Gateway has launched three new ultra-slim LED-backlit displays. The FHX series boasts fast 2ms response times and are available as a 21.5” (FHX2152L) and 24” (FHX2402L) model with glossy black bezels. The FHD2303L has to make do with a 5ms response time and is only available as a 23” model with a transparent frame and attractive asymmetric stand.

All three models support a huge 12,000,000:1 (presumably dynamic) contrast ratio and media-friendly 1920x1080 full high definition resolution in 16:9 aspect ratio. They can all produce up to 16.7million colors at 250 nits of brightness. All models come with VGA and DVI (with HDCP) connectivity with the larger 23” and 24” models also carrying a HDMI interface – an interesting omission on the smaller model.

Gateway is also pushing the eco-friendly credentials as the new displays are composed of non-toxic materials and with LED-backlighting, these displays save up to 68% of the power used by conventional CCFL displays, thus achieving RoHS Energy Star qualifications.

All three displays will be available this month at $190 for the 21.5” model and $250 for the two larger models. Considering that makes the 24” FHX2402L with the faster response time the same price as the smaller, slower 23” FHD2303L, it seems the only decision is whether to buy the 24” model or the smaller 21.5” FHX2152L for $60 less, albeit without HDMI.

POST A COMMENT

98 Comments

View All Comments

  • EnzoFX - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    I think what the general consensus is that 1080p monitors in general are not for us power users, heh. A perfectly valid argument, these monitors would have to offer something much more to impress the average anandtech reader, and that's without even getting into color quality/panel type, etc. Reply
  • TegiriNenashi - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    Full HD, 1080p is so yesterday. It looks like marketing drones badly need new slogans, so let me do homework for them.

    1. Start counting pixels, something digital camera world having for a decade already. Why do we still have puny 2 megapixel displays?

    2. "Optimized for a web" means a dispaly that have a sane ratio, not ridiculous shortscreen 16:9.

    Reply
  • DoofusAmericanus - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    Let's see: 1920x1080x24(bits per pixel)x500(Hz) = ~25 Gbps

    Even HDMI 1.3 maxes out at ~10 Gbps, say nothing of DVI. As for VGA, pushing that much signal you'd best hope for world's best cable quality, and have the world's shortest cable...

    And even if you somehow managed to feed this beast's bandwidth demand, what the heck do you need a 2 ms refresh for??? The human visual system can't perceive anything faster than about 30 ms anyway... (Maybe it would help your monitor look better on video? But how many people need that??)

    This is nothing but gratuitous and pointless technological overkill.
    Reply
  • Roland00 - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    The 2ms doesn't tell you how many hertz or frames or seconds the monitor is capable of. All it tells you is that once it processed the signal it takes 2ms for the monitor to change a grey pixel to another grey pixel.

    A better way to call it is image delay after input is processed.

    Note this information doesn't tell you black to white and back to black (which takes longer due to not having monitor overdrive), nor does it tell you how long it takes to process the image. Knowing the grey to grey latency is useless you should want to know the total system latency.
    Reply
  • Revdarian - Wednesday, October 6, 2010 - link

    The human visual system can see faster than 30ms(33fps).

    What you are spouting off is a missconception taken from motion pictures, in which people forget that you have blurred images due to the shutter speed, and that blur helps the brain connect the static images in a seemingly fluid way.

    That also doesn't take into account high contrast images for example grab an old crt, open a blank word document, see it at 60hz, 75, 85... you will notice the different, your brain does too, and it was the main cause for eyestrain, that simple test should tell you that your 30ms number was wrong.
    Reply
  • wicko - Wednesday, October 6, 2010 - link

    You've got your numbers swapped. 33ms is 30fps, not the other way around. Reply
  • 8steve8 - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    there is a reason i visit anandtech instead of engadget, and thats because anandtech usually has quality and interesting articles. They do not normally publish random PR from uninteresting products.

    this , is one of the least interesting product launches in awhile, 21-24" 1080p tn displays, yes they use LED, but there are probably 20 other lcd's of this size and resolution that also do....
    heck, a year ago i bought a LG w2486L that is 24" LED 1080p display.

    FILTER
    Reply
  • fausto412 - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    lol...you on the money man. Reply
  • El_Capitan - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    I don't know what you guys are talking about. I've been wanting to upgrade my triple 28" 1920 x 1200 monitors to some triple 24" 1920 x 1080 monitors for a while now, and Anand's article got me salivating for an upgrade.

    All you haters can hate, and stick with your 4 year old outdated 30" 2560 x 1600 screens.
    Reply
  • fausto412 - Tuesday, October 5, 2010 - link

    sarcasm? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now