The HP L2335 is advertised as a business 23" display. We certainly have no problem using the L2335 for business, but in our opinion, this may be the ultimate gaming monitor under $1000. Like other Super IPS displays, the HP L2335 features a 0.258mm pixel pitch, 16ms response time and a relatively conservative contrast ratio and brightness. This is a true 8-bit LCD and our benchmarks should reflect that later on in the benchmarks of this review - almost a necessity in our book.

 Hewlett Packard 23" L2335
LCD Panel 23" WUXGA LCD (Active Matrix)
pixel pitch: 0.258mm
Anti-glare coating
Super IPS Panel
Advertised Scanning Frequency Horizontal: 30-94kHz
Vertical: 48-85Hz
Advertised Response Time 16ms (Typical)
Advertised Viewing Angle 170 / 170 (Horizontal / Vertical)
Advertised Contrast Ratio 500:1 (Typical)
Advertised Compatibility 1920 x 1200 (Native)
Advertised Brightness 250 cd/m2
Advertised Warranty 3 years parts, labor and on-site

Almost everything about this display is identical to the Dell 2005FPW except size and resolution. Viewing angle, response time and contrast ratio are all identical - a common trait, since both displays use panels from the same LG.Philips LCD family. The L2335 also features component, composite and S-Video inputs, a pivotable panel and Picture In Picture, features that we saw on the Dell 2005FPW lineup too.

It seems odd that we would pat a company on the back for advertising their product specifications to be the same as the OEM, but it feels so good to not see a company flat out lying about their specifications. If anything, HP may have been a little conservative in their specifications of the display, as the 170/170 viewing angle is slightly below what the panel manufacturer advertises (but we will get more to that in a minute). Consider HP's only real competitor in the 23" segment is Apple, and in the whole Ultra-Enthusiast market, they only really need to look out for Dell. Given Dell's move to tone down some of their "marketecture", it looks like the whole industry may be moving away from exaggerating their specifications. After all, LCDs are running out of room to innovate.

Even though the HP website claims that the L2335 display uses less than 100W during operation, the actual number that we recorded with a Kill-A-Watt device in the lab was 73W during operation, and 4W in sleep mode. Compare this to displays like the Dell 2005FPW that uses 53W during normal operation.

Index Cable Management, Pivot, Stand


View All Comments

  • Gatak - Sunday, July 10, 2005 - link


    You are still wrong. A TFT need 12-14bits resolution per colour channel to be able to resolve the same levels as a CRT monitor.

    The reason is simply because a TFT is linear in its response whereas a CRT is not (Gamma). The TFT must compensate for the gamma curve, which requires up to 14bits resolution (or more if you use higher gamma than 2.2).

    So, these 14 bit LCDs/TFTs are the only ones getting _CLOSE_ to CRT native colour resolution. A CRT is inherently analogue too, which means it can utilize the 10bit resolution per channel that many modern graphics cards can produce (Matrox, ATi). Remember this is 10bit is with the gamma compensation already applied. For a TFT to reach the same resolution they would need much more than 14bits!
  • Therms - Saturday, July 09, 2005 - link

    Just wanted to add that one of the biggest games of the summer, Battlefield 2, does not properly support widescreen.

    The best it can do is basically a zoomed 4:3 image which results in a display with the top and bottom parts of the picture chopped off. This means that widescreen users actually see less than standard 4:3 screen users.
  • semo - Saturday, July 09, 2005 - link

    is there a big problem right now with all those different aspect ratios out there?

    i hear that 16:9, 16:10 and 15:9 are pretty much the same/compatible. why all the standards in the first place anyway?
  • DragonReborn - Saturday, July 09, 2005 - link

    Hmm...interesting. I was definitely ready to buy the 2405...no way to really compare the two, huh? I game, but nothing crazy, and just want a nice big screen. Probably save the $300 and get a nvidia 7800 instead of the 6800... =) Reply
  • Gioron - Saturday, July 09, 2005 - link

    "Also keep in mind that a 21" Trinitron has about the same viewable area of a 19" or 20" LCD."

    Mostly true, but you need to specify whether its widescreen or not, since you lose a bit of area on a widescreen display.

    Screen area on a standard 4:3 display with a 20" viewable diagonal is 192 in^2.
    Screen area on a widescreen 16:10 display with a 20" viewable diagonal is only 180 in^2. (If I haven't managed to screw up the math...)

    If I were being pessimistic on your statement, a 19" widescreen would have a bit over 160 in^2, while a CRT with a 20" viewable diagonal would have 192 in^2. I wouldn't consider that "about the same".

    The other thing that some people need to consider is whether you'll be displaying a lot of 4:3 content, in which case you throw away annother 20% of your viewable area to black bars along the side (unless you fill it out and distort the image). Admittedly, this isn't a huge factor for computer use, since most gaming and desktop resolutions can be adjusted to be correct, but its something to consider if you know you're going to be doing a lot of picture viewing or have video sources that are fixed at 4:3.
  • Pastuch - Saturday, July 09, 2005 - link

    29 - Posted on Jul 8, 2005 at 5:59 PM by svi

    But most engines stretch or clip a 4:3 picture to produce widescreen output. Source is an exception, and a big one, but you can't make a generalization like that based on a single case where widescreens are better.


    I wont be buying BF2 until they add Widescreen support. EA WAKE UP! All of the following games have official support for widescreen: Halflife 2, CS Source, World of Warcraft, Everquest 2, Far Cry, Doom 3, GTA: San Andreas PC, and I've heard Dungeon Seige 2 will be fully compatable as well.
  • KristopherKubicki - Friday, July 08, 2005 - link

    SilthDraeth: Icecrown Alliance. Biggest waste of money and time grumble grumble... ... er... Yeah I mean it's a fun game!

    kmmatney: Supposedly. Somehow I got suckered into an NEC NDA over a *year* ago which I may even still be bound to. NEC had some neat stuff to show me concerning LED backlit LCDs and medical-grade LCD monitors, but unfortunately NEC also has an elitist mentality that has completely barred them from competing on a retail level with anyone. 10-bit panels are not new, I actually saw my first one at *Comdex 2002*. Fortunately I just made a friend at Eizo and I will definitely be asking them for this display.


  • kmmatney - Friday, July 08, 2005 - link

    There are LCD panels out now that surpass CRTs in image quality and color reproduction. See the links:


    NOte the spec: 16.77 million from a palette of 1.06 billion

    Also see:


    These are the real enthusiast monitors for graphic artists.

  • MrEMan - Friday, July 08, 2005 - link

    Does anyone know if either HP or Dell has anything involvement at all with the design of their respective monitors?

    If they don't then I believe the credit should go to the monitor manufacturers and not the companies whose only involvement is to slap their name on the case.
  • SilthDraeth - Friday, July 08, 2005 - link

    Kris what server on WOW do you play on? I play Deathwing, a pvp server, Alliance side. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now