Samsung SyncMaster 910V

While Samsung's 193P is an impressive piece of technology, the 910V is a great alternative for those interested in a Samsung panel without breaking the bank (although we suspect that this is not a true PVA LCD). Samsung would have gladly sent us a 910V for our review, but we bought this sample from NewEgg to see what the on-shelf inventory looks like.



 Samsung SyncMaster 910V
LCD 19" SXGA LCD (Active Matrix)
pixel pitch: 0.294mm
Anti-glare coating
Scanning Frequency Horizontal: 30-81kHz
Vertical: 56-75Hz
Response Time 22ms (Typical)
Contrast Ratio 700:1 (Typical)
Compatibility 1280 x 1024 (Native)
Brightness 250 cd/m2
Viewing Angle 170 / 170 (Horizontal / Vertical)
Power Working: 38W
Standby/Off: 1W
Warranty 3 years parts and labor
Interface 15-pin D-sub

Unfortunately for this SyncMaster, the 910V only comes with a 15-pin D-Sub interface, and we already know that the signal will be severely hurt in our comparative analysis later on. While we stacked this monitor up against the other units in this analysis, we can deduce that it will be sorely incapable of competing on an ambitious level.

On an odd note, while this particularly Samsung 910V claims 22ms response times and 700:1 contrast ratio, Samsung's corporate website claims slightly different contrast ratio and response time. Many of Samsung's products seem to have multiple sets of specifications; different models are built for different parts of the world. The SyncMaster 910V that we bought from an on-line US merchant a few weeks ago comes with a black bezel while the model on the Samsung website comes in silver.

We were a little sad to see this entry level 19" Samsung completely outclassed by the other entry level monitors in this review that cost $80 less.

Samsung SyncMaster 193P Sony SDM-S94
Comments Locked

97 Comments

View All Comments

  • soki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    We want to see some reviews of the new wave of 19'' LCDs. Like the sony HS-94P/B with x-black technology, viewsonic VP912b or some 10 bit eizo monitors.. When?
  • UlricT - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    umm... page #4
    "The time that it takes the LCD to go from black to white may be 15ms while the time that it takes the LCD to go from black back to white may be 10ms"

    could be kinda confusing for the noob there. You guys really need an editorial staff :D
  • screech - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    #4 true.....i have also heard that working at a CRT monitor for 8 or more hours a day doubles the chances of glaucoma.....so it might be safer going LCD (for the eyes)........anyway.....
  • Jeff7181 - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Man... I guess ignorance is bliss... I'm perfectly happy with the image quality of my $80 17 inch CRT... I can't imagine paying over $500 for a monitor unless you're doing graphics work as a profession.
  • D0rkIRL - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Why does the Dell 2001FP have a 25ms typical response time while on your older review you state it as having a 16ms typical response time?
    The pixel pitch changed from .255mm to .55mm.

    Any reason behind these?
  • skunkbuster - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    just out of curiosity, what happens to all these lcds after they are reviewed?
  • KingofFah - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    I think there have to be gamers here, and I do not think LCDs are there yet when it comes to refresh rates; it would have been nice to see the refresh rates on the monitors at 1024, 1280, and 1600.

    I still haven't found a monitor better than a high quality, high res trinitron.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now