It’s been a criminally long time since we’ve had a display review, partly because we’ve been changing and revamping our test bench with some new things you’ve been asking for, and partly because Jarred has graciously offered to let me do display reviews while he focuses on notebooks and other greater things. His are some hugely big shoes to fill, so go easy on me. ;) But enough with that, let’s dive right in!

If you’re familiar with the G2410, you’ll find that the G2410H is much the same, with one major difference - a higher-end height adjustable stand. This ergonomic shortcoming was something criticized in its earlier brethren, which many argued sacrificed too much in the way of utility. It's amazing how much importance one can impart to a simple stand.
 


The G2410H rectifies the matter this time with a height, rotate, and tilt adjustable stand complete with a cable management port square in the back. If you’ve seen other Dell monitors, you’ve probably seen this mount before, as it’s common to the U2410 and myriad others.

In a sea of relatively generic TN panels, the G2410H doesn't stand out immediately, though it does feature WLED backlighting instead of older CCFL technology. As we’ll see later though, this combination isn’t going to set any records for color gamut, as CCFL again usually produces better results in practice. But the real point of using WLED is all about that green cred. It’s apparent that Dell’s aims were more on keeping power consumption down with WLEDs and a few other things.

The G2410 is priced at an MSRP of $339, making it more expensive than similarly sized 24” TN panel-packing monitors, but it packs a bevy of features not found in those other generic displays. That brings us to the details:

 
Dell G2410H - Specifications
Property Quoted Specification
Video Inputs Dual-link DVI with HDCP
VGA
Panel Type TN (14K0N9CS346U)
Pixel Pitch 0.277mm
Colors 16.7 million colors
Brightness 250 nits typical
Contrast Ratio 1000:1 advertised
1000000:1 Dynamic advertised
Response Time 5 ms typical
Viewable Size 24" diagonal
Resolution 1920x1080 (1080P)
Viewing Angle 170 degrees horizontal, 160 degrees vertical
Power Consumption (operation) <20 watts typical
29 watts maximum
Power Consumption (standby) <0.15 watts
Screen Treatment Matte (anti-glare)
Height-Adjustable Yes - 3.94"
Tilt Yes
Pivot No
Swivel Yes
VESA Wall Mounting Yes - 100x100mm
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 21.47" x 18.26-14.32" x 7.25" (WxHxD)
Weight 8.86 lbs w/o stand
13.33 lbs w/ stand
Additional Features Optional speaker bar
Limited Warranty 3-year warranty standard
4-year and 5-year extended available
Accessories DVI, VGA[c] and power cables
Price $339 MSRP

As mentioned before, this is a refreshed G2410 with more attention to ergonomics, but with the same emphasis on keeping the product green.

That greenness starts right out of the box, as packaging foregoes polystyrene foam in favor of an intricately-designed cardboard cladding. The difference is actually more striking than you’d expect out-of-box; removing the monitor from its corrugated cardboard shell is a bit of a puzzle in some ways. It’s well designed however, and there wasn’t any apparent weakness that would lead us to believe it’s more prone to getting damaged during shipping than other packaging. Dell claims that they’re using less plastic in the box as well, which is difficult to quantify, but seems likely considering just how much cardboard is inside.

The display’s components and panel are also eco-friendly - the panel is arsenic, mercury, BFR, CFR, and PVC free. Most surprisingly, the chassis and bezel plastic is made of at least 25 percent post-consumer recycled plastic.


Packaging and construction are one thing, but what really matters to display-shoppers is how well the G2410H sips energy. Dell claims that their energy-sipping power supply draws less than 0.15 watts in sleep mode using VGA input, and under 20 watts at maximum brightness. Of course, this is also the logical reason for opting with WLED backlighting instead of CCFLs; energy consumption is less. There’s also an ambient light sensor, and three power profiles to balance brightness level against power consumption. At the end of the day, Dell claims that adds up to a 60% decrease in power consumption compared to the 50 watt drawing E248WFP.

The G2410H is relatively spartan when it comes to onboard ports - the only options are DVI-D and VGA. There isn’t any option for HDMI, USB, or even DisplayPort like we’re starting to see crop up in a surprisingly diverse array of displays. That’s a bit of a letdown, but it isn’t a game-killing omission for the display. If you haven’t gotten the picture yet, this monitor is definitely oriented toward energy-conscious businesses doing office and productivity work before all other.
 

Subjective Analysis
POST A COMMENT

39 Comments

View All Comments

  • strikeback03 - Monday, May 10, 2010 - link

    Using the native software packages for both I liked the i1D2 better than the Spyder3. But when my i1D2 dies after 8 months and xRite/Pantone wouldn't do anything for me I wasn't about to buy another. Reply
  • strikeback03 - Monday, May 10, 2010 - link

    should be died, not dies Reply
  • Brian Klug - Monday, May 10, 2010 - link

    Oh man, it died? That sucks. I hope ours doesn't give out. Thus far I agree with you - the i1D2 is producing better looking/more consistent results than the Spyder 3 subjectively, but I haven't been really good about testing, just initial messing around.

    Hmmz, this could be a review of its own... ;)

    -Brian
    Reply
  • strikeback03 - Monday, May 10, 2010 - link

    I don't care overly much about the actual power consumption, but would like a display that draws less power just to keep the heat down in the summer. My Gateway FPD2485W draws about 100W regardless of brightness setting and is quite toasty. Reply
  • ctsrutland - Monday, May 10, 2010 - link

    If you really want to tell us how green it is, you also need to tell us how much CO2 was generated during its manufacture in comparison to other screens. How much oil was used in its making? Does it have a thinner plastic shell to reduce oil use? You also need to tell us whether the finished article is particularly easy to recycle in some way. Does it have a longer warranty than normal - if I can keep it in use for more years before replacing it, then it would be greener. Does it have components that are easier to fix? It's much greener to fix faulty things than to chuck them out and buy a new one. Has Dell undertaken to make spares available for more years to help with this? Don't suppose so... Reply
  • dragunover - Monday, May 10, 2010 - link

    Mine supports like 150 or so hertz at that resolution...
    NEC MultiSync 90
    Reply
  • ReaM - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 - link

    THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TESTING THIS ONE!!!

    I had it in the shopping cart for a month now in an online shop. Very low power consumption!
    Reply
  • strikeback03 - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link

    Yeah, after about 8 months it wanted to calibrate everything to a very green hue and would flat out refuse to even run the calibration on my laptop at settings I had previously used (and had a screenshot of). It was stored in a drawer with the clip-on diffuser cover on when not in use. I know hardware goes bad, the lack of support is what disturbed me. Reply
  • AllenP - Sunday, May 16, 2010 - link

    Concerning the processing and input lag:

    TOTALLY AWESOME that you are adapting this new CRT comparison technique. :) This is by far one of the most important elements of a display to me, so I'm happy to see a solid site like AnandTech giving some solid data.

    But, two comments that struck my eye about this test:

    1) It seems a little strange that you're using an HDMI to DVI adapter, instead of just going straight form a DVI off the graphics card, but it shouldn't make a difference anyway.

    2) WOW. 9ms total latency is VERY low for an LCD. I usually find around 30+ms when looking around (which is totally unacceptable to me). This is a nice monitor -- I'm looking forward to seeing some more data to verify that your test methods are solid. Man, that's low latency. :)

    The human eye can see apprx. 85Hz out of the rods (greyscale) and 60Hz out of the cones (colour). So this means that the center of your vision sees at around 60Hz and 85Hz at the edges (due to a lot more cones in the center).

    I assume that this would mean that we can therefore discern between 16.66ms and 11.76ms of lag. (Please correct me if my assumption is wrong... I'm sure I'm a bit off on that) 9ms is nicely below that threshold, which is quite impressive for an LCD.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now