Database Info

AMOLED vs LCD vs TFT

So currently these 3 types of display techs(mainly their variants like Super AMOLED, Super Clear LCD, Super IPS LCD, LED Backlit LCD,IPS TFT etc) are the main kinds of display technologies which can be seen on the latest phones.
I have a few doubts regarding this topic.
1- Which technology gives the best color reproduction?
I know AMOLED sucks at this field.What about Super IPS n LED Backlit LCDs n TFTs?
2-Which one has the best viewing angle?
3-What is all this pentile matrix stuff about AMOLED Displays?
4-Longevity,which one lasts long without noticeable degradation?
5-One technologies main advantages/disadvantages over another

yzak58 said:
So currently these 3 types of display techs(mainly their variants like Super AMOLED, Super Clear LCD, Super IPS LCD, LED Backlit LCD,IPS TFT etc) are the main kinds of display technologies which can be seen on the latest phones.
I have a few doubts regarding this topic.
1- Which technology gives the best color reproduction?
I know AMOLED sucks at this field.What about Super IPS n LED Backlit LCDs n TFTs?
2-Which one has the best viewing angle?
3-What is all this pentile matrix stuff about AMOLED Displays?
4-Longevity,which one lasts long without noticeable degradation?
5-One technologies main advantages/disadvantages over another
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1 amoled has very good contrast. but pixel density also important. Phone could have anyone of these displays and have varying dpi
2 IPS has the best viewing angle
3 i heard of that I've have to google it.
4. Longevity has too many variables. depends on use quality and always random dud phones so idk.
5. depends on what you want it for reading vs watching video the size of the screen quality of a product. you can get knockoff iphone with rentina like display doesn't mean cheap phone will last longer then a lessor display. It's more of a personal choice than an overall one better than another.

1. Depends if you're looking for real life looking colors or bright, vibrant colors. Out of the box AMOLED is the latter, while all LCD's are the former. However, all these screens can be adjusted (Android phones anyways), so it's not such a huge issue.
2. IPS LCD has the best viewing angle, but AMOLED is so close behind it's not a deal breaker. All other LCD's would be behind them, but the amount of which depends on the quality of the panel. iPod Touch viewing angle is terrible, while Xperia Play's is amazing for an LCD.
3. Pentile is just a different sub pixel arrangment. It can apply to LCD or AMOLED, it's just seen more on AMOLED's because it makes those displays last longer. Pentile screens don't look quite as crisp as RGB layout screens, but it's harder to notice with the 720p displays out there now.
4. Traditionally AMOLED doesn't last as long as LCD, but it seems to be panel specific. Some AMOLED panels can last really long. All in all you shouldn't see issues within a 3 year phone contract with either.
5. Totally personal preference. I like AMOLED's myself, mainly for the infinite black levels, vibrant colors, and very good viewing angles. Some people like LCD's because the colors out of the box are more natural. Also some like how there are 720p RGB layout LCD's on phones. AMOLED hasn't been able to do this yet, it has to resort to pentile for those resolutions. Then again, it's hard to notice at ~320 PPI

Ips > Amoled > LCD > tft
Sent from my U8150 using XDA

How about super amoled?
Sent from my GT-I8150 using xda premium

Personally i seem to prefer SLCD over SAMOLED, the whites are bluish and there's a weird hue in all colors except black in amoled, not sure why but the blacks are true blacks which is not the case in lcd where all colors are perfect except black is kind of grayish because of the back light.

Rick_1995 said:
Personally i seem to prefer SLCD over SAMOLED, the whites are bluish and there's a weird hue in all colors except black in amoled, not sure why but the blacks are true blacks which is not the case in lcd where all colors are perfect except black is kind of grayish because of the back light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My AMOLED colors were slightly off when I got my phone (a little on the warm side). With a quick color tweak the colors look amazing now, along with the true blacks.

noisyzero said:
How about super amoled?
Sent from my GT-I8150 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Super Amoled Plus and super LCD are the higher end panels and bring out the best of each technology. However nothing beats a good ips panel in my books. The colors are flawless, and the viewing angles impeccable. That is all I need.
Sent from my U8150 using XDA

Rick_1995 said:
Personally i seem to prefer SLCD over SAMOLED, the whites are bluish and there's a weird hue in all colors except black in amoled, not sure why but the blacks are true blacks which is not the case in lcd where all colors are perfect except black is kind of grayish because of the back light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AMOLEDs provide true black because in this technology, each pixels produce its own light(unlike LCDs,in which a single lightsource illuminates the entire screen). And when black is needed to be produced,that individual pixel is completely shut down,thus zero light is emitted.Hence true black.

@Allanitomwesh
Ips > Amoled > LCD > tft
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry about the resurrection, but what aboit IPS TFT?
in case of motorola xoom2?

not a fan of AMOLED screen burnouts

ChinchilaO said:
@Allanitomwesh
Sorry about the resurrection, but what aboit IPS TFT?
in case of motorola xoom2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically IPS is a really good TFT panel. Like how a maybach and a c200 are both Mercedes. IPS being the maybach ofcourse.
And technically an LCD is also tft. But then it starts getting confusing if you go down that road.
Sent from my U8150 using xda app-developers app

amoled is much more colourful than the others.
A I-Phone 4 looks really pale beside a Galaxy S or a Galaxy S2.
Amoled has limited life-time and looses brightness.
The power consumption is dependent extremly on the brightness of the colour.

Martin L. said:
amoled is much more colourful than the others.
A I-Phone 4 looks really pale beside a Galaxy S or a Galaxy S2.
Amoled has limited life-time and looses brightness.
The power consumption is dependent extremly on the brightness of the colour.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Power consumption is EXACTLY what interests me most about this. I remember reading a couple of years ago that Sony Walkmans using OLEDs offered vibrant colours while using far less power than LCDs. The trouble is I'm having trouble finding more information on this now that I'm looking at OLEDs in smartphones. Is this true, does OLED use less power, does it not use a backlight like LCD?
I'm dying to know because I bought a cool phone a few months ago, but hadn't learned about battery usage/capacity and now I HATE the phone for it. I'm looking at the OLEDs e.g. on the Motorola RAZRs (with 2000 mAh batteries) and I'm curious about them.
UPDATE: I just found a simple document composed from companies and organisations involved in OLED production which, they say is designed to eradicte myths on this. You can see the document here, and on power consumption, my brief understanding is this:
LCD: uses maximum power to display any image
OLED: uses minimal power on darker images, maximum power on brighter/whiter/colourful images - white/very bright images use more power than LCDs
This leads me to think that switching to OLED can only result in at least some benefit in battery life, no? I think most of us on Android are conscious of the use of black and white in the UI, wallpapers etc. so something like this would help. Is it a significant benefit? A backlight on a TV plugged into the wall is fine, on a smartphone I can see why it's a battery-killer. I note the caveat about OLEDs using more power for white and very bright images, but the way I see it, unless you're using a white wallpaper, this isn't an issue. I speculate a power saving when all is accounted for.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...sD8gJk&sig=AHIEtbR1--xI02ZyDoQZKtuuUS-sv_aKPA

So, if a TFT display is considered not quite as good as an AMOLED or an SLDC…how could a difference be noticed between the Xperia Z’s TFT display, the SGS4’s AMOLED and the HTC Butterfly’s SLDC3 – all 5 inches, all 1920x1080? Battery life/colour reproduction/daylight visibility?
Thanks for the input.

decision
I'm sorry for breakin' in this late, but... I hope to help in the future decisions.
We're mixing some things here:
LCD is a technology. AMOLED is another technology.
TFT is a sub technology that must be applied under one of the mentioned before.
TFT is an array used to feed large displays (a mobile phone is already a large display).
Since phone displays are "large" either LCD or AMOLED need an active controller to maintain brightness in each pixel.
This is A BIG difference between OLED (PMOLED) and AMOLED.
As SharpnShiny mentioned mp3 players/walkmans (small displays) can use OLED which use much lesser power than AMOLED.
In OLED/AMOLED displays each pixel produces it's own light, which can be a good power saving if most of the image is black or dark, because, in black the pixel just doesn't light up.
In LCD there's permanently (monitor ON) a "backlight". Even if the image is black! What the display does is block the backlight when it needs black.
About power consumption in either cases... I don't think there's a really noticeable difference because it depends a lot on the usage!
UPDATE: Sometimes the best way to save battery is to tweak several settings (including the Kernel) as the display brightness levels and thresholds.

dreis911 said:
I'm sorry for breakin' in this late, but... I hope to help in the future decisions.
We're mixing some things here:
LCD is a technology. AMOLED is another technology.
TFT is a sub technology that must be applied under one of the mentioned before.
TFT is an array used to feed large displays (a mobile phone is already a large display).
Since phone displays are "large" either LCD or AMOLED need an active controller to maintain brightness in each pixel.
This is A BIG difference between OLED (PMOLED) and AMOLED.
As SharpnShiny mentioned mp3 players/walkmans (small displays) can use OLED which use much lesser power than AMOLED.
In OLED/AMOLED displays each pixel produces it's own light, which can be a good power saving if most of the image is black or dark, because, in black the pixel just doesn't light up.
In LCD there's permanently (monitor ON) a "backlight". Even if the image is black! What the display does is block the backlight when it needs black.
About power consumption in either cases... I don't think there's a really noticeable difference because it depends a lot on the usage!
UPDATE: Sometimes the best way to save battery is to tweak several settings (including the Kernel) as the display brightness levels and thresholds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! That's what I intend to say. It seems many people misunderstanding about TFT.
TFT is not a panel technology in comparison with TN, MVA, IPS, PLS, AVS, AMOLED,....
1- Which technology gives the best color reproduction?
I know AMOLED sucks at this field.What about Super IPS n LED Backlit LCDs n TFTs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In other hand, Led-backlit is a similar case, it is a type of backlight, cause the LCD need the illumination. And there are 2 kind of LED, Edge and full-array. In mobile, almost is edge-led because of low cost and thickness. Full-array Led backlit only appear in several high-end TV models. The older tech is CCFL, which consumes more power
It means that a new LCD display which uses IPS panel also include a TFT layer and an edgeLed-backlit.
Sorry if any typo mistake. My bad English

Does anyone here know much about SAMOLED? I read in a phone review that it's more a marketing term than actual performance difference over AMOLED, but I'd prefer to double check that. For anyone who hasn't seen that term, the S is for Super (don't laugh yet!). I think the Motorola RAZR i and the Samsung Galaxy S III Mini are using SAMOLEDs.
I've been comparing my new and old phone screens when considering this thread. I have to say I prefer the TFT LCD screen more than anything. Even with a lower resolution, the images (video and static) is beautiful to me. My RAZR i has a higher resolution but a pentile matrix SAMOLED. It reminds me of phones 5 years ago, the matrix gives the impression of cheap pixel displays in my opinion - but I keep reading it's amongst the most battery-saving screens in the mainstream smartphone market and for that I am greatful.

I get noticeable battery drain difference by turning down the brightness on my AMOLED screen.
Decreased brightness also extends the life of the display.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app

good work
SharpnShiny said:
Does anyone here know much about SAMOLED? I read in a phone review that it's more a marketing term than actual performance difference over AMOLED, but I'd prefer to double check that. For anyone who hasn't seen that term, the S is for Super (don't laugh yet!). I think the Motorola RAZR i and the Samsung Galaxy S III Mini are using SAMOLEDs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. SAMOLED is the Super AMOLED from Samsung.
I wouldn't dare to say that it's just a marketing stuff... Because it's a little about "sub-pixels" and their layout. I would say thay the AMOLED technology is there with Samsung's engineering so that picture could get better.
Pennycake said:
I get noticeable battery drain difference by turning down the brightness on my AMOLED screen.
Decreased brightness also extends the life of the display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I meant in my last post, under the UPDATE statement. Also try to tweak your phone's clock (if you haven't done it yet).
Mine (a poor 600MHz ZTE Blade) is working from 245MHz to about 650MHz depending on the load (from underclock to overclock).

Do you like the One S display?

I just want to know if you satisfied with the One S pentile matrix screen. I have a Sam S2 and recently bought a One S (S3 chipset) and i noticed the lcd is very pixelated (if its a real word, sry for my English) compared with the S2's screen. Its not too bad but noticeable and a bit disappointing. How you live with this?

gszabi said:
I just want to know if you satisfied with the One S pentile matrix screen. I have a Sam S2 and recently bought a One S (S3 chipset) and i noticed the lcd is very pixelated (if its a real word, sry for my English) compared with the S2's screen. Its not too bad but noticeable and a bit disappointing. How you live with this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By not being incredibly picky. The phone wasn't cheap, so before I signed a contract, I made sure I was happy with every aspect of the phone. While I do agree it's pixelated, and that my Sensation had slightly better quality, I am incredibly happy with the screen. I'm rarely centimeters away from the screen so I can live with it especially because the color reproduction is amazing.

gszabi said:
I just want to know if you satisfied with the One S pentile matrix screen. I have a Sam S2 and recently bought a One S (S3 chipset) and i noticed the lcd is very pixelated (if its a real word, sry for my English) compared with the S2's screen. Its not too bad but noticeable and a bit disappointing. How you live with this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you just get used to it after a while. I couldn't stand the screen when I first got the phone, It stopped me using it regularly because I just used to get annoyed at the screen! (sad I know) But now I don't even think about the screen because I'm so used to it. I came from the Desire S which had a S-LCD display and a 480x800 display so that was a very good screen considering it was only 3.7 inches! I found the amoled colours of the one s to be extremely saturated. I didn't like the yellowish/blueish whites and the fact that every time you slightly changed the angle of the screen the colours would turn slightly blue. Text looked pixelated especially on a white background, that doesn't help considering a key part of sense 4 settings is all white background. It took me a good month to get used to the screen and 3 months in, I'm used to it Possibly getting the Nexus 4 soon so doubt I'll have much longer with this phone anyway.

Sorry for the little off topic might pickup a one s didn't want to start a new thread...
I saw the one s at my local fido store and damn its so snappy even whit sense !! But i tried the one x and it was somewhat slower is this normal ? Flicking through homescreens just werent the same..
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium

I did notice it some when I first got it, but I really don't anymore at all, and like was said above, I'm never close enough to my display to really notice it. I think the screen is incredible, as is every other aspect of the phone. I LOVE my One S.

I thought it would annoy me, but the phone was free so I decided to bite the bullet. I've had the phone 6 months now, and I really don't notice it at this point.

I love the one S display, sure the screen isn't as sharp as the GN, GS 3 and one X etc. and you don't get as much screen real estate but everything else is just as good, if not better:
- one of the best screens in sun light, don't even have to put my screen above 70% brightness in direct sun light in order to be able to make stuff out easily and this is on a darkish background too, MUCH better than the GN and GS 2 in this area
- colour reproduction is superb, my screen is pretty much perfect, whites are super white, brighter white than my dell u2311h, iirc a review site stated that the screen is better calibrated than the GS 3 SAMOLED screen
- no tinting at all on mine, usually with AMOLED screens you get a blue or yellow tint, which is noticeable at angles on whites but not on mine (this varies with every single screen though)
- of course blacks are black and the viewing angles are superb
- high contrast ratio etc. so games and videos look great
I only notice the pentile when looking at white text on black backgrounds and a few icons, but only when I really look for it and have my face pretty close to the screen. I find the one S screen to be sharper overall compared to the GS 2 screen.
I have had the one S beside the GS 2, GN and GS 3 and personally I didn't like the GS 2 screen at all, res. is too low so things are huge (felt like an old man using a phone designed for people with poor eye sight ), colours are far too saturated/warm. The GN screen is nice and sharp but the colours aren't saturated enough, rather dull over all and plus both phones are poor in comparison to the S for view ability in the sunshine. The GS 3 screen is great, better than the GN, however, I think the one S screen looks better for colours.
Anandtech more or less summed up my thoughts:
What’s different, however, is how well HTC has controlled the color temperature and gamma compared to Motorola in the RAZR. As shown in the HCFR galleries below, gamma is pretty close to 2.2 until you get to the high end, and color temperature is pretty close to 6500K, except at the two darkest grey points. This is so much better than any other OEM calibration of an AMOLED panel I’ve taken a look at, which is rather humorous because the panel is undoubtably Samsung’s. HTC is also letting the panel go pretty bright, up past 350 nits, instead of clamping it way down around 200 (I’m looking at you, Galaxy Nexus) to save power. I also haven’t noticed blacks not being totally off on the One S like I have with some others. Of course, colors are still massively oversaturated if your source color space is sRGB.
I’ve griped about PenTile RGBG before on this panel and other SAMOLED displays, but I find the One S to be completely enjoyable in spite of having it thanks to two things. First, how well HTC has controlled the panel (no awful hues, weird white points, or dramatic shifts as you change brightness) - this is basically the best I’ve seen this particular panel, and until SGS3, the best I’ve seen AMOLED in general. Second, because HTC doesn’t appear to be applying any processing that applies sharpening (like Samsung’s mDNIe) to text.
How you feel about PenTile really is the final factor: it’s there, but I’ve slowly become accustomed to it after staring at it for so long. If you go back to the Nexus S days, I was one of the most outspoken critics because of how large those subpixels were. With small enough subpixels (below visual acuity), PenTile starts to make sense. In other news, HTC moving back to Samsung AMOLED for phones is an interesting move after supply issues forced HTC to SLCD with some earlier phones, here on the HTC One S however, it looks great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5868/htc-one-s-review-international-and-tmobile/6

My solution: Get old. You probably can't see all the minute issues you guys think matter, and you don't really care if you do. Every phone I've ever had has had a better screen than the previous and I think that's pretty nice.

I hate the screen, drives me nuts. I found that using a theme that mostly uses blacks and whites makes it more bearable though.

mbh87 said:
I hate the screen, drives me nuts. I found that using a theme that mostly uses blacks and whites makes it more bearable though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have to agree. Thing is apart from the screen it's a fantastic phone. It's so fast, battery life is great and the camera is great. I don't even think the screen would be that bad if it wasn't pentile it's just the fact that it's a pentile display it makes the phone look way more pixelated than it should be

I think I need to go to specsavers, I've never noticed a problem with the screen.

The screen on this is amazing. Don't notice any pixellation whilst on it . It's quite an improvement over my old Wildfires QVGA 3.5 inch 240x320 TFT display.
Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk 2

If you switched from Wildfire you cant see this but if you had any phone in the alike pixel density and resolution you can see the difference. According to others opinion its not bad, the perfect color saturation, contrast etc will eliminate the bad feeling about those subpixels.

HTC does calibrate their screens nicely

I suppose it depends on what you're used to. When you come from an iPhone or high-end LCD-screen you probably will get annoyed with this display. However, when this is your first touchscreen smartphone or when you had a smartphone with a low-end display before this one, you will probably be able to cope with the slight pixilation.
Personally, even with this being my first touchscreen smartphone and coming from an E72 with a PPI of about 170, the display of this device would be the only reason for me to buy a One X or Nexus 4. That being said; you don't buy a smartphone solely for its display, you buy it for the complete package (price, battery, design, display, size, cpu/gpu, storage, support, OS, cloud integration etc.). And for me, the package the One S offers is more compelling than that of most other smartphones one the market.

I compared the One S screen to that of my Galaxy Nexus and honestly, when it comes to clarity, there isn't much of a difference. If you are in your twenties with near perfect eyesight and able to hold the phone less than a foot from your face then you will probably see pixelation but at normal distances it isn't an issue. For me it seems that anything above 250ppi is fine - my original Galaxy S was less (I think 233ppi) and that display was pixelated to me, but then again it was an earlier generation screen, I'm sure there have been other refinements besides resolution since then.

One S 256 PPI
Sam Galaxy S2 217 PPI but looks sharper.
Its all about the pixel placement, pentile matrix is a pattern. This matrix gives us better colors because more subpixels. Google for it there are many info i cant explain it in english

I come from an LG Optimus 2x, 4'' ips display, 800x480, and I feel this display better IMHO.
Sent from my HTC One S using xda app-developers app

gszabi said:
One S 256 PPI
Sam Galaxy S2 217 PPI but looks sharper.
Its all about the pixel placement, pentile matrix is a pattern. This matrix gives us better colors because more subpixels. Google for it there are many info i cant explain it in english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I said Galaxy S, not S2.
Yes the S2 was/is superior despite the lower resolution thanks to the RGB arrangement (not pentile). The original Galaxy S was pentile, and not that great by today's standards.

It's okay, but I'm actually kind of unsatisfied with the blacks. I thought it would be completely black, but when I have a black picture shown on the phone in a completely dark room, the screen still lights up
Sent from my HTC One S using xda app-developers app

CNET: Full HD Super AMOLED more accurate than Super LCD 3

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-6452_7-57587774/screens-test-htc-one-vs-samsung-galaxy-s4/
They compare the LCD technology and the AMOLED technology from the HTC One and the Samsung Galaxy S4 respectively. They determined that color accuracy, image detail, contrast and blacks to be superior in the Galaxy flagship, while giving brightness and outdoor legibility in direct light to its competitor. The iPhone 5 is considered best in class for handheld mobile LCD technology when it comes to color reproduction, due to better screen calibration on a smaller panel.
This comparison finding is further supported by the reputable business "DisplayMate" conducting comparison tests on the iPhone 5 and Galaxy S4 only to determine that they're on par.

megagodx said:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-6452_7-57587774/screens-test-htc-one-vs-samsung-galaxy-s4/
They compare the LCD technology and the AMOLED technology from the HTC One and the Samsung Galaxy S4 respectively. They determined that color accuracy, image detail, contrast and blacks to be superior in the Galaxy flagship, while giving brightness and outdoor legibility in direct light to its competitor. The iPhone 5 is considered best in class for handheld mobile LCD technology when it comes to color reproduction, due to better screen calibration on a smaller panel.
This comparison finding is further supported by the reputable business "DisplayMate" conducting comparison tests on the iPhone 5 and Galaxy S4 only to determine that they're on par.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"When you deselect the Adapt Display check box you can select from Dynamic, Standard, Professional Photo, or Movie. We measured them all, and Movie delivered the most accurate color. Its saturation error in particular is much lower than that of the other modes. Movie mode's advantage over the others isn't as strong as it was on the Note 2, however."
Movie is the best mode? Movie mode looks washed out, poor and boring close to Dynamic or Adapt Display.
I don't give a damn about synthetic color accuracy. That only makes sense if you are a professional that works with imaging and you NEED color accuracy. I don't care about that, since I don't work with that. I'm just a regular user that wants to enjoy my cell phone and I want rich, vivid images with images exploding with exaggerated color, because that's what makes me feel like having a great screen, and that´s what people tell me when they see my screen and say "wow, look at those colors".
I always thought that Galaxy S screens look much better then iPhone screens, and one of the reasons for that is the natural color boosting AMOLED screens do. Sure, they are not "accurate", but they look great. Accurate = boring. Vivid colors = awesome.

Yea. I switched to Movie Mode on my N2 and it looked horrible and faded.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using xda app-developers app

I much prefer saturated/richer colors, but I did wonder about color accuracy since reading other blogs/reviews/posts people have said the S4 is much less accurate than the HTC One/iPhone with regards to accuracy. I guess this sort of counterpoints those claims.

I am glad that we can chose what we want so... that's really good.
There is mode for everyone and it's great to be able to chose and have more options.

The point is. We all know OLED is not as color accurate as LCD. OLED boosts rich vivid colors that, although unaccurate, look awesome. Not to mention the perfect dark pitch and virtually infinite contrast ratio (unlike color accuracy, elevated contrast ratio is equally impressive both in theory and in practice).
Buying a OLED phone and trying to make it look like an LCD phone makes no sense to me. If I want a LCD-looking screen with LCD color accuracy, I´ll just buy an LCD phone.

^ Are you buying a phone based on the screen?
Point is that Amoled can be great on it's own but also can be good where LCDs are better and improve from generation to generation.

Suchomimus said:
I much prefer saturated/richer colors, but I did wonder about color accuracy since reading other blogs/reviews/posts people have said the S4 is much less accurate than the HTC One/iPhone with regards to accuracy. I guess this sort of counterpoints those claims.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blogs, pundits of tech sites and such aren't usually knowledgeable when it comes to all factors of determining a good display. I find that they more often than not base their knowledge off of general propaganda. Or they don't have the right type of technology to conduct an invasive and accurate test for gauging the quality of a display in comparison to another.
All the information supplemented in the OP comes from sources that work in the business as screen calibrate technicians; DisplayMate (http://displaymate.com/Galaxy_S4_ShootOut_1.htm) is among the most reputable you'll ever find when it comes to screen assessment, as they do calibration for a living and have the technology to properly asses. I'd rather take their word than some editorial pundit from PocketNow or Gizmodo.

I think they all have their pro's and con's, I suggest you choose what looks good with your eye's and not base on test results or peoples opinions.

richardbroder said:
The point is. We all know OLED is not as color accurate as LCD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OLEDs are perfectly capable to display absolute accurate colours and go beyond any other display technology in terms of output.
The problem is Samsung's presets accuracy and lack of education.
Sadly because the US variant of the S2 and S3 lacked the hardware for the display modes, that AMOLED got this asinine reputation.

http://www.phonearena.com/news/UL-certifies-the-4.99-FHD-display-on-the-Samsung-Galaxy-S4_id43874
According to UL, the screen on the Samsung Galaxy S4 offers one of the best color reproductions in the mobile industry with the broadest color gamut of up to 97% for the Adobe RGB color space. The screen is said to have one of the best contrast ratios and can be better seen under bright sunlight than the display on many of the phone's rivals.

*Emix* said:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/UL-certifies-the-4.99-FHD-display-on-the-Samsung-Galaxy-S4_id43874
According to UL, the screen on the Samsung Galaxy S4 offers one of the best color reproductions in the mobile industry with the broadest color gamut of up to 97% for the Adobe RGB color space. The screen is said to have one of the best contrast ratios and can be better seen under bright sunlight than the display on many of the phone's rivals.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking about linking that, too. AMOLED truly does seem like it's going to be the future for top-end displays. They really just have to improve energy efficiency with the panel, so it can push higher degrees of brightness, that should dethrone any practical advantageous aspect to an LCD. The panel from S III to S4 was a major leap forward in enhancement. Makes me eagerly curious to see what the Note III and moreover, the S5 will shape this technology into next.

I use Movie mode and find it the best for me beacause im not a big fan of saturated colors.

They just need to sort motion blur and burn in before they can get back to the top.
That article is all well and good, but doesn't take into account that side by side with a HTC One, the S4 screen is underwhelming in real world.
I have gone with Samsung since S2 as I loved that device to bits, but the screen on the S4 blew me away for all the wrong reasons, hence why I bought the HTC One.
Had to chime in as I love samsung phones, but feel they dropped the ball with this one. The S4 screen for me is not even as nice as the S3. I don't know why, maybe by trying to mimic LCD, they lost what was good about AMOLED in the first place. The "pop".

Why didn't Huawei use an AMOLED screen vs IPS?

It's kind of a head scratcher. I compared it with my 3T and is pretty noticeable as on the 3t the colors are better. Was it to keep cost down?

Screen on time is much better than amoled when viewing mostly white content such as web pages.
Amoled tends to over saturate colours, lcd is more subdued but also more natural looking.
Rgb matrix gives better sharpness than the pentile matrix typically used in amoled screens.
Possible issues securing sufficient quantities if amoled panels.
Mate 9 screen is also brighter.
My last three daily drivers were the Note 7, Oneplus 3 and s7. There's definite advantages to amoled but there's advantages to lcd as well. Personally I have no complaints, Huawei have used a very high quality ips panel, so I'd be surprised if cost was the main motivator.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

Exactly. People tend to hear AMOLED and think it's clear cut. It's not. Each tech has its own pros and cons.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using XDA Labs

I forgot to mention screen burn in - a problem that lcd panels don't face and which they still can't solve for amoled.
The screen on the Mate 9 is gorgeous, I've caught myself just staring at it a few times. Not once have I felt like it is a downgrade from the s7, and the s7 is a better panel than what the Oneplus has.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

hackdrag0n said:
Screen on time is much better than amoled when viewing mostly white content such as web pages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell that to LG. Their phones are LCD yet have terrible battery life. Yet my Pixel XL and Samsung phones have had much better battery life despite using AMOLED... so this is not necessarily true.
hackdrag0n said:
Amoled tends to over saturate colours, lcd is more subdued but also more natural looking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, color calibration/saturation has NOTHING to do with screen tech. The manufacturer sets the color calibration/target. The Mate 9 IS OVER SATURATED. Not as much as most AMOLED phones, but it is not calibrated to sRGB by ANY means. AMOLED phones have typically over saturated because AMOLED has had much higher color coverage capability, and it was a strong selling point. I dislike over saturated colors, but love AMOLED when it is set to a reasonable target (sRGB or Adobe RGB). Contrast is extremely important for image quality, ESPECIALLY in dark viewing conditions. Fast pixel response time is hugely important for a smartphone to maintain a "clean" looking display when scrolling. The Mate 9 LCD is one of the worst I've seen. It has bad ghosting and/or overshoot artifacting which makes the problem even worse.
hackdrag0n said:
Rgb matrix gives better sharpness than the pentile matrix typically used in amoled screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true. Maybe Samsung will bring back RGB for the S8. They used to have RGB AMOLED in older phones at one point, you know?
hackdrag0n said:
Mate 9 screen is also brighter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. Samsung panels have high brightness modes under sunlight and other bright light sources. I can trigger this mode whenever I want using root and a kernel. My Pixel XL is brighter than my Mate 9.
Governa said:
Exactly. People tend to hear AMOLED and think it's clear cut. It's not. Each tech has its own pros and cons.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is clear cut. AMOLED is superior. It's why I spent nearly $6,000 for TWO TV's in my house that are AMOLED. The quality is mind blowing on a large screen, and once you realize its benefits there, you will never want an LCD again... even on your smartphone. At least that's the case with me. It's also why Apple is going for AMOLED with the iPhone 8... because they know it's better.

No, it's your opinion that amoled is superior. It's not a hard fact.
I'm also not sure how your pixel can be brighter when review sites have it listed at under 400 nits and the Mate 9 is listed at over 600.
Actually, I'll rephrase that: if contrast ratio is the most important factor to you then yes amoled is a must. Other than that I still maintain that there are still areas where lcd has advantages.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

There are a lot of misconceptions about display technology.
As mentioned they each have advantages and disadvantages.
LCD has a very flat power consumption due to the fact that it's essentially white LEDs shining through color filters whereas AMOLED consist of individual pixels that combine to create color meaning that each LED will vary in consumption according to what is displayed meaning white requires all of them to shine at maximum to create white which is why AMOLED uses more power in that situation and no power when displaying pure black. LG has somewhat solved that on their TVs because they use 4 sub pixels: RGBW. They therefore create white separately and can save power that way.
AMOLED is only oversaturated because it is naturally a wide gamut display. When uncalibrated it will look oversaturated because all content is pretty much sRGB which is a limited color space. Many manufacturers including Huawei don't bother calibrating their displays for accuracy.
Huawei most likely used LCD for the regular Mate 9 because no decent 6" AMOLED was available which explains why the Pro variant has a 5.5" display.
LCD has poor latencies which is also why the regular 9 doesn't support Daydream. OLED displays naturally has low latencies which is why all Daydream compatible phones are AMOLED.
AMOLED is more prone to burn-in and is also prone to display degradation due to each sub pixel aging at varying rates.
LCD displays have higher peak brightness and is therefore more easy to see in sunlight. On the other hand, AMOLED have individually controlled brightness meaning pure blacks can be attained (turning off pixels completely) whereas LCD have edge lit displays with poor control resulting in light bleeding and above-zero blacks resulting in grey-ish blacks because there will always be some light shining through. So the contrast is much greater and only limited by peak brightness on the AMOLED display.
AMOLED doesn't have RGB but RG-BG sub pixels resulting in some odd problems including potentially green tint and reduced display quality and sharpness. Pentile sucks but the yields are better I guess and it does have some advantages such as decreased power consumption.
Finally, an often overlooked issue: many modern LCD displays use voltage controlled display brightness regulation where all AMOLED displays use PWM. Why is this important? PWM can cause eye strain and headaches. Especially due to the low frequency of 240 Hz that many AMOLED displays use. Your eyes won't necessarily notice the flickering but they can be irritated by it anyway.
PS. Typed this on my phone... Should have switched to laptop. What a pain to do this write-up.

↑ now THAT is a great post. Kudos.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using XDA Labs

hackdrag0n said:
No, it's your opinion that amoled is superior. It's not a hard fact.
I'm also not sure how your pixel can be brighter when review sites have it listed at under 400 nits and the Mate 9 is listed at over 600.
Actually, I'll rephrase that: if contrast ratio is the most important factor to you then yes amoled is a must. Other than that I still maintain that there are still areas where lcd has advantages.
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look at the world of TV's. As is sits, LG's OLED TV's are the pinnacle of displays. They are the absolute best. No question, no contest, every quality review site agrees, as do the owners (myself included). I said the Pixel is brighter because I have enabled the Samsung panel brightness boost mode via root and a custom kernel - it acts just like the sunlight brightness boost on the S7/S7E, except I can enable it whenever I want. It is just as bright, if not brighter, than the Mate 9. The only advantage LCD has today is higher peak brightness, and that is only true in TV's since they have much larger backlights. Cellphones, AMOLED is actually much better in terms of outdoor viewing as tested by GSM Arena, due to a combination of peak brightness and lower reflectivity. Other than the potential for burn-in/image retention, there is zero benefit to an LCD in a cell phone.
Trixanity said:
LG has somewhat solved that on their TVs because they use 4 sub pixels: RGBW. They therefore create white separately and can save power that way.
Huawei most likely used LCD for the regular Mate 9 because no decent 6" AMOLED was available which explains why the Pro variant has a 5.5" display.
AMOLED is more prone to burn-in and is also prone to display degradation due to each sub pixel aging at varying rates.
AMOLED doesn't have RGB but RG-BG sub pixels resulting in some odd problems including potentially green tint and reduced display quality and sharpness. Pentile sucks but the yields are better I guess and it does have some advantages such as decreased power consumption.
Finally, an often overlooked issue: many modern LCD displays use voltage controlled display brightness regulation where all AMOLED displays use PWM. Why is this important? PWM can cause eye strain and headaches. Especially due to the low frequency of 240 Hz that many AMOLED displays use. Your eyes won't necessarily notice the flickering but they can be irritated by it anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone who actually knows something about AMOLED too on XDA! It's like finding a unicorn... just a few things to add...
LG does add a 4th white subpixel in their TV's, but it's moreso to increase peak brightness and not really save power. When display white, there are actually 3 subpixels turned on (I believe it's red, blue, and white) so it's not making much difference there... but it is certainly brighter because ALL the subpixels are WHITE subpixels (red, blue, and green have color filters), so having a white subpixel without a color filter eliminates brightness loss on those subpixels.
It blows my mind that Huawei couldn't get a decent ~6" AMOLED panel. Motorola did it for the Nexus 6. And hell, Samsung made them a custom 6.6" AMOLED display for the Honor Note 8! Oh well... maybe Samsung wanted less competition against the S8.
I will say that AMOLED phone panels have had a nasty tendency to burn-in. I can't say how the 2016 panels perform in normal usage (store burn-in is not a fair baseline), but it seems to improve every year. Neither of my 2016 LG OLED TV's show any burn-in, and 1 of them has been used as a PC monitor its entire time. I have taken a few steps to mitigate it (I hide icons behind browser windows, have the task bar set to auto-hide, and turn the brightness down slightly), but nothing major and it is perfectly fine. Image retention and uneven wear on the display is often confused with burn-in. For instance, the nav bar on my Pixel XL is clearly visible if I go fullscreen on a gray background (the most obvious color for burn/IR tests), but that is mostly because the black pixels there just never get used... so they're actually brighter, ever so slightly, than the rest of the screen. By running a manual compensation cycle when I'm not using the phone (such as white noise, or inverted colors), it mostly fixes the issue. That is an acceptable trade-off to me, especially considering the fact that the nav bar is always there. My TV's run black-screen compensation cycles automatically every 8 hours or so (after shutdown), so this is the nature of the beast.
True about the RG-BG pentile garbage. But that's Samsung's doing since they have terrible yields with full RGB. They did make at least 1 phone years ago that had true RGB AMOLED, and they marketed that specific feature too, literally telling customers how much sharper RGB is compared to pentile! - funny how they went away from it. Probably why their OLED TV division failed as well, since RGB AMOLED is clearly impossible to produce good yields right now, especially at larger sizes. I am hoping that the S8 brings back RGB AMOLED in the mobile world... rumors say it will.
AMOLED phone panels certainly do use PWM, but LG OLED TV's do not use PWM.

Nitemare3219 said:
Look at the world of TV's. As is sits, LG's OLED TV's are the pinnacle of displays. They are the absolute best. No question, no contest, every quality review site agrees, as do the owners (myself included). I said the Pixel is brighter because I have enabled the Samsung panel brightness boost mode via root and a custom kernel - it acts just like the sunlight brightness boost on the S7/S7E, except I can enable it whenever I want. It is just as bright, if not brighter, than the Mate 9. The only advantage LCD has today is higher peak brightness, and that is only true in TV's since they have much larger backlights. Cellphones, AMOLED is actually much better in terms of outdoor viewing as tested by GSM Arena, due to a combination of peak brightness and lower reflectivity. Other than the potential for burn-in/image retention, there is zero benefit to an LCD in a cell phone.
Someone who actually knows something about AMOLED too on XDA! It's like finding a unicorn... just a few things to add...
LG does add a 4th white subpixel in their TV's, but it's moreso to increase peak brightness and not really save power. When display white, there are actually 3 subpixels turned on (I believe it's red, blue, and white) so it's not making much difference there... but it is certainly brighter because ALL the subpixels are WHITE subpixels (red, blue, and green have color filters), so having a white subpixel without a color filter eliminates brightness loss on those subpixels.
It blows my mind that Huawei couldn't get a decent ~6" AMOLED panel. Motorola did it for the Nexus 6. And hell, Samsung made them a custom 6.6" AMOLED display for the Honor Note 8! Oh well... maybe Samsung wanted less competition against the S8.
I will say that AMOLED phone panels have had a nasty tendency to burn-in. I can't say how the 2016 panels perform in normal usage (store burn-in is not a fair baseline), but it seems to improve every year. Neither of my 2016 LG OLED TV's show any burn-in, and 1 of them has been used as a PC monitor its entire time. I have taken a few steps to mitigate it (I hide icons behind browser windows, have the task bar set to auto-hide, and turn the brightness down slightly), but nothing major and it is perfectly fine. Image retention and uneven wear on the display is often confused with burn-in. For instance, the nav bar on my Pixel XL is clearly visible if I go fullscreen on a gray background (the most obvious color for burn/IR tests), but that is mostly because the black pixels there just never get used... so they're actually brighter, ever so slightly, than the rest of the screen. By running a manual compensation cycle when I'm not using the phone (such as white noise, or inverted colors), it mostly fixes the issue. That is an acceptable trade-off to me, especially considering the fact that the nav bar is always there. My TV's run black-screen compensation cycles automatically every 8 hours or so (after shutdown), so this is the nature of the beast.
True about the RG-BG pentile garbage. But that's Samsung's doing since they have terrible yields with full RGB. They did make at least 1 phone years ago that had true RGB AMOLED, and they marketed that specific feature too, literally telling customers how much sharper RGB is compared to pentile! - funny how they went away from it. Probably why their OLED TV division failed as well, since RGB AMOLED is clearly impossible to produce good yields right now, especially at larger sizes. I am hoping that the S8 brings back RGB AMOLED in the mobile world... rumors say it will.
AMOLED phone panels certainly do use PWM, but LG OLED TV's do not use PWM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the first time I've been called a unicorn. I like it.
Thanks for the correction on the LG OLED TVs. I was under the impression they used the W-pixel to both produce higher brightness and reduce the added power consumption from going full tilt on each of the other pixels. I did not know they used filters like that actually. I thought they used similar tech to Samsung but apparently not But that also explains why their yields are so different.
About Pentile: that phone was the Samsung Galaxy S2 (coincidentally my first Android phone) - released in 2011. I guess the yields weren't good enough and at the same time they wanted to increase screen density. Maybe it made the yields plummet and then pushing towards HD and full HD made it unfeasible. The S2 had a 800x480 resolution by the way.
I'm hoping the S8 can do away with both Pentile and PWM. Then I'd probably buy it instantly but that's wishful thinking.
PWM is apparently used to avoid hue shifts which I suspect might be because of the Pentile arrangement but I'm not sure. I've not seen measurements on the S2 but I've heard anecdotal evidence that it was actually not using PWM.
It might also explain why LG doesn't use it on their TVs; that they simply don't have that problem with hue shifts because their panels are so different. I wish LG would get back in the OLED display game for smaller screens including phones, tablets, laptops and monitors. It would be so awesome with some competition.
By the way, interesting note on the peak brightness. Can the brightness boost be maintained indefinitely or does it dim after a while? I know LG had a booster on their recent LCDs (of all things) and it dimmed shortly after. One thing I should note that the Mate 9 reaches up to 700 nits and that's not limited to auto brightness like Samsung's is meaning that you can manually boost it to that at all times. The Pixel XL only manages 400 in the same scenario but if you can boost the peak brightness through a mod and keep it there (perhaps even without auto brightness?) then that's impressive especially if goes over 700. I do believe 700 nits is about as bright as you'll get on a smartphone LCD. The only reason we even need it is because of sunlight. 700 nits would be blinding to my eyes in any other scenario
If only they could invent a display that could switch between being emissive and reflective with few drawbacks - that would solve a lot of problems.
Edit: forgot to address the Huawei panel. Whether Huawei could get a 6" panel for the phone or not is uncertain. I'm just guessing; I have no sources to back that up but it seems to be the case that they couldn't find a panel that suited their needs. They probably also had a good deal with JDI since they've used their panels for some years and AMOLED was only just about to become the expected standard. We've long seen LCD being used by most manufacturers - it's only in the recent year or two that it has spread to other brands than Samsung. I mean Apple, LG, HTC, Sony and Huawei have all been using LCD either exclusively or primarily. That's about to change in the coming years.
I'm thinking the AMOLED panels they could get weren't up to the standard they were looking for. The LCD panel they used was pretty damn good although poorly calibrated. Although now that I think of it the reason the Pro is is 5.5" might be more to do with the requirement for a curved display which limits their options quite a bit. Also, keep in mind a custom display is expensive so producing a phone on the scale of a Mate 9 would probably limit them to off-the-shelf components to avoid gutting their profit margins. I'm sure they could have gotten any display they wanted if they were willing to pay the price.
With that being said: there are probably many reasons not to go AMOLED for the regular Mate 9 and all we can do is guess what their reasons are.

Trixanity said:
About Pentile: that phone was the Samsung Galaxy S2 (coincidentally my first Android phone) - released in 2011. I guess the yields weren't good enough and at the same time they wanted to increase screen density. Maybe it made the yields plummet and then pushing towards HD and full HD made it unfeasible. The S2 had a 800x480 resolution by the way.
I'm hoping the S8 can do away with both PenTile and PWM. Then I'd probably buy it instantly but that's wishful thinking.
PWM is apparently used to avoid hue shifts which I suspect might be because of the Pentile arrangement but I'm not sure. I've not seen measurements on the S2 but I've heard anecdotal evidence that it was actually not using PWM.
It might also explain why LG doesn't use it on their TVs; that they simply don't have that problem with hue shifts because their panels are so different.
By the way, interesting note on the peak brightness. Can the brightness boost be maintained indefinitely or does it dim after a while? I know LG had a booster on their recent LCDs (of all things) and it dimmed shortly after. One thing I should note that the Mate 9 reaches up to 700 nits and that's not limited to auto brightness like Samsung's is meaning that you can manually boost it to that at all times. The Pixel XL only manages 400 in the same scenario but if you can boost the peak brightness through a mod and keep it there (perhaps even without auto brightness?) then that's impressive especially if goes over 700. I do believe 700 nits is about as bright as you'll get on a smartphone LCD. The only reason we even need it is because of sunlight. 700 nits would be blinding to my eyes in any other scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S2... man, long time ago. They probably only managed RGB because of the low resolution and/or realized then just how bad the yields were.
I've never noticed PWM, so it's no issue for me. I believe the color hue shifts when viewing at an angle is actually because the display is pentile. LG's OLED TV's have mind blowing viewing angles - it is essentially perfect no matter where you view from in terms of color, AND the brightness does not decrease either like on an LCD - forgot to mention that too! LCD panels get much dimmer if you view off-axis... OLED do not.
As far as I know, the Pixel can maintain the brightness boost indefinitely. I have used it for upwards of 20 minutes or so before. I can manually enable it via widget, or have it set to function automatically as well. I'm not sure I want to test long periods of time though... there could be a downside to it over time (perhaps why Samsung does not allow it to be user enabled). I know LG's phones in the past have quickly turned down their peak brightness due to heat issues. I wonder if the Mate 9 could suffer from the same problem eventually? Probably not seeing as how Apple manages to have displays that bright as well without issue. I think LG's mobile division is just really, really lacking right now. Hopefully they bring OLED to their phones again soon (they've used P-OLED a few times, and I experienced it in their Watch Urbane LTE 2nd edition smartwatch, and that was fantastic).

Nitemare3219 said:
The S2... man, long time ago. They probably only managed RGB because of the low resolution and/or realized then just how bad the yields were.
I've never noticed PWM, so it's no issue for me. I believe the color hue shifts when viewing at an angle is actually because the display is pentile. LG's OLED TV's have mind blowing viewing angles - it is essentially perfect no matter where you view from in terms of color, AND the brightness does not decrease either like on an LCD - forgot to mention that too! LCD panels get much dimmer if you view off-axis... OLED do not.
As far as I know, the Pixel can maintain the brightness boost indefinitely. I have used it for upwards of 20 minutes or so before. I can manually enable it via widget, or have it set to function automatically as well. I'm not sure I want to test long periods of time though... there could be a downside to it over time (perhaps why Samsung does not allow it to be user enabled). I know LG's phones in the past have quickly turned down their peak brightness due to heat issues. I wonder if the Mate 9 could suffer from the same problem eventually? Probably not seeing as how Apple manages to have displays that bright as well without issue. I think LG's mobile division is just really, really lacking right now. Hopefully they bring OLED to their phones again soon (they've used P-OLED a few times, and I experienced it in their Watch Urbane LTE 2nd edition smartwatch, and that was fantastic).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a heads up, I've added an edit to my previous post.
I wish I could afford an OLED TV One would be foolish not to pick up an LG OLED TV over any LCD display out there today (barring the price that is).
I don't think maintaining peak brightness is an issue unless you're standing out in direct sunlight all day with your phone. I mean you wouldn't switch to manual brightness and crank it up when you're inside. Most probably use auto brightness anyway and that means it won't be anywhere near the maximum unless you're outside. I'm sure it might reduce the lifespan of the LEDs or maybe increase the likelihood of a defect.
I was actually quite intrigued by LG's G Flex series (aka banana phone) which had a P-OLED display. It might be a bit gimmicky especially the 'self-healing' back cover but it looked different but it was plagued by poor sales and the second iteration was let down by the Snapdragon 810.
The G6 will have their new 18:9 (2:1 really) 5.7" LCD display. It will have 2880 x 1440 resolution. So not this time.

While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag. They can also suffer from burn in. Oled/amoled may be the technology of the future if they sort the niggling issues. Right now lcd still has merits. Quantum dot might bring lcd to the fore again though, time will tell
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

hackdrag0n said:
While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag. They can also suffer from burn in. Oled/amoled may be the technology of the future if they sort the niggling issues. Right now lcd still has merits. Quantum dot might bring lcd to the fore again though, time will tell
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt the input lag stems from the panel technology. Input lag is usually related to processing lag in the display controller and other IC. However they can achieve 1 ms response time and theoretically 100000 Hz refresh rate, so it has the potential to be the best gaming display technology ever.
As previously mentioned: what many consider burn-in is merely image retention which is very much reversible and it does continue to get better in that regard.

Trixanity said:
I doubt the input lag stems from the panel technology. Input lag is usually related to processing lag in the display controller and other IC. However they can achieve 1 ms response time and theoretically 100000 Hz refresh rate, so it has the potential to be the best gaming display technology ever.
As previously mentioned: what many consider burn-in is merely image retention which is very much reversible and it does continue to get better in that regard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well "burn-in" is actually the leds "burning" so there is no way to recover them.

Lodix said:
Well "burn-in" is actually the leds "burning" so there is no way to recover them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't really refute what I said. That's merely an explanation for what burn-in is. What I said is that many think image retention is burn-in when they're two different things (or more accurately you could say that the symptoms are the same but the prognosis is different especially if given the right medication - so to speak). Image retention is reversible as I said.

Trixanity said:
That doesn't really refute what I said. That's merely an explanation for what burn-in is. What I said is that many think image retention is burn-in when they're two different things (or more accurately you could say that the symptoms are the same but the prognosis is different especially if given the right medication - so to speak). Image retention is reversible as I said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the problem with oled panels is the burn-in, not the retention. Maybe this year they have manged to solve it someway since Apple is implementing it in their iPhones and people are very nitpicking with their devices.
PD: I am all over AMOLED panels, it is one of the reason why I got the 9 Pro.

I don't mind a quality 1080 panel. Huawei makes me rethink my love of AMOLED displays.
I personally don't see a major difference unless it's the newest Samsung flagship. Not a major change from my 6p or Nexus 6 but these weren't cream of the crop AMOLED displays.
I truly thought this would be the mate that got the qhd AMOLED especially after the honor note 8 that released not long before this one. Extremely happy with the LCD panel.
Last 2 LCD phones I used was LeEco s1 and lg v10. The s1 had a great LCD panel that look AMOLED. Lg v10 just looked washed out most of the time.

hackdrag0n said:
While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag. They can also suffer from burn in. Oled/amoled may be the technology of the future if they sort the niggling issues. Right now lcd still has merits. Quantum dot might bring lcd to the fore again though, time will tell
Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're wrong. In 2015, yes they were ****. I had an EG9600 and it had about 50ms of input lag. I have 2 2016 TV's now, a C6 and a B6. The B6 just got an update and it does 28ms of input lag at 4:2:2, but close to 70ms at 4:4:4. The C6 does 34ms of input lag at either setting (4:2:2, or 4:4:4). The lag is NOT noticeable at all, and part of this is because the pixels respond instantly to new frames (<.1ms) whereas IPS and VA can take MANY milliseconds to update the pixels - some panels take dozens of milliseconds for a full transition for some colors. OLED is the fastest refresh for a panel today. My C6 has hundreds of hours of PC use ONLY, and has ZERO burn in... NONE.
Lodix said:
But the problem with oled panels is the burn-in, not the retention. Maybe this year they have manged to solve it someway since Apple is implementing it in their iPhones and people are very nitpicking with their devices.
PD: I am all over AMOLED panels, it is one of the reason why I got the 9 Pro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is a lot of people mistake burn-in for image retention because they don't come back and check again later after viewing different content on the display for awhile. I will say that burn-in can be an issue for phones though, depending on how you use them/set them up. My friend's S5 has the keyboard ghosted/burned into the display. He must text a LOT or something. Blew my mind when I saw that.

hackdrag0n said:
While beautiful, oled tv's are **** for gaming due to the horrendous input lag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not in Gaming/PC Mode on the most recent models. On the 2017 OLED the input lag is 21ms in virtually all situations.
Trixanity said:
I wish I could afford an OLED TV One would be foolish not to pick up an LG OLED TV over any LCD display out there today (barring the price that is).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For pricing, you just have to wait until Black Friday for deals on the current year's models. That's the best time to buy a TV that will last you many years. Picked up the LG 65" C7P for $1900 last Fall. I wouldn't consider Samsung's QLED TV's over LG's RGBW OLED. However, there is the advantage of luminance. QLED have a higher luminance. Also keep in mind that although RGBW is not Pentile and doesn't suffer from inferior sub-resolution, you do lose color volume to an extent when using the higher levels of luminance (You'll be depending on the additional white sub-pixel). I'd say this is a fairly tertiary concern but could be important if you use the OLED in a bright living room. If using a dark room, there's absolutely no contest. Personally, I have the C7P in a living room and still completely satisfied. There's a reason why it's a champ on every review site. Oh and for reference, all the LG 2017 OLED have essentially the same panel irregardless of price.
Trixanity said:
About Pentile: that phone was the Samsung Galaxy S2 (coincidentally my first Android phone) - released in 2011. I guess the yields weren't good enough and at the same time they wanted to increase screen density. Maybe it made the yields plummet and then pushing towards HD and full HD made it unfeasible. The S2 had a 800x480 resolution by the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Samsung Galaxy Note II (2012) also had a Full RGB AMOLED Display (720P HD). That was the last time for phones. However, Samsung also still does Full RGB AMOLED for the larger 9.7" models in their premium lines of tablets (Galaxy Tab S2, Tab S3). Those have the same 4:3 resolution as the iPad (2048x1536). The 10.5" Galaxy Tab S has a 2560x1600 Full RGB AMOLED Display as well. I certainly hope Samsung turns away from Pentile sometime in the future, but I don't think they'll do so anytime soon for smartphones. However, there is some hope.

Is the OLED using Pentile or RGB subpixel?

Does anyone know? There is a big difference especially if the screen is bigger and the resolution is not quad HD. If you do not know how to tell them apart, just google pentile vs rgb
https://www.google.ca/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA789CA789&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=nX3HW_zyMuTH0PEPqb-uyAE&q=pentile+vs+rgb&oq=pentile+vs+rgb&gs_l=img.3..0j0i7i30k1.99779.100357.0.100738.2.2.0.0.0.0.68.109.2.2.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.2.108....0.NDFhIw5uI5c
EDIT: Answer found, Pentile display for Honor Note 10

Debatable. This is a big screen phone not the typical 5.5 inch ones back in the day. I still want to know if this is rgb or not. I have a mi max 3 and the screen is pretty good

It is almost sure pen tile. As I know, only tab s and tab s2 hase pure rgb matrix... I had and have both tabs. And had at least 15 different phones, also flagships between them,wirh pentile
Picture quality is night and day... You can never get that accuracy of colors in pen tile.

SmartPhonesFan said:
it is amoled .. from samsung ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone knows that from the spec sheet. I'm talking about the subpixel arrangement. RGB vs pentile diamond layout. It makes a difference on a big display

​
SmartPhonesFan said:
it is amoled .. from samsung ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SmartPhonesFan said:
i bet samsung has only one type of amoled .. or 2 amoled and super amoled .. so try google it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Before I made this thread I did that, no answer can be found. I'm trusting the owners of this phone on this site to help find the answer.

Answer found. Pentile display said by Frankie Tech. He says it in his video around the 8:17 mark. He said Honor 8X LCD is sharper than Honor Note 10

Hi,
Me, I have the device for a few hours, and I must say that I find the display really good.
I even tried to downgrade it to lower resolution and it still looks good with no real difference in sharpness. Now, I am almost 50 years old and so maybe my eyes are fooling me... so don't trust this too much. But I'm pretty sure that for "daily use" it is more the enough.
There's one thing that bothers me though : it is that slightly blueish tint it's getting when viewed at about 20°C vision angle. Not as bad as on earlier LG displays, but still there. Noticeable only on white backgrounds It's common "disease" for OLED/AMOLED displays.
Anyways, how can I say it's pentile or RGB ? The link provided explains the difference but doesn't say how to check does it ?
Regards.

NexusPenguin said:
Hi,
Me, I have the device for a few hours, and I must say that I find the display really good.
I even tried to downgrade it to lower resolution and it still looks good with no real difference in sharpness. Now, I am almost 50 years old and so maybe my eyes are fooling me... so don't trust this too much. But I'm pretty sure that for "daily use" it is more the enough.
There's one thing that bothers me though : it is that slightly blueish tint it's getting when viewed at about 20°C vision angle. Not as bad as on earlier LG displays, but still there. Noticeable only on white backgrounds It's common "disease" for OLED/AMOLED displays.
Anyways, how can I say it's pentile or RGB ? The link provided explains the difference but doesn't say how to check does it ?
Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's easy to tell by experience at looking at screens especially on a big screen even on a 5.5 inch screen I can tell the difference/ Oneplus owners have complained about their displays being not as sharp too because they use 1080p pentile displays now imagine this on an even bigger screen like the Honor Note10, 8X and 20X.
The one method to use is to drop bits of water on a screen displaying text and use a magnifying glass then you can examine the subpixel arrangement to determine if it's pentile or rgb. Smaller drops of water magnify the pixel more and largers drops magnify less
This is example is a RG/BW LCD which is also blurry. Notice how this display has the blue in a diamond pattern similar to a Pentile layout. This makes text and edges of icons and pictures and finer detail look blurry.
http://i.imgur.com/yS4djZz.jpg
A traditional RGB LCD has all the colors in a straight line
https://www.phonescoop.com/img/g/489_9cdf1622caf8656bee9d377123e7817f.jpg
I'm fine with pentile on a 2560x1440 or higher display but not on anything lower as it's noticeable
These are pictures of my mi max 3 6.9 inch lcd display. Rgb layout, red blue green all in a straight vertical line. One of the reasons why I picked the max 3 over the note 10 was the display sharpness and accurate color reproduction.