Samsung 2493HM Evaluation
The OSD options in general are similar to what we found on the Samsung 245T, though there are some differences. For example, picture-in-picture mode is missing and the options for color control are slightly more limited. Both of these changes are in tune with the "consumer" target audience. One change that we definitely don't like is the button style for the OSD. Put bluntly, we find the OSD buttons to be extremely annoying. There is no tactile feedback, and it can be difficult to see the labels against the shiny LCD bezel. Gateway gets around this by using blue LEDs to show you where the buttons are, but on the 2493HM we always felt like we were searching to find a proper place to "press". There were many occasions where we mistakenly pressed the wrong button. On the plus side, you don't have any buttons clearly visible on the front of your display, and once you have the display set up and configured properly you probably won't need to enter the OSD menus too frequently.
Samsung provides a couple "magic" options in their OSD. MagicBright is simply their name for the preset color/brightness/contrast settings, and there are seven options. Like all the other displays we've tested so far that feature dynamic contrast, we found the net result less than perfect -- color accuracy in particular is horrible when dynamic contrast is enabled (i.e. Delta E of over 12.0 after calibration). We stuck with the "custom" color setting for the remainder of our testing. You also get MagicColor, which again seems to enhance color rendering in contrast at the cost of color accuracy. Color Tone provides for other settings (cool, normal, warm, and custom) and then there's Color Effect where you can have the LCD render in grayscale or sepia tones. (Why you would want that is not something that is immediately clear.) There are also three gamma settings; mode 1 appears to correspond to 2.2 gamma, with modes 2 and 3 providing higher gamma levels.
There
are only two choices for aspect ratio control (listed under Image Size): Normal
and Wide. There is also an "AV mode" setting that enables or disables
overscan on certain resolutions. Again, why anyone would actually want to
enable overscan is beyond us. "Wide" usually stretches your selected
resolution to fill the entire screen, while "Normal" squishes things
into a standard 4:3 aspect ratio. Note that there is no 1:1 setting, so we say "yes"
in the chart below for situations where the chosen resolution fills the screen
properly without any work on the part of the user. Also note that in these cases,
the Image Size functionality is disabled. This means that the 2493HM will always have the wrong aspect ratio on 16:9 resolutions.
| Samsung 2493HM Resolution and Input Notes | |||
| DVI | HDMI | VGA | |
| 800x600 | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" |
| 1024x768 | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" |
| 1152x864 | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" |
| 1176x664 | AV Mode = Overscan to fill LCD more | AV Mode = Overscan to fill LCD more | - |
| 1280x720 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 1280x768 | Set to "Wide" | Set to "Wide" | Set to "Wide" |
| 1280x800 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 1280x960 | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" |
| 1280x1024 | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" |
| 1400x1050 | Always stretches to fill LCD | Always stretches to fill LCD | - |
| 1440x900 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 1600x1200 | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" | Set to "Normal" |
| 1680x1050 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 1768x992 | AV Mode = Overscan to fill LCD more | AV Mode = Overscan to fill LCD more | - |
| 1920x1080 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 1920x1200 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Again, the scaling settings are limited as there is no 1:1 or proportional mode. Frequently the 2493HM scales incorrectly without manual selection of the correct scaling algorithm ("Normal" for 4:3 and 5:4 and "Wide" for 16:9 and 16:10). This is a concern with all three input types, though it's noteworthy that HDMI and DVI perform identically during testing. You can set up the "Custom Key" option in the OSD so that it will switch between the two scaling modes (or alternately use the custom key to cycle between the MagicBright, MagicColor, or Color Effect options). We couldn't enable the NVIDIA Scaling options on NVIDIA GPUs for whatever reason - the control panel always reverts to LCD control. (That occurs on some other LCDs, but they usually have better scaling functionality.) The "AV Mode" option seems odd - why would you want overscan? You can use it with 1176x664 and 1768x992, but it's better to use 720P and 1080P in the first place. You will need to disable it on many of the WS resolutions. On the plus side, the VGA auto centering/adjustment is relatively quick and accurate and remembers the settings after the initial setup.
 |
Image scaling did perform well at non-native resolutions, though we would have preferred the presence of 1:1 and aspect scaling as opposed to only getting "Normal" and "Wide". Now let's look at the color accuracy and gamut. Again, note that we disabled MagicColor and used the Custom setting on MagicBright and Color Tone.
Color gamut is the lowest of any of the tested LCDs today, coming in at 75% of Adobe RGB 1998. As a consumer display, however, this shouldn't be a major problem - sRGB has a much smaller color space, and the 2493HM gamut is fine for normal use. There are two sides to the color accuracy story. On the one hand, calibrated color is pretty mediocre, with an average Delta E of 1.8 and several colors in the 3.0 and above range. The uncalibrated colors on the other hand score almost the same as the calibrated colors, with an average Delta E of 2.4. That puts the 2493HM in second place among tested LCDs for uncalibrated color accuracy.
To Samsung 2493HM more or less lives up to its billing as a consumer LCD. It doesn't have all the high-end features that we find on displays like this Dell 2408WFP, but the default color accuracy is quite impressive and you also avoid the input lag that we measured on all the S-PVA panels. Online prices start at only $450, including a 3-year manufacturer warranty. Outside of demanding image professionals, we think the 2493HM is a great choice for a display that provides accurate colors at an extremely attractive price. Depending on whether you prefer glossy or matte finishes on your LCD panel, it's really a tossup between the Gateway FHD2400 and the 2493HM.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
Rasterman - Friday, May 9, 2008 - link
Yeah the figures reported are meaningless, if they were actually useful we wouldn't even need reviews :) I can't believe that a company as big as Viewsonic doesn't send a review site as big as Anandtech a review model, that is just ridiculous, they should be sending you guys a new model of every new monitor without even asking, maybe you aren't emailing the right person. BTW its awesome to see a reviewer actually answer questions and critics to a review, awesome job Jarred!JarredWalton - Friday, May 9, 2008 - link
I'm sure I'm not getting the right person at Viewsonic (and other companies as well), but that's the trick: *finding* the right person. Without an inside contact, it can be tough to get started.Generic PR Person: "AnandTech? What kind of a name is that? http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail50.html">Baleeted!" I'll try to meet with them next CES or something....
PS - Anyone from Viewsonic read this? If so, email me! :-)
10e - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link
Great review. This is what multifunction fans are looking for. I had this issue a year ago trying to find "THE" multifunction.You may want to mention that in terms of 720p and 1080p the Samsung stretches both to 16:10 with A/V mode off. I tested this and found that problem recently, which was unfortunate due to the fact that I liked it as a high quality TN.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link
I mentioned this on page 11, but I have highlighted (italicized) the pertinent text. I also clarified by indicating that 16:9 modes will always have the wrong AR. Thanks for reading and commenting!xerces8 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
A picture says more than 1000 words :http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma...">http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?...2=49&...
(I can't create a link, seems the post javascript is broken, I cant make bold or italics text either, tried FF and IE7)
JarredWalton - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
You mean, http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma...">pictures like this one? I don't see any large blowups of their comparisons available for download, so I have no idea exactly how they're testing. What I do know is that I provided images showing LaCie 324 and Dell 2408WFP clearly displaying a 40ms delay relative to an HP LP3065, and I've also provided a picture of the ASUS MK241H with a relative delay of 0ms relative to the same LCD.I've got nine other sample images from each of the tested monitors showing the evidence for my "input lag" conclusions. That's about as close to full disclosure as you'll get. All I get on that comparison you linked is a chart that apparently "proves" the ASUS MK241H has a 54ms average delay compared to a CRT, but then the same site lists the Dell 2408WFP as 69ms, the 2407WFP as 24ms, the LaCie as 41ms, and the Samsung 245T at 59ms. I got more or less the same result on the Dell 2407WFP and the LaCie 324, but nowhere near the same result on the MK241H, 2408WFP, and the 2493HM.
Again, you've got at least one clear sample of my results for each LCD. Sorry, but I have to question their results without better evidence.
Dashel - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
Hi Jarred,Not sure if this is based on the same test or what but there is this:
http://www.behardware.com/art/imprimer/712/">http://www.behardware.com/art/imprimer/712/
Which looks to be the same graph and results. To me your results seem to make the most sense if the 2408 is very similar to the 2407WFP-HC, then the input lag should be close too I would guess. I'm hardly an expert just tryint to be logical.
The thing is I also see anecdotal claims of lag and people who have tested it getting in the 60ms range as well which leads me to wonder if there isnt some sort of defect or difference in some of the panels vrs others.
Example of a test by an owner:
http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1032124531...">http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1032124531...
I'd love to hear Dells thoughts on it as well as what and when their revision is due to hit.
JarredWalton - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
I'd like to know what software people are using as timers. I tried about 10 different "timers" and discovered that a bunch are limited to the Windows default timing resolution - about 54ms. So they either scored "0ms" or "54ms" on the delay. I know this because I had screen refreshes where the timer was split in half; the top half would show for example 40.067 and the bottom would show 50.121.3DMark03 at least looks to be accurate down to 10ms - there are again pictures where the timer is cut in half, only in such cases I would see 20.23 and 20.24, so I can be sure that the timer is updated in .01s increments rather than in something larger.
Without a lot more details about what software people use and large images showing the results, I must say that I'm very skeptical. I feel "input lag" testing needs several things to be even remotely acceptable:
1) Run at native LCD resolution in clone mode (because built-in scalers could have an impact)
2) Disclosure of the test software that manages better than 54ms accuracy.
3) You need a high-end camera with a fast shutter speed to capture the results. Simply choosing "Auto" mode and snapping a picture doesn't tell the whole story.
4) Provide at least one sample image at a high resolution that clearly shows what the camera captured.
I met all of those criteria I think. In looking around at other reviews, I have not been able to clearly answer any of those questions. Perhaps that's why some of the other results are so different. I also tested at 2560x1600 to verify that I wasn't hurting the HP LP3065 by running at a lower resolution; since the scaling is handled by the GPU rather than the LCD (the LP3065 doesn't have a scaler), there was no penalty.
DangerousQ - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
I cant believe this set of reviews is so one sided, why no P-MVA panels, I bought a BenQ FP241W about 3 monyths ago and the 6ms response time plus unbelievable colours make this panel really hard to beat, but you try finding any reviews on it. The one review I did find, a long time ago and have lost it now compared it to the 2407 dell and found it a better panel for less money! I know this cos I was going to buy the dell before I saw the review.JarredWalton - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link
Send me an MVA panel - or get one of the manufacturers to send me one - and I will be more than happy to review it. I don't have the means to go out and purchase $500+ test LCDs, so I review what I get sent. Dell, Gateway, Samsung, ASUS, and other major companies are great about working with review sites like ours. Other companies are not. Thus, I take what I can get.