Features and Specifications

For those who are unfamiliar with some of the jargon we'll be using, we put together a short glossary of terms that we use in our display reviews. Manufacturer specifications can sometimes overstate the importance of certain factors, while at the same time omitting other important information, but we will do our best to separate the reality from the hype in our reviews.

HP w2207 Specifications
Video Inputs Analog (VGA)
DVI with HDCP support
Panel Type LCD Active Matrix TFT TN+film
Pixel Pitch 0.282mm
Colors 16.2 million (6-bit)
Brightness 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio 1000:1 (typical)
Response Time 5ms Tr/Tf
Viewable Size 22" diagonal
Resolution 1680x1050
Viewing Angle 160 vertical/horizontal
Power Consumption <52W max
Power Savings <2W
Power Supply Built-in
Screen Treatment BrightView (Glossy)
Height-Adjustable Yes - 4.25 inches
Tilt Yes - 25 degrees back/5 degrees forward
Pivot Yes
Swivel No
VESA Wall Mounting 100mmx100mm
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 20.61"x14.60"x11.38" (lowered)
20.61"x18.95"x11.38" (raised)
Weight w/ Stand 19.8 lbs.
Additional Features (2) USB 2.0 (USB connection to PC required)
Audio Two 2W rear-facing speakers
Limited Warranty 1 year parts/labor warranty standard
3 year extended warranty optional ($110)
Pixel Defect Policy 0 bright dot standard
60 day 100% satisfaction guarantee

Two years ago, 22" LCDs didn't even exist on the market. Today, just about every major display manufacturer has one available. That should be a pretty clear indication of how important they consider this particular market, the $250-$350 midrange display. There's only one real problem with all of these 22" displays: the designs and appearance may be different, and certain features may be present or lacking depending on what model you're looking at, but invariably they all use TN panels. The TN (twisted nematic) LCD panel is one of the oldest and most common designs, and while that may be good for prices the reality is that other aspects of these panels tend to be behind the times. Viewing angles in particular are not as good as other LCD panel technologies, and TN panels only provide 6-bit (with dithering) rather than true 8-bit color.

Like many other 22" LCDs, HP uses an LG.Philips panel. The technologies used to approximate 16.2 million colors are quite good these days; nevertheless, there were times during testing where we noticed some minor artifacts that made the 6-bit nature apparent. This is not something that most people would notice during typically use, and we certainly don't consider this to be a problem limited to the HP w2207 - all 22" LCDs at present have similar difficulties. The bottom line, however, is that in terms of quality we feel most of the 24" LCD panels are superior to the 22" panels. That might also explain why they cost quite a bit more.

In the features department, HP does add a few things to put this particular LCD above most of the entry level 22" offerings on the market. One of the major differences between the HP w2207 and panels like the Acer AL2216W is that the HP has a glossy finish on the panel. This does tend to make colors look more vibrant and the contrast ratio is higher than other 22" models, but it has the drawback of making the panel more reflective as well. The other major feature is that the display supports portrait mode, something missing from many inexpensive LCDs. Going along with the pivot function, you also get a high-quality stand that provides over 4" of vertical travel. Compared to something like the Acer AL2216W, the stand makes a significant difference, though it also has a larger footprint than some competing LCDs. You also get two USB 2.0 connections that are easily accessed on the left side of the display.

We have previously covered HP's warranty and support options, and our experience when reviewing the w2207 was similar to what we encountered in our review of the LP3065. HP informed us that all of their products come with a 60 day satisfaction guarantee, so at least in terms of pixel defects customer should not have any difficulties. Beyond the first 60 days, you might need to make a bit more noise if you encounter any pixel defects and you want a new display, but it seems that if you squeak enough HP's customer service may be willing to lend you some oil. As one of the largest computer equipment manufacturers in the world, you also get the benefit of 24/7 technical support, although it can sometimes take a bit of effort to get to the right department if you don't buy the display as part of a computer package.

As one of HP's consumer/home office offerings, the w2207 comes with a standard one-year warranty. You can purchase a three-year extended warranty for an additional $110, although at that price we would seriously recommend looking at some of the 24" offerings on the market that come with three-year warranties. It will still be $100 more to move from a 22" w2207 with a three-year warranty to just about any of the 24" LCDs, but we think the use of S-PVA (Super Patterned Vertical Alignment) panels and additional features tips the scale in their favor.

Index Appearance and Design


View All Comments

  • Bjoern77 - Thursday, August 02, 2007 - link

    You'll find that Monitor to be very popular in Europe, specially Germany due to it's low price.
    Well - low price compared to other monitors.

    EG, the Dell 2407 WFP HC is supposed to cost around 1000$ here, the older version is on "sale" for about 850$. If i see the US-Prices for tfts...ouch. Same goes for a lot of other monitors. The HP is the first i noticed on the us markt which seem to be on a European price level, which, i assume, is at least 25% higher.
  • trajan - Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - link

    The one thing I immediately noticed from the review was the difference between the Gateway 24" and the Dell 24". I've never seen these ratings before -- it looks like in most catagories the Gateway is superior. Am I reading this right? I thought the Dell was the hands down 24" champion! Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - link

    The Gateway has a brighter backlight, but in most other areas I felt the 2407WFP and the FPD2485W were about the same. I prefer the appearance of the Dell LCD over the Gateway LCD, and the extremely bright backlight on the Gateway means that you usually have to spend more time tuning things if you don't want to be blinded. If you had them both set to the same intensity, however, I don't think most people would be able to tell the difference between the panels. Reply
  • nilepez - Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - link

    I'm still using an old CRT, and I don't know why one would compare at a monitor with a max resolution of 1600x1050 to a CRT that was likely capable at least 1800x1440 and 1920x1440 was fairly common. Mine goes higher, but the refresh rate is too slow at that point.

    I personally think that the 24" displays are the first ones that are comparable to 21" monitors. The 22" monitors are more comparable to some of the better 19" monitors (though I suppose there may have been crappy 21" monitors with a max usable res of 16x12.

    I personally wish I could justify the 30" monitors, but at current prices, I'd be better off going dual monitor with 2 24" models (desktop space is king :) )
  • Jodiuh - Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - link

    Have you seen a nice 20in S-IPS next to your old CRT? I have an older 19in CRT and it pales in comparison to the NEC or Dell panels. Reply
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, August 02, 2007 - link

    I had a professional grade 21" CRT next to my 19" WS LCD, and I have to say that the LCD is much, MUCH better for vibrance/image sharpness. The LCD to boot was also 1/5th-1/6th the cost of the 21" CRT . . . Reply
  • nilepez - Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - link

    Probably not, given that most stores carry crappy monitors, but I'm really not willing give up real estate to move to a flat screen.

    even at 1920x1440, I feel cramped if I'm I've got more than 2 instances of jedit open (and I'd really like to have 4, and occasionally more, in most cases).

    24" monitors are the smallest monitors with sufficient resolution, although even then, my desktop shrink by almost 20%.
  • Great Googly Moogly - Thursday, August 02, 2007 - link

    Well, it seems you're forgetting about pixel pitch. Those 1920x1200 24" have quite a high pixel pitch. Certainly a 20.1" LCD with a 1600x1200 resolution is better for you?

    The only LCDs with a decent pixel pitch not stuck in 1991 (seriously) are the 1280x1024 17" (too small, physically, though), 1600x1200 20.1" and the 2560x1600 30".

    The new 1920x1200 26-27" are really atrocious, and the most popular 1680x1050 22" is not up to my standards either--hence the main reason (out of many) why I'm still on an iiyama CRT. And if this trend is still going in a few years, we'll have 720p 40" computer monitors. And everyone will love them.

    So sick and tired of computer display tech going steady backwards since the 90s.
  • jc44 - Thursday, August 02, 2007 - link

    To be fair 2001 was a good year for displays - IBM built the first T221s (24" 3840x2400) :-) 2006 was not such a good year - IBM ceased production of T221s with nothing even vaguely equivalent in sight from anybody :-(
  • strikeback03 - Thursday, August 02, 2007 - link

    Didn't they cost somewhere around $30,000? no wonder they disappeared. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now