
| Securemart.com | 318.39 |
| CompuVest | 377.95 |
| Compare prices | |
| Diagonal screen size | 22 pouces |
| Type | TN |
| Resolution | 1680 x 1050 pixels |
| Response time | 5 ms |
| Interfaces (HDMI / DVI / VGA / YUV) | NC |
| Options | |
| Viewing angles (H/V) | 160° / 160° |

As for the actual performance of this component, as you can see from the image it’s of good quality and it can even stand the comparison with pro models. Whites are bright, there is good contrast, however, there are limits in darker tones. As you can see on the test card, these blend together and are indistinguishable causing a noticeable loss of detail in these areas. Finally, for reactivity and as is usually the case rapid movements aren’t the best captured. Rendering is best if you don’t move too much.
Test date: 2007-08-07
Note: If you consult the specifications on Samsung’s website, contrary to what is stated, it is not 22 inch 1400 x 900 pixel, but a 1650 x 1080 monitor as is listed elsewhere on the site.
Strong points? Viewing angles and color rendering...according to Samsung.
In this screen’s marketing brochure or that which was conceived to give arguments to sales people, Samsung emphasizes three main characteristics:
Viewing angles: it states 170° in the vertical plane, however, we really wonder where they obtained this value. Here is what we have at just 100°. At 170° we don’t even show you...

Reading a little further, Samsung mentions the particularly fast response time of 5 ms. This is satisfactory but it’s also what is the current slowest - all technologies included. In practice, this 5 ms turns out to be less reactive than the 6 ms of PVA panels and 8 ms MVAs. It’s good enough for normal use, however, nothing to write home about.
Finally and even more misguided, Samsung sings praise for its colors thanks to a component called the MagicColor Chip. Actually, if we were really to be mean we could say that their diagram is much better the actual results:

Before this processing, colors could have been good, a bit bland but at least natural. However, Samsung opted for special processing that is supposed to make colors ‘’sublime’’ – at least in their brochure – but which actually over-saturates and burns them out. In the end, this isn’t that catastrophic but it isn’t great either. The average difference between perfect colors and those displayed on the screen is 6.3, a result that we typically found two years ago. These days better performances of some monitors arrive at a value of around 2. Here, the difference is blatant and translates into a very noticeable blue dominance accentuated by a lack of red. It can only help to try and manually compensate for this in the OSD menu of the screen.
- Good quality webcam
- VGA + DVI with HDCP
- Integrated USB Hub
- Preset colors
- Base isn’t vertically adjustable unlike its ViewSonic rival
- Lower viewing angle darkens quickly
- 5 ms panel is a little less reactive than the Samsung 226BW
- No zero dead pixel policy contrary to ViewSonic







Product face-offs










