Original Link: https://www.anandtech.com/show/7456/samsung-s27b971d-monitor-review
Samsung S27B971D Monitor Review
by Chris Heinonen on October 31, 2013 12:00 PM ESTAt the 2013 CES Samsung made a point to demonstrate the excellent accuracy of their monitors. They had an example of the automated calibration routine they go through at the factory. Using a Konica Minolta CA-310 meter, 25 points on the screen are measured to ensure uniformity and accuracy in every high-end monitor they produce. Included in the box of the S27B971D model that I am reviewing, there is a sheet of results showing the accuracy of the display. Very few vendors have displayed this level of confidence in their monitors, or commitment to calibration, so seeing how well Samsung can live up to their words is something I wanted to find out.
Samsung is one of the very few vendors making their own panel today. Most 27” WQHD panels out there are IPS models from LG. Some vendors use higher quality panels than others but they almost all come from the same source. Samsung produces their own PLS panels and one is used in the S27B971D display. PLS claims lower power consumption and lower manufacturing costs, than a comparable IPS panel. I can’t verify the latter, but we can check the former later in the review.
One thing that is true of the Samsung displays that I have reviewed is that they look stunning. The S27B971D is a gorgeous piece of industrial design with nice metal touches, curved lines, and an overall stunning look on the desktop. This design comes at a price however: the display lacks pivot or swivel functionality, and there are no VESA mounting holes for a different stand. As the base has all the electronics built into it this would be an impossibility anyway. You can adjust the height and a bit of tilt, but you’re stuck otherwise. Given the base design I’m unsure why they couldn’t have integrated at least swivel into it, but it is missing.
Another Samsung hallmark are the touch-sensitive controls. My last experience with these was a disaster as they would ignore commands and made even changing inputs a challenge. These are much better behaved, but they still sometimes miss a finger press or two. It makes the monitor look great, but I’d rather have buttons I can actually press and get a tactile response. Perhaps integrated into the front of the base, or much larger touch sensitive controls in the base, would work better.
When they do work the OSD that Samsung provides is well laid out. Navigating the menus is easy and the choices are intuitive. If the controls worked 100% of the time then the OSD would be one of the best on the market. As it is it responds at least 90% of the time, but the missed ones really can get to you (particularly if you use the OSD regularly, as I'm apt to do in a monitor review).
There are five preset modes in the S27B971D display: Standard, High Brightness, Cinema, sRGB, and Calibrated. Using standard you have access to all the controls including brightness and contrast, white balance and gamma. Using sRGB or Calibrated locks those down. You can still adjust the brightness in sRGB mode but in Calibrated everything is disabled. If you wish to adjust the Calibrated settings you can do so using the Natural Color Expert software from Samsung and a meter. They are then locked away so they can’t be adjusted by yourself or anyone else. High brightness pushes the maximum light output past 300 cd/m^2 but at the expense of accuracy while Cinema is designed for Blu-ray players and such over HDMI.
On paper the S27B971D looks like a nice display, and according to the included calibration report it should be really accurate. I needed to test to find out for sure.
Samsung S27B971D | |
Video Inputs | DVI-DL, DisplayPort, HDMI |
Panel Type | PLS |
Pixel Pitch | 0.2331mm |
Colors | 16.7 Million |
Brightness | 220 cd/m^2 (standard), 300 cd/m^2 (bright) |
Contrast Ratio | 1000:1 |
Response Time | 5ms GtG |
Viewable Size | 27" |
Resolution | 2560x1440 |
Viewing Angle (H/V) | 178/178 |
Backlight | White LED |
Power Consumption (operation) | 63W Max |
Power Consumption (standby) | 0.5W Typical |
Screen Treatment | Anti-Glare |
Height-Adjustable | Yes |
Tilt | Yes |
Pivot | No |
Swivel | No |
VESA Wall Mounting | No |
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) | 25.4" x 18.4" x 9.7" |
Weight | 16.5 lbs. |
Additional Features | 7W stereo speakers |
Limited Warranty | 1 Year |
Accessories | Power cable, power brick, DVI cable, DisplayPort cable, USB cable, MHL cable |
Price | $990 |
The maximum light output of the S27B971D is only rated for 250 cd/m^2 in the Standard mode, which is lower than we expect to see. For all these pre-calibration measurements I use the sRGB mode of the display. It is the most accurate out of the box and what I would use if I couldn’t calibrate the display.
With the brightness set to maximum we get 261 cd/m^2 of brightness on a white screen. This is slightly more than the specs say, which is nice to see, but 10 nits is a pretty small difference. Set down to the minimum we get 62 cd/m^2 which is a good range of brightness. Many displays stop well before 100 cd/m^2 which can be too bright for nighttime or light controlled environments. If you do use the high brightness mode you can get 321 cd/m^2 from the S27B971D, but you give up accuracy. I’d skip it, unless there was a specific instance where it was helpful.
As PLS is similar to IPS I expect to see black level results that more closely mirror it than a VA style panel. The black levels on the Samsung are a bit underwhelming. With the backlight at maximum the black level is 0.3737 cd/m^2; at minimum it is 0.0904 cd/m^2. With values like this I’d like to see a higher white level as the contrast levels are going to be only fair.
As I suspected the contrast levels on the Samsung are only 700:1 and 690:1. These are OK for an IPS/PLS panel but not amazing. Samsung rates the display at 1,000:1 for static contrast but I didn’t find a way to achieve those numbers unless you use the dynamic contrast system (which I don’t). So it's a fair result but not great.
With its white LED backlight the Samsung S27B971D is only capable of the sRGB gamut and nothing larger. So for all of this testing I used CalMAN 5.1.2 with an i1Pro spectrometer and a C6 colorimeter that is profiled off the i1Pro. Our targets are 200 cd/m^2 of light output, a gamma of 2.2, and the sRGB color gamut. The pre-calibration measurements are done using the sRGB mode as I can adjust the brightness to 200 cd/m^2 and it is more accurate than the Standard, High Brightness, or Cinema modes.
Pre-Calibration |
Post-Calibration, 200 cd/m^2 |
Post-Calibration, 80 cd/m^2 |
|
White Level (cd/m^2) | 199.19 | 198.86 | 80.07 |
Black Level (cd/m^2) | 0.4146 | 0.4266 | 0.1761 |
Contrast Ratio | 480:1 | 466:1 | 455:1 |
Gamma (Average) | 2.2195 | 2.1989 | 2.4188 |
Color Temperature | 6257K | 6533K | 6460K |
Grayscale dE2000 | 3.2326 | 0.4453 | 0.491 |
Color Checker dE2000 | 1.8896 | 0.6109 | 0.4321 |
Saturations dE2000 | 1.8564 | 0.4521 | 0.3985 |
From the report that comes with the S27B971D in box I expected better results. Out of the box, the grayscale has a definite lack of blue, and the error levels are much higher than you want. The gamma is more of an S-curve than a slope, and the contrast ratio is only 480:1. Color accuracy is good but cyan shades are particularly bad compared to others. Skin tones are very nice and we usually notice those errors first.
Give the Samsung a calibration with CalMAN and now you have a monitor. The only negative is the contrast ratio of 466:1 as the black level has risen from when the backlight is set to maximum. This is very strange behavior, but it is what I measured and I double-checked the data. Look beyond that and you see perfect numbers. Every single dE2000 value is below 2.0 so you won’t see a flaw in the display. Images look incredibly accurate and the accurate gamma helps make the contrast look reasonable.
Going to our other target, 80 cd/m^2 of light output with the sRGB gamma curve, and the behavior is the same. The S27B971D has an okay contrast ratio and is amazing everywhere else. Our maximum dE2000 values are even lower with some of the bars being practically invisible. Post-calibration the Samsung S27B971D produces amazing results that are as good as any display I’ve seen. The contrast isn’t fantastic but you can use the preset Cinema mode if you are going to watch a movie or play a game where contrast is perhaps more important.
The only way to describe the uniformity data is “also amazing.” Rivaling or even exceeding what I have seen from NECs professional displays, the uniformity of the S27B971D is superb. White uniformity is all within 8% of each other, which is likely to not be noticed in real life. Even the dimmest area on the screen only drops by 6% which I did not notice when using it. Like NEC the high-brightness setting probably affects uniformity as well, but using the sRGB mode it stays incredibly uniform.
Black levels have more of a fall-off but not for the usual reason. Typically black uniformity is bad because of some bright corners or edges, but here it is less uniform because the edges are darker. I’m not going to complain about this as it is much better than having bright corners around the screen. I’m assuming the higher overall black levels are due to the technology they are using to produce the uniformity in the display. As I mentioned with the calibration bench, if you need contrast ratios, you can use the movie mode for that. For work where color accuracy and uniformity are more important the sRGB mode is perfect.
With our white levels being totally stable the contrast uniformity varies due to the black levels. The good news is that it varies in a good way, with the edges of the screen being more dynamic than the center. It never exceeds 557:1 so it still lacks the pop of a VA panel, but it is very stable across the screen.
Saving the best for last, color uniformity is perfect. Only two values exceed 1.0 dE2000 on average when compared to the center, and the largest average is 1.23. When you look at an image on the screen, colors will match the rest of the screen and everything will look correct. Phenomenal results here from Samsung.
Despite Samsung billing this as a professional display, I didn’t expect these kinds of results. Even when I saw their 25-point calibration demo or the document that came with the display I didn’t expect it. However Samsung has made a display that ranks up with displays costing hundreds of dollars more in terms of uniformity and accuracy.
Input lag is tested over HDMI using the Leo Bodnar lag tester. It is limited to 1080p but it provides consistent, repeatable results that anyone can duplicate. A scaler can also be designed to introduce very little lag if implemented correctly so native resolution might provide better results, but it would be a slight difference (unless a poor/slow scaler is used).
Tested this way the Samsung S27B971D averages 26.3ms of lag. This is competitive with other 27” WQHD monitors that have produced 22.53 – 35.97ms of lag. Basically if you find any 27” WQHD monitor to be too slow, the Samsung won’t change your mind. I found nothing wrong with the overall gaming performance in my testing.
Power Use
Power draw from a Kill-A-Watt is reasonable on the Samsung with 21 watts at minimum backlight and 42 watts at maximum. On a candelas-per-square-inch-per-watt basis it comes in as being one of the most efficient monitors at maximum backlight and middle of the pack at minimum backlight. Now that virtually everyone uses LEDs, even for wide gamut displays, there probably won’t be as much difference here as there used to be.
Color Gamut
This is a bit interesting to me. In the sRGB mode the Samsung S27B971D falls short of the full sRGB gamut. It fills 67% of the AdobeRGB gamut, and not the 69% that we expect from sRGB. It’s a small difference but it is still a difference. If we switch to the standard color mode instead of sRGB then the gamut is larger. I ran the pre-calibration numbers, did a calibration in both modes, and ran the post-calibration numbers and found that the sRGB preset was far superior in the end. So while the gamut might come up just slightly low, it’s better than being over-saturated all around. In practice, very few people if any will notice the difference between 67% and 69%, as what we’re really looking for are displays that use significantly less than the sRGB gamut.
My expectations for the Samsung S27B971D were high after seeing their demo at CES and how they calibrate displays. They increased when I opened the box and saw the calibration report with some pretty incredible numbers on it. While the initial out-of-box numbers didn’t really impress me, the post-calibration numbers made me sit up and take notice. They are the kind of numbers we hope to see in a display but so rarely do.
What I’ve been trying to figure out is where the Samsung S27B971D sits in the display hierarchy. It is a very interesting mix of features and performance that sits a bit on its own. From the post-calibration and uniformity data I’d tend to compare it to the NEC display, like the PA271W: very uniform, very accurate. But the NEC model offers the AdobeRGB gamut, much more refined on-screen controls, and a far more flexible stand; it isn’t nearly as attractive as the Samsung, but it has even better performance. Of course the Samsung also sells for $1,000 compared to the PA271W at $1,240, but Samsung lacks NEC’s initial accuracy.
Compared to a cheaper display like the Dell U2713HM, the Samsung can be more accurate but isn’t as flexible with placement and sells for over $400 more. It has a gamut that is no larger, and out of the box performance that isn’t any better. Input lag is roughly the same for gaming and the gamut is a bit worse. Unfortunately the Dell didn’t go through our updated CalMAN testing suite so we can’t compare uniformity data to see how it does. Even if the Dell is only average for uniformity, that’s a large difference in the two display prices.
What it really comes down to is if the Samsung was as accurate out of the box as it is after calibration, it would have a good target audience. People that want a highly accurate, high performance display but don’t need the AdobeRGB gamut. It would slot in just below the NEC displays that are out there. The person that this becomes ideal for is one that wants a very accurate, very uniform display and has their own calibration gear. Then you can coax this fantastic performance out of the Samsung S27B971D display and be competitive with a higher-end display. You won’t have the larger gamut, but you might not need it depending on your work.
How many people fit that narrow group? I really don’t know. I think the Samsung is an excellent performer post-calibration. It’s one of the best I’ve seen. I just think that with the pre-calibration numbers only being so-so it’s hard to recommend to either professionals, who can get the NEC, or to users without calibration gear, that can do just as well with the Dell. It feels strange to not recommend it just on the bench tests alone, but outside of a vacuum the performance doesn’t really matter if it doesn’t have a good target audience.
If you fit that small segment that would do well with the Samsung S27B971D it is a great display. I’m just not sure if that audience is very large for it the way the display ships right now. If the out-of-box calibration numbers from our testing could match Samsung's calibration report, it would be a bit easier to recommend, but if you're willing to spend $400 more than something like the Dell in order to get an accurate display, adding in another $200 to get an NEC and a wider gamut seems the way to go.