![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
S27B970 Impressions.
- Thread starter Ohmycaptain
- Start date
Hmm. Nice review but the response times (input lag numbers) are strange... I have both the zr2740w and this monitor - samsung feels a bit more responsive to me, while in your test the difference is like x2.8 times over the samsung.
Also I'd like to note a crush of details in shadows. That means that shadows looke like completely black spots very often. With no details of the ground, or whatever it is being casted on. (I always forget to point this out)
Also I'd like to note a crush of details in shadows. That means that shadows looke like completely black spots very often. With no details of the ground, or whatever it is being casted on. (I always forget to point this out)
Did you try to use the EODIS3 with the NCE program? I can't get it to run properly - the NCE doesn't see the calibrator no matter what I do. It is listed as a supported calibrator though. Dam coreans...
Is it double? I haven't read Prad's review of S27A850D (it's a locked, pay to read review) but I thought someone menioned the lag was something like ~14ms circuit delay + average pixel response time = typical total latency of approx. 24ms.
If Simon/TFTCentral's measurement is similarly circuit delay + pixel response time, then the discrepancy is not so large? ~28ms vs. ~24ms
Does the Prad/SMTT 2.0 method expect some error? I think it does, but the google translation is not 100% clear: http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/specials/inputlag/inputlag.html
Last edited:
I've told you multiple times, the i1d2 is not compatible with this display. DL the NCE PDF and look at the compaitble colorimeters list. The i1d2 is not on it.
http://www.samsung.com/my/support/model/LS27B970DS/XM-downloads
PRAD measured the 850D's input lag to be 13.6ms+5.7ms for the pixel response times, the actual delay value is 13.6ms. The SMT Tool 2.0 should only be out by 1 or 2 ms vs an oscilloscope which is why TFT's measurements baffle me.
TFT Central has a simplified input lag article
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/input_lag.htm
Last edited:
You may want to reread my post. My question was about EODIS3 not 2. Which, in its turn is perfectly supported by the program, even though it is not on the list.
While the EODIS3, wich IS on that list, can't be identified by the program... It just doesn't see it.
I can use it in another applications perfectly well so I guess it's not about calibrator and its functionality.
He has his own forum now - why bother about us, simple owners... Those guys getting cherry picked monitors and writing reviews are so funny
I think you're being needlessly unfair, Simon runs TFT Central as a hobby and pays for the forum bandwidth himself (that's why you can't use it unless you're registered) and there is little advertising on the main website. He does post on many forums, but life takes over and I understand completely that he isn't posting prolifically or following every thread, here or anywhere else. Now that I've specifically pointed out this thread he may answer directly here. I've corresponded with him in the past and he seems like a good guy. He's looking into the latency issue and has a few ideas. I'm sure Simon is as keen as any of us to understand where the differences in measured lag can be attributed.
This topic may warrant its' own thread later, but for now he pointed out that Prad use circuit delay + ½ average frame change time, whereas SMTT 2.0 tool as he is using it just gives a total latency based on the actual pixel transitions as they are displayed - remember that dependant on which colours you start and end with, the slowest pixel transitions can be several times longer than the fastest.
Simon also just tested 'fastest' vs 'faster' response time setting on the S27B970D and found a difference of 3.6ms, but he quotes the 'faster' result as it's better overall in terms of limiting overshoot and artifacts. So in retrospect, if the S27A850D reviews quoted lag based on different response time settings there is some accounting for the difference.
The two issues pointed out may be enough to fully explain the discrepancy, but there may be other factors we haven't thought of yet. Simon didn't mention it, but I'm guessing that there could also be some small difference in measured lag due to different reference displays.
This topic may warrant its' own thread later, but for now he pointed out that Prad use circuit delay + ½ average frame change time, whereas SMTT 2.0 tool as he is using it just gives a total latency based on the actual pixel transitions as they are displayed - remember that dependant on which colours you start and end with, the slowest pixel transitions can be several times longer than the fastest.
Simon also just tested 'fastest' vs 'faster' response time setting on the S27B970D and found a difference of 3.6ms, but he quotes the 'faster' result as it's better overall in terms of limiting overshoot and artifacts. So in retrospect, if the S27A850D reviews quoted lag based on different response time settings there is some accounting for the difference.
The two issues pointed out may be enough to fully explain the discrepancy, but there may be other factors we haven't thought of yet. Simon didn't mention it, but I'm guessing that there could also be some small difference in measured lag due to different reference displays.
Last edited:
the_real_7
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,404
just took the plunge couldn't pass this screen up with the new egg special of 999.00 , hopefully works out well or ill just sale quickly what i paid for it , another screen that looks promising is the EIZO FORIS FS2333 , love to see these two screens side to side
orangeblue
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 325
Dammit, I broke down too. At $200 off, it was reasonable considering I was looking at the ACD too, which would have been over $1k with tax. My nearly 5 year old Samsung 245t is just about ready to retire (probably get a new home with my brother, but if not, I may sell it here pretty cheaply).
the_real_7
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,404
same here my 5 year old 20wmgx is getting a bit old and having alot of image retention , after i post this it be in the screen for a couple of seconds ,last time i checked my screen had 13833 HOURS AND 47 MIN lol . . . I had the apple ACD 27 a the crossover korean screen , the apple was better quality , but still both had to much blur on movement and back light bleed from where the power button is on the lower right , i guess just that panel has those faults , the Samsung seems like it addresses alot of those issues , so i think i will be happy , plus with a 5ms (GTG) , it a bit faster than this screen im using at 6ms (GTG) . now i just have to find a place to rent a color meter , mine is not meant for led screens
S27B970 does not really stand for its price as well as its performance.
Hardware calibration: Fail
Software Calibration: Fail
For the same price, you can buy 2 X P241W.
Epic Fail Product !
based on what info?
Astral Abyss
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2004
- Messages
- 3,065
Epic Fail Post !
Who wants P241W with 1920 x 1200 resulotion over this one? You sir should be ashmed.
You should read the calibration performance comparisons before you reach the verdict.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/samsung_s27b970d.htm
Last edited:
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
Judging these charts is a bit problematic because there is a mix up of profile validations and measurements (utilizing the same and for that task unsuitable profile validation) against other undefined targets – including a comparison between those different measurements which doesn't make sense (think of a videocard review that would list the performance of different cards in fps without mentioning that different games or settings were used). So the colorimetric workflow is questionable (not the whole review of course which has been carried out carefully ) – true for many consumer display reviews. A good compromise would be the usage of the UDACT.
However: I don't want to anticipate too much but the new Samsung is a quite potent and neutral screen (which already becomes clear due to the little tricky numbers in the mentioned review). Only drawback regarding the colorimetric performance is the limited color gamut and the hardware calibration software (in addition: which is regarding its operating mode more comparable to solutions like Eizo EasyPIX or the semi-automatic mode of basICColor display 5). It's a good screen for users who want a glossy panel and maybe originally thought of the Apple screen which is clearly outperformed through the precise signal processing and homogeneity compensation. For CMYK softproofing and/ or the usage of RGB working color spaces beyond sRGB one should choose a screen with WCG-CCFL or RGB-LED blu of course.
Best regards
Denis
Last edited:
The Uniformity embedded in SB970 is only available for "Hardware Calibration Mode", which is very strange considering its target customers.
I do not see any features to justify its retail price.
Last edited:
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
The inital corrections by the manufacturer also affect other picture modes (maybe not high bright). Our screen had an average chroma difference of < 1 (max. < 2) regarding 15*4 (white and 3 grey levels) measurement points across the screen in standard picture mode out of the box. This correlates entirely with the results of screens with active compensation functions – at least when measuring this "fresh" screen – and is a bit "too good" to be an unprocessed result. The reduced range of contrast even with native whitepoint supports this estimation (I will try to get an definite answer by Samsung). Has your screen uniformity problems?
Best regards
Denis
Last edited:
Two of mine CG275 & P241W have this feature already since their early legacy models, EIZO CE /NEC 90 series.
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
Yes this is correct. I only wanted to point out that our test sample achieved homogeneity-results comparable to active compensation functions like ColorComp, DUE or ADC. That's why I asked if your S27B970 has uniformity problems.
Best regards
Denis
I get my refund next week, it seems.
Is this monitor any good?
I am still looking for an IPS/PLS monitor to hook up to my macbook pro.
Don't want one with AG coating so this monitor was on my mind.
Also another question, I am used to use a 24" 16:10 monitor. How will this 27" affect text compare to the 24? Bigger or smaller text etc?
Greetz
I am still looking for an IPS/PLS monitor to hook up to my macbook pro.
Don't want one with AG coating so this monitor was on my mind.
Also another question, I am used to use a 24" 16:10 monitor. How will this 27" affect text compare to the 24? Bigger or smaller text etc?
Greetz
burningrave101
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Messages
- 11,825
Is there any way to stop the S27B970D from loading Samsung's factory calibrated settings without buying a colorimeter just to create a new profile? When I power the monitor off and back on the screen is noticeably brighter with more vibrant colors for the first few seconds and then Samsung's Natural Color Expert pops up on the screen stating that it is loading the factory calibrated profile which on mine is making the colors look dull and washed out and adds a noticeble warm/yellow tint I don't like.
Last edited:
Hardcore2012
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2012
- Messages
- 84
Isn't that what high bright mode is?
So is most of you happy with the 970D?
I am looking to buy a non grainy IPS/PLS monitor to hook up my macbook pro. I don't want the thunderbolt.
I was thinking about the 970D or the S24A850D (but after some reading there is backlight bleed on most of them or something).
I am also a little afraid on the 970D since its 27" that text would be to small compare to the 24".
Would like some help on this mather. Thanks and greetz!
I am looking to buy a non grainy IPS/PLS monitor to hook up my macbook pro. I don't want the thunderbolt.
I was thinking about the 970D or the S24A850D (but after some reading there is backlight bleed on most of them or something).
I am also a little afraid on the 970D since its 27" that text would be to small compare to the 24".
Would like some help on this mather. Thanks and greetz!
burningrave101
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Messages
- 11,825
No, all High Bright Mode is doing is increasing the brightness some but it's still using the same hardware calibrated profile.
Sailor_Moon
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 611
The high bright mode of our test sample didn't utilize the additional LUT corrections of the factory calibration.Grey balance and gradation were significantly worse than in all other picture modes.
It's an interesting monitor. How much of that price do you all think is because of the "new" PLS tech?
PLS tech definitely has my interest in general.
I think the price of the SxxA850x and S27B970D is partly because it's new and Samsung are attempting to get the best return on their 'new' tech (not genuinely new as it's an IPS copy) so the marketing is about pitching it as a top of the range product, and in the case of S27B970 they are pitching it as a top of the range 'designer' product next to the Apple 27" display. It's not so much what it is worth by any rational measure, as what they think the market is is willing to pay.
As it appears to be not quite as good as IPS, it's tough sell. I imagine the Samsung prices will continue downward. It's not cheap enough to take many sales from Dell & HP, Samsung don't really compete with NEC/Spectaview or EIZO/Colouredge, and those who covet the Apple product are still more likely to buy that while the prices are close.
As it appears to be not quite as good as IPS, it's tough sell. I imagine the Samsung prices will continue downward. It's not cheap enough to take many sales from Dell & HP, Samsung don't really compete with NEC/Spectaview or EIZO/Colouredge, and those who covet the Apple product are still more likely to buy that while the prices are close.