Samsung 2233rz review - the 120hz revolution begins

10e said:
I saw the HDCP thing in the user manual, not their useless quick start guide.

Here's a link for ya:

http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/UM/200901/20090106142742765/BN59-00834A-Eng.pdf
Click to expand...

Yeah, I linked the same document previously. I was using foxit instead of acrobat reader and search was failing. This is at least some mention. Good enough for me but still strange. Shouldn't require detective work to find out how it works.

This should be good for the real hardcore gamers...
 
Oh come on, lets start seeing these monitors being sold by themselves! WAITING!!! :|

p.s: anyone interested in a L227WTG once I get one of these bad boys? :)
 
looks like the vx922 is still the best lcds for fps:

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.p...&p2=4461&ph=12

I will be sticking with my crt until the technology improves.
Click to expand...

There's a whole bunch of monitors better then this. Iolair's MB24W is far superior for fps. no input lag. The vx922 performes mediocre at ghosting.

Im looking forward to 120hz panel reviews. The ghosting tests so far look a bit disapointing.
 
SH1 said:
"0.1 cd/m² are close to perfection" ...unfortunately, perfection, it certainly is not...but still, this monitor looks very good for what it is...

And is 100 cd/m² at the lowest brightness I wonder? Maybe it goes even lower...(80 cd/m² for many would probably be just fine for example. Maybe this thing can go even lower with the black level...)

In any case, 3d was one of the coolest things ever...glad to see it coming back...
Click to expand...

My bro's Samsung 2232BW is rated at 0.1 cd/m2 black level on the site yet no matter how dark you adjust the monitor it still shows a grey'ish black level when viewing it at night, so just dont expect anything close to CRT black levels.
 
shiznit said:
The minimal difference in input lag between this monitor and the vx922 does not make the viewsonic better, no LCD still running at 60hz could ever be better (unless the 120 samsung was worse in every other way but it isn't). 120hz trumps everything, panel type, viewing angles, colors, backlight bleed, bla bla, nothing is more important. If more people had owned a quality CRT at one point they would understand this.

I'm surprised this thread is still only 2 pages, you would think people would jump at the idea of a true 120hz lcd (I guess the bundle isn't helping get the word out) but they seem to be more interested in wide gamut bullshit like that IPS HP.
Click to expand...

So true, however i have no first hand experience with 120hz LCDs yet but all i know is i get headaches after 1.5 hours on any LCD, and no headaches on a 100hz CRT, not to mention the amount of smoothness is soo much better.

My eyes are extremely sensitive to this type of thing, and my TF2 gaming experience has always felt lacking due to a 60hz LCD.

My guess is alot of other panel companies are gonna start adopting this now that its becoming much more affordable to make, and we'll see it in installments similar to how the widescreen LCD came into production.
 
mathesar said:
My bro's Samsung 2232BW is rated at 0.1 cd/m2 black level on the site yet no matter how dark you adjust the monitor it still shows a grey'ish black level when viewing it at night, so just dont expect anything close to CRT black levels.
Click to expand...

Is the room well lit then? If it is it won't be as noticable. I mean even on my trinitron CRT if I'd sit in a pitch dark room it wouldn't be perfectly black at the current brightness setting, I could adjust it to become perfect black but then it would be a bit on the darker side for other colors too and since I always use a well lit room due to lightening to eye-strainness it's not noticable.

Inu said:
So true, however i have no first hand experience with 120hz LCDs yet but all i know is i get headaches after 1.5 hours on any LCD, and no headaches on a 100hz CRT, not to mention the amount of smoothness is soo much better.

My eyes are extremely sensitive to this type of thing, and my TF2 gaming experience has always felt lacking due to a 60hz LCD.

My guess is alot of other panel companies are gonna start adopting this now that its becoming much more affordable to make, and we'll see it in installments similar to how the widescreen LCD came into production.
Click to expand...

Yea games like TF2 just have to be played with 100Hz+ IMO. I'm not a TF2 player but I keep playing UT series and the day I'd have to start using 60Hz would be the day I'd put all the gaming on a shelf and let it sit there until 100Hz+ monitors are available again.

I wouldn't count on it to become this popular, at least not in the next few years and by the time another tech is released 120Hz might become the new standard instead but that's very difficult to say. I'm sure other companies will follow quick but they're all gonna only offer a very limited stock at beginning for probably the next 2 years.

But it all depends how big market there is for these displays, so it would be a great idea to spread out the news to all the uneducated people out there that doesn't know the difference a higher refresh rate can make. The more people that buys these initial displays the better for future in mind as well. The fake 120Hz trick for TVs seems to have become rather important in the fullHD TV market too so who knows...

But one thing is for sure, I'll be buying either the Samsung or ViewSonic 120Hz monitor once it's out even if technically it would prolly be worse still on most points vs my current trinitron CRT but I wanna support this new feature and hope there will be enough demand for manufacturers to release even better ones in future.
 
I don't have much to say, but I'll post here anyway because I want to support this "120Hz LCD revolution."

I'm one of the people who knows the difference between 60Hz and 120+Hz when it comes to fast paced action FPS gaming.

P.S. 240Hz is even better. I know Sony has recently released a 240Hz HDTV, but I'm sure you probably can't get more than 60Hz out of it when connected to a computer. That's a shame, and here's hoping for 240Hz LCDs also being available for PCs someday. The more, the better for me.
 
shurcooL said:
I don't have much to say, but I'll post here anyway because I want to support this "120Hz LCD revolution."

I'm one of the people who knows the difference between 60Hz and 120+Hz when it comes to fast paced action FPS gaming.

P.S. 240Hz is even better. I know Sony has recently released a 240Hz HDTV, but I'm sure you probably can't get more than 60Hz out of it when connected to a computer. That's a shame, and here's hoping for 240Hz LCDs also being available for PCs someday. The more, the better for me.
Click to expand...

I agree the more the better but its gonna be extremely hard to find games you can play at 240 fps, thus making 240hz pretty useless
 
just because the manufacturer says xyz hrz doesn't mean you can set it to that much on your pc. we are looking for true 120hz or better. Btw I own a Panasonic plasma that is supposedly 480hz, it's 60hz only and it judders when watching movies.
 
I hope you guys realize these upcoming 22" LCD monitors and the HDTVs with 100/120Hz support or higher are highly different.

The HDTVs use 60Hz input (don't know how the 240Hz or 480Hz TVs work like though, could be 120Hz + added interpolation trick or simply 60Hz + more frames inserted/calculated between for example) and use a controller that inserts/calculate the frames between to double the framerate. Now this will also cause the movies rendered at 30 or 25 FPS seem much more fluid as the frame rate doubles, it takes away that "film effect" and makes it seem more like a soap-opera TV series, ie it feels more realtime-like due to the higher FPS and the lower FPS's we're talking about the easier for people to see the difference why even those uneducated people usually also notice the difference between 30 and 60 fps for example. Don't get me wrong, I like this effect after watching it with my own eyes but this wasn't the point of this post though. However with the 22" 120Hz LCD monitors, movies will look the same as they have before too and still run at the same 25 or 30 FPS. The point is the 22" LCD monitors use 120Hz input and the TVs (well most of them, if not all) 60Hz and then doubles the framerate using a built-in controller. That is why you can't get 120Hz support for the comp if hooking up one of those TVs to the comp as the computer will need 120Hz input to get those 120 FPS and if you have true 120Hz input you will not need any "tricks" to get those 120 FPS. :p
 
I got a chance to play with my Samsung 2223rz all weekend along with the 3d vision. I can say when I put the monitor on it booted in 60 hz. After changing the refresh rate to 120 it was instantly noticeable in just moving the mouse cursor. This is a great monitor.
 
relapse808 said:
I got a chance to play with my Samsung 2223rz all weekend along with the 3d vision. I can say when I put the monitor on it booted in 60 hz. After changing the refresh rate to 120 it was instantly noticeable in just moving the mouse cursor. This is a great monitor.
Click to expand...

I'm glad I'm not the only person to see difference in mouse cursor movement smoothness only changing the refresh rate. Will be nice to be able to use even 120Hz at high res as 1680x1050 (coming from a 19" CRT user).
 
A question for the 120Hz LCD owners, does it also show significant improvement when scrolling up and down among topics in a forum section for example, if the text remains noticably more clear at 120Hz compared to 60Hz. Comparing a 60Hz LCD to a CRT at 100Hz+ you get annoyed by this as the difference is so big but when I also put the refresh rate lower on the CRT it also doesn't remain as clear but still a bit better than on the LCD of course due to better response time I guess. So how's it like on these 120Hz LCDs?
 
Sweet, this might help push down prices of 22-24" LCD's. Of course I'm happy w/ my NEC FE950 CRT w/ Trinitron Tube(& the ViewSonic G90F I had), but it is 19". I'd like a bigger monitor so I can use a higher res w/o having text too small. :p
The Sony SDM-HS75P 17" LCD I have for secondary doesn't have too bad of ghosting for being from 2004. I figure an LCD from 2K8/9 would be a bit better. :D
 
I do not understand this. Why has there been real 120hz LCD TVs on the market for at least two years and just now computer monitors are just getting this technology?

Sure the circuitry of the TVs do not allow 120hz input but the panels do run at 120hz so I think the upgrade (if there is enough bandwidth in HDMI) to accept 120hz input (thus making it a PC monitor) can not be that costly of an upgrade.
 
Staples said:
I do not understand this. Why has there been real 120hz LCD TVs on the market for at least two years and just now computer monitors are just getting this technology?

Sure the circuitry of the TVs do not allow 120hz input but the panels do run at 120hz so I think the upgrade (if there is enough bandwidth in HDMI) to accept 120hz input (thus making it a PC monitor) can not be that costly of an upgrade.
Click to expand...
there hasn't been real 120hz tv.
 
shiznit said:
there hasn't been real 120hz tv.
Click to expand...

Well if the really refresh at 60hz, then why do they look a lot more fluid and more importantly, how are they different than the rest of LCD TVs? I would be hard pressed to believe that their panels refresh at 60hz.
 
I have the Samsung 120hz 22" monitor and here are my observations:

The monitor has an insane amount of back light bleeding across the top and bottom. It's very very bright.

120hz is very nice (very little ghosting that I have noticed in normal 2D operation)
In sterescopic mode I have noticed negative images on bright objects. This is probably due to the lcd switching being too slow for the drastic image changes that occur at 120hz in stereoscopic mode.

The colors are good and the screen is bright. The build quality is a little subpar given the fact you pay 399 for it.
 
I don't know of any mass market LCD TV that accepts discrete 120hz input. All those 120hz TVs you see only upscale / interpolate to 120hz, while accepting 60hz / 24hz input only.
The Samsung rear projection DLPs can take 120hz input though, from what I've read.
 
Staples said:
Well if the really refresh at 60hz, then why do they look a lot more fluid and more importantly, how are they different than the rest of LCD TVs? I would be hard pressed to believe that their panels refresh at 60hz.
Click to expand...
frame insertion.

no tv out right now will take a true 120hz signal.
 
Staples said:
Well if the really refresh at 60hz, then why do they look a lot more fluid and more importantly, how are they different than the rest of LCD TVs? I would be hard pressed to believe that their panels refresh at 60hz.
Click to expand...

The 120Hz TVs are showing 120 frames per second, but getting less than that from the source. If it's a video source, the TV is getting 30 frames per second from the source. If it's a film source, the TV is getting 24 frames per second from the source.

If your TV is running at 60Hz and displaying 30FPS video, it will insert one new frame between each original frame, and it will look perfect because it is merely doubling the number of frames and everything divides out evenly. If your TV is running at 60Hz and displaying 24FPS film, you've got a problem, because it doesn't divide out evenly. It has to drop frames. This looks noticeably worse, and a lot of film buffs have complained about this.

Now do the same thing with a 120Hz TV. When it displays a 30FPS source, it inserts three new frames between each original frame and looks perfect, and when it displays a 24FPS source, it inserts four new frames between each original frame and looks perfect. That's why 120Hz - it is the lowest number that divides evenly into 24 and 30.

Some 120Hz or faster TVs (I'm not sure if all of them do this), when they insert those frames, they don't just copy them - they interpolate them. Say you have a ball moving across the screen. In original frame #1 it's over here, and in original frame #2 it's over there. When you insert the three or four new frames between original frame #1 and #2, you can either just copy frame #1 three or four times, or you can photoshop the ball in the three or four positions between its position in original frame #1 and original frame #2, making the motion appear to be three or four times smoother.

I'm honestly amazed that TVs have enough computing power to do that kind of interpolation on complicated movie scenes at speeds of up to 480Hz. That just boggles my mind, but apparently they're able to do it.

Now what we're talking about in this thread is an LCD monitor that displays a true 120Hz, taking up to 120 frames per second from the source, which is a lot different than taking 30 frames per second from the source and then manipulating it into 120 frames of new data. For one thing, single-link DVI apparently doesn't have enough bandwidth to do 1920x1080 at 120FPS (that is a lot of data to push).

For another thing, I'm not sure that the "fake" 120Hz or faster TVs with interpolation would be helpful for gaming. Those interpolated frames are being generated by the TV, not the source - which means if the player decides to change their direction of motion between original frames, the TV will guess wrong for a couple of frames, and be generating frames that do not accurately represent what the player is actually doing. It will get corrected at the next original frame, but I can't help but think that is going to look or feel wrong, sort of like input lag. Edit: Later posts explain that this does indeed force a minimum lag of 1 frame (16ms), but in fact most 120Hz TVs have at least 3 frames of lag (48ms) which make them pretty undesirable for gaming (thanks, sethk).
 
I guess that is why 120hz TVs look so smooth.

I would imagine that if the TV is generating frames like that, there is probably always a 1fps lag so that it will predict correctly all the time.
 
Staples said:
I guess that is why 120hz TVs look so smooth.

I would imagine that if the TV is generating frames like that, there is probably always a 1fps lag so that it will predict correctly all the time.
Click to expand...
much more than that, some of them have 60ms or worse input lag, a 60hz signal frame is 16.7ms.
 
sethk said:
The Samsung rear projection DLPs can take 120hz input though, from what I've read.
Click to expand...
I was in the market for such a TV recently (falsely got my hopes up) and the overwhelming consensus over at avsforum is that while the display engine is capable of 120hz, it only does it at 960x1080 and then combines the two halves of the image into one 60hz 1920x1080 frame.

Besides there is no way to get a 120hz dual-link dvi signal into a tv that doesn't have a dual-link dvi input.

If Buy.com actually ships the Viewsonic to the people who ordered at $227 it will be the monitor deal of the year so far.
 
Haha too late, now the price is listed as $359 on buy.com. Knew it was too good to be true. :rolleyes:
 
Regarding the ViewSonic VX2265wm, I see only Vista drivers for the display at this point at least on their homepage? What about us XP users? :mad: Hope there's drivers for it least on the CD.

Maybe time to send an email.
 
shiznit said:
much more than that, some of them have 60ms or worse input lag, a 60hz signal frame is 16.7ms.
Click to expand...

And it's noticable... even on the desktop...

We got a Sony Bravia 120hz and the input lag is really noticable :(

Nice for movies, meh for anything else... I don't plan to buy 120hz again, films look fine on my Westinghouse 37" 1080p (sans color/brightness/contrast but frame-rate wise) So my next TV will be 60hz...

Hopefully more TV's will still come with 120hz interpolation, but have an option to turn it off... ?
 
Are there any current downfalls to the 120hz LCDs on the market?

Has anyone seen any reasons other than current "new" price and limited screen size that would be a cause not to purchase these?

When LCDs came out, I downgraded to a smaller screen size than my CRT in order to enjoy the benefits of LCD (the screens were only available up to 17"). I'd bet many lcd owners would be fine doing this again, and this time our secondary screen will be a much more convenient lcd, instead of trying to wedge a CRT onto your desktop alongside your lcd. My CRT long ago was tossed out due to it's cumbersome traits.

This is really where I'm looking for answers. Is the 120hz good enough to take a hit in screen size in order to enjoy the benefit of increase refresh, or is the technology still too immature to fully enjoy?

The larger question being, when do we get to see [H]ardForum taking a look at these new displays and whipping up demand for a transition to 120hz?

***edit***
I failed to stipulate "true" 120hz, not interpolated or any other gimmicks.

I'm currently referring to the Samsung 2233rz and the ViewSonic VX2265WM that are for sale right now, but I didn't want to limit it to just those. As the OP talks about his experience with his Samsung, I'd like to hear more It's more in terms of the 120hz refresh rate, not necessarily the ins and outs of these two monitors other features. It's great to hear good things from the OP, but that has been the only person to post their experience with these monitors. Anyone else?
 
Heh, I don't even like 120hz... the fakeness of it all was annoying, ESPECIALLY since it wasn't consistent.

It would be super smooth, then go to "sorta smooth" then back to super-smooth... like the TV wasn't capable of rendering 4 new frames out of thin-air every second (which makes sense depending on the complexity of the scene). Making 120hz essentially pointless. I turned off Cinemotion and Motion Enhancer on the Sony just to get the look/feel of real Film... (Atleast imo) which made buying that 120hz TV pointless and I regret it... It's not a bad TV, just wish I would have spent less on one that was 60hz...
 
$275, that's great. :)

Can you please check if there's any XP drivers included on the driver CD when you get it? I guess drivers are really needed for 120Hz refresh rate mode so.

If it lacks XP drivers which would be very weird to me I won't pick this one up. :p
 
i doubt specific monitor drivers are needed for 120hz, you should be able to create a custom resolution in the display driver if it's not available by default.
 
shiznit is correct, you don't need the drivers. I'm using XP. Just plug the monitor in and it's detected as 'plug and play monitor.' The 100hz and 120hz refresh rates will automatically appear in the refresh settings.

The reason behind the Vista requirement is that these monitors are intended to support stereoscopic 3D and the Nvidia stereoscopic 3D drivers only support Vista. (The stereoscopic drivers won't install on XP. I tried.) However if you don't care about the 3D glasses, then the monitor works equally well on XP.
 
Will definitely post my initial impressions and try to compare it to my previous monitors. Currently using an LG L227WTG-PF @76hz native ( soon to be sold after I receive the VX ), and compare it to the old 22" Sony CRT where I was able to use 144hz. Looks to be exciting :)

Edit for 02/18: Looks like CDW removed the price of $274 for the Viewsonic VX2265WM and changed it to "call only" then to "374.xx"... they charged my CC and I have an invoice for the earlier price of $274..... I should have ordered 10 of them while it had the lower price earlier LOL :p
 
Seems to be at $359 now, same as buy.com... So yea seems ViewSonic really pushing the retailers to stick to that ~$350 MSRP.
 
shiznit said:
If Buy.com actually ships the Viewsonic to the people who ordered at $227 it will be the monitor deal of the year so far.
Click to expand...

No luck on the $227 monitor deal. I had ordered one just for kicks (at that price, why not?) - but buy.com canceled my order this morning stating "the product is no longer available." Anyhow, the vx2265wm is now in stock at several online stores so hopefully we'll see a review trickle in soon.
 
yea my order got cancelled too. Buy.com never honors a sale when the price was a mistake...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top