Samsung 172X: 12ms Response Time for 17" LCD
by Kristopher Kubicki on June 8, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Displays
Construction
Most Samsung LCDs that we have seen in the past two years are radically different in design than anything else currently available. We expected the SyncMaster 172X to look like nothing else available right now.
Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.
| Samsung SyncMaster 172X | |
| LCD | 17" SXGA LCD (Active Matrix) pixel pitch: 0.264mm Anti-glare coating TN Display Mode |
| Scanning Frequency | Horizontal: 30-80kHz Vertical: 56-75Hz |
| Response Time | 12ms (Typical) |
| Contrast Ratio | 500:1 (Typical) |
| Compatibility | 1280 x 1024 (Native) |
| Brightness | 270 cd/m2 |
| Power | Working: 40W Standby/Off: 5W |
| Warranty | 3 years parts and labor |
Unlike the Sharp LL-191A-B unit that we looked at last month, the Samsung 172X sports an even lower average response time - 12ms. Don't forget to check out our comments on response time in that publication. Unfortunately, the display uses a method of Frame Relay Control (FRC) on a TN mode display. Over the last few years, Samsung has relied almost exclusively on its own PVA (Pattern Vertical Alignment) display mode (a little bit more info is here). Going from PVA to TN display modes is a fairly big deal for Samsung; PVA is typically regarded as a much more elegant and efficient display mode. TN displays typically have shallower viewing angles and do not appear as crisp.
Specifications are fairly on par with what we have seen concerning other 17" LCDs from Samsung. Our 172X is slightly brighter than last year's SyncMaster 172T model; 270 nits versus 250. While correct, we could increase the brightness to surpass the luminance of some of our other 250 nit LCDs, and color washes out very quickly. This is tell-tale of the 6-bit LCD panel (we saw similar results on our LL-191A and Hitachi CML174).
Like many of our LCDs of late, the Samsung 172X had zero pixel defects. We did not find a single stuck pixel or subpixel.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
19 Comments
View All Comments
operator - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
#7That's myth. There's a lot of articles debunking said fact.
synic - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
prod·i·gal ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prd-gl)adj.
1. Rashly or wastefully extravagant: prodigal expenditures on unneeded weaponry; a prodigal life.
2. Giving or given in abundance; lavish or profuse: prodigal praise. See Synonyms at profuse.
Obviously it doesn't mean what you think it does, given the context you use it in.
jdreyer - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
If the human eye is only capable of detecting 60 frames per second (one frame every 16 ms), why do we need response times any faster than that?Mithan - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
I had one of these for a week and I found it to be a fairly good monitor, though there was a tad bit of ghosting in games like UT2004, however it was extremly playable.The main problem I had with this monitor is that I had to order 3 of them before I got one that didn't have a burnt or stuck pixel.
JGF - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
I've decided that LCD's still arent for me yet and purchased a Mitsubishi 19' 930SB CRT. Gorgeous monitor.T8000 - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
When you select the 16 bit color mode in Windows or in games, does that disable color shifting, because 16 bit is less then 3 x 6 bit?AlexWade - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
No, you can stop waiting. I've got a 19" LG.Philips S-IPS panel and I notice absolutely NO streaking and ghosting in anything, even though official response time is 25 ms. I paid a hair under $600 for the 19" LG 1910S. Its Analog only. And the text isn't too sharp. I don't like that. Still, it cost less than the Samsung monitors.The NEC 1996NXi (the numbers may be off) is also a S-IPS panel. But it costs more and is harder to find than the LG.
Phiro - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
I dunno, sounds pretty good to me. If it was $300 I'd try to buy it. Currently $540, I'm going to bookmark this on their realtime price thing and check it every week for awhile.araczynski - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
so...just keep waiting as usual...