At the maximum brightness and contrast, the display was fast at turning the pixel on and slow at turning it off. When the brightness and contrast were reduced, this balance changed. As a result, the total response time decreased a little, but then went up again. The maximum response time was 39ms. Alas, notwithstanding the average result (in numbers), the image I saw was simply abominable. I can’t tell you the reason: display electronics, or the matrix, but the display was simply unusable at 100nit screen brightness. When I was typing text, I saw letters slowly appearing on the screen – very slowly. I had my eyes aching after a few minutes of work in several windows. The special effects you get when switching between windows or moving them around are hard to describe. After working at this display for half an hour, I got assured in my verdict: this is the slowest display among all included into this roundup.
Pixel rise time
Pixel fall time
Both brightness and contrast ratio were far from perfect. The brightness didn’t make it to its specs, while the contrast ratio mostly equaled 100:1, although the manufacturer specified the highest contrast ratio of all displays I reviewed today: 700:1. Lowering the backlighting brightness helps to improve the contrast ratio, but it is still below 700:1.
Thus, I consider this display overpriced because of the lack of DVI input, bad color temperatures setup, low brightness and contrast ratio and very high response time at a low brightness. The design of the display is original and beautiful, but is not functional at all.
For those who own an SDM-HS93 display, here is my advice: regulate the screen brightness by adjusting the backlight lamp brightness rather than the brightness setting in the menu. Thus, you improve the level of black and lower the response time.