Samsung LTM295W 29" LCD Review

An anonymous reader noted a review of the Samsung LTM295W. Quick excerpt "The contrast ratio of 600:1 is amazing, and takes the cake for being the highest Iâ(TM)ve seen to date here with the site. I was pleased to see a more than acceptable brightness level of 450cd/m2. The response time isnâ(TM)t anything to snuff at, standing at 22ms. For viewing angles everyone should be pleased with 170/170 (W&H). The last mention is the pixel pitch which sits at .4935(h) X .4935(w). The optimal resolution while in PC use is 1024 x 768 @ 75Hz although the maximum is 1280 x 768 @ 75Hz." Not the highest resolution, but still, quite impressive.

Comments

Samsung is the Best

[Tighe_L]

Samsung is the innovator of Display Technology, Their LCDS are top notch.

When you buy a Dell Flat Panel, it is a Samsung

Panasonic, then Sharp would be next when it comes to LCDs

Re:Samsung is the Best

[Yomlogs]

I would agree with you, if I wasn't on my third replacement Samsung 171P. And even this one has a couple of dead subpixels, for which Samsung are unlikely to replace the monitor :-(

Aside from that, though, the display is stunning - just crap customer service and reliability IMO.

Re:Samsung is the Best

[rhombic]

"Look to the Koreans for that..."

At first I thought you were trying to be funny. You do realize that Samsung is a Korean company, right?

Re:Samsung is the Best

[vladkrupin]

I just loooove those numbers! 600:1, 450cd/m^2, 22ms... So amazing... NOT!

For instance, Viewsonic boasts some imressive contrast ratios. In reality they suck. At least, the viewsonics that I saw on display and had a chance to compare to some other brands were left to shame. Same, but even to a greater extent can be said about response times. Everyone seems to find their own way of defining those. Some for fading of a pixel from white to black; some - from black to white. (notice that those two are QUITE different due to the way those transistors operate). Some go even further and declare that very dark colors are very close to completely black, and very bright colors to white, so they'll measure times for those 'approximate' extremes, and some even just measure the 'common case' response time, whatever that is.

I (and a lot of other people - just check Tom's hardware guide for their LCD overview) seem to notice that there is just way too much fudge in those numbers when it comes to measuring different aspects of LCDs.

Let me give you an example. My monitor (Samsung 181T), for example, boasts 25ms response time. I'd say it's more like 35 (at least that's what tom's hardware guesses it to be and I think he is quite close), but FPS games are a lot more playable on mine than on a lot of other 25ms panels. Why? Probably because their "fudge" factor is a bit smaller. The only real way to tell a difference easily is to look at the same set of tests being displayed on an array of several different panels. First and foremost you'll notice that color fidelity on some of them sucks. That factor alone will probably eliminate more than half of the panels from what you could consider buying. After that try adjusting contrast/brightness and notice that some monitors (notable ViewSonics) are pathetic. After that, if there are any monitors still left, check if their response time is reasonable. Chances are, it isn't. After that, slow down, think and lower your expectations.

When shopping for an LCD I learned a lesson that the numbers you see describing LCDs are not what they appear. There is so much discrepancy in how manufacturers define various parameters that those numbers become close to meaningless. The only numbers that aren't fudged are the resolution and hom much power they use. Maybe also the life of the bulb. That's about it. So, next time you are impressed with the specs of some particular LCD panel, try to see if you can have a look at it next to some other panels, performance of which is known to you. Make sure they are running the same stuff, and see what difference you can see.

Full text in case of slashdotting

[Anonymous Coward]

Samsung LTM295W

Posted:Chris Allen
Reviewer:Jun 3rd, 2003
Provided By:Samsung CA

Manufacturer:
Samsung Genre:
TFT LCD Monitor/TV Released:

In the last year or so Samsungâ(TM)s name has been an everyday household name around here at MonkeyReview. In terms of LCDâ(TM)s weâ(TM)ve seen our fair share, ranging from in size from 15â all the way up to todayâ(TM)s whopping 29â. Today weâ(TM)ve got the Samsung LTM295W LCD TV/monitor on the block which will be sure to impress many of you with its nice 29â viewable area and elegant looking design.

Thereâ(TM)s no question in my mind that most of you, if it was possible, would love an LCD plopped in front of you rather than a conventional CRT which hogs up 50% of your desk space, well, what if it was not only an LCD but one which is larger than most of your mates home TV? With a viewable area of 29â the LTM295W will appeal to those either looking for the crÃme de la crÃme monitor or a great looking high end HDTV ready TV or a combination of both. The Samsung LTM295W offers us at least one feature which makes me a lover of it right off the bat; Iâ(TM)ll discuss this a little later though.

Click For Larger Image
Contents & Setup

The Samsung LTM295W comes to us in two separate boxes, one which has the speakers and the other for the Monitor/TV as well as setup essentials. For a complete list of everything thatâ(TM)s included please read a little further down. Opening the box which contains the actual Monitor/TV we find a smaller box which contains the documentation, the remote (batteries included), RGB to DVI Cable, DVI cable, Power cord, audio cables, and warranty information. I was very pleased to find the RGB to DVI cable included as it will allow support for all VGA cards rather than just those with a DVI output.

LTM295W Display

Remote control (2x AAA batteries included)

Owners Manual

DV Adapter

DVI Cable

RGB to DVI cable

PC Stereo Cables

Power Cord

Clamp Back/Screw

Speakers (Stands, mounts, screws, wires)

Click For Larger Image

Also in the box, we find the large silver finished DC adapter. Finally, under the mentioned goodies, within the full Styrofoam encasing, we find the LTM295W LCD monitor/TV. To furthermore ensure its safety we find it covered in wrapping. Something worth noting is Samsungs safe packaging for all of their monitors/TVâ(TM)s. Itâ(TM)s definitely an aspect in which weâ(TM)ve noticed over the course of time and something which deserves a mention. Itâ(TM)s also something we would expect when paying the price for one of these guys, on that note; while checking pricegrabber the lowest price is $3139 USD and for our fellow Canadians itâ(TM)s going to be setting you back $4659 CDN according to Soho Diffusion, the only Canadian website which I could find thatâ(TM)s offering it.

Click For Larger Image

The next thing we focused our attention on was the box which contained the speakers. Opening the box we find the screws, braces, speaker wires and of course the 2x 10W speakers. Also in the box we find stands for alternate speaker mounting/usage. Iâ(TM)ve never been a fan of having the speakers on the side of the Monitor/TV, and so, as usual, I opted to connect them to the side of the LTM295W, using the included braces and screws. I must make a mention that while Iâ(TM)m generally unimpressed with some of the mounting methods used for speakers by manufacturers, this one is well done and while I wouldnâ(TM)t recommend carrying around this TV holding nothing more than the speakers, they are mounted in a solid manner.

Click For Larger Image

Once we had the speakers mounted, the DC Adapter plugged in, and our source ready (PC, Bell Express Vu Satellite, and DVD). A few notes about our sources The PCâ(TM)s specs are listed below, the main thing I should

Price?

[echucker]

Didn't see one mentioned, but I know the 24" Samsung at newegg is 2700 buckeroos. I don't even want to think what the 29" will cost!

Re:Price?

[jrl87]

They cost over $3000(usd), pricegrabber link

Holy MegaPixels, Batman!

[Gorimek]

That's gotta have some real big pixels. My 23" Apple LCD has 1920x1200!

Re:Holy MegaPixels, Batman!

[takotech]

They did mention dot pitch of .4935

If you want ultimate pixel counts, check out the T221 22.2" from IBM. For $8400, you too can have a native QUXGA-W(3840x2400) resolution. Dot pitch is a microscopic .1245

Re:Price?

[angle_slam]

If you looked at the article, you would see the lowest price is about $3100.

Re:sw33t

[DJ Rubbie]

Low refresh rates hurt on CRT screens becase each pixel flickers at that frequency much like a strobe light (think seizures). LCD screens, on the other hand don't have this problem because the backlight glows constantly so it does not flicker like a strobe light. Try waving you hands rapidly back and forth in front of a CRT screen displaying a white background (such as this page) you will find your hands 'flickering'. On a LCD Screen, your hands will not 'flicker'.

I remember I (or my brother) used to do the waving in front of the old and antiquated 13" CRT screen, and go, Look at all the fingers I have!!!

Re:Refresh rate??

[Anonymous Coward]

The refresh rate cited is probably the amount of time it takes for a single pixel to go from 100% off to 100% on. That makes it a misleading statistic, because the majority of pixel transitions aren't straight ON/OFF, and LCD monitors take a longer time to do smaller transitions.

Dan Rutter's got an excellent write-up of another samsung monitor that goes into this issue at some depth here

There are better choices for computing

[Tyrdium]

The NEC 1760V (Tom's Hardware Guide here)is a 17" display with the same resolution and a 16 ms pixel response. It can be had over at newegg for 430 bucks. Granted, the contrast ratio isn't as good at 450:1, but it should be good for everyday use. Lastly, the dpi is a hell of a lot higher, and a good resolution for viewing it at, instead of 1280 x 1024 on a 29" display. The Samsung would be good for watching TV on, but a larger plasma display can probably be had for around the same price.

Re:There are better choices for computing

[SCHecklerX]

The 1760V from NEC SUCKS!

Maybe I was unlucky and got a bad one (last they had at the store...I too bought this based on the Tom's hardware review...which ONLY looked at the thing from playing quake...not from how well text looked when doing real work), but mine took HOURS of fussing around with the fine tuning to get it crisp. Then as soon as you flip resolution (ie, to play quake at 1024x768...I only have an Athlon 900), and come back, Major blur all over the screen.

I took it back. Picked up the sony 17". The sony isn't quite as bright (So what, I use computers here in a dark room anyway and still had to turn it down), and the response is supposedly slower, but I do not see it, even when playing RTCW and Quake, but it is CRYSTAL CLEAR. I adjusted it ONCE. It locked on and has been sharp as a razor ever since.

If all of the 1760Vs are as crappy as the one I got, I'd highly recommend anybody considering one steer clear of it and go with the sony 17", which actually does provide a very crisp display at its native resolution.

Re:DLP

[nherc]

I have a BEAUTIFUL 133" picture projected onto a 16:9 screen for $1k less than your plasma. You need to think about what you really want. A theater experience and peoples jaws dropping or an over priced flat conventional TV?

Checkout projectorcentral.com for prices/info and the Under $5k Digital Projector forum for more detailed info.

Re:DLP

[Chmarr]

The Dell 3200MP is 1024x768, and $2000USD list price. Mine should be turning up tomorrow :)

SyncMaster 172t

[ackthpt]

Samsung is the innovator of Display Technology, Their LCDS are top notch.

Bought a SyncMaster 172t, after a few reviews swayed my opinion. It's amazing alright, the only thing I'd ask is for the ability to get the brightness lower. I could literally read by the lowest brightness settings with standard wallpaper displayed. The brightness is so much at the lowest setting I am having some eyestrain problems and have been considering getting smoked plastic to hang over the screen. The lowest setting is more than adequate with daylight coming in a nearby picture window. 500:1 contrast is great, as black is pretty near black and it rocks for watching DVD's on, but who actually uses a brightness setting higher?

Re:LCD's are still overpriced.

[ackthpt]

Unless you live in Japan and really need the room, I don't see why anybody would want an LCD monitor.

I sit behind two CRT's at work and used to have my home desk crowded by a 16" Sun monitor. The real estated, if not the power bill or adjustability/versatility is a major selling point. They're also very sharp and do fine for games, those like the Samsung SyncMaster 172t with faster refresh rates. Considering 17" CRTs used to run ~700$US, LCD monitors are progressing downward in pricing nicely.

Re:Rant: FUXGA!

[takotech]

I thought that too but then it started to make sense:

• VGA: 640X480
• SVGA: 800X600 <- Super VGA
• XGA: 1024X768
• SXGA: 1280X1024
• SXGA+: 1400X1050
• UXGA: 1600X1200 <- Ultra XGA
• UXGA-W: 1920x1200 <- Ultra XGA - Wide(16:10 ratio)
• QUXGA-W: 3480X2400 <- Quad Ultra XGA Wide

So, basically, this thing has room to show 4 native HD(1920x1080) pictures at once, a la Brady Bunch style and still have room left over. That's pimp.

Re:Viewing angle - I'm skeptical

[Macgyver7017]

Not necessarily, my buddy just bought a dell notebook, and i can watch a movie at about 170 degrees off... and the colors are all there, just like you are looking straight at it, except of course the skewing because of viewing it an an extreme angle. the colors and contrast and such are all great at the angle, however.

Wrong Resolution!

[Ramjet350]

I don't know where they are getting there specs but straight from Samsung's website: Samsung Wide format Progressive scan 6.8M pixels 350 cd/m2 500:1 contrast ratio 170'/170' viewing angle 1900 X 1200 resolution Virtual Dolby sound Detachable speaker PC capable PIP & Double screen AV wireless solution(option)

Re:Refresh rate??

[jfroot]

When they say 75Mhz, that is the optimal frequency for the AD converter. All LCDs have this optimum frequency. It will most likely work at any refresh rate, but the AD converter is calibrated for 75Mhz. This is only if you are using an RGB output btw. If you have a graphics card with a DVI out, there is no refresh rate setting.

Dude, try a T221 from IBM

[Hollinger]

If you want a REAL LCD, check out the IBM T221 Flat Panel.

Let's see... specs...

* 22.2-inch viewable image area
* 3840 x 2400 addressability (QUXGA-W)
* 9.2 million total pixels, 204 pixel density per inch (80 per cm)
* 16.7 million colors, 8-bit drivers
* Two models, one with a modified graphics adapter, and one with DVI cables for attachment to DVI graphics adapters
* Tilt stand
* Detachable Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) standard mount size (100 mm) stand
* Available in stealth black

This sucker requires four DVI connectors. Check out the various reviews.

Poor review

[illumin8]

I'm not sure how much I would trust a review of a widescreen television from someone that doesn't even know how to enable 16:9 widescreen mode on their DVD player...

My god, if you look at the picture of the Monster's Inc. screenshot you can tell he is running it in standard 4:3 letterboxed mode from his DVD player, which is further stretching the image to 16:9 dimensions... Ugh!!!

Also, why not run the PC in 1280x768 mode as well? LCDs do not perform very well unless you run them in their native resolution. It would have been nice if he ran DScaler and scaled up some 480i sources as well.

Half of the benefit of one of these TV's is their ability to properly display the full picture information on 16:9 anamorphic DVDs.

Samsung's Take on the Resolution Issue

[rlsnyder]

After reading the repeated posts on the lame resolution, I decided to see what Samsung has to say on their site. Well, basically, they DON'T advertise this thing as monitor. It's not even listed as a product on their site with other monitors.

It's a TV; they market it as the "Bedroom Home Theater" unit. So, the fact that the review keeps refering to it as a "Monitor" or a "Monitor/PC", and listed it on the Monitor section, is a little misleading. Sure, you can USE it as a monitor. I could also drag race a Winnebago, I suppose.

The PC Monitor market is not what the the manufacturer is targeting, so this whole "resolution is too crappy for a Monitor" thing is kinda irrelevant.

22ms response time == 45 fps...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not very good for games.

Re:Any gaming-useful flats yet?

[90XDoubleSide]

You just need to look at the response time when you buy an LCD; you want around 20ms to really eliminate streaking in games and video. Most cheap LCDs will have a 35-50ms response time, which is almost unwatchable; Samsungs are around 25ms, which is quite a lot better, and will work in most situations.

The best I've seen is Formac's Gallery 2010 Platinum with a response of 15ms; that's a really great display all-around.