Product comparison · 2 monitors

EIZO 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ vs Samsung monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog

Add a product
  • 15specifications compared
  • 14differ
  • 1identical
  • 14known for one product only

Key differences

The Samsung monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog has 100 cd/m² more display brightness (typical) than the EIZO 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ (270 cd/m² vs 170 cd/m²). The Samsung monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog has 200 :1 more contrast ratio (typical) than the EIZO 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ (500:1 vs 300:1). The Samsung monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog has 20° more viewing angle, horizontal than the EIZO 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ (160° vs 140°). Display diagonal: 38.1 cm (15") on the EIZO 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ, 43.2 cm (17") on the Samsung monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog. Display resolution: 1024 x 768 pixels on the EIZO 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ, 1280 x 1024 pixels on the Samsung monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog.

  • Display diagonal
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:38.1 cm (15")
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:43.2 cm (17")
  • Display resolution
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:1024 x 768 pixels
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:1280 x 1024 pixels
  • Display brightness (typical)
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:170 cd/m²
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:270 cd/m²
  • Contrast ratio (typical)
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:300:1
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:500:1
  • Viewing angle, horizontal
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:140°
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:160°
  • Viewing angle, vertical
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:120°
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:140°
  • Pixel pitch
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:0.297
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:0.289
  • Horizontal scan range
    • 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ:31 - 61 kHz
    • monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog:30 - 80 kHz

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only (off)
Comparison of 15IN 1024X768 61KHZ, monitor 172X Silver 17LCD Analoog
29 specifications
Display9 differ
Display diagonalDiffers38.1 cm (15")43.2 cm (17")
Display resolutionDiffers1024 x 768 pixels1280 x 1024 pixels
TouchscreenNoNo
Display brightness (typical)Differs170 cd/m²270 cd/m²
Contrast ratio (typical)Differs300:1500:1
Viewing angle, horizontalDiffers140°160°
Viewing angle, verticalDiffers120°140°
Pixel pitchDiffers0.2970.289
Horizontal scan rangeDiffers31 - 61 kHz30 - 80 kHz
Vertical scan rangeDiffers50 - 75 Hz56 - 75 Hz
Viewable size, horizontalKnown for one30.4 cmUnknown — not stated by the source
Viewable size, verticalKnown for one22.8 cmUnknown — not stated by the source
Response timeKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source16 ms
Display number of coloursKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source16.78 million colours
Ports & interfacesidentical
I/O portsKnown for oneD-Sub mini, 15 pinUnknown — not stated by the source
Ergonomicsidentical
Plug and PlayKnown for oneYesUnknown — not stated by the source
Panel mounting interfaceKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source75 x 75 mm
Power1 differ
Power consumption (typical)Differs35 W40 W
Weight & dimensions3 differ
Width (without stand)Differs384 mm361 mm
Depth (without stand)Differs171 mm193 mm
Height (without stand)Differs386 mm363 mm
Packaging contentidentical
Bundled softwareKnown for oneDrivers & UtilitiesUnknown — not stated by the source
Other features1 differ
Audio systemKnown for oneNoUnknown — not stated by the source
Power requirementsKnown for one110-120/220-240V, 50/60HzUnknown — not stated by the source
CertificationDiffersTÜV Rheinland/GS, CB, CE Mark, EPA ENERGY STAR Program, Energy 2000TCO99
Power managementKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceEPA, E2000
Supplied AC adapter typeKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceLCD
Packaging dataidentical
Package dimensions (WxDxH)Known for oneUnknown — not stated by the source461 x 142 x 393 mm
Package weightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source5.45 kg

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More monitor comparisons

All monitor comparisons