one thing to understand about the pic there above of the NEC 20WGX2 next to their 1990FXp is that colour vibrancy does not necessarily equal colour accuracy. The 20WGX2 undoubtedly offers very vibrant and rich colours, due in part to it's glossy OtpiClear filter coating. However, while at that press event the 20WGX2 looked brighter and more vibrant next to even some of the NEC range aimed at colour enthusiasts, it doesnt necessarily mean colour accuracy is great at those kind of settings. For gamers and general users, i think most people would rather have vibrant and rich colours though and so this screen is certainly a very good choice in practice.
Having said that, I've got the screen with me at the moment and using the Lacie Blue Eye Pro calibration hardware on default factory settings (but with brightness turned down to a sensible level - 100% setting out of the box is too much!
) the colour accuracy is as follows:
in case some haven't seen these kind of graphs before, basically the lower the bars the better. When the DeltaE rating is 2 or below (on the Y axis) then colours are deemed accurate by Lacie. Out of the box, the colours were not particularly accurate, but the display still looks very nice in practice and very vibrant.
However, the screen is capable of producing accurate colours anyway, but you would need a good calibration device to achieve them.
Anyway, just pointing out differences between colour virbancy and accuracy.....i digress.
The screen is a very good gaming screen, arguably one of the best in the market right now and would be a good choice. The Samsung 215TW mentioned above is a good screen, but not really on par in terms of responsiveness sadly. Take a look at the pixel response time graphs from Toms Hardware for example:
Samsung 215TW
NEC 20WGX2
As you can see from these and if you read the reviews at THG and the likes, the Samsung is a nice screen, but cant match the responsiveness of the NEC. If you want a good gaming screen the NEC is one of the best. Apart from it's fast responsiveness, the DVM feature for dynamic contrast adjustment is a nice touch and can really help in gaming and movies.
One other thing to set straight regarding the Dell 2007WFP as well, it is a good gaming screen, and arguably better than quite a few of the 20" range which have a faster rated response time. While the response time of the Dell is listed at 16ms, this is a conservative figure based on traditional ISO response time measurements. LG.Philips who make the panel used in the Dell rate the screen with an 8ms G2G response time which Dell decided not to market for one reason or another. In practice the Dell is very responsive. Take a look at the review of it at
BeHardware where they compare it with the NEC. Sadly I had to send the Dell back just before the NEC arrive otherwise i could also have compared them side by side, but I did find the Dell perfectly adequate for gaming and more responsive in tests than a 6ms TN Film panel in the Samsung SM205BW.
.
.JPG)
