Samsung SyncMaster 915N: 8ms Response Times
by Kristopher Kubicki on May 25, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Subjective Analysis
For this portion of the benchmark, we will pit the SyncMaster 915N against the other monitors benchmarked in our 19” LCD roundup and comprehensive 19” display reviews since then. This is a subjective test that relies on our overall experience with the monitor after several hours of casual and thorough use. We also use test patterns and guidelines from the VESA FPDM to rate each unit as fairly as possible.Here is generally how we rate a category:
5 - Outstanding; we have not seen anything to date that could rival our impression of this monitor's performance.
4 - Good, but room for improvement. There are units on the market that perform better.
3 - Average; this monitor performs well enough to maintain the status quo, but does not excel.
2 - Improvement needed; this monitor performs poorly in performance of this category.
1 - Unacceptable; this product does not pass even basic performance requirements.
| DisplayMate / CheckScreen / VESA FPDM 2.0 | ||||||||
| BenQ FP931 | Dell 1905FP | Planar PE191M | Samsung 193P | Samsung 910V | Sony SDM-S94 | LG L1980U | Samsung 915N | |
| Intensity Range Check | 4.5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3.5 |
| Black Level Adjustment | 4.5 | 5 | 4.5 | 5 | 4.5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Defocusing, Blooming, Halos | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Screen Uniformity and Color Purity | 4.5 | 5 | - | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Dark Screen Glare Test | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4.5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Primary Colors | 3 | 4.5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3.5 | 4 | 4 |
| Color Scales | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| 16 Color Intensity Levels | 3 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 4.5 | 3 | 4 |
| Screen Regulation | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Streaking, Ghosting | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
Note: the streaking/ghosting mentioned in this portion of the analysis refers to streaking and ghosting as interference, not as a byproduct of poor response time.
Notes from the Lab
As we somewhat suspected, the real weak points of the display line up with the intensity range check and black level adjustment. LGE recently had similar troubles with their L1980U (6-bit TN) display as well. When compared to the L1980U, Samsung clearly had an edge on color reproduction. Part of this may be due to Samsung’s slight change in the TN mode itself, but more likely has to do with the color interpolation – which does not use a square matrix like many of the other TN displays that we have seen. This image quality is not flawless, of course. Even though the interpolation might be slightly better than other 6-bit TN displays, some of the same issues with text present in the L1980U are present in this display as well.The other low point for the SyncMaster 915N is the analog only cable. Dell uses expensive, but versatile Genesis digital signal processors for all of their displays. As a result, almost all of their displays are capable of multiple inputs and, at the very least, DVI and analog. Samsung displays very commonly have DSPs that are custom designed just for that display, and tacking on a DVI input isn’t just a matter of plugging the interconnects into the chip. In any case, we appreciate the fact that Samsung gave us so many levels of control in the DSP, like sharpness and coarse adjustment, but a DVI interface would have done this display a lot of justice. There were several instances while playing games where we could pick up small artifacts along the edges of the screen, and this anomaly seemed dependent on where the analog input cable was positioned on the desk. Analog interconnects need to disappear off the face of the earth, and fast.
Gaming was one of the better qualities of this display. Since the colors seemed accurate enough and wash out occurred infrequently, response time became the focal point of the display again. World of Warcraft and UT2004 received a noticeable boost in performance when rotating the camera. Motion blur was considerably less on the SyncMaster 915N when compared to the Dell 1905FP. One way to really differentiate this display from a display like the Dell UltraSharp 1905FP was to rotate the camera, but leave something in the center field of vision. LG’s L1980U performed great in this category as well, but the fact that the SyncMaster 915N came out ahead in several other tests really sets it apart from LGE’s alternative.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
View All Comments
LX - Thursday, May 26, 2005 - link
Spacecomber (#20), the LTM190E4 is specd to be half as bright as the LTM240M1 (250 vs. 500 cd/m^2).I am not sure how it translate to real-life scenarions though.
JNo - Thursday, May 26, 2005 - link
I did comment this on the preceding LG display review but just to reiterate..."I know anandtech focuses a lot on the Dells and Samsungs in the LCD world, which is in many ways fair enough given their marketshares, but there are other LCDs coming out which I'd like to see reviews of. I know response time isn't everything and is often a controversial subject but I'd love to see priority reviews on the reported 6ms Gray To Gray (GTG) BenQ FP91V+ and the reported 4ms GTG Viewsonic VX924. Inquiring minds would love to know.."
at80eighty - Thursday, May 26, 2005 - link
Jarred, Kristopher ..ANYONE!!this has probably been asked before (my apologies in that case)
Could we have a round up of the best 19"+ monitors for gaming?
and here's the noob question of the day - how is a 6bit monitor better for gaming than a 8bit?
Thnx in advance
DoctorH - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
I was debating getting the 915N or the NEC 1970GX, also an 8ms LCD, but with the glossy black screen that makes movies look better.I decided to go for the glossy black screen. Plus I get a 700:1 contrast ratio, and DVI inputs, and USB hub.
All this for $535 canadian.
No dead pixels either.
A friend of mine also picked one up.
Best monitor I've laid eyes on. I did a direct comparison with the 915n, which was also, good, however, no DVI, and had that matte black finish.
archcommus - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
#26, thanks. The 930B is definitely still my choice, then. I'm going to pick it up at Best Buy.I want to buy it now, but my upgraded computer won't be ready for a couple weeks still, and I don't want to buy the monitor and then just have it sit there - I want to use it actively from the moment I buy it in case any pixels or something dies. Hmm, what to do...
shiznit - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
i apologize, didnt see the buyer's guide. but a review last year would have been nice.ocyl - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
Kristopher,Thank you for your sustained poundering on 6-bit panels. It really is much appreciated.
Best regards.
MajorPayne - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
#24, the main differences between the 2 are 1) DVI connection (Essential for most folks), and 2) Software DPS control (useful to some, but I have never minded setting it manually, so not that useful to me). The other specs are the same.... 8ms response time, still no swivel (at least it does tilt), and a beautiful screen. I was playing farcy64 last night on mine (I just got it 2 days ago), and could not believe how beautiful everything looked. I kept getting killed because I stopped to stare at stuff ;)!Rocket321 - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
So what is the actual response time for the Dell 1905? This review indicates that it is a 25ms panel - several times. Yet in the full review from January it is listed as a 20ms panel. Which review has it right?archcommus - Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - link
I wanted to get a 930B pretty soon, is it different in any ways besides having DVI? Should I still get that one?