Related
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
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
cardinalryan said:
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sad to see you go but IMO Screen > Camera
I think the camera will be fixed with an update or mods, screen you are stuck with forever. I know the camera on this thing can be better, just wait for them to get the bugs worked out. Enjoy the S4, it DOES have a great camera
My disclaimer is I rarely take photos with my phone. My wife does a good job snapping great photos I just use it to capture something funny or cool when I am not around family.
I liked the screen too but a lot of original gs4 features were calling me (including customization of the physical phone with cases and replacement parts and internal software)
Sent from my SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
Camera seems great for me, a bit better than my Note 2. IMO a waterproof phone, better looking, better display, and more rugged is better than a slightly better camera on the regular S4.
I noticed a green tent sometimes. It must be a software issue.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using xda app-developers app
geoff5093 said:
Camera seems great for me, a bit better than my Note 2. IMO a waterproof phone, better looking, better display, and more rugged is better than a slightly better camera on the regular S4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is certainly a fair comment. For me though, the camera was just too weak...but holy crap the Active screen is exponentially better than the SAMOLED S4 screen...not even close.
mattpayne92 said:
I liked the screen too but a lot of original gs4 features were calling me (including customization of the physical phone with cases and replacement parts and internal software)
Sent from my SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cases will not show up if people don't let the companies know that they are wanted
cardinalryan said:
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wait to get the OBEX or Lifeproof case for your S4...as I will do...when I had both (The the S4A for a week before returning) I thought the screens were comparable with an edge to the S4.
planoman said:
Just wait to get the OBEX or Lifeproof case for your S4...as I will do...when I had both (The the S4A for a week before returning) I thought the screens were comparable with an edge to the S4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the person
Some people like their screens over saturated with deep blacks, some people like their screens natural with normal whites.
joshuadjohnson22 said:
Depends on the person
Some people like their screens over saturated with deep blacks, some people like their screens natural with normal whites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So true. I personally was sold on the S4A screen over the S4 screen when I was compairing them side by side, and it was ultimatly the reason I went with the S4A over the S4.
Kyuta Syuko said:
So true. I personally was sold on the S4A screen over the S4 screen when I was compairing them side by side, and it was ultimatly the reason I went with the S4A over the S4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the s4 active has a more 'natural' screen but its tft and the color reproduction is horrible. At least in movie mode the regular S4 can seem much more accurate and not bland
To each their own. I purchased the Active because I get wet and my Note 2 was on borrowed time. The better camera and screen on the active are a bonus.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537
I feel like most of the people prefer the actives screen. I compared both side by side and I actually prefer the bolder colors. Its all personal opinion
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
Yeah I love the active screen but hate the angles and just hate tft. The active is better from the start but the amoled on the normal s4 has more potential. A wide color gamut. Movie mode Is almost perfect. And this is coming from professional display reviewers. And if we get perseus kernel onto the 9505 variant it'll be even better.
But to be honest I have it on auto screen mode for some reason I love the colors too
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
jetlitheone said:
Yeah I love the active screen but hate the angles and just hate tft. The active is better from the start but the amoled on the normal s4 has more potential. A wide color gamut. Movie mode Is almost perfect. And this is coming from professional display reviewers. And if we get perseus kernel onto the 9505 variant it'll be even better.
But to be honest I have it on auto screen mode for some reason I love the colors too
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree the SAMOLED screen has more potential and if the S4 ever got a mod like Voodoo Color the user could probably get the screen looking just as good or maybe even better than the S4A screen.
TwoStroker37 said:
To each their own. I purchased the Active because I get wet and my Note 2 was on borrowed time. The better camera and screen on the active are a bonus.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In no way does the Active have a better camera than the original S4. I would venture to say that the camera on the Active is among the worst on a high end smartphone. It is plumb terrible.
cardinalryan said:
In no way does the Active have a better camera than the original S4. I would venture to say that the camera on the Active is among the worst on a high end smartphone. It is plumb terrible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine has taken great photos and mine has taken horrible photos.
The truth is they do need to update the camera to fix the bugs... after that I think it will be great... Of course not as good as the S4 but close
cardinalryan said:
Since I was an original proponent of the S4 Active's camera, I wanted to publicly admit that I was wrong. The camera on the S4 Active is, indeed, a deal breaker (at least for me).
It's not that it dropped from 13mp to 8mp...that, in and of itself, has no bearing on the performance, but the images produced by this camera are muddy and not pleasing at all. It is miles behind the original S4 or HTC One in the image department.
I went back to the original S4 which is fine, but I really miss the screen of the Active. It's just a choice each individual will have to decide for themselves, but I just can't understand why Samsung downgraded the camera so dramatically on the Active. It's a shame because, to me, everything else about the Active is awesome, most notably, the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used the S4 Active in store and the display seems to be a lot more accurate than the S4 (since it uses the TFT display). How was it's outdoor visibility?
Southernboyj said:
I used the S4 Active in store and the display seems to be a lot more accurate than the S4 (since it uses the TFT display). How was it's outdoor visibility?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The display isn't more accurate its just not exaggerated colors. But you can fix that in the regular s4
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
jetlitheone said:
Yeah I love the active screen but hate the angles and just hate tft. The active is better from the start but the amoled on the normal s4 has more potential. A wide color gamut. Movie mode Is almost perfect. And this is coming from professional display reviewers. And if we get perseus kernel onto the 9505 variant it'll be even better.
But to be honest I have it on auto screen mode for some reason I love the colors too
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its about 97% accurate to sRGB (which is industry standard) in Movie mode, versus 91% on iPhone 5, 83% on S4 Active, and 85% on HTC One. The AMOLED screen actually has a wider gamut than sRGB but it is not calibrated correctly. At its most vivid, it is capable of about 102% sRGB gamut, though it does suffer from some slight gamma issues as well due to AMOLED being totally off when displaying 'true' blacks.
I tested them all with a friend and his colorimetry gear with some standard calibration images, with Pantone, sRGB, and Rec709 standard materials as well as gray plates and focusing scales (attached). Feel free to compare to your HDTV/monitor of choice.
However, a 3% variation is negligible at best; most males (60-something percent) are partially colorblind anyways and really cant see the difference until its about 18% off. Women its closer to 1% have color issues, and with females comprising the majority of the population and about 1/3 of the S4 buyers, that means that roughly 75% of you could not tell the difference between a perfectly calibrates S4 and one that is 3%, 5%, or even 10% off.
That said, i have some 10 bit Marshall, JVC, and Sony calibrated field monitors that are closer to 78% sRGB, and i used them every day for work (we use scopes to verify anyways; cant trust your eyes), and even a VERY VERY nice, VERY expensive calibrated 10 bit IPS LED LCD field monitor that costs as much as some new cars that is only 94% accurate.
I rely on my eyes at work every day; i have incredibly sharp and perceptive vision, and i can comfortably say that 'Movie' mode is BETTER than most other screens you would watch movies/tv on, yes including your $1,000 HDTV or $300 PC monitor. I can easily see the pixels on the smaller, 720P GS3 screen, and make them out decently on the S4 as well, even 18" away from my face. The HTC one as well, but its closer to 14" away maximum. That is incredible for me.
TFT has bad viewing angles, very bad backlight passthrough transmission, and is based on old tech. IPS LED would have been a MUCH better choice, but Samsung doesnt do much in that field; TFT they have the tech and fab for. It was a poor choice IMO.
The HTC One screen or iPhone 5 screen is way better than that of the Active for viewing angles, and also much more saturated (One is oversaturated, iPhone 5 only slightly). But for contrast and viewing angles alone, Samsung SHOULD have gone IPS.
KEEP IN MIND...
Brightness, viewing angles, saturation, gamut, and contrast are quantifiable. These are what i base my statements on; what ive measured and what ive seen.
PERCEIVED color is not; thats your brain, mostly. Your eyes only collect raw data. I could show you correctly calibrated images under different lighting and you would swear the peoples faces were purple, green, etc, when in fact they are absolutely correct, and its your brain compensating.
As far as the S4A camera, i had read Samsung had a problem with supply on the 13MP units, and opted for the same part as the S III camera as it was available, and part numbers stack up (pinouts do not). The software camera app on the S4A may not be up to snuff in that case; the S III takes great shots for a camera phone; and if you look at S III, S4A, and S4 shots side by side with the same settings of the same objects under same lighting and other conditions, the S4A and S III are pretty damn close to identical if you check out scopes or histograms; the S4 with the 13MP camera has a slight edge.
I cant see the Perseus kernel doing much better; most of the issue with the S4 screen is gamma shift based off the PenTile display architecture; yes the S4 screen is RGBG, which is an RGB variant, but in practice calibrating it is WILDLY different from an RGB screen. If anyone gets a chance, take a look at the exact same picture (both the one i attached and also one of people) on a Motorola Atrix 4G with the RGBW (red green blue white) pixel layout; the Atrix has THE WORST COLORS I HAVE EVER SEEN, period. BUT, you could see that thing perfectly in the glare of the sun at any angle.
How well do you know your fifty shades of grey? Rate this thread to express how good the Huawei Nexus 6P's display contrast is. A higher rating indicates that black is true black, rather than a very dark gray.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Great contrast thanks to AMOLED
It gets backly black as if the screen was off exactly like other OLED displays I've used(S4, Note 4, S6)
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
AMOLED
/thread
Actually, in real world usage blacks are pretty poor/washed out, unless you're in a dark room. When the screen is off you can see the surface of the screen is much lighter than, say, Samsung AMOLED phones. It's more like greenish dark grey rather than black so even if the actual pixels are turned off, it doesn't look black. It's even worse than many LCDs. I have no idea how come no one has mentioned this in any reviews, or at least I've never seen it.
Jockson said:
Actually, in real world usage blacks are pretty poor/washed out, unless you're in a dark room. When the screen is off you can see the surface of the screen is much lighter than, say, Samsung AMOLED phones. It's more like greenish dark grey rather than black so even if the actual pixels are turned off, it doesn't look black. It's even worse than many LCDs. I have no idea how come no one has mentioned this in any reviews, or at least I've never seen it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ROFL are you hallucinating? My 6P's blacks are pitch black. The way I can tell... The edge of the screen, when black, is equal to the blacks on the top and bottom of the screen.
Eric214 said:
ROFL are you hallucinating? My 6P's blacks are pitch black. The way I can tell... The edge of the screen, when black, is equal to the blacks on the top and bottom of the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except that is not true. Take a look at the screen when it is turned off. The surrounding bezel is truly black but the screen itself is greenish gray, meaning blacks are not getting darker than that. Then look at a Samsung AMOLED phone and you'll see it's the other way around, it's the screen itself that is as black as it gets. Samsung obviously uses different filters/polarizers which result in much better blacks in anything other than total darkness. I just compared my 6P to an old Galaxy S2 and again, the S2 has much deeper blacks thanks to the actual surface being much darker. You only really get true pitch black when you're using the 6P in a dark room. Otherwise blacks are pretty much on par with your average LCD, which is a poor result for an AMOLED screen.
Jockson said:
Except that is not true. Take a look at the screen when it is turned off. The surrounding bezel is truly black but the screen itself is greenish gray, meaning blacks are not getting darker than that. Then look at a Samsung AMOLED phone and you'll see it's the other way around, it's the screen itself that is as black as it gets. Samsung obviously uses different filters/polarizers which result in much better blacks in anything other than total darkness. I just compared my 6P to an old Galaxy S2 and again, the S2 has much deeper blacks thanks to the actual surface being much darker. You only really get true pitch black when you're using the 6P in a dark room. Otherwise blacks are pretty much on par with your average LCD, which is a poor result for an AMOLED screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it's true on mine. Maybe your panel is different then mine. I just compared my 6P to my Note 4 and they look the same. Which makes sense since Huawei buys there panels from Samsung so they are the same panels. Only difference is Samsung panels get a few nits brighter.
Guess we can agree to disagree. Especially since you can get different quality panels from phone to phone. Just like that can happen on Samsung phones.
Oh and I forgot, there are no filters to make blacks, black as you don't filter light on Amoled screens. The pixel just doesn't receive power so the pixel is off, not filtered. What you are referring to is an LCD panel, not Amoled
Eric214 said:
Well, it's true on mine. Maybe your panel is different then mine. I just compared my 6P to my Note 4 and they look the same. Which makes sense since Huawei buys there panels from Samsung so they are the same panels. Only difference is Samsung panels get a few nits brighter.
Guess we can agree to disagree. Especially since you can get different quality panels from phone to phone. Just like that can happen on Samsung phones.
Oh and I forgot, there are no filters to make blacks, black as you don't filter light on Amoled screens. The pixel just doesn't receive power so the pixel is off, not filtered. What you are referring to is an LCD panel, not Amoled
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has nothing to do with pixels being off. Look here https://technology.ihs.com/509943/w...izer-technology-trend-of-amoled-use-polarizer
Remember the first Nexus, the Nexus One? It also had an amoled screen, with terrible blacks. How was that possible? Because the actual surface of the screen was so reflective, if there was even a little bit of ambient light reaching the screen it would completely wash it out. Whether the actual pixels emitted any light was irrelevant in any other conditions other than complete darkness.
There are no different panels being used on the 6P. Just take the phone out of a dark room and you'll see the screen is clearly not as black as the bezels when it's turned off. I have so far compared it to the following phones: Note 5, S6 edge, S4, S4 mini, S2. All of them have deeper blacks than the 6P due to their surface being darker. It may be a Samsung panel but it's not the same one as used by Samsung on their devices. Even Anandtech have mentioned it uses different lamination which actually provides slightly better viewing angles. What's strange is that the more off angle you go, the lighter the surface appears. Can be seen in this video comparing the 6P to the 5X http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXtDCBSKQV8&t=3m44s Obviously it's not as bad when looking head on but it's still pretty poor for an amoled screen.
Jockson said:
It has nothing to do with pixels being off. Look here https://technology.ihs.com/509943/w...izer-technology-trend-of-amoled-use-polarizer
Remember the first Nexus, the Nexus One? It also had an amoled screen, with terrible blacks. How was that possible? Because the actual surface of the screen was so reflective, if there was even a little bit of ambient light reaching the screen it would completely wash it out. Whether the actual pixels emitted any light was irrelevant in any other conditions other than complete darkness.
There are no different panels being used on the 6P. Just take the phone out of a dark room and you'll see the screen is clearly not as black as the bezels when it's turned off. I have so far compared it to the following phones: Note 5, S6 edge, S4, S4 mini, S2. All of them have deeper blacks than the 6P due to their surface being darker. It may be a Samsung panel but it's not the same one as used by Samsung on their devices. Even Anandtech have mentioned it uses different lamination which actually provides slightly better viewing angles. What's strange is that the more off angle you go, the lighter the surface appears. Can be seen in this video comparing the 6P to the 5X http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXtDCBSKQV8&t=3m44s Obviously it's not as bad when looking head on but it's still pretty poor for an amoled screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm sorry man mine is just black. Agree to disagree. Can't say any better then that. I'm moving on. If your not happy with the phone for that reason, sell it and get a Samsung.
Well, it was nice discussing with you but one may as well say "mine is pink, agree to disagree". It doesn't really mean anything as far as facts go.
I just took out my old Nexus 5 and surprise surprise, it absolutely kills the 6P when it comes to black depth in well lit conditions. The surface of the screen simply reflects way too much light.
Hahaha so many people here producing disinformations...
AMOLED, especiall Super, has 0.098% of light coming thru when fully black but on. That's the blackest as it gets.
6P, Note's, S6, S7. have the BEST SCREENS around. And by far.
Turn on sRGB mode in developer options if u want, a bit washed, but 100% accurate colors. What u see is what u get on print. But why would u use that, unless you're a professional photographer like me.
mihovil13 said:
AMOLED, especiall Super, has 0.098% of light coming thru when fully black but on. That's the blackest as it gets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Coming through what? Screen surface reflectiveness is what matters the most when it comes to black depth outdoors. LCDs have extremely high MEASURED black levels in comparison to AMOLED but you can't see that outside because of ambient light. Case in point, the 6P looks worse than most good LCDs outside. It's like when people claim plasma TVs have amazing blacks but forget to mention that is only true in low light conditions.
Jockson I understand and agree with you. The screen on the 6P has a lighter surface color than the black bezels above and below which is noticeable. It isn't a major detractor from the visual quality screen on, but I agree that in a bright setting, blacks don't get to be as black as could be. It isn't bad by any means, but unless you get a completely black unreflective layer it may not be easy to improve (or Samsung is hogging it all to themselves).
Either way, you're right though the quality of the screen is still really good on the 6P so, yea. Still like my 6P, even after using a HTC 10 with it for the past 6 months. Both great, but the 6P has me returning to it more, for now.
Finally someone understands what I'm talking about. I don't want to "sell this phone and buy a Samsung then". I already had the Note 5 and got rid of it for the 6P. Love this phone, love the screen as well in low light conditions. But this really caught me by surprise. I've switched to a full black theme and outside, it really shows how washed out it really is. On a cloudy day outside, blacks on the Note 5 look almost perfectly black and yet the 6P next to it looks horribly washed out and more like greenish grey. I knew it wouldn't compete with the Note 5 in direct sunlight but it's pretty disappointing that it loses out considerably in medium light conditions as well. And not only to the Note 5 but to the ancient S2 as well. The display surface just doesn't look like any Samsung amoled phone ever which is pretty strange.
Jockson said:
Well, it was nice discussing with you but one may as well say "mine is pink, agree to disagree". It doesn't really mean anything as far as facts go.
I just took out my old Nexus 5 and surprise surprise, it absolutely kills the 6P when it comes to black depth in well lit conditions. The surface of the screen simply reflects way too much light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this completely. It's pretty hard not to notice that there is a definite green/brown tint to the display in contrast to the surrounding black bezel when in good ambient light. I came from a Nexus 4 and I was immediately disappointed by this aspect of the 6P display. Since then I have reconciled this disappointment with the fact that the 6P is overall a fantastic phone with substantially better value than other premium phones.
I'm not 100% sure that it's much better on Samsung devices because Samsung goes out of its way to mask this issue by making the top and bottom bezels of their phones different (non-black) colors. I'll even go so far as to suggest that the curved display on the Edge was a gimmicky attempt to obscure this issue. This, among others, is an AMOLED problem and why Apple hasn't used them. Still love the 6P, especially now on Nougat.
You are absolutely right regarding Samsung making their bezels non black. Even on their black phones bezels are often very, very dark grey. But still, their screens do have far less reflective surface. I wasn't really sure myself was it such a big difference until I compared it side by side with the Note 5, S6 edge and S2. The 6P just looks green and very washed out in comparison.
People often forget it's the perception of contrast that matters, not the absolute measured black level. LCD often gets criticized for poor contrast but visually it has deeper blacks than plasma and CRT do, except in low ambient light. Same story with the 6P. Great blacks when there isn't much light around, otherwise pretty poor and washed out.
Jockson said:
You are absolutely right regarding Samsung making their bezels non black. Even on their black phones bezels are often very, very dark grey. But still, their screens do have far less reflective surface. I wasn't really sure myself was it such a big difference until I compared it side by side with the Note 5, S6 edge and S2. The 6P just looks green and very washed out in comparison.
People often forget it's the perception of contrast that matters, not the absolute measured black level. LCD often gets criticized for poor contrast but visually it has deeper blacks than plasma and CRT do, except in low ambient light. Same story with the 6P. Great blacks when there isn't much light around, otherwise pretty poor and washed out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well yes if the screen is off and you're in sunlight, you can see the difference from the bezel. That's normal for every phone. I rarely use my phone in direct sunlight. I'm talking about normal use and when the screen is on, I can not tell the difference if say the status bar is black and the edge/top/bottom of the bezel. So if you're just talking about screen off and in bright light/sunlight.... that's every phone basically. But I don't stare at my phone and worry about how dark the screen is when it's off.
Eric214 said:
ROFL are you hallucinating? My 6P's blacks are pitch black. The way I can tell... The edge of the screen, when black, is equal to the blacks on the top and bottom of the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true. I usually root to get the tinted navigation bar but this time i didn't root to get that because the blacks are usually same as the bezel of the phone which looks damn good.
Eric214 said:
Well yes if the screen is off and you're in sunlight, you can see the difference from the bezel. That's normal for every phone. I rarely use my phone in direct sunlight. I'm talking about normal use and when the screen is on, I can not tell the difference if say the status bar is black and the edge/top/bottom of the bezel. So if you're just talking about screen off and in bright light/sunlight.... that's every phone basically. But I don't stare at my phone and worry about how dark the screen is when it's off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How dark the screen is when it is turned off IS what the blacks actually look like. It can't look any darker than that, the screen doesn't emit the "black" color When there is bright content on the screen it just tricks your eyes/brain into thinking black areas are darker than they really are but in reality, contrast is still pretty poor.
I'm not talking about direct sunlight either. Even in medium ambient light blacks wash out considerably. Certainly MUCH more than they do on Samsung AMOLED phones and most LCDs so no, not every phone is the same. The 6P display just isn't very good in this regard.
LG is falling behind in the smartphone display world. My Note7 is the best phone display I have ever had, by far, and that is no exaggeration. Yet here we are with another flagship release by LG who are using dated technology on the most important component of a phone - the display. IPS contrast sucks. Contrast is a huge deciding factor in image quality - perhaps the most important. Additionally, LCDs and IPS in particular have substantial pixel response motion blur over AMOLED. I HAD to return my HTC 10 because I couldn't stand using the display with how muddy it looked compared to the AMOLED on my 6P, even though HTC touted their display as having a fast response rate. Simple actions like pulling down the notification shade produced easily noticeable differences between the devices. LG is well aware of how great OLED is - they invest billions in their OLED TV division. I have spent $7,000 this year between their 65" and 55" OLED TVs, and they are mind-blowing. LG needs to either purchase Samsung display panels, or invest in their seriously lacking mobile division, because they're going to end up like HTC sooner or later at this rate.
I hope this IPS panel is at least an improvement. The contrast is likely no better than 2000:1, which is great for an IPS, but poor overall. I'm not stoked about the always-on-display in the ticker area either. It is far less useful than the G5's or Note7's - another step backwards. And at night, LCD always-on-displays also look like crap with tons of halo/light bleed. The lack of detailed performance specs at the launch event was disappointing. Using the SD 820 was a poor choice, and you could have easily thrown 6GB of RAM in there. And launching in a few weeks is idiotic as well. They could have capitalized on the Note7's recall and gotten their device out before the iPhone 7 if they wanted to. We'll be lucky to have it by October. There better be a decent promotion, because I am on the fence about buying this phone with its poor display, less than stellar battery (even if replaceable), lack of water resistance, and ugly UI. I must give credit where it is due, and that is the audio and camera capabilities are out of this world (except for the 5 MP front camera - WHY) - and I appreciate them destroying the competition in those VERY important areas., and keeping a removable battery with a premium and durable design. But this phone could have been the best of 2016 if they wanted it to be. This phone hardly has any advantage over the Axon 7 for far less cash.
In their defense, LG manufactures MANY flat panel TVs with excellent picture quality. I suspect their choices of phone screens are based upon energy consumption, cost effectiveness, and the plain ole theory that such a small size doesn't require an extravagantly engineered screen. Don't get me wrong, I love a super-amoled / OLED screen personally. When I compared the S7 vs my G5, I honestly was like....hmmmmmmmmmm, wish I had that screen though.. LOL
But from what I have read, the V20 screen is supposed to be far superior to that of the V10.
AMOLED has a major minus: screen burn, and the white turns muddy over time.
G Flex used to have AMOLED, but it turned out LG abandons it.
mingkee said:
AMOLED has a major minus: screen burn, and the white turns muddy over time.
G Flex used to have AMOLED, but it turned out LG abandons it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AMOLED doesn't burn in normal use conditions anymore - this isn't 2012. The white also does not turn "muddy" over time - whatever the hell that means. You're making stuff up. Sure, some panels have had white uniformity issues... but Samsung may be resolving that as my Note7 is literally perfect. There is no defense for LG here. They either were too cheap to invest in their mobile division's display panels, or they are behind in their mobile division... which is funny considering they make the best OLED TVs in the world. Basically the only OLED TVs.
I've had an OLED display with my Note 2, 3, and 4. I too had hoped that LG was going with OLED this time for the V20, since they do make OLED TVs, but instead looks like they are still using the same LCD that is on the V10. At least Samsung stepped up the OLED on the Note 7 to support HDR.
You're very unlikely to see any light bleed on a high quality IPS-screen. I've never seen light bleed on an iPhone for example, but I had really bad light bleed on my Nexus 5. I also have absolutely zero light bleed on my OnePlus One.
mekanismen said:
You're very unlikely to see any light bleed on a high quality IPS-screen. I've never seen light bleed on an iPhone for example, but I had really bad light bleed on my Nexus 5. I also have absolutely zero light bleed on my OnePlus One.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The v10 had significant light bleed from the second screen.
Nitemare3219 said:
AMOLED doesn't burn in normal use conditions anymore - this isn't 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you please explain further?
Don't all amoled screens burn in regardless of use because of it's organic components?
mekanismen said:
You're very unlikely to see any light bleed on a high quality IPS-screen. I've never seen light bleed on an iPhone for example, but I had really bad light bleed on my Nexus 5. I also have absolutely zero light bleed on my OnePlus One.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had a G4 and V10 both with terrible light bleed on a corner that I had to exchange. Also, IPS glow is a huge problem, and at night you don't get true blacks which is especially distracting with the second screen.
rivera02 said:
The v10 had significant light bleed from the second screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly.
Sharpshooterrr said:
Can you please explain further?
Don't all amoled screens burn in regardless of use because of it's organic components?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That isn't burn in. Burn in is permanent image retention and an actual ghost image always being on the display. You may be thinking of OLED wear over time, becoming less bright - but it takes a significant amount of time for this. Theoretically I suppose if you used an OLED display for several hundred thousand hours it could eventually get so dim that you wouldn't want to use it anymore. But you are never going to hit that amount of hours. You will have moved onto something else long before then.
Sharpshooterrr said:
Can you please explain further?
Don't all amoled screens burn in regardless of use because of it's organic components?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Galaxy S1 equivalent screen on my Samsung Epic was used 3 straight years as primary phone and didn't fade or burn-in.
I've read cliches' like this for years and mostly do not agree. The limitation I saw with using the older 2010 era Amoled screen was screen brightness in daylight. That's no longer an issue with newer Amoled panels since 2014 and always improving to the point Samsung Amoled panels exceed LCD panels in virtually every use category including brightness and efficiency.
Other users have experienced burn-in. My mother-in-law burned her S6 screen by charging phone and playing solitaire at same time. Not sure but I think fast charging was enabled. Heat combined with images that are continually displayed and not pixel shifted factor heavily with burn-in. So yes, it's possible but never happened to me. (Samsung does utilize pixel shift in the status bar to prevent burn-in. I'm unaware if pixel shift is used in third party applications like solitaire; her game used white cards on green background. Card images were retained and didn't respond to typical scrolling images to alleviate it.)
I don't use fast charging unless needed. Temperature can be bad on battery and display. I also try to avoid using my phone while in early stages of charging but my Note 4 does revert to slow charging when display is on.
IIRC, I read LG was transitioning to Amoled screens in late 2017. Apple is rumored to be switching to Amoled as well.
I've been known to squeeze 9 hours screen on time on my Note 4's stock 3220mah sized battery when mostly browsing on a single charge. Very much wanted the Note7 but locked bootloader kept me away before their battery became a headline exploding issue. Was also disappointed with edge only screen version and sealed battery. What an open for LG! I looked to LG to address shortcomings but lack of Amoled screen and locked bootloader prospect have me still looking and undecided for 2016 offerings thus far.
I may consider V20 if the bootloader was unlocked to allow TWRP and custom kernels. But I'd miss the Amoled screen. The battery door latch is cool though; I didn't want to lose removable battery feature and see little reason to trust Samsung's batteries to last 24 months without a letdown.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Nitemare3219 said:
LG is falling behind in the smartphone display world. My Note7 is the best phone display I have ever had, by far, and that is no exaggeration. Yet here we are with another flagship release by LG who are using dated technology on the most important component of a phone - the display. IPS contrast sucks. Contrast is a huge deciding factor in image quality - perhaps the most important. Additionally, LCDs and IPS in particular have substantial pixel response motion blur over AMOLED. I HAD to return my HTC 10 because I couldn't stand using the display with how muddy it looked compared to the AMOLED on my 6P, even though HTC touted their display as having a fast response rate. Simple actions like pulling down the notification shade produced easily noticeable differences between the devices. LG is well aware of how great OLED is - they invest billions in their OLED TV division. I have spent $7,000 this year between their 65" and 55" OLED TVs, and they are mind-blowing. LG needs to either purchase Samsung display panels, or invest in their seriously lacking mobile division, because they're going to end up like HTC sooner or later at this rate.
I hope this IPS panel is at least an improvement. The contrast is likely no better than 2000:1, which is great for an IPS, but poor overall. I'm not stoked about the always-on-display in the ticker area either. It is far less useful than the G5's or Note7's - another step backwards. And at night, LCD always-on-displays also look like crap with tons of halo/light bleed. The lack of detailed performance specs at the launch event was disappointing. Using the SD 820 was a poor choice, and you could have easily thrown 6GB of RAM in there. And launching in a few weeks is idiotic as well. They could have capitalized on the Note7's recall and gotten their device out before the iPhone 7 if they wanted to. We'll be lucky to have it by October. There better be a decent promotion, because I am on the fence about buying this phone with its poor display, less than stellar battery (even if replaceable), lack of water resistance, and ugly UI. I must give credit where it is due, and that is the audio and camera capabilities are out of this world (except for the 5 MP front camera - WHY) - and I appreciate them destroying the competition in those VERY important areas., and keeping a removable battery with a premium and durable design. But this phone could have been the best of 2016 if they wanted it to be. This phone hardly has any advantage over the Axon 7 for far less cash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would the v20 screen be less bright than the N7?
Nitemare3219 said:
AMOLED doesn't burn in normal use conditions anymore - this isn't 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it is 2016 and burn in at OLED displays still occurs and will occur. No matter how it's called (supertrooper amoled etc). At my SG7E, I got burn in after 10 days - I used Waze 2 hours every day; brightness at 50% etc. I've been told thay would replace a display as it was in warranty, but I decided to get money back (14 days period) and I will never go for OLED again.
ISP was what has me interested in this device, despite swearing LG off. I do not like OLED, mostly for the burn in issue. Yes, the technology has improved but burn in still exists.
Regarding the screen, I do have one question. It's touted as having a 5.7 inch screen but isn't part of that the second screen? If you can't shut off the second screen and use that space for displaying what's on the main screen, then the device has a 5.5 inch screen, not 5.7.
Should be the main screen that is 5.7 inches. That's how the v10 is. With the second screen it's closer to 5.9"
Sent from my awesome T-Mobile LG V10!
That's be nice. A competitive price and I could be swayed back to LG, provided they offer an unlocked model and do so reasonabley quick.
Sammae7 said:
ISP was what has me interested in this device, despite swearing LG off. I do not like OLED, mostly for the burn in issue. Yes, the technology has improved but burn in still exists.
Regarding the screen, I do have one question. It's touted as having a 5.7 inch screen but isn't part of that the second screen? If you can't shut off the second screen and use that space for displaying what's on the main screen, then the device has a 5.5 inch screen, not 5.7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The V10 an V20 really have one LCD. It is just partitioned into the main 5.7" display, and the top ticker display.
I'm glad that they decided on LCD instead of AMOLED. Despite what has been said in this thread, burn-in is still happening especially when on screen navigation buttons are used. That's why Samsung avoids them. Also uneven degradation happens fairly quick when the status bar is black, which is the case with many apps such as Chrome.
I for one am happy that LG using IPS instead of OLED because the majority of OLED screens flicker at 240hz, which causes eye problems I seem to have eye damage and cannot use OLED screens at all.
I wrote more info about this problem here
I have an amoled burn in in the top of my screen note 3 and 4
Technically it's brighter since the white isn't usually used, the rest of the screen lost a couple percent brightness
It's amoled ageing not burn in. I'm probably getting a v20 if it's rootable. Almost got a note 7 but can't stand no root, sealed battery and fires. I'll admit I'd rather have amoled but ips is ok. Kinda sucks on nexus 5, hope v20 is much better.
Nitemare3219 said:
LG is falling behind in the smartphone display world. My Note7 is the best phone display I have ever had, by far, and that is no exaggeration. Yet here we are with another flagship release by LG who are using dated technology on the most important component of a phone - the display. IPS contrast sucks. Contrast is a huge deciding factor in image quality - perhaps the most important. Additionally, LCDs and IPS in particular have substantial pixel response motion blur over AMOLED. I HAD to return my HTC 10 because I couldn't stand using the display with how muddy it looked compared to the AMOLED on my 6P, even though HTC touted their display as having a fast response rate. Simple actions like pulling down the notification shade produced easily noticeable differences between the devices. LG is well aware of how great OLED is - they invest billions in their OLED TV division. I have spent $7,000 this year between their 65" and 55" OLED TVs, and they are mind-blowing. LG needs to either purchase Samsung display panels, or invest in their seriously lacking mobile division, because they're going to end up like HTC sooner or later at this rate.
I hope this IPS panel is at least an improvement. The contrast is likely no better than 2000:1, which is great for an IPS, but poor overall. I'm not stoked about the always-on-display in the ticker area either. It is far less useful than the G5's or Note7's - another step backwards. And at night, LCD always-on-displays also look like crap with tons of halo/light bleed. The lack of detailed performance specs at the launch event was disappointing. Using the SD 820 was a poor choice, and you could have easily thrown 6GB of RAM in there. And launching in a few weeks is idiotic as well. They could have capitalized on the Note7's recall and gotten their device out before the iPhone 7 if they wanted to. We'll be lucky to have it by October. There better be a decent promotion, because I am on the fence about buying this phone with its poor display, less than stellar battery (even if replaceable), lack of water resistance, and ugly UI. I must give credit where it is due, and that is the audio and camera capabilities are out of this world (except for the 5 MP front camera - WHY) - and I appreciate them destroying the competition in those VERY important areas., and keeping a removable battery with a premium and durable design. But this phone could have been the best of 2016 if they wanted it to be. This phone hardly has any advantage over the Axon 7 for far less cash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Non-full rgb amoled's are garbage. IPS is superior. Nothing to see here.
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.