The monitor’s brightness and contrast are both set at 80% by default. I reduced them both to 60% to achieve 100nit brightness of white. The monitor reproduces color gradients without banding at any brightness/contrast settings.
The gamma curves look well, but pass below the theoretical ones. It means the image looks somewhat darker and has a higher contrast than it should do. The curves are closer to the theoretical ones at the reduced brightness/contrast settings, while the monitor still distinguishes between darkest tones.
The matrix employed in the 720NA is a little faster than the matrixes of the above-described monitors from LG and Philips, yet its behavior is not dramatically different. Having a speed of 12 milliseconds at the minimum, it is as slow as 27 milliseconds, or over two times slower, at the maximum.
The color temperature setup is rather sloppy. The monitor is too predisposed towards cold hues and there is also a big difference between white and even light grays.
The contrast ratio is average, not exceptional (because the contrast ratio degenerates at low screen brightness) but not bad, either (because it is high enough for a TN+Film matrix at high screen brightness).
In other words, the SyncMaster 720NA is an average product and doesn’t stand out an inch from the crowd of same-type monitors. And I won’t venture a guess as to how many customers will be as thrilled about the integrated air ionizer as to prefer this model to others…