24" LCD Roundup

by Jarred Walton on May 1, 2008 8:00 PM EST

Gateway FHD2400 Specifications and Appearance

Gateway FHD2400 Specifications
Video Inputs DVI with HDCP support
HDMI
Analog (VGA)
Component
S-Video
Composite
Panel Type TN (GWY 0968)
Pixel Pitch 0.270mm
Colors 16.7 million (6-bit with dithering/interpolation?)
92% color gamut
Brightness 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio 1000:1 Static
Response Time 3ms GTG with UltraResponse
5ms GTG without UltraResponse
Viewable Size 24" diagonal
Resolution 1920x1200
Viewing Angle 160 horizontal/vertical
Power Consumption <150W max stated
76W max, 36W min measured
Power Savings <2W
Screen Treatment Glossy UltraBright
Height-Adjustable Yes - 5.00 inches
Tilt Yes - 25 degrees back/5 degrees forward
Pivot Yes
Swivel Yes - 360 degrees (with sufficient space)
VESA Wall Mounting 100mm x 100mm
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 22.48" x 17.36" x 9.92" lowered (WxHxD)
22.48" x 22.36" x 9.92" raised (WxHxD)
Weight w/ Stand 17.2 lbs.
Additional Features (2) USB 2.0 - left, (2) USB 2.0 - back
(USB connection to PC required)
Faroudja video processing
Audio Optional speaker bar
Limited Warranty 1-year parts and labor
3-year optional upgrades from Gateway ($30)
Price MSRP $500
Online starting at ~$450

The Gateway FHD2400 is similar to the Dell 2408WFP in some ways: you get a bevy of input options and a fully functional stand. Move beyond that areas and there are plenty of differences. First, like the ASUS MK241H the FHD2400 uses a TN panel. Unlike all of the other LCDs in this roundup, the Gateway includes a glossy panel. You can easily see reflections in the LCD, particularly when it's off or showing dark content in a well-lit room, but in normal use it's not much of a problem. In fact, we can stop right now for those of you that like glossy displays: this is a great 24" LCD and definitely gets our recommendation for the glossy club. (However, there are a few other caveats that we will get to shortly.)

Gateway doesn't offer quite as many input options as Dell, but then we imagine the vast majority of users will only use one input anyway. Still, you get HDMI and DVI digital inputs, VGA for analog computer use, and component video in case you want to use the display as an HDTV. (Does anyone actually still use S-Video or composite inputs?)


In some ways, the Gateway stand is the best of the bunch today. It has two small wheels on the bottom that allow you to rotate the display 360° -- and beyond as long as you manage to keep the cables out of the way. You need quite a large surface area to do this, but then most people will be okay swiveling the display 20 or 30° to the left or right. The aspect that we truly appreciate with the Gateway stand is that it offers 5" of height adjustment. Why is that important? It allows you to easily pivot the display into portrait mode, and you won't find us complaining about an extra inch in height adjustment. Even if you don't use the portrait mode, the pivot function proves to be extremely convenient when connecting or disconnecting cables -- we definitely missed it on the two LCDs that don't pivot. Similar to the Dell display, the stand also has a cutout in the center that can be used for cable management.

Based purely on appearance, we would rate the Gateway FHD2400 has the best-looking LCD of the bunch. That's a completely subjective opinion, of course, but a silver stand and accents with the glossy LCD panel are definitely eye-catching. Like ASUS, Gateway does put something of a blemish on the exterior by including a large marketing sticker in the bottom-right corner listing the various features, but take that off and you're left with an elegant LCD.

Dell 2408WFP Evaluation Gateway FHD2400 Evaluation
Comments Locked

89 Comments

View All Comments

  • AnnonymousCoward - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link

    I agree with Jarred on both accounts: you can't go wrong with the LP3065 or 3007WFP-HC, and input lag is far less than the lag time you experienced on the tablet. But if you're really sensitive to it, I'd avoid the Dell 2708, Dell 3008, Samsung 244T, and Samsung 245T, as those seem to have the worst lag of all.

    For unbeatable 24" color accuracy, the choice is obvious: NEC LCD2490WUXi (U.S.) or Hazro HZ24W (U.K.). I think they have mid-range lag (35ms?), which you probably wouldn't notice. The LP3065, 3007, and DoubleSight 26" are high quality IPS screens with very little lag, and for professional animation work, why not go bigger than 24"?
  • AnnonymousCoward - Sunday, May 11, 2008 - link

    Jarred, I'm glad to see input lag drawing so much attention. You seem well aware of this, but I wanted to point out that the LP3065 was a poor choice for a reference monitor. It likely performs the same as the 3007-HC, which has measurements that bounce from 0-20ms; 3 increments on your scale (maybe 2 considering refresh rate). Some LCDs out there consistently measure close to 0ms.

    The editor's comments are completely out of context! ("They're huge, heavy, and require more power, and the best ones were made over five years ago. Sorry - LCDs are where everything is heading.") A heavy, power hungry, old, and obsolete 15" CRT would still be an ideal reference.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 13, 2008 - link

    It would probably be a faster reference, but I'm not going to try to dig one up. Sorry. My place is crowded enough without keeping around an obsolete CRT. I sold off a couple 19" CRTs two years ago, and that was the last time I had one around for testing. I had to junk my old 21" CRT (from 1997) because I couldn't even give it away. 85 pounds now at the junk pile.

    As it stands, I will continue to use the LP3065 as a reference LCD. If I test an LCD that scores better than the LP3065, that's not a problem: it will have a negative "relative input lag" score. A CRT might very well score 20ms faster; my problem isn't with 0ms vs. 20ms (assuming CRTs can score 0ms); it's with 0ms vs. 60ms and perhaps 0ms vs. 40ms.

    Personally, I'm certainly fine with the LP3065 - it is in use on my own gaming system and I've never been bothered with any discernible input lag. Image tearing caused by turning off VSYNC is a much bigger concern -- and that's one area where I'd like to see LCDs improve; a 120Hz refresh rate would help a lot. But then we'd need all new graphics cards and connectors to manage the data rates for 120Hz at 2560x1600.
  • AnnonymousCoward - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link

    I hear ya on CRTs being too big to keep around :)

    I thought your measurements would have more variation, like by 40ms, since in many lag tests I've seen, measurements varied by 20ms. But your variations were 20ms, including both the reference and the one tested. I'd have to agree that a CRT isn't necessary, since the variations are under control (but I'll still add 11ms to the final numbers, as you've talked about). I'm surprised your 245T results weren't higher.

    I have a 3007-HC and agree about the excessive tearing. And of course if the framerate can't stay above 60, I have to disable vsync and live with it. You gotta admit, it's quite nice that the 8800-series cards came out within a year of the 30"ers, and that those two separate technologies complement each other.

    I wonder why the DoubleSight is going EOL, if it's such a great monitor and hot seller! Does that indicate customer return problems?
  • ShocWave - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    Actually, I have a 2493HM.
    AV mode will display 720p and 1080p at the correct aspect ratio with overscan. What it basically does is fill the screen and crops out the sides.

    It's not 1:1, but better then nothing.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    I just don't understand why anyone would *want* overscan. AV Mode takes 720p stretched to fill the whole screen and then overscans it, right? Or are you saying it only crops the left and right sides? (I suppose I could check if I dig the LCD back out.)

    I'm not a stickler on aspect ratios, especially 16:9 stretched to fit 16:10 - the information is merely listed for those who really do care. I still think the Gateway has a better approach and overall better design. The Samsung however offers better color accuracy and a non-glossy panel for the same price. It's a close second in the TN panel contest (out of tested LCDs).
  • 10e - Saturday, May 10, 2008 - link

    Yes, that's exactly what it does. Takes the 720p/1080p image and "zooms" it so that it fills the screen vertically, but gets cut off at the sides. So you have a 16:10 "window" looking at a 16:9 screen that is missing some of the image left and right (about 5%)

    I use an image from the "TigerDave" site that shows exactly the amount of 720p and 1080p overscan a display will suffer. It does actually cut off a very small part of the image top and bottom as well.

    I don't know what Samsung had in mind here. The newer revisions of the 245T and 275TPlus have a built in image setting for 16:9 now that supposedly works, so why they couldn't fix this in a technically newer design (2493HM) is confusing.

  • BattleRattle - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    Do input lag against a CRT... Its the analog of the CRT that matters
  • viperboy2025 - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    How does this compare to other reputable LCD monitors, I can't help but think anandtech is commercializing Dell displays. I mean how about the profesional serious from viewsonic, VP2650wb. They don't have a 24" oddly, but they do have a 26", VP2650wb, at a similar price as the dell 24", costing $615 at onsale.com with free shipping at the moment.
    The specs of this monitor seem to be better at everything than the dell, as it has 26" (compare to 24"), same resolution, 3ms response time, same 110% color gamut, 4000:1 contrast ration (compare to 3000:1), only difference I see are the inputs, since the professional serious doesn't carry TV inputs. But viewsonic does has a line of the X serious, all of which have hdmi, component, composite, and s video components, which i even doubt most people would use anyways since they would be attaching this to a computer not using it as a TV.
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    Drop contrast ratio and response time from that list, as they are meaningless figures. Color accuracy with "dynamic contrast" is horrible on all the displays I've tested - you can see the screen get darker/brighter as you watch, and I find it extremely distracting. So what you end up with is a 26" display at a good price. Is it better or worse than the Dell? In color accuracy, I'd bet a lot of money that it's worse without calibration.

    For the record, Dell displays are already "commercialized". The only thing wrong with the 2408WFP that I can see is input lag. I made this quite clear. If you're looking for a good 24" LCD for professional work, I'd recommend it without reservation. If you want a gaming LCD, probably look around more.

    I can't review every LCD out there, in part because most companies don't send us samples. Viewsonic is one of those companies (I've emailed them at least six times in the past year without a single response). They can call something a "professional display" if they want, but that doesn't make it any more true than the "get rich quick" schemes you see floating around. It may or may not be a great LCD; I'd love to get one sent here for review. Note also that all it took was one email to LaCie and they jumped at the opportunity for this review. If you're looking for a true professional display and you want great support, I'd recommend them in a heartbeat. $300 more is a tough pill to swallow for casual use, but for professionals that should be a non-issue.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now