G2400WD or E2400HD?

S

Shrimpanzee

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
244
I'm replacing my Gateway FPD2185W that I bought in 2006 in search of a better display for non-gaming computer use and Xbox 360 gaming.

I don't care about 16:9, as the G2400WD supports 1:1 pixel mapping anyways.

So, does the E2200HD have any technical advantage such as input lag over the G2400WD....or are they pretty much the same panel with a different native resolution?

Input lag is my top priority because I will mainly be playing FPS games.
 
E2200HD: 21.5 Wide, TN, 1920X1080, 16:9, 2ms RT, 10,000:1 DCR, HDMI 1.3, Speakers
E2400HD: 24 Wide, TN, 1920X1080, 16:9, 2ms RT, 10,000:1 DCR, HDMI 1.3, Sperkers
------------------------------Similar panel-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G2400WD:24 Wide, TN, 1920X1200, 16:10, 2m RT, 4000:1 DCR, HDMI1.0, 1:1 pixel mapping
V2400WD:24Wide ultra slim, TN, 1920X1200, 16:10, 2m RT, 4000:1 DCR, HDMI1.0, 1:1 pixel mapping
------------------------------Simialr panel----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Exactly....so is there any reason to get the E2400HD?

Dynamic contrast ratio means nothing to me.
 
For most computer usage, the extra 120 pixels is, well, more pixels. And can you ever have enough? Although the tighter dot pitch on the E2200 would be nicer for images and tinier text, if you like that sort of thing..
 
i have V2400W and it lives up to its promise. I will recommend it to anyone. It's $359 and freeshipping on BenQ's site now.
 
clockdogg said:
For most computer usage, the extra 120 pixels is, well, more pixels. And can you ever have enough? Although the tighter dot pitch on the E2200 would be nicer for images and tinier text, if you like that sort of thing..
Click to expand...
You mean extra 230,400 pixels? There are an extra 120 vertical lines of pixels.
 
Yes, you wouls gain 1920 X 120 = 230,400 pixels on 24" 16:10 compared to 24" 16:9
 
G2400W, 1920 * 1200 is the computer standard res, 1920 * 1080 is NOT.
 
Shrimpanzee said:
What are you talking about "computer standard". 1920x1200 is just 16:10......1920x1080 is 16:9
Click to expand...

He is talking about how widescreen PC monitors have always been 16:10 and 16:9 is for TVs... Manufacturers trying to force that **** format on us just to cut costs.
 
Raudulfr said:
He is talking about how widescreen PC monitors have always been 16:10 and 16:9 is for TVs... Manufacturers trying to force that **** format on us just to cut costs.
Click to expand...

Well said, that's what I meant, thanks.

Edit: This move also try to split the standard, which is very bad.
 
Raudulfr said:
He is talking about how widescreen PC monitors have always been 16:10 and 16:9 is for TVs... Manufacturers trying to force that **** format on us just to cut costs.
Click to expand...



Actually the 24 inch 16:9 format makes sense for TN panels due to the bad vertical viewing angles.
 
montana said:
Actually the 24 inch 16:9 format makes sense for TN panels due to the bad vertical viewing angles.
Click to expand...

Really? How does that work exactly?

That would explain why this 16:9 transition has, so far, only affected TN panels (and only at 1920 x 1080).
 
Shrimpanzee said:
Exactly....so is there any reason to get the E2400HD?

Dynamic contrast ratio means nothing to me.
Click to expand...

Not really. 1920 x 1080 is only good if you don't want black bars while watching 1080p content (frankly, I never understood the beef some people have with black bars). Think someone mentioned a while back that 1080 resolution monitors would be able to scale better in 1:1. Don't know how much that held up though.
 
King of Heroes said:
Not really. 1920 x 1080 is only good if you don't want black bars while watching 1080p content (frankly, I never understood the beef some people have with black bars). Think someone mentioned a while back that 1080 resolution monitors would be able to scale better in 1:1. Don't know how much that held up though.
Click to expand...

I LOL every time someone says they want 16:9 so no black bars, most movies are 2.x : 1...
 
Shrimpanzee said:
So, does the E2200HD have any technical advantage such as input lag over the G2400WD....or are they pretty much the same panel with a different native resolution?
Click to expand...
Not exactly the same panel with different resolutions. E2400HD (16:9) is more wider (physically) than G2400WD (16:10), therefore movies and 1080/720 HD content will look slightly bigger on E2400HD.
 
phoenixfx said:
Not exactly the same thing with different resolutions. E2400HD (16:10) is more wider (physically) than G2400WD (16:9), therefore movies and 1080/720 HD content will look slightly bigger on E2400HD.
Click to expand...
You've got your numbers switched around but yeah.

switch 16:10 with 16:9 and you've got yourself an accurate comment :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top