more popular.

There are many (most of which WUXGA owners or WSXGA+ owners) who claim that LED is "overratted". Though it may be true, the fact is, LED still is "rated over" the standard CCFL displays. Though I do feel I have laid out all the advantages, regardless of whether its overstated or not, there is still a noticable improvement regardless. WUXGA owners say their displays are bright, yes, but when put side by side to the LED, the LED is admittedly brighter, sharper and offers better colors. Regardless of how much that improvement is which is determined by each individual, the improvement is noticable.

Trends in Buying
Though we may not know the actual trends that buyers have, numerous polls have shown that more people prefer the WXGA+ display over the WUXGA+ display over the many times. Looking at the Dell site, it is clear that the LED screens are very popular as there is always a deal to get the WUXGA screens, and never or rarely an LED backlit display.

In Notebook review terms, the retention rate of LED is much higher than WUXGA as no one who has had an LED display has returned theirs for a higher resolution after they see the screen. Though there are people with WXGA or WUXGA, mostly WUXGA, who have returned theirs for an LED screen and were satisfied. Out of those that returned, many have said it was due to the text size, readability, and usability.


Why This Decision May be So Frustrating
The main thing is, most people arn't able to put side by side comparison photos of LED vs CCFL displays as most either have the LED WXGA+, and those that have the CCFL WUXGA, though like Ive said before, more people have opted to ship back their WUXGAs for their LEDs and were satisfied with it and everyone that had LED kept theirs because of the quality of the screen. In terms of resolution, it is impossible really as pictures dont do justice. The best thing you can do however is to go out and find place with 15.4 inch 1920 x 1200 resolution to best see whether you feel your are fine with it or not.

Gaming, Pixel Count vs Brightness, Vibrantness, etc
In terms of gaming many have this mislead thought that if you game, you want to go with the lower native resolution display. This is NOT true. A WUXGA can play Assasins Creed or any other game at a lower resolution just as easily as a WXGA+ can and there really is no difference in quality!

However one must consider the fact that what resolution they will be gaming at. For Assasins Creed and other more modern games, it is very unlikely that you will be playing above 1440x900 as you WILL notice slow framerates that really dont make the game playable, sure you could sacrifice some settings here and there, but your not going to be playing it at 1920x1200 resolution and expect good results.

If you are a more nostalgic gamer who likes games like Half Life 2, yes, you will be able to play it at high resolutions and take advantage of the high settings and pixel count, however chances are you will want to play more modern games when they come out. Red Alert 3 or Starcraft 2 for example. But one may say that you can turn down the resolution when the time comes around, which is true. So why not go with the higher WUXGA?

Well, the fact is, the LED display is brighter, more vibrant, and has much better color reproduction. A game played on low settings on the LED, looks a lot nicer than that of a standard CCFL display. So the way you can think of it is, as more demanding games come out in the future, WUXGA will be stuck playing games at a dimmer brightness than that of LED, and at worse color reproduction.

Consider Assasins Creed for example. Both played at 1280 settings or any for that matter on the LED, really brings out the nice graphics, combined with the realistic world, it really increases your immersion in the game. games like Call of Duty 4 and such really really shine on an LED display. However on the WUXGA, playing it at the same settings, though it does seem to look nice, you most likely wont get as immersed into it as you would on an LED screen due to all the advantages. Regardless of what new games come out, the LED will always have the upper hand as the WUXGA is stuck with the same brightness and less vibrance.

Of course the whole font size problem and readability is not a problem on larger monitors such as the 17 inch or above... but... for 15.4 inch, it really is much smaller.

Perspective
Personally I was very curious about the LED screens, but really didnt think it was worth getting since I felt it was overrated. Having my own E1505 which I really enjoyed, I didn't ever think about switching to an LED display myself. However, one day I had to get a tablet PC and it just so happened to come with an LED display despite being a much lower resolution. Looking at the display, I felt it was noticably brighter, more contrasty, and the colors wre much more vibrant despite being 1280. My E1505 at the time was WSXGA+. The only thing I think stunk was the fact that screen estate stunk.

Eventually when I was considering on purchasing the M1530, I did manage to see a friend of mine have a WUXGA display, and another with the WXGA+ LED display. The WUXGA display looked nice felt like my E1505 but larger res of course, though when I saw the WXGA+, it really changed my perspective. The brightness, the colors, the contrast.

Going with the M1530 with LED display, I look at the other 3 Dell laptops I own and are still used occasionally including my E1505, their displays really weren't as bright as I had thought them to be. What I had used to think were the best displays, really weren't the best compared to the LED and I can say now that I wouldn't get a CCFL if I could prevent it. To me, it felt like a world of a diffrence that was even more noticable when I actually had the unit in my hands to compare.

Many of the people who say LED screens are overatted, most likely never even seen a LED screen themselves vice versa, but I can safetly say from my own experience that it really makes a difference.

Viewing Angles of LED vs CCFL, CCFL Right, LED Left (ApocNarok Shots)


Considering MacBook Pro?
Shame on you for considering the Macbook Pro, but oh well. One thing to point out is all MBPs now have LED backlit displays and the 15.4 inch MBP is native 1440x900 display whereas the 17inch is native 1920x1200 display. If you go with the 1440x900 display with LED backlit, you will already have the display that is the equivalent or better than Apples display. Coupled with the large config options, your M1530 is safetly better than what Apple offers.

Conclusion
I hope this guide I made gives you some insight on LED vs. WUXGA. Its all really up to you. If you are hesitant on LED and WUXGA, hopefully this guide will be of use to you in helping you with your decision. However if you are very very used to a high resolution, go ahead and get the WUXGA, but hopefully this guide will let you be aware of what you might lose. I myself am one who has been used to WSXGA+ displays for many many years and was definitely on the fence when I had to choose between WUXGA or the LED WXGA+, though as you can see by the pros and cons, I felt the LED had much more pros compared to the WUXGA display which is why I felt resolved in going with it. Sure I'd sacrifice some of the things I loved most about the WSXGA+ display, mainly pixel density and the ability to do mutliple things, but... one sacrifice is fine for the many other benefits it has. If you had thought of it differently from the way I did and resulted in choosing WUXGA, please feel free to voice your opinion.

 

I went from 1400x1050 on my old laptop to 1280x800 on my next laptop to 1680x1050 on this one. I was miserable on 1280x800, pixellation in DVDs, no real estate for documents, it was bad. While 1680x1060 isn't 1920x1200, for many and perhaps even most people, sacrificing screen space for brightness (When the CCFL screen is already quite bright and vibrant) and 100 grams is simply not worth it.

 

Duplicate post...

 

LED is overrated, a good hi res CCFL is better than a low res LED. Who cares about 15% more brightness, little more battery life and somewhat better colours if you can not get a decent resolution. And yes in my book 1440x900 is low res.

LED is a minor improvement to the LCD technology, nothing more. OLED is the killer technology for panels.

Viewing angles and graininess have nothing to do with what technology is used for backlit. The LCD panel is what determine the viewing angles and the graininess.

Did you just make up the VELB (Vibrant Efficient Lightweight Bright) acronym?

And why should people be ashamed for looking at the MBP... People can use whatever they feel works for them.

Your post could be helpful if it was not so blatantly biased toward LED.

 

Your viewing angles picture is worthless for 2 reasons: You conveniently took it so that there's a sharper angle on the CCFL than LED, and second, like Rhodan said, display manufacturer is what determines viewing angle quality.

 

100000 mg sounds more impressive than 100 g. maybe u shoulda used that. u also forgot price

 

Agreed, what a biased waste of space this thread is.

+1 for all (very correct) opinions expressed by Rhodan in his post.

 

Lol.....need to get a bit more scientific with the photography,or at least swap the two around in another picture to give a fair comparison.

Glad you like your LED screen though

 

Forte borrowed the shot from my thread. The other photo with the laptops swapped is here. LED does have improvement in viewing angles, but this shouldn't make you lean towards buying an WXGA+ over something with a higher resolution. To each their own. I like the lighter weight, so the LED is for me.

 

No, LED does not have an improvement in viewing angles. A backlight cannot improve the viewing angles on a display screen. If it's better, it's because Dell used a higher quality display panel, which is entirely unrelated to the backlight.

 

Down here in Aus they don't even allow us to have LED, business or home users. So this is not a [MUST READ].

 

Jlbrightbill is correct, the backlight has nothing to do with the viewing angles. A higher quality display panel (ie the LCD component of the panel) is what affords this, so panel with the same quality as the one used in the LED display will provide similarly good viewing angles.

Also it appears to me that between your two laptops, the one with the LG display has far more accurate colour reproduction (whites are whiter, and colours look very realistic) as opposed to the yellowish LED panel (Chi Mei? I'm not sure of the brand they use).

This particular picture (LG on left, LED on right):

 

That picture was merely for brightness comparison. Those laptops were both at default settings to make a fair comparison, and the LED was frighteningly bright. I adjusted the display settings and the LED is fine now in terms of the yellowish panel you mentioned.

You make valid points, but I personally prefer the LED based on my minimal needs. I have never seen an m1530 with a resolution greater than mine, so I have no right to say which screen you should get.

I sense that LED will eventually go mainstream. I am hoping that Dell will start making LED screens with higher resolutions. Perhaps they'll start making them for the new 15.6' screens?

 

unless you live somewhere that eating more than once a week is a treat i don't see how that makes a difference lmao

 

Not quite true. LED sidelights generate highly directionalized lighting, which is much easier to guide than the diffuse CCFL. This translates to engineering advantages to the diffuser, including greater control of backlight diffusion and scatter and allowing for thinner TFT LCD substrates. CCFL is nearing the end of the line as far as viewing angle is concerned, whereas LED is just getting started.

Whether people want to admit it or not, LED will replace CCFL in its entirety. The regulatory requirements for mercury controls plus the low startup voltage requirements, minimal EMI and no need for an inverter make it a TKO for CCFL. The only question is how quickly the transition takes place. Every CCFL sidelighting manufacturer on the planet has a LED competancy already in place.

 

To me it was an easy decision. I don't want resolution so high that I have to squint at it all the time. LED uses less energy, is brighter, has better angles, weighs less and I don't have to play Russian Roulette to see if I get a good one or not.

And I wouldn't own a mac.

 

Wow.. Forte.. I've rarely seen so many frustrated people who didn't get the LED and are now regretting it Don't worry about it, I know how the LED is too, got one in my face now, and would not change it for the world (and i've had dozens of notebooks, all rez, all sizes..)

 

There is a lot of good info in your post, and I appreciate your taking the time to compile the information. However, this information is just plain wrong. *Any* time you render a lower res image on a higher native res display, there is a degradation in quality. Whether it's off-putting to each individual user is subjective.

 

Oh Please. His so called guide is so full of inaccuracies it’s not funny. The whole thing sounds more like a poor marketing blurb or self justification for why he bought a LED.

It’s one thing to inform; in this case the valid information is buried in a pile of inaccuracies than makes the whole post misleading.

 

Well can say for one, I had a grainy 1680x1050 and was lucky enough to get an LED as a free replacement upgrade. Sure it is a slightly lower resolution, but i was sick of the grainy screen and the replacemetns they sent were just as bad.

I am comparing them side by side and the LEDsuperior in every way (vieing angles, colors, clarity, grainness, etc). In my book the LED is worth getting just to be sure you dont get a grainy screen, but since DELL dropped the 1680x1050 displays (thank god) and the 1920x1200 have very low
chance of grainess, there is not as much reason to make sure you get it any more. So if you like super small and detailed resolution then go for the 1920x1200. But if you have "old man" eyes and want a rich, bright display, go for the LED. It really is up to the buyer. The non-LED 1440x900 display is for the poor folks who cant afford the LED or better resolution.

We can all just be thankful that they dropped the 1680x1050 displays.

 

You are comparing a Samsung 1680x1050 with the LED 1440x900? That is the worst screen to compare with. Again, viewing angles and graininess have nothing to do with the backlit used in the panel. You can have grainy screens as well as poor viewing angles on LED.

And it is a shame Dell is currently not shipping wsxga+ screens on the m1530. That is the best resolution for a 15.4 screen IMO.

 

Rhodan.. it sounds like it is you who is trying to justify something.. Forte's analysis is his own point of view, and, FWIW, it seems to be shared by a majority of users in this community.

Its not because YOU think 1440x900 is not the best resolution for YOU that the LED screen is crap compared to yours.

Think about that.

 

I have a LED coming...and I am worried that I won't like such a low resolution screen.

If I don't like it, i'll send it back and keep my original one. I guess I can learn to live with a bit of backlight bleed on my 1680x1050.

 

Sooner or later,LEDs will become mainstream, it's all about quality anyway

 

I don't mind LED becoming mainstream, heck, I would've gotten an LED WUXGA screen if it was available at the time of purchase, but it wasn't, so I had to make the choice between resolution and brightness; I chose resolution and I am perfectly happy with that decision.

So back to the original topic; I think people who are upset about forte's post are upset not because they don't like LED displays, but because the title of the thread sounded like this was going to be a fair comparison and it turned out to be an obvious promotion for LED displays.

Like people have said, it's all up to the buyer to decide what they want and it's not fair to them if they end buying one screen because two owners of that screen decide to start threads that bash the other resolution, maybe to make them (the owners) feel better about their decision, or maybe for some other reason. It doesn't matter, because they're still trying to make it sound like it's a fact that one display is better than the other when it really is just their opinion.

LED is good for brightness, and WUXGA is good for resolution, each is lacking something that the other one has and each has something that the other one doesn't. We need to end this argument before it becomes a Mac vs PC war, we don't need two of those. Buy what you need, and be happy with it, there's no need to make someone else buy what you bought if they don't need it or (just to make the LED ppl happy) they need the other more.

 

I think younger people will tend to go for the larger resolution (1920x1200) such as myself. Older people are probably more likely to go with an LED 1440x900. I went with the 1920x1200 because I LOVE high resolutions, it makes your desktop look so much better and gives you so much more room to work with.

 

Yup... I know back when I could see, I would have taken it for granted and gotten it small. Now that I need glasses due to aging I go for the lower res. I miss those days of being able to see anything.

 

Yeah. A thread title like "Detailed Guide Assessing LED WXGA+ vs CCFL WUXGA To Help Assist Potential Buyers of M1530 [MUST READ]" suggests a more dispassionate and objective analysis. I doubt anyone would have complained if Forte had titled the thread, "Why I like my LED better than my CCFL." Plus, it merely compared two individual screens that may or may not be representative of the norm for those screens.

Nice of Forte to put the time into sharing his thoughts, but yeah, the title was a bit misleading.

 

Nice to see a truly biased "report".

 

Where did I say that LED is crap? Forte did not write an analysis, he wrote document showing how much he loves his LED screen and told us it was the best thing and we should buy it. Then he titled it like it was something to help potential buyers...

You like your LED, good for you. I like my high resolution screen and I do not write fake assessments of screen to promote the screen I use.

 

It is an analysis of why I chose LED over WUXGA. Its by no means fake. Sure I have thrown some of my bias towards it, but many aspects of LED such as vibrant colors, battery life increase, brighter screen, etc and all the points Ive metnioned are valid points. Like I said at the end of the post, it is my own thoughts, if an owner who has a WUXGA would like to state is own reasoning on why he got WUXGA, please put in your bias in a reply so that people will know where your coming from.

I feel I have provided not a "Why I love LED so much", because honestly, I prefer WSXGA+ myself, and the purpose of this thread is to help people hesitating to know how I came to the conclusion the way I did. Im sure there are people who disagree, but at least state why instead of "its overrated" or "I disagree with this analysis. Its biased, blah blah" yet not provide ANY reasoning or even your own bias as to why WUXGA is better. I believe I have laid it out very well and though yes, clearly the resulting thought process and analysis I went through resulted in me choosing the LED, the reasons are justified and most definitely not "fake". Rhodan is just jealous that LED provides more battery life from a previous thread.

If anyone with WUXGA would like to state their thought process and reasoning as to why they chose WUXGA CCFL over LED, please do so and I assure you, I'll update this thread to reflect that. Like I said for example in Pros and Cons, WUXGA does offer more screen estate. Though LED does offer more pros than cons regardless of how you look at it. Though to some, resolution may weigh much more than the other points listed. There is nothing wrong with it. If you know more valid pros to WUXGA, instead of saying again that LED is overrated, post some, and I'll add it in to the list.

Like I said, WUXGA owners, you have just as much ground to prove to others WHY you like your WUXGA over an LED WXGA+. You can say you like your WUXGA better because... to justify it. As potential buyers, it does help to weigh options. Im sharing my own experience and factual research as a potential buyer myself of how I got to where I did and why. I almost ordered a WUXGA myself too you know. Though after more looking into, I switched for many reasons. Just because I like my LED display doesnt mean my review is not valuable. Instead of saying how biased or how things are wrong with it, make some arguements of your own.

Again, WUXGA owners, if you'd like to write on what justified your purchase, I will happily update the thread and add your justified research and observations in. Instead of mindless disparaging comments, think of something for WUXGA, if you have any, its the purpose you know.

If I were a potential buyer, I would not lean towards WUXGA just because of people saying LED is overrated, etc. I'd like to see reasons. Disparaging comments about bias arn't going to help if you can't provide any counter bias or arguments of your own. Help the consumer.

To be honest, everyone has a bias regardless of what you went with. Truly I found that as a buyer, completely unbiased comments on WUXGA and LED screens don't really help. Sure LED is brighter, sure WUXGA has more real estate. YES I KNOW THAT. Can you please give me more depth and comparison? Whats the thought process behind it? What Pros and Cons did you weigh? How you reach your decision is more helpful than saying someone elses decision stinks and is "overrated".

 

I really don't care if you like it more, neither does Rhodan, just don't pass off your opinion of why you like it more as a "Detailed guide assessing LED WXGA+ vs CCFL WUXGA", as it is nothing of the sort.

 

Kid, You have nothing that I could possibly be jealous of. If I wanted a LED screen I would order a system with one. In fact I switch or upgrade computers many times a year if needed.

Battery life hey? Oh yeah you only get 2.5 hours while I run mine for close to 3 hours... I sure envy the additional battery life you get with your LED...

I stand by my previous comments. Your post is little more that your personal opinion which you attempted to pas for something that must be read...

 

We have a winner!!

 

What is the prize?

 

Rhodan you are sinking low. The whole "I got money and can buy anything I want" and the "kid you have nothing that I could possibly be jealous of" are comments worthy of a 12 yr old. Grow up please and if you have more than insults to share in this thread, please do so. We are all ears.

 

You are putting words in my mouth I never said... But it fine for Forte to say i am jealous and I can not reply back according to you. Nice double standard, I guess that is all you can contribute to the thread...

 

Oh yes, you had your brightness down two three notches, power saving mode whereas my 2.5 hours was at max brightness and high performance mode. Oh and by the way, turning LED brightness down two notches and power saver mode, I get 3 hours and 30 minutes. Like I said Rhodan, if you have something to say that is productive, please do so. Flaming at an OP doesn't do any good for potential buyers.

At any rate, resolution wise, I do agree with you about WSXGA+ being perfect for 15.4 inch. Then again I'm afraid thats a bias too. Rhodan, you got a problem with it? Everything is a bias. Saying you prefer WUXGA better is in itself a bias.

If you want to comment on something, state at least why you love your WSXGA+ CCFL more than LED and your reasoning behind it instead of flaming and other irrelevant comments. Thank you. ^_^

Of yes and Rhodan, before you call things "Oh Please. His so called guide is so full of inaccuracies it’s not funny.", please at least point out the "many inaccuracies" you have. Its just another way of saying "overrated" without any reason or basis behind it.

(Irrelevant posts do not do anything in terms of assisting a purchase decision of the consumer. Only the relevant ones matter. If you want to convince CCFL WUXGA is the way to go and disagree with my opinion, try coming up with some on your own, or maybe I have already stated all of them in the 1st post I made. Until you do, Ill take that as I yes, my research and thought process is correct. It is thus most beneficial to the potential buyer.)

 

Rhodan FTW!

 

You just don't get it do you. If your post title and substance was up front stated to be your opinion on why you like it better, we'd be fine with it. But you make it out to be a detailed unbiased evaluation, which it clearly is not. Is it hard to understand? We have no agenda--you do. Even if we did have an agenda (Convince others to get CCFL WUXGA/WSXGA+), at least we're up front about it being opinion and preference.

 

this post is crap, forte shame on you for such a blatent biased post.

 

Maybe we can all pitch in and buy you an LED screen that you are apparently so jealous of.

Seriously though, I think I said it once, this thread is just a waste of space... maybe we should just let it die? Clearly it's biased to hell and it's just him trying to justify to himself that he made the right choice... much moreso than a "detailed guide" assessing anything.

 

Yeah, I agree the title can be changed and and we all have our own biases. I really could care less what people end up buying, LED or WUXGA. Im just giving information that I have come by in my research and the thought process as to why I ended up with LED that I feel will help potential buyers. If there was someone who posted something like this when I was trying to decide between displays. Really it is a matter of preference. Like I said, some people feel resolution matters more over the type of lighting. Though I do feel I've outlined the major points particularly in the Pros and Cons. Though I have stated my opinions revolving around fact and observations, which led me to the conclusion. Regardless, you can't disregard the usefulness of this thread.

If there were people who would have posted such things when I was trying to decide, it wouldve made a huge difference. Of course it doesnt to people who have already bought theirs, but regardless of how small it matters, it'll still be something to consider.

P.S~ I changed the title btw.

If you'd like to respond which parts you disagree with that is "crud", please do so WUXGA owner, it would be most beneficial to us all if you provided us with some opinion, arguement, or information instead of "You are wrong because you are blatently biased". You have just as much bias as I do. Make use of it instead of blank flaming. If you were to say "pixel density matters more because.... or higher resolutions outweigh lighting technology..." yeah, thatd make sense, but... simply saying something is biased wont get you anywhere since everything you say is biased. Every review is biased regardless of how unbiased one may think it is.

 

Topic title officially changed to rid any confusion.

Detailed Guide Assessing Why I Went With LED WXGA+ over CCFL WUXGA To Help Assist Potential Buyers of M1530 [MUST READ]

 

+1 rep for forte for taking the time to voice his opinion

Hell, I find this thread very useful. It is exactly what I needed when I was ordering my M1530. It would've saved me a whole ****load of time when I was ordering. Now I have to wait forever for the exchange process to go on. How long does it take for them to process an exchange? Yeesh.

 

I just quickly glanced through this thread but I don't think anyone touched on this point yet.

How exactly does using LED put less strain on GFX card and processor? Unless you are comparing running it in 1920x1200 vs 1280x800?

Then in which case it doesn't even matter what screen you're using. With that argument, an old 13" CRT monitor will put even less strain on your CPU and GPU since the monitor only supports 800x600.

 

Yes, I am comparing it 1920x1200 CCFL vs 1440x900 LED. It has nothing to do with the lighting tech, but resolution. Its something to consider when choosing between WUXGA and WXGA+.

 

Again you seem to feel the need to embellish your story with false information. When I mentioned my battery life in another thread I specifically said 2 notch lower than maximum and I never said which power scheme I was using. You turn this into 2-3 notch down and in power saving...

You seem quite literate and I am at lost to understand why you do this. It is one of the main reason your supposed guide ( whatever you call it makes no difference) is so biased, to much unsubstantiated information.

Anyway I guess this thread was your 15 minutes of fame... Enjoy.

 

Aside from the obvious bias (negating most points made), the big issue is that Forte has foolishly created a thread comparing TWO variables at once rather than one; an ideal comparison would be between resolutions and backlighting technologies separately. Anyway when it comes to the latter, from what I can see, LED isn't the be all and end all afterall! Since I brought up an issue with colour reproduction previously (after seeing ApocNarok's side by side photo), I decided to do some more research.

I think this photo shows how the LED seems to produce a somewhat yellowish white, compared to more accurate white reproduction on the LG panel (left).
http://forum.notebookreview.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=18263&d=1209932678

Now, I thought maybe it was a one off (that's what I was told), but check this out:
http://www.engadget.com/photos/macbook-pro-backlight-comparison-led-vs-ccfl/266113/

Same results again! The LED on the right does not appear to reproduce white accurately. What good is the supposed extra brightness if it has a yellow tinge? I'm sure this will vary between different panel brands (I've seen yellowish CCFL panels too), but clearly the LED's both Dell and Apple use both have the issue. I only notice this when I see a good white panel next to a yellowish one so you won't notice much unless you know what to look for, but personally it's obvious to me.

As an interesting sidenote, when compared at 50% brightness, the CCFL display on the left was much brighter - might help expose some issues with comparing battery life between the two backlight technologies at different levels of brightness.
http://www.engadget.com/photos/macbook-pro-backlight-comparison-led-vs-ccfl/266121/

Now since Forte wanted a comparison of resolution as well, there's very little argument here in my opinion. Of course it is down to personal preference, which is why a thread like this is so useless - but once you have actually tried a higher res panel, you'll never go back. On the other hand, if you're using a lower res panel, upgrading to a higher res is always on the cards.

I'm using an LG-Philips WUXGA 15.4" screen, and it is stunning. The viewing angles are excellent, the whites are TRULY white (All LG's I've seen have been this way, and, graininess aside, the current Samsung panels reproduce whites really well too)... and the real estate means you've essentially got a 24" studio display (and associated productivity levels) that you can carry on your shoulder.

I'm a web developer/programmer and could not work without the extra space. WSXGA+ is a minimum resolution on a 15.4" display from a professional standpoint, and if you are comfortable with it, WUXGA is even better.

But all work and no play makes jack a dull boy. So what about gaming on WUXGA? I think it's great. The high pixel density means that non-native resolutions scale quite well, and it still looks great playing newer titles at lower than WUXGA resolutions. But what a lot of people don't realise is how much performance this video card is truly capable of. Recently, myself and halkyon (on this forum) have tested the limits of overclocking the DDR3 8600GT, and the results are stunning. Stable clocks of 685mhz core / 1000mhz memory were achieved (tested for artifacts in ATITool and actual games), which translates to an impressive 3dmark06 score (running at a true 1280x1024, something that users with 1280x800 / 1440x900 screens can't do) of about 6000.

What does that mean? It means that you can play older through to somewhat recent games at the native 1920x1200 resolution (which looks absolutely stunning), and newer titles at upto 1680x1050 resolution - with fluid framerates in both cases.

It's really a matter of milking the most performance you can from the lowest form factor machine that will provide it, and in my opinion, a higher resolution panel is a big step in bringing this goal to fruition. A little clock tuning and all of a sudden you have the hardware to drive games at the higher resolutions too... and all this while having all that extra desktop space to be productive with.

I think all that leaves is small fonts and eyesight, and seriously, my advice is - man up and spend a few weeks using it. You get accustomed to it very fast, and once you have, you'll never want to go back.

As for weight and battery life, well I think Rhodan has shot the battery life argument down. I'll handle the weight. No one has facts and figures, so for now the weight difference is complete BS. If you want to make a point, weigh both laptops on a digital scale and post figures. I can weigh my CCFL unit for comparison if required, off the top of my head it was about 2690g with 6-cell battery, and space-savers installed in card reader and express card slots.

Hope that tells the other side of the tale,
Udi

 

FWIW, "true white" on a calibrated professional monitor, is done to the D65 standard (6500 Kelvin), which, to you or I, would appear much "warmer/yellow" than what we're used to. What you would qualify as white is in reality much too blue (cooler) than what it should really be. Just a fact.

As for the weight difference, lets forget about it, its minor if anything and should not even be a factor.

Lastly, with regards to performance, there is no getting around that two identical 1530 running at their native rez (1440x900 vs 1680x1050 or 1920x1200), the lower rez model will be getting better gaming performance (in terms of FPS) with an identical GPU/clock settings. Now, for some ppl, rez is more important then FPS. True. But I would say that for most, FPS is the most important factor. How good is ur WUXGA screen with lots of pixels if it can't run a game at decent speed?

Cheers