I only got to play with a pre-pro model for a bit. I think that as far as ranging goes, that is not where the big gain is here. In the sub 2400 models, the step forward is you are getting AB ultralite, so it will work basically like a Leica 2700b model. There are some differences, but more or less, the function is close. But their biggest seller for this line is their integration with their scopes. If you are not using one of the BDX line scopes, obviously you don't get that.
If you step up to the 2400 series, you get integration with a Kestrel, which is in my opinion is pretty awesome and should be the best current workflow for working with these devices IMO (this assumes you want to use a kestrel, and not go to the 2400 ABS all in one solution). I say should be because I have not had one to test other than the initial demo, so can't say how well it will work in extensive use, but at first blush, pretty cool. The glass on the new 2400 is the same as on the ABS if that matters to you.
So whether it is worth it really depends on what you want it for, what you already have, and what other tools you are or want to use. If you are starting from a clean sheet, and are wanting to use a Kestrel for long range shooting, the 2400 BDX is probably a good consideration. On the other hand, if you already have a 2200, already have the scope you want, and don't want to go to a Kestrel and/or a 2400, the improvement on the 2200 BDX over what you currently have is only going to be the onboard AB ultralite. That's something, but is it enough to consider the expense? Not sure.
Those are only examples, but the point is, again, depends where you are at the moment and where you are trying to go.