Samsung SyncMaster 213T: The Glass Ceiling for Enthusiast LCD
by Kristopher Kubicki on February 20, 2004 4:24 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Full Screen Application
Here are a few quick looks at some demanding full screen applications (except solitaire, which is windowed). All of these screenshots are taken with DVI inputs on the LCDs. We used a Radeon 9800 XT for testing.
The Matrix Reload, The Matrix - We include these movies into our benchmark to test full motion video. As expected, the darks were much better on the 213T, but there was still a washed out blue tone. However, compared to our 2001FP, the 213T image looks like a screenshot. Both images were taken from the same position with the same lighting. Even though the two images are dramatically different, do not put all of your faith in them as digital cameras tend to over-exaggerate visual defects.
Magic the Gathering: Battlegrounds - We picked up a new game since our last benchmark, and in all honesty this is probably one of the better benchmarking games for an LCD; rich colors, fast motion, excessive contrast everywhere (the game is actually kind of fun to play, too). In any case, even though this is an expanded fantasy card game, MTG:B gives us a lot of opportunity to test motion blur due to its high level of activity. Motion blur was essentially non-existent; we did not experience any problems with the LCD keeping up with the rapid color changes on the screen.
Morrowind - Another solid 1600x1200 game we like to test LCD monitors on. Unfortunately, the sky in the game should not be as blue as it shows in this picture. This is partly due to the camera, but also due to the screen. On our 2001FP the sky is the (correct) grey, but the overall image has a more washed out look to it.
Max Payne 2 - Again one of our favorite games to benchmark LCDs because we get such different results each time we change LCDs. There is a slight blue hue to everything even though we have already calibrated our monitor with the OptiCal software. Even though there are some discrepancies in the color, the contrast levels are very good; unlike many other LCDs dark objects on dark backgrounds were difficult to distinguish. This is the desired effect in many games.
Halo - Halo gave our 2001FP a little bit of trouble. While we did notice motion blur, the camera over emphasized the issue due to the shutter rate. For avid gamers there is a noticeable difference between the 213T and the 2001FP, but it is difficult to distinguish. The 213T cannot keep up with the 2001FP; particularly with the constant light to dark imagery (rapid explosions in dark corridors).
Solitaire - For some reason, everyone enjoys our Solitaire benchmark. Indeed, with all that mind bending, card flipping excitement, its no wonder the most played PC game in history deserves its own benchmark.
Unlike our other images, do not confuse these image defects with the defects in the other pictures. The "two" mouse cursors are normal; we are catching two separate frames in the same image due to the cameras shutter rate. What is not normal is the blurring along the edges of the cursor. You can clearly see how the 2001FP has a crisper cursor; the SIPS panel is more capable for this type of imagery.
33 Comments
View All Comments
SLCentral - Sunday, February 22, 2004 - link
Great review, but my question is how the hell did you get the picture on the first page (with the display that has anandtech.com on it) to show the review already online? :-Dwrong - Sunday, February 22, 2004 - link
I bought a Dell 2001FP. It was nice and crisp, but the textured appearance of solid color areas was quite distracting. It would not reliably sync to the various text modes passed through during boot. Worst, it FLICKERED in a kind of checkerboard pixel pattern when things moved, as if it was really an 18-bit panel and was using a 2x2 pixel dither pattern.Either I got a dud, or AT's model had a different panel to mine. Not sure which. I sent mine back and got a CRT. (Not fond of Dell tech support either.)
Workin' - Sunday, February 22, 2004 - link
I've been using a 213T for about 2 months now and it is a fantastic display, absolutely worth every penny of its price!I run mine on the DVI output of a Radeon 9600, and the picture is simply stunning. Also, my panel has zero pixel defects, which is amazing considering there are almost 6 million subpixel elements.
KristopherKubicki - Sunday, February 22, 2004 - link
wizardsinc: Sapphire makes a bunch of dual DVI AGP cards - you might have to special order them but they are totally worth it. As of November I heard that dual DVI accounted for less than 1% of graphics card sales.Kristopher
wizardsinc - Saturday, February 21, 2004 - link
I just thought I'd post an update: A friend of mine just bought a Dell 2001FP, so I was finally able to compare the Dell & Samsung 213T side-by-side. I'd have to say that I agree 100% with Kristopher: The Dell is absolutely beautiful, but the Samsung sitting next to it looks even better. The main differences I could see (besides the obvious physical size differences) were: (a) The Samsung was softer on the eyes and appeared brighter and "whiter". (b) The lines between pixels on the Dell were much more obvious than on the Samsung - when sitting side-by-side, the Dell looked like I was seeing the image through a small screen mesh (very crisp). The Samsung has nicely defined pixel bounderies, but the line between pixels is not as apparent. (c) In Dell's favor - the 16ms vs 25ms refresh rate difference was noticable. Small fast-moving images would fade slightly on the Samsung, where they would remain intact on the Dell. All-in-all though, I decided that for my purposes, the Samsung was the winner. There is currently a $100 mail-in rebate on the Samsung, bringing the price down to $1100 at Best-Buy, so I picked up a couple of them. I've already set them up and I must say they're awesome running side-by-side! :-) Now I have to upgrade to a video card that supplies two DVI outputs (I'm currently running 1 DVI & 1 VGA). Any suggestions? I'm under the impression that Nvidia might be a better choice over ATI, but I could be wrong. Again, any suggestions are welcome!Thanks to all of you for aiding me in my display purchase decision. It's great when discussion groups work. ;-)
KristopherKubicki - Saturday, February 21, 2004 - link
TauRusIL: Interestingly enough, samsung makes a majority of the components including panels. One of the reasons we look at so many Samsung LCDs is just because they typically sell the panels to several other mainstream OEMs.Kristopher
gizzard - Saturday, February 21, 2004 - link
PrinceGaz - Saturday, February 21, 2004 - link
You don't need a hack to make XP run at 640x480 (or to use a 256-colour mode at any resolution either). Just press the 'Advanced' button and select the Adapter tab, then press 'List All Modes...' button and you'll find the hidden modes listed and selectable.Vey useful for some older games which won't run full-screen unless started from 640x480, and a few which won't run at all if not in a 256-colour mode.
TauRusIL - Saturday, February 21, 2004 - link
I noticed most of the LCD panels reviewed here are made by Samsung. I wonder if there were any plans to include LCDs from other manufacturers.I am a long time and very happy user of Princeton SenErgy line of LCDs. To my eyes, the picrure quality of Princeton Senergy line is way above most of other LCD panels. Of course this is a subjective view.
I would love to see a comparative review of the Princeton Senergy and lets say Samsung or Dell panels.
On the side note: does anyone know who is the OEM for Princeton line of LCD panels, or do they make their own panels?
dgrady76 - Saturday, February 21, 2004 - link
Great review. I'd like to see more of the "subjective analysis" in the hardware reviews at AT (as long as it's labeled as such, of course). Hard numbers can omit many truths about a product's actual performance.