Subjective Evaluation
As usual, we spent some time using the display both before and after calibration. Many users don't have access to color calibration tools, while for imaging professionals some form of hardware calibration is standard procedure. We will start with our subjective evaluation before getting to the actual quantitative results.
After our last review, we actually heard from a reader who said he was a big fan of glossy LCDs. We actually preferred non-reflective finishes on our LCD panels, so we prefer displays like the Samsung 245T to glossy options like the HP w2408 -- and that's before we take into account other performance aspects. Hopefully, we've made it clear that we are not fans of TN LCDs, and switching from the HP w2408 to the Samsung 245T once again reinforces that opinion. With the two LCDs sitting next to each other, besides the better viewing angles on the 245T we also felt that it had better overall color quality and vibrancy. Some might prefer the industrial design of the HP display, but in all other areas we would rate the Samsung 245T higher.
Comparing the 245T to other LCDs that we've reviewed, the differences are not as dramatic. The Gateway FPD2485W and Dell 2407WFB are both quite similar in features and functionality, and to the naked eye we would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between any of these three LCDs. That should come as no surprise, however, since all three LCDs appear to use Samsung S-PVA panels. Pricing is also similar on all three offerings, although the FPD2485W has been discontinued and the 2407WFP is due for replacement in the near future. (Yes, we will be reviewing the replacement as soon as the NDA expires.) The major difference would be the inclusion of an HDMI port on the Samsung, or the flash media ports on the Dell LCD.
We did test out the other extra features that the Samsung 245T advertises, specifically the MPA (Motion Picture Acceleration) and the dynamic contrast setting. The difference between enabling and disabling MPA is quite small, but to our eyes the display did look a bit better with the function enabled. Except where otherwise noted, we left MPA on for the rest of our testing. The dynamic contrast did not make as good of an impression; as we will see in a moment, contrast ratios are indeed higher, but it comes primarily from increased maximum brightness and lower color fidelity. When you enable Dynamic CR, you also lose control over the color levels, contrast, and brightness -- all of these apparently get set to "automatic". So score one for faster response times, but forget about dynamic contrast ratios.
One other question that has come up is whether there is any sort of internal image lag - i.e. processing that can add a frame or two delay to the output. This is something that exists to varying degrees on all LCDs, but for the most part it's not an issue. There may be a 0.02s lag, but the vast majority of users won't notice it. During testing, we didn't feel that the 245T was any different than other LCDs we've used, but then we've never complained about input lag on any LCD we've tested. Considering double-buffering and SLI/CrossFire also add a couple frames of delay, and no one appears concerned about that, we're not too worried about LCD input lag. If we do notice it on future reviews, though, we will be sure to make a note of it.
Unless otherwise noted, we ran the remaining tests after calibrating the displays using Monaco Optix XR, both the professional version of the software as well as an XR (DTP-94) colorimeter. In some of the tests, calibration can have a dramatic impact on the result, but viewing angles and response times remain largely unchanged. We also performed testing with ColorEyes Display Pro, although the overall results were better using Monaco Optix XR.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
60 Comments
View All Comments
alainiala - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
I do A LOT of monitor testing at my work because I'm one of a handful of people responsible for setting our enterprise hardware standards. I try to steer our company away from TN-based panels, but sometimes its unavoidable (all but one 22" panel that I'm aware of are TN). I find S-PVA to be acceptable, but the true beauties are the S-IPS monitors. NEC makes some of the best S-IPS monitors around, but they are very pricey. My favorite monitors is undoubtably the NEC 2490WUXi, but you have to be prepared to sell an organ to get one. Not worth it for the average user, but anybody with color-critical apps should take a long hard look at it. I do wish more manufacturers would stick with S-PVA and S-IPS... But alas, the pricepoints demand we all get stuck with TN garbage.Pjotr - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
TVA -> PVAJarredWalton - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
Fixed, thanks - after writing an article for so many hours, some things start to blur past your eyes. :)uethello - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
The panel being listed as TN is ominous to me. I've been studying monitors hard for about a month (since I found out how much of my money Uncle Sam is giving me). Seems like some manufacturers build monitors with both types of panels. Going for the "Hope" buy, I guess. The person who hears about someone getting a good panel and buying in the hopes of not getting a TN.JarredWalton - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
I talked to my contact at Samsung and got this response on the panel:"As to your question, the 245T does have an S-PVA panel, which is a far superior technology than TN, not that I need to tell you that. The 245BW uses a TN panel. The proper authorities have been notified and they’re working on fixing [the PDF] immediately. I appreciate you letting me know."
So no worries - the 245T is an S-PVA panel as reported and as the images show.
Dainas - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
...all manufacturers are seemingly phasing out all mva/pva panels below $650, replacing them with TN at the same pricepoint and no one cares. It surprises me that the reviewers despite not being a big fan of $500+ TN panels, have not noted this plain as day trend.JarredWalton - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
Ummm... did you read my HP w2408 review? I pretty much slammed on that trend and said that IMO the TN panels still suck by comparison. I also praised this LCD for not being a TN panel. How is that "not noting the trend"?Dainas - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
ok, you noted that much :P Except for what amount to closeout deals, we are starved for choice compaired to 6 months ago. Its not just a matter of waiting for things to get back up to swing after the chinese new year. Besides the expensive stalwarts such as this and the dells line, TN is just eating up everything else was :(I would expect nothing short of a full blown rant about this, hehe.
strikeback03 - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
Aside from closeout deals and Black Friday specials and the like, have there ever been 24" LCDs that didn't use TN panels available "cheaply"? Seems that when the 24" LCDs were initially all good panels and all expensive, then as more came out the prices dropped some, then someone started making 24" TN panels and those monitors formed a whole separate price bracket.JarredWalton - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
I believe there are some S-PVA 24" panels for around $400-$450. Are they good LCDs, or are they the reject S-PVA panels that couldn't be put in $600 LCDs? I don't know - I'd like to get one to test, but unfortunately the budget LCD companies aren't interested in sending us review samples. Anecdotally, I've heard that while they are usually better than TN panels, they've got other issues - firmware, low build quality, etc.