Articles: Monitors
 

Bookmark and Share

(2) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 ]

Conclusion

If asked to mark the most interesting models in this review from the customer’s point of view, I would single out the ASUS VW222u and the Samsung SyncMaster 2232BW. The former offers an unusual combination of a fast matrix and an almost total lack of RTC-provoked visual artifacts. Surprised as I am, I can even forgive ASUS the sloppy implementation of Splendid technology and call the VW222u one of the leaders of today’s tests.

The SyncMaster 2232BW, on the contrary, set no records, but proved to be one of the best products I tested in the total of its characteristics. It is actually free from drawbacks (for its class and its price, of course). Thanks to that, it takes a place on the podium next to the model from ASUS.

From a technical viewpoint, the Samsung SyncMaster 225UW is most original, coming not only with integrated speakers and microphone but also with an integrated sound card. The high price of this product makes the user’s choice not so obvious, though.

The other models don’t provoke such strong emotions. Most manufacturers do not hurry up to introduce monitors with Response Time Compensation. For example, Acer uses outdated matrixes with a specified response time of 5 milliseconds (ISO) and a real response of over 13 milliseconds (GtG) even in its top monitor series.

Especially queer is the ASUS MW221u model that is declared to have Response Time Compensation but doesn’t have it actually. The real response time of this monitor is six times worse than the specified value!

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 2
Discussion started: 10/31/11 11:18:20 PM
Latest comment: 03/05/14 11:48:42 AM

View comments

Add your Comment




Latest materials in Monitors section

Article Rating

Article Rating: 8.8462 out of 10
 
Rate this article:
Excellent
Average
Poor