Subjective Analysis

DisplayMate/CheckScreen/VESA FPDM 2.0
Test Monitor Observations
Intensity range check 213T (digital) 5, No problems
213T (analog) 5
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5, Good
Black level adjustment 213T (digital) 5, Very Good
213T (analog) 5
2001FP (digital) 4.5
2001FP (analog) 4.5, Acceptable
Defocusing, blooming and halos check 213T (digital) 5, None
213T (analog) 5
2001FP (digital) 5, None
2001FP (analog) 5, None
Screen uniformity and color purity 213T (digital) 4, Backlights noticable
213T (analog) 4
2001FP (digital) 4.5+
2001FP (analog) 4.5+, better than 192T, but still small imperfection on upper right
Dark screen (Glare Test) 213T (digital) 4.5
213T (analog) 4.5
2001FP (digital)
4.5
2001FP (analog)
4.5, Improvement over 1702FP and 192T
Primary colors 213T (digital) 4, Attempted to correct with software, OSD color correction disabled
213T (analog) 4.5, Some color correction allowed within OSD; more accurate results achieved
2001FP (digital) 4
2001FP (analog) 4, attempted to fix curves with OptiCal
Color Scales 213T (digital) 3.5, read errors
213T (analog) 4, corrected with the OSD
2001FP (digital) 4, red errors
2001FP (analog) 4, red errors
16 intensity levels 213T (digital) 4.5, Good, red is the only real problem here
213T (analog) 4.5+, Corrected with OSD for slight improvement
2001FP (digital) 4+
2001FP (analog) 4.5+, Improvement over the 192T
Pincushion/barrel distortion 213T (digital) 5, None
213T (analog) 5, None
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5, none
Geometric Linearity 213T (digital) 5, no curvature
213T (analog) 5
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5, no curvature
Focus check 213T (digital) 5, Acceptable
213T (analog) 5
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5, Uniform
Horizontal color registration 213T (digital) 5, Level
213T (analog) 5, Level
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5, Level
Vertical color registration 213T (digital) 5, Level
213T (analog) 5, Level
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5
Fine line moiré pattern 213T (digital) 5, None
213T (analog) 4, Streaking
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5, No moiré, but intense streaking
Screen regulation 213T (digital) 5, no problems
213T (analog) 4.5, Streaking along sides
2001FP (digital) 5
2001FP (analog) 5
Streaking and ghosting 213T (digital) 5, None
213T (analog) 4, Decent reproduction but streaking ineviable
2001FP (digital) 5, None
2001FP (analog) 3.5, Extremely present at 1600x1200. Analog signal is not capable.


Our analysis is on the next page.

ColorVision Spyder Benchmark Analysis
POST A COMMENT

33 Comments

View All Comments

  • techna1 - Tuesday, September 14, 2004 - link

    I just got 213T and I am semi-impressed with the display. After reading anandtech's review I was conviced that ghosting would be very minimal if not absent, but after playing COD, UT2004 and FarCry I have realized that is not so. I do not consider myself an avid gamer. I game a few times a month mainly at LAN parties butI found the ghosting to be very annoying especially in dark low contrast levels. COD is probably the worst due to the intense amount of dark grey, but UT2004 can also be bad too. In very dark areas you tend to lose a lot of information. For example dtails in dark corners in may UT2004 levels are completely lost on the Samsung compared to any standard CRT display. I tested the 213T and a high-end 21" CRT side by side using dual ouput and could really see the differences in dark or grey levels. I would suggest not purchasing this LCD is you plan to game more than a few hours per week. It's just not worth it. One saving point for games though is the intensity of the color and brightness. Explosions and light tend to be very intense and dramatic giving games an interesting edge that I have not seen on any CRT before. Basically from what I can tell, CRT produce much better black levels but LCD like the 213T win for producing brighter colors.

    However, for those who don't game I am pleased to report the LCD is excellent for other tasks such as text and graphics. The LCD is very sharp and bright making most standard windows tasks easy on the eyes. I was quickly annoyed when returing to a CRT for text just after a few hours on the 213T.

    Lastly, DVD playback was pretty good, but I still had issues with DVDs that are very dark. After watching resident evil, I realized that LCDs just don't cut it where dark colors and lots of black is required. The black levels although good were still a little to bright to really make DVDs easy to watch (some reviewers claimed the black levels are equal to monitor when it is off, however that is entirely false). However, Shrek, a much brighter film, looked excellent and gave the 213T a chance to show off its vivid picture.

    Bottom line: Not the best for gaming or DVDs, but everything else is the best I have seen on an LCD. I ended up keeping my CRT and running it in dual mode (extended desktop) on my 5950FX, using the 213T for everyday applications and my CRT for games and DVDs. Its a pretty good solution but I really wanted the LCD for LAN parties for easy transport but I guess I'll have to wait for something better for that.

    BTW, I got my on ebay.com. You can easily pick one up for $800.00 + 35.00 shipping. The cheapest I found them retail were 980 before shipping, so ebay is by far the best bet.

    Good luck!
    Reply
  • davidjay - Tuesday, March 9, 2004 - link

    An excellent, detailed review of the Samsung 213T LCD monitor, but I spotted one oversight:

    Your comment: "...the monitor must be tilted before rotated since there is not enough clearance between the panel and the stand...." indicates you're not aware that the stand has a vertical adjustment. Raise it a couple inches, and there's no need to tilt the panel back when rotating it 90 degrees and back.

    Reply
  • KristopherKubicki - Wednesday, February 25, 2004 - link

    dalhtech: Waiting for our sample.

    Kristopher
    Reply
  • dalhtech - Wednesday, February 25, 2004 - link

    Will Anand review the Sharp LL-T2015? From the specs it seems like a good balance between the Samsung and Dell's respective strengths.

    http://www.sharpsystems.com/products/lcd_monitors/...
    Reply
  • DrumBum - Monday, February 23, 2004 - link

    "We have some more monitors coming up later this month so stay tuned!"

    Which monitors are you reviewing?
    Reply
  • Lorrin - Monday, February 23, 2004 - link

    How does the color reproduction of a high-end monitor like this one compare to that of LCD's pitched at the graphic arts market -- like the Apple Cinema Display or the Formac monitors? Reply
  • Odeen - Monday, February 23, 2004 - link

    [q]The pixel [0.27mm dot] pitch is a little too large for some tastes[/q]

    I don't know of a better way of putting this, but you DORKS!

    Do the math.

    sqrt(1600^2 + 1200^2) = sqrt(4000000) = 2000
    So the monitor has two thousand pixels across the diagonal.

    The monitor is 21.3" measured diagonally, which is 21.3*25.4 (mm/inches) = 541.02mm diagonally. Over half a meter! :)

    541.02 mm / 2000 pixels =0.27051mm per pixel, or 0.27mm dot pitch.

    Which means that EVERY 21" monitor capable of a maximum resolution of 1600x1200 will have .27mm diagonal pixels!

    The only way to achieve a finer dot pitch is to a) increase the resolution w/o increasing size as much, which shrinks the image, or b) decrease image size.

    That's why a Dell 2001FP will have a smaller dot pitch (.255mm, if I recall)- it has to pack the same 2.1 million pixels into an 11% smaller area!

    A .27mm dot pitch on a 14" clunker means the resolution is severely limited. But there's no practical way to decrease the dot pitch on a behemoth such as this one. Nor is there a reason to.
    Reply
  • KristopherKubicki - Monday, February 23, 2004 - link

    23: they represent which generation the monitor is. The letter denotes teh feature.
    T: means the high end LCDs (dual input)
    X: means low response time
    N: means thin bezel for multimonitor
    S: means system builder LCDs usually with just one vga input.

    The 213T breaks teh batter for some reason but oh well.

    Kristopher
    Reply
  • wizardsinc - Monday, February 23, 2004 - link

    I believe the 213T has a 21.3 inch diagonal, so it's possible that the last digit represents 10ths of an inch diagonal. Reply
  • airchie - Monday, February 23, 2004 - link

    Can anyone tell me what the model numbers on Samsung screens mean?

    ie,
    Theres 191T, 192T, 193T, 172x etc

    obviously the first two digits are the screen size.
    What do the third digit and the letter denote?
    The letter (I think) tells you if it has speakers built in or other features etc.

    Anyone know for sure what they all mean?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now