The vertical viewing angles are much worse in comparison with the PVA matrix, of course. The picture becomes dark as soon as you just lower your head a little below the screen. When you are looking at the screen from below at an angle of about 50 degrees, the image goes almost completely black.
The 940B’s gamma curves look better than the 940T’s. They lie close to the theoretical curves, so the image looks normal, without excessive whitishness. There are no serious problems with the curves and none arise when contrast is reduced in the monitor’s settings.
The 940B’s color temperature setup is similar to the 940T’s, too. In every mode it yields a colder image than the 940T does, but the difference in negligible.
Despite the declared response time of 8 milliseconds, the matrix installed in the SyncMaster 940B is not too fast. It’s an ordinary TN+Film without response time compensation, and a rather slow TN+Film, too: the response time is as high as 35 milliseconds at the maximum. Of course, the 940B can’t stand competition against modern monitors with RTC and doesn’t suit well for applications that require a fast matrix.
The TN matrix cannot compare with the PVA when it comes to contrast ratio, yet it is good enough against many other TN-based monitors. Moreover, the contrast ratio remains good even at the low screen brightness thanks to the considerable decrease in the level of black.
Thus, the SyncMaster 940B can be viewed as a monitor for everyday work, a kind of cheaper 940T for those who don’t care about the small vertical viewing angle. It is well (but not perfectly) set up, has good parameters and is assembled in a neat, cute and practical case. Like the 940T, the SyncMaster 940B should only be purchased for home if you are sure its speed suits you fine. I can’t say it is much faster than the 940T despite the threefold difference in their specified response times (they differ, of course, but there is a bigger difference between them and modern monitors with RTC).