This study presents an evaluation of the extent of differences between measurements performed by O(3) and NO(2) diffusive samplers and by the reference methods for diffusive samplers commercially available. The tests were performed in an exposure chamber under extreme conditions of controlling factors and under field conditions. For NO(2), the results of the laboratory experiments showed that most of the diffusive samplers were affected by extreme exposure conditions. The agreement between the samplers and the reference method was better for the field tests than for the laboratory ones. The estimate of the uptake rate for the exposure conditions using a model equation improved the agreement between the diffusive samplers and the reference methods. The agreement between O(3) measured by the diffusive samplers and by the reference method was satisfactory for 1-week exposure. For 8-hour exposures, the diffusive samplers with high uptake rates quantified better the O(3) concentration than the samplers with low uptake rates. As for NO(2), the results of the O(3) field tests were in better agreement with the reference method than the ones of the laboratory tests. The field tests showed that the majority of diffusive samplers fulfils the 25% uncertainty requirement of the NO(2) European Directive and the 30% uncertainty requirement of the O(3) European Directive for 1-week exposure.