Samsung SyncMaster 213T: The Glass Ceiling for Enthusiast LCD
by Kristopher Kubicki on February 20, 2004 4:24 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Construction Continued
| Samsung SyncMaster 213T | |
| LCD | 21.3" UXGA LCD (Active
Matrix) pixel pitch: 0.27mm Anti-glare coating PVA Mode |
| Scanning Frequency | Horizontal: 31-80kHz (analog) Vertical: 56-76Hz |
| Response Time | 25ms (Typical) |
| Contrast Ratio | 500:1 (Typical) |
| Compatibility | 1600 x 1200 (Native) |
| Brightness | 250 cd/m2 |
| Dimensions (WxHxD) | 18.6"x 18.0" x 8.7" |
| Power | Working: 75W Standby/Off: 5W |
| Weight | 11.2lbs |
| Warranty | 3 years parts and labor |
At first glance these specifications are copasetic, particularly for a display of this size; good contrast ratio, brightness and response time. The pixel pitch is a little too large for some tastes, but even at 0.27mm the pitch is still capable. We can see that the PVA display mode is a dead giveaway that inside this behemoth is a Samsung manufactured panel. The PVA technology is exclusive to Samsung, and there just aren't that many people who make 21.3" TFT panels. Even though the LCD sports a 25ms TrTf response time, our experiences with other Samsung produced panels indicates that the more important gray to gray response and color replication are better than average.
Click to enlarge.
The 213T uses a near identical method for ventilation as the Dell 2001FP. Slits around the rear perimeter of the display provide passive cooling with no fans. Even though Samsung manages to passively cool their huge panel and the AC to DC inverter, excessive passive cooling unnecessarily exposes the components of the display. The TFT will emit excessive interference and dust will wreak havoc on the mechanisms inside.
Click to enlarge.
Our particular 213T came with only two flaws. Near the right side of the screen we found one dead subpixel adjacent to a dead pixel. Two inches directly underneath this group we found another dead subpixel. Three dead pixels/subpixels is about par for the course on a 1600x1200 LCD. We found a blue subpixel stuck "on" near the left bezel, but after several hours of use this imperfection seemed to correct itself.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
33 Comments
View All Comments
araczynski - Friday, February 20, 2004 - link
so the bottom line is that for the serious gamer there's still no reason to get an LCD.PrinceGaz - Friday, February 20, 2004 - link
Do you have any CRT monitor reviews coming up or only LCD ones?damage75 - Friday, August 5, 2011 - link
I have been running two 213T monitors continuously for 7 years. Both displays, including the CCFL's are working perfectly. Zero dead or stuck pixels. If there is a diminished brightness, which there has to be, it is not causally visible.I think I am tempting fate by posting this ;-)
The only negative items are these:
1) I bought them when very first available - $1600.00 each.
2) After about 5 years one monitor became unable to hold it's weight. It would slump. Even after disassembly and reassembly it would not hold it's position. This "can" be corrected, but frankly at this point I can live with it.
In 2004 I blew away my colleagues with two amazing 21.3" PVA monitors (powered by a 9800XT). Here we are in 2011 and they are still running perfectly. I know I am "lucky", but it is worthwhile to post that they are still in use and still excellent monitors. I would like to thank Anand and Samsung for this outstanding purchase. Even at that very high cost, they have amortized themselves into nearly free service. The points made by Anand are true - slow response and the black level is not optimum. That has not affected my pleasure/perforamnce with using them.