VERSUSVERSUS
!
VERSUS
!
VERSUS
!
VERSUSV
E
R
S
US
VERSUS
V
E
R
S
US
VERSUS
V
E
R
S
US
!
MA XIMUMPC JANUARY 2006
THE TESTS
In the past we’ve warned readers to be
wary of pixel-response-time claims, and
that’s still true today. There’s simply no
industry standard for reporting the spec,
making it an unreliable means of compari-
son. Nevertheless, pixel response times
are an increasingly hot marketing tool,
particularly geared toward gamers. It is,
after all, the spec that describes a screen’s
refresh rate—or how quickly pixels change
from one state to the next—so it can have
a tremendous bearing on an LCD’s ability
to handle rapidly changing content, such
as action-packed games.
Our purpose here is two-fold. First, we
want to compare the two LCDs currently
sporting a market–leading response time
of 4ms: Viewsonic’s VX924 ($470, http://www.
viewsonic.com) and Samsung’s just-released
940BF ($500, http://www.samsung.com). While
there are likely variations in how each ven-
dor arrived at its number, we do know that
both Viewsonic and Samsung are referring
to the pixels’ change from “gray to gray”
(as opposed to from black to white, or from
black to white to black again), so the LCDs
should be closely matched.
We also want to compare these sup-
posed speed demons with an LCD that
boasts a more average response time of
16ms—namely, Philips 190P5 ($580, http://www.
philips.com), which received a 9 verdict and
a Kick Ass award in our August 2005 LCD
roundup. Will we even discern a perfor-
mance difference?
With all three LCDs lined up side-by-
side and connected to the PC via a DVI
signal splitter, we compared their perfor-
mance in the following apps: DisplayMate’s
LCD script, which isolates a screen’s
abilities in key areas and reveals even
the most minute fl aws; Need for Speed
Underground 2, a racing game that shows
signs of smearing and ghosting if an LCDcan’t keep apace
with a careening
hot rod; Quake
4, a test of both
fast-action pixel
response and (in
certain scenes) a
screen’s ability to
reproduce detail
in dark environments; and fi nally, a high-
defi nition video trailer for Terminator 2, for
its combination of unusually dense video
information and fast-paced action.THE RESULTS
The 4ms spec might have special appeal to
power users, but these LCDs aren’t the pre-
miere 19-inch offering of either vendor. The
Viewsonic and Samsung screens are housed
in no-frills cabinets that allow you to tilt the
screen forward or back to a slight degree,
but not raise, rotate, or turn the screen in the
least. Philips’ LCD lets you do all that.
In terms of picture
adjustment, Samsung (like
Philips) beats out Viewsonic
by offering a full comple-
ment of controls in DVI
mode, including RGB color
sliders and three gamma
modes. The Viewsonic lets
you adjust just brightness
and contrast.
What’s more, Samsung
goes toe-to-toe with
Philips’ outstanding 1905P in DisplayMate
performance, while the Viewsonic LCD has
backlight seepage around the perimeter of
the screen, a so-so black level, and less-
than-perfect grayscale reproduction.
Regarding games, we were skeptical
we’d see a performance difference between
the 4ms screens and Philips’ 16ms offering.
In our testing for the August LCD roundup,
we found the Philips “perfectly accept-
able” in Need for Speed Underground 2.
And acceptable it
may be—but next
to the 4ms jobbies,
the Philips displayed
noticeably softer lines
in the background
details, particularly
vertical lines, as ourracecar went zooming by. A performance
difference was even more apparent in Quake- This surprised us, because movement in
the fi rst-person shooter isn’t especially fast,
but perhaps because of the game’s high-
res textures and extreme detail, the Philips’
pixel response proved lagging. When pixels
can’t change their color fast enough to keep
up with the action, objects in the game can
appear to have a faint halo and edges can
blur. This is known as “ghosting,” and we
witnessed it on the Philips monitor, but not
on the two high-speed offerings.
As for the high-defi nition video clips, all
three LCDs handled them
with equal aptitude.
THE "OTTOM
LINE
In the contest between
the Viewsonic and
Samsung 4ms LCDs,
we gotta hand it to
Samsung. While both
proved exceptional in
the games department,
Samsung’s 940BF has the advantage of a
deeper black level, better color reproduction,
and more user controls in DVI mode.
Does this mean 4ms is the magic num-
ber? Not necessarily. As we mentioned
before, until there is a standard for reporting
the pixel-response spec, no number should
be taken at face value, instead you have
to rely on real-world testing. Furthermore,
there’s a lot of ground between 4ms and
16ms. If a 6ms or 8ms LCD gets you better
amenities (say, a fully adjustable stand or a
larger screen), along with superb gaming,
why settle for less?
We’re starting to see a whole new crop
of LCDs from various vendors, sporting
single-digit response times and an array of
features. Look for reviews of these products
in upcoming issues.9ARDA'E
Strong all-around performer.SAMSUNG 940BF'AR"A'E
Poor ergonomics.SPECS
SAMSUN' 0"F VIEWSONI# VX
SCREEN SIZE 19 INCHES 19 INCHES
NATIVE RESOLUTION 1280 X 1024 1280 X 1024
INPUTS DVI, VGA DVI, VGABEST FAST LCD
Viewsonic’s VX924 and Samsung’s 940BF both boast a 4ms
pixel response time—making them (theoretically) the fastest
LCDs currently available on the US market. Which super-fast
LCD is better, and is either one really all that?If speed is what you’re after are you better off with Viewson-
ic’s VX right or Samsung’s 0"F on your team?