Subjective Analysis (continued)

Generally, we follow up our application analysis with a table pitting two LCDs against each other using benchmarks that we derived from VESA's handbook and test patterns from DisplayMate/CheckScreen. All of our monitors are running on an X800 Pro AGP over a DVI connector unless denoted otherwise. Monitors that don't have DVI connectors are compared using a D-sub connector instead. We have simplified our table a little bit so that we can fit all of our data on the same page, but our Notes From the Lab section flags any behavior that we would typically note on the table. The table ranks each benchmark on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the best rating and 1, the least desirable.

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  NuTech L921G  Planar PE191M  Samsung 193P  Samsung 910V  Sony SDM-S94  ViewSonic Q190MB  Dell 2001FP
Intensity Range Check 4.5 4 4 5 4 4 4 5
Black Level Adjustment 4.5 5 4.5 5 4.5 5 5 4.5
Defocusing, Blooming, Halos 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5
Screen Uniformity and Color Purity 4.5 5 - 5 4 4 5 4.5
Dark Screen Glare Test 3 4 4 4.5 4 4 4 4.5
Primary Colors 3 4 4 4 3 3.5 4 4
Color Scales 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
16 Color Intensity Levels 3 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Screen Regulation 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Streaking, Ghosting 5 5 5 5 2 4 5 5

Notes From the Lab

Above, you can see the Planar PE191M only scored N/A on its screen uniformity test. While the monitor is quite good, the cluster of defective pixels really strained our eyes and we found it fairly difficult to get an accurate reading of the screen uniformity. When we look for screen uniformity errors, we usually look on the corners and sides where light may be seeping through from the backlight around a poorly insulated edge. Since the dead pixels were in the corner, we had trouble when attempting to inspect the corner accurately.

You'll notice that our LCDs grab 4.5s pretty much across the board with the exception of the BenQ. Spotting 6-bit LCDs are fairly easy for people who do a lot of graphics work. The image below displays 256 different shades of blue across the top; it represents the 256 hues of blue that are found in an 8-bit sub pixel. No amount of dithering can render this square correctly on a 6-bit LCD.



As expected, the lack of a digital cable on the Samsung 910V hurt it in more ways than one. For most of our other LCDs, we knew that we were getting the correct signal with the test pattern rendered the way in which the LCD manufacturer had intended it to render. After testing a few monitors on a digital connection, we almost immediately recognized small amounts of interference on the 910V, and we did the best that we could to record our observations on the other tests.

We were not real surprised to see the Samsung 193P pull ahead in a lot of the subjective testing. It's a $700 monitor, and it should perform better in many situations. Samsung seems to have a knack for making good panels. However, if we had to pick a second best performer (other than the Dell 2001FP), we were a little surprised to see that the ViewSonic Q190MB and the NuTech L921G had posted generally sound performance numbers. Color was on balance, screen uniformity was there, and glare was fine.

Application Analysis Final Thoughts
Comments Locked

97 Comments

View All Comments

  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Interesting, let me look into this. My 2001FP is A00 as well and i've had mine for over a year now. (No problems though).

    Do you know how much of a delay there is?

    Kristopher
  • Cat - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    My boss's is A00. I'm assuming mine is as well, since I bought it a few days after he did. This was about a month and a half ago.
  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Angry Kid: We couldnt get a VP912B in time for the roundup. I am working on doing an individual review on that one though.

    Cat: On the back of your monitor near the serial it should say the REV number, like A01 or A00. Can you tell me which number it says on all those monitors?

    Kristopher
  • blackmetalegg - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    And what's the color depth for the VP912b? It's not mentioned anywhere on Viewsonic's website and google didn't turn up anything. I'm torn between VP912b(supposed 8-bit panel) and FP937S(6-bit)...
  • KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Ensign: Fixed.

    Kristopher
  • KingofFah - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    #19, I have no clue when it comes to LCDs, so thanks for giving me that information. How many images are drawn on an LCD in a second (if they even do that at a fixed rate, i dont know)?

    If there is no refresh rate given, I assume that the response time could be equated to the gaming performance of the monitor. In that case I'd want the fastest possible response times, and I do not think that the price would justify it. I think image quality, speed, and clarity go to a CRT. Size, power usage, and eye care seem to be the concern for LCDs. I've got plenty of space, don't use the computer that often, and don't care about power usage.
  • Araemo - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Is the NuTech L921G an 8 bit or 6 bit panel? it doesn't say in the specs.

    How about the Planar PE191M? or the Samsung SyncMaster 193P?

    I'm not trying to nitpick guys, but I've been burnt by missing specs before ("Well, the review didn't mention it, so it must not be a problem..."), so I don't want to simply assume they're 8-bit when you didn't mention them(Since that wasn't stated in the intro)
  • Angry Kid - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    Agree with many of the others - why were none of the more recent, more high-end 19" LCDs tested?

    It would've been nice to see the ViewSonic VP912B FEATURED IN THE NOVEMBER GAMER BUYER'S GUIDE included.

    =/
  • garfieldonline - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    I have been working with order people, and I can say many of them prefer their resolution around 1024x768. I may be wrong, but as for LCD monitors, if they are not running at their optimal resolution, the screen tends to look a bit blur. This is not a problem with CRT monitor, things are sharp as long as the resolution is within the limit.
  • Araemo - Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - link

    "It's the same friggin reason why people buy a 50" TV instead of a small 20""

    I doubt it, since most people I know buy a 50" so they can sit 20 feet away and still pick out the super-model's pimples. But not many computer users sit 20 feet back from their monitors(Or even signifigantly further back with bigger screens)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now