The response time graph does not differ from the SyncMaster 730BF’s one and it shouldn’t. The manufacturer declares an average response time of 4 milliseconds for both models.
But the RTC error graph is just horrible. We’re dealing with an error of over 100% here – note that I even had to adjust the scale of the Y axis to fit the graph in!
Moreover, I also discovered that the monitor is sluggish (up to 32 milliseconds) at switching between two light tones. It seems RTC just does not work at all on such transitions – the numbers are too alike to the performance of a typical RTC-less TN+Film matrix (see the diagram at the beginning of the article). Fortunately, the RTC errors that impressed me so much on black-gray transitions are noticeably lower on gray-gray ones. But “lower” does not mean you can disregard them altogether as they still amount to 40-60%!
Alas, the SyncMaster 760BF has not improved since the SyncMaster 730BF as concerns the RTC implementation. The RTC error is still so big that it makes working in Windows uncomfortable. The monitor’s behavior on transitions between light tones is strange, too.
The gamma curves are similar to those of the 730BF and the 930BF. They are generally good, but there is a characteristic bend in the top right part of the graph that betrays a too-high contrast setting. This bend disappears as soon as the contrast setting is lowered.
The color temperature is set up with a definite bent towards colder hues. Even the “Warm” setting gives you a temperature of about 6500K which should correspond to “Normal” rather than “Warm”. The difference between the different levels of gray is not too high, but noticeable.
The white brightness of the 760BF is a little lower than of the 730BF, but the black brightness is, on the contrary, a little higher, so the contrast ratio is lower, too. The contrast ratio still remains at an acceptable level for matrixes of that type, though.
So, the SyncMaster 960BF differs from the SyncMaster 730BF in the design of the case mostly – a very pretty and elegant case, I should confess – and the lack of control buttons. The characteristics of the two monitors are very, very similar, and the 760BF has the most serious defect of the previous model – the most inaccurate RTC setup. RTC artifacts are all too visible. Alas, this almost negates all the advantages of this monitor. It turns to be suitable for simple office work only, but why would you need a monitor with RTC for office work? I hope Samsung will solve the RTC setup problems in their future monitor models – at least they’ve managed to almost eliminate them in their monitors on PVA matrixes!