Product comparison · 2 monitors

Dell UltraSharp 2009W vs LG L1510BF computer monitor

22specifications compared
15differ
7identical
21known for one product only

Key differences

Display diagonal
- UltraSharp 2009W:50.8 cm (20")
- L1510BF computer monitor:38.1 cm (15")
Display resolution
- UltraSharp 2009W:1680 x 1050 pixels
- L1510BF computer monitor:1024 x 768 pixels
Display brightness (typical)
- UltraSharp 2009W:300 cd/m²
- L1510BF computer monitor:250 cd/m²
Response time
- UltraSharp 2009W:5 ms
- L1510BF computer monitor:8 ms
Contrast ratio (typical)
- UltraSharp 2009W:2000:1
- L1510BF computer monitor:550:1
Viewing angle, horizontal
- UltraSharp 2009W:170°
- L1510BF computer monitor:160°
Pixel pitch
- UltraSharp 2009W:0.258 x 0.258 mm
- L1510BF computer monitor:0.297 x 0.297 mm
USB Type-A downstream ports quantity
- UltraSharp 2009W:4
- L1510BF computer monitor:3

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only

Comparison of UltraSharp 2009W, L1510BF
43 specifications	A Dell UltraSharp 2009W View product	B LG L1510BF computer monitor Model L1510BF View product
Display7 differ
Display diagonalDiffers	50.8 cm (20")	38.1 cm (15")
Display resolutionDiffers	1680 x 1050 pixels	1024 x 768 pixels
Touchscreen	No	No
Display brightness (typical)Differs	300 cd/m²	250 cd/m²
Response timeDiffers	5 ms	8 ms
Contrast ratio (typical)Differs	2000:1	550:1
Viewing angle, horizontalDiffers	170°	160°
Viewing angle, vertical	160°	160°
Display number of coloursKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	16.78 million colours
Pixel pitchDiffers	0.258 x 0.258 mm	0.297 x 0.297 mm
Horizontal scan rangeKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	31 - 63 kHz
Vertical scan rangeKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	56 - 75 Hz
Separate H/V syncKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	Yes
Viewable size, horizontalKnown for one	43.3 cm	Unknown — not stated by the source
Viewable size, verticalKnown for one	27.1 cm	Unknown — not stated by the source
Multimediaidentical
Built-in speaker(s)	No	No
Built-in camera	No	No
Ports & interfaces1 differ
USB hub version	2.0	2.0
USB Type-A downstream ports quantityDiffers	4	3
VGA (D-Sub) ports quantity	1	1
DVI-D ports quantityKnown for one	1	Unknown — not stated by the source
HDCPKnown for one	Yes	Unknown — not stated by the source
Power2 differ
Power consumption (typical)Differs	42 W	28 W
Power consumption (standby)Differs	2 W	3 W
Power consumption (max)Known for one	70 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
Power consumption (off)Known for one	1 W	Unknown — not stated by the source
Weight & dimensions3 differ
Width (with stand)Differs	472.9 mm	356 mm
Depth (with stand)Differs	183.4 mm	229 mm
Height (with stand)Differs	333.8 mm	380 mm
Weight (with stand)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	5.5 kg
Width (without stand)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	356 mm
Depth (without stand)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	103.3 mm
Height (without stand)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	291 mm
Weight (without stand)Known for one	5.13 kg	Unknown — not stated by the source
Packaging data1 differ
Package dimensions (WxDxH)Known for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	412 x 180 x 427 mm
Package weightDiffers	8.08 kg	7 kg
Sustainabilityidentical
Sustainability certificatesKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	ENERGY STAR
Other features1 differ
TV tuner integrated	No	No
Power requirementsDiffers	AC 120/230 V ( 50/60 Hz )	AC 90 - 264 V, 47 - 63 Hz
CertificationKnown for one	Unknown — not stated by the source	UL, UL-cUL, TUV-GS, SEMCO, FCC-B, CE, VCCI-2, TCO-99, MPR-II, ISO 9241-3, 7, 8, GOST, C-TICK, ISO 13406-2
Supplied AC adapter typeKnown for one	LCD	Unknown — not stated by the source
Designidentical
Market positioningKnown for one	Business	Unknown — not stated by the source
Product colourKnown for one	Silver	Unknown — not stated by the source

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More monitor comparisons

All monitor comparisons