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
daarrid - Wednesday, August 13, 2008 - link
First, I'd like to thank Jarred Walton for his excellent review. A great deal of work goes into such a review. So, first and foremost, thank you sir! I'm also impressed by your timely follow-ups to the comments that have been posted.I just purchased the Samsung 245T (August, 2008). The firmware evidently has changed because there are new scaling options.
I'm only using two inputs - the VGA for various computers connected to it via a KVM and a Sony Playstation via the HDMI.
The VGA input now shows three options for size: wide, 16:9 (this is new), and 4:3. Wide is the only useful option (it appears to be 1:1 pixel mapping). The other two options distort the display. Why 16:9 was added as a choice is hard to say because it adds no useful function I can think of.
However on the HDMI input (and perhaps the DVI - I didn't test the DVI input) we have the old choices - Wide, 16:9, 4:3 and a new one! The new one is called "Just Scan" which seems to be 1:1 pixel mapping. Samsung evidently is listening.
bobo51 - Thursday, June 26, 2008 - link
I find it interesting that 4 months after Jarred was reassured by his contact at Samsung that this panel was a PVA, it is still speced as a TN panel on the Samsung website. And the mail order websites that report this characteristic seem to just parrot what is on the Samsung website.It would seem that it being a PVA unit would be a marketing point that Samsung would want to be front-and-center in their specs and advertising. So why isn't it out there?
Does anyone have any written documentation or labeling on the back of a unit (or anything other than someone's statement) that this is a PVA panel?
maxdog - Friday, August 22, 2008 - link
All of the 24" panels on the Samsung website state the same type. I'd like to know for sure.TrinityJayOne - Saturday, June 7, 2008 - link
Just thought I'd point out that there's an error in this review regarding display modes. It's true that there's no 1:1 pixel-mapping, but there IS a 16:9 option, it just isn't available when using a DVI source (I'm guessing because Samsung figure DVI = PC only and video cards support 16:10 resolutions). For HDMI, component, S-video etc, the 16:9 option will keep your 1080p signal un-squished and 720p will be upscaled. Check it out for yourself in the user guide, about 2/3 of the way down the page- http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/EM/20070...">http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/conte.../200707/...XrayDoc - Wednesday, April 2, 2008 - link
The new Dell 2408WFP has been available for perhaps a month. When are we going to see a killer review on AnandTech?machspeed5 - Saturday, February 16, 2008 - link
Conflicting Information!!!Page 4 of this trustedreview of the 245T states "genuine 1:1 pixel mapping"
http://www.trustedreviews.com/displays/review/2007...">http://www.trustedreviews.com/displays/.../2007/11...
".....A tonne of connectivity only adds to the appeal, as does the genuine 1:1 pixel mapping from 1080p sources."
This Anadtech review clearly states the opposite!
Who is correct here? Clarification appreciated, as you've thrown a monkey wrench in my purchasing decision! :P
Thanks
machspeed5 - Saturday, February 16, 2008 - link
found this:source: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=10319083...">http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=10319083...
According to the User's Manual:
- if the video source is connected through PC/ DVI, you will be able to switch the size between "Wide" and "4:3";
- if the video source is connected through Composite/ S-Video, you will be able to set the size to "Wide", "16:9", "Zoom1", "Zoom2" or "4:3";
- if the video source is connected trough Component/ HDMI, you will then be able to choose the size between "Wide", "16:9" or "4:3".
Supposedly, by "Wide", they mean "Full screen" (1920x1200).
I don't really know what they mean by "Zoom1" and "Zoom2", but I guess this is some scale of "expansion" (by keeping the aspect ratio). But I insist, this is just me guessing; I do not own the screen.
As matter of fact, this leads also to the conclusion that there is no pure "1:1 pixel mapping" for all resolutions, even if you can get such pixel map for a HD 1080 lines source if you choose the "16:9" size.
can you confirm please, & perhaps update the review? many thanks.
JarredWalton - Saturday, February 16, 2008 - link
I checked the VGA and DVI connections... I didn't consider that they would add options on other inputs (most OSD controls gray out disabled options rather than removing them completely). I'm trying to come up with some meaningful "input lag" testing -- internal image processing lag would be more appropriate as a description -- so I'll see about testing the Component/HDMI/S-Video as well.Not surprisingly, I've got other things to review as well, so it might be a couple weeks before I get around to testing this.
machspeed5 - Sunday, February 17, 2008 - link
thanks.looking forward to seeing the input lag & HDMI pixel mapping options on the 245T. :)
word on the street is that the input lag is pretty bad, ~50ms, (2.5 frame lag.)
from my readings, 50ms (while on the upper end of laggy displays) may still be usable for all but the most time-sensitive games. (fps specifically) a lot of people complain and overrate the input lag problems on forums, though it's evident few understand what it is. (even confuse it with response time)
i'd appreciate hearing your opinion on the matter. I plan to use a PS3 with the 245T, and FPS will certainly be in the machine from time to time.
Genuine 1:1 pixel mapping is also important to me, and if you could clarify the issue here i'd be much appreciated.
cheers
Thetruepit - Monday, February 11, 2008 - link
It does suffer from inverse ghosting.Most noticeable in gaming mode so I don't use that.
Surprised it wasn't picked up. Also if you move your mouse cursor over a grey background you see noticeable ghosting.