https://youtu.be/AQ85eJkupWk
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
xzpremium1976 said:
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't need a video to know the Xperia 1 will be one of the first to run out of battery lol
Mackay53 said:
Don't need a video to know the Xperia 1 will be one of the first to run out of battery lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically speaking it's not the first to run out of battery, it performed way beyond my expectations in this video since most other devices have 15-35% more battery juice. In fact I expected the difference to be much bigger.
Mackay53 said:
Don't need a video to know the Xperia 1 will be one of the first to run out of battery lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is to see what with only 3300 MAH and the best screen makes almost the same time as others with garbage screens low resolution and 4200 mah
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
xzpremium1976 said:
is to see what with only 3300 MAH and the best screen makes almost the same time as others with garbage screens low resolution and 4200 mah
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All screens had the same resolution during benchmark not to mention that the 4K resolution on the Xperia is rarely activated ( i doubt I'm noticing it when it does )... so screen resolution isn't really a criteria.
Xeon said:
All screens had the same resolution during benchmark not to mention that the 4K resolution on the Xperia is rarely activated ( i doubt I'm noticing it when it does )... so screen resolution isn't really a criteria.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Other are Amoled pentile low resolution poor in subpixels.
Oled Xperia 1 rescaled 1080 p to 4k
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
xzpremium1976 said:
Other are Amoled pentile low resolution poor in subpixels.
Oled Xperia 1 rescaled 1080 p to 4k
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
95% of the time it's 1080p. Battery is as expected compared to others due to size, nothing special
Mackay53 said:
95% of the time it's 1080p. Battery is as expected compared to others due to size, nothing special
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Xperia 1(3300 MAH) do 20 minutes less alone than the Huawei p30 pro(4200 MAH) with its processor and mid-range GPU and its low-end screen
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
Yes but why sonu just dont give us 4000 mah..nothing loss
xzpremium1976 said:
Xperia 1(3300 MAH) do 20 minutes less alone than the Huawei p30 pro(4200 MAH) with its processor and mid-range GPU and its low-end screen
Enviado desde mi G8141 mediante Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
P30 pro has a larger area screen. You can work out what that requires compared to a smaller one
SOC 855 is a better chip than the Kirin 980
SOC 855 has a better GPU than the Kirin 980
Xperia 1 is nothing special, gets the same as my mix 3 which has a similar sizes battery
---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 AM ----------
blegs said:
Yes but why sonu just dont give us 4000 mah..nothing loss
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably no room unless you want an even bigger phone, bigger bezels, bigger cost
Mackay53 said:
P30 pro has a larger area screen. You can work out what that requires compared to a smaller one
SOC 855 is a better chip than the Kirin 980
SOC 855 has a better GPU than the Kirin 980
Xperia 1 is nothing special, gets the same as my mix 3 which has a similar sizes battery
---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 AM ----------
Probably no room unless you want an even bigger phone, bigger bezels, bigger cost
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope anothe mamufacture can make it why not sony.
If u love sony dont always pretend they always right.
As a fans if there something wrong wr jave to tell sony about it.
blegs said:
Nope anothe mamufacture can make it why not sony.
If u love sony dont always pretend they always right.
As a fans if there something wrong wr jave to tell sony about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Sony is not the same as other manufacturers. Can't have it all so certain things are not included.
No need to tell Sony about the smaller battery. You either buy it based on what they offer or you don't buy it.
With my usual usage:
Xperia 1:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Mate 10 pro (previous phone):
Pretty big difference, I have the feel I Always need to charge my phone ( I never go under 20% and more than 80% charge to rpeserve the battery, worked great with the huawei). But since overall I like this Sony phone a lot, well, I'll just get used to it. But the Sony still drain a little more energy than the huawei, but they don't handle background app the same way.
Mackay53 said:
P30 pro has a larger area screen. You can work out what that requires compared to a smaller one
SOC 855 is a better chip than the Kirin 980
SOC 855 has a better GPU than the Kirin 980
Xperia 1 is nothing special, gets the same as my mix 3 which has a similar sizes battery
---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 AM ----------
Probably no room unless you want an even bigger phone, bigger bezels, bigger cost
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are quite wrong about size display, size display nothing to do with consumption but how many pixel size and ppi in display thats the matter..
if it was have 12 inch display if only showing 720p then it still low consumption display.
you also wrong about processor..
kirin is huawei own chips, it really well optimized to huawei and have low consumption power but bit less power than snapdragon in gpu term.
so technically huawei to be expected have lead the battery life but reality is not.
sony xperia 1 have to be expected lag behind due the character display always doing sharpness in video content which in tes it showing video too and smaller battery .. we dont know for sure if benchmark material also have hdr or not, 4k support or not..
if you are understand about software, you can see clear which phone in final have well optimized.
looks huawei mate 20x its well optimized better than p30 pro in more less same spec..
of course the worst on that video is iphone.., either processors too high consumption or just pooor battery management.
in the end the phone showing well optimized are sony xperia 1 and huawei mate 20x, and for well composition hardware is pixel. combined middle chipset and small-medium battery is great
if people still just focus on spec sheet paper, entirely they will tricked by marketing forever. like megapixel war, higher mp is great but not always great. there is about composition hardware.
---------- Post added at 09:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:12 AM ----------
Mackay53 said:
P30 pro has a larger area screen. You can work out what that requires compared to a smaller one
SOC 855 is a better chip than the Kirin 980
SOC 855 has a better GPU than the Kirin 980
Xperia 1 is nothing special, gets the same as my mix 3 which has a similar sizes battery
---------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 AM ----------
Probably no room unless you want an even bigger phone, bigger bezels, bigger cost
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hildr said:
With my usual usage:
Xperia 1:
Mate 10 pro (previous phone):
Pretty big difference, I have the feel I Always need to charge my phone ( I never go under 20% and more than 80% charge to rpeserve the battery, worked great with the huawei). But since overall I like this Sony phone a lot, well, I'll just get used to it. But the Sony still drain a little more energy than the huawei, but they don't handle background app the same way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be fair your comparison not quite fair..
yes i dont say xperia 1 will be winner here, of course huawei mate 10 also well optimized combined with bigger battery.
but in your comparison, applications was different.
look at your launcher, in xperia 1 you using 3rd party launcher thats absolutely will drain your phone vs stock huawei own launcher. im using xperia stock launcher and the consumption is very low
For the specs and screen type, it's a fair and decent battery life. Like i said, personally I'm getting 7-8 hours of SOT.
xerxess said:
you are quite wrong about size display, size display nothing to do with consumption but how many pixel size and ppi in display thats the matter..
if it was have 12 inch display if only showing 720p then it still low consumption display.
you also wrong about processor..
kirin is huawei own chips, it really well optimized to huawei and have low consumption power but bit less power than snapdragon in gpu term.
so technically huawei to be expected have lead the battery life but reality is not.
sony xperia 1 have to be expected lag behind due the character display always doing sharpness in video content which in tes it showing video too and smaller battery .. we dont know for sure if benchmark material also have hdr or not, 4k support or not..
if you are understand about software, you can see clear which phone in final have well optimized.
looks huawei mate 20x its well optimized better than p30 pro in more less same spec..
of course the worst on that video is iphone.., either processors too high consumption or just pooor battery management.
in the end the phone showing well optimized are sony xperia 1 and huawei mate 20x, and for well composition hardware is pixel. combined middle chipset and small-medium battery is great
if people still just focus on spec sheet paper, entirely they will tricked by marketing forever. like megapixel war, higher mp is great but not always great. there is about composition hardware.
---------- Post added at 09:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:12 AM ----------
to be fair your comparison not quite fair..
yes i dont say xperia 1 will be winner here, of course huawei mate 10 also well optimized combined with bigger battery.
but in your comparison, applications was different.
look at your launcher, in xperia 1 you using 3rd party launcher thats absolutely will drain your phone vs stock huawei own launcher. im using xperia stock launcher and the consumption is very low
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Research and official figures says otherwise.
All phones will have the same resolution so can't use PPI as an argument, all will have enough pixels on to support 1080p
Mackay53 said:
Research and official figures says otherwise.
All phones will have the same resolution so can't use PPI as an argument, all will have enough pixels on to support 1080p
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmmm got it i think you are right.. about that
xerxess said:
to be fair your comparison not quite fair..
yes i dont say xperia 1 will be winner here, of course huawei mate 10 also well optimized combined with bigger battery.
but in your comparison, applications was different.
look at your launcher, in xperia 1 you using 3rd party launcher thats absolutely will drain your phone vs stock huawei own launcher. im using xperia stock launcher and the consumption is very low
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used the same launcher on my mate 10 pro, same app were installed, just that between the charge and the Screenshot I did not use the same. My phone environment and usage didn't really change for 2 years I'm on Android now.
And what is important is the mean measure on 7 days.
But you are right that the screen off time is not camparable since now I'm listening to music over Bluetooth. The deep sleep mode and overal screen off time is far better on Xperia 1. But screen on time is low. It's fair because of the screen, being in Creator mode all the time doesn't help either. The battery is good considering what it does, but my charge frequency get highter comparing to the mate 10 pro. The fact the battery is smaller is not really an excuse, that's a design choice from sony, and shouldn't affect the usage.
If someone want a phone that can endure a long usage because they don't have access to power, there will be better phones, but again, considering the small battery, the crisp screen, the Creator mode that upscale and convert SDR content to HDR like, the phone does well, really well (the deep sleep mode is stellar, just check my comment on offscreen section). And it's still better than the Apple counter part.
Mackay53 said:
Research and official figures says otherwise.
All phones will have the same resolution so can't use PPI as an argument, all will have enough pixels on to support 1080p
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hildr said:
I used the same launcher on my mate 10 pro, same app were installed, just that between the charge and the Screenshot I did not use the same. My phone environment and usage didn't really change for 2 years I'm on Android now.
And what is important is the mean measure on 7 days.
But you are right that the screen off time is not camparable since now I'm listening to music over Bluetooth. The deep sleep mode and overal screen off time is far better on Xperia 1. But screen on time is low. It's fair because of the screen, being in Creator mode all the time doesn't help either. The battery is good considering what it does, but my charge frequency get highter comparing to the mate 10 pro. The fact the battery is smaller is not really an excuse, that's a design choice from sony, and shouldn't affect the usage.
If someone want a phone that can endure a long usage because they don't have access to power, there will be better phones, but again, considering the small battery, the crisp screen, the Creator mode that upscale and convert SDR content to HDR like, the phone does well, really well (the deep sleep mode is stellar, just check my comment on offscreen section). And it's still better than the Apple counter part.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes you are right, agree with you, your explanation is fair and people can understand it very well to make decision
xerxess said:
where you get it bro? will have same resolution so ppi cant use as matter? hah? i did read out there and still the matter...
seems you know very well, if you dont mind you can put one of your resource otherwise your argument not quite strong too..
as display produce quantity of pixel is different even in same size resolution (example full hd)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PPI doesn't matter in the video, think about it.
In the video is the content 4k? No it's not as the other phones won't support it. Everything would be in 1080p
Does 1080p use all all the pixels on the Xperia 1 needed for 4k? Of course not, it used enough pixels for 1080p
Does PPI matter when comparing 1080p to 1080p? Not really as it will be all similar.
Is the Xperia 1 always 4k? No of course not so not all the pixels will be used and will be switched off resulting in a lower used ppi
Related
I cannot decide between two latest LG phones. I currently own a note 2 and i am looking a phone with big nice screen but at the same time pocket/hand freindly nature
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Nexus 5 Screen : True HD IPS Plus 4.95 inches (~445 ppi pixel density)
LG G2 Screen: True HD-IPS LCD 5.2 inches (~424 ppi pixel density)
Nexus 5 Camera: 8 MP , 3264 x 2448 pixels, autofocus, optical image stabilization,HDR+, LED flash,video recording [email protected], 1.3 MP front facing camera
LG G2 camera: 13 MP, autofocus, optical image stabilization, LED flash, [email protected] video recording, HDR, stereo sound rec., video stabilization, 2.1 MP front facing camera with [email protected]
LG Android OS, v4.2.2 (Jelly Bean), Nexus ANdroid version: 4.4
Chipset, RAM and memory option is same
CPU/GPU of LG g2: Quad-core 2.26 GHz Krait 400, Adreno 330
CPU/GPU of Nexus 5: Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400,Adreno 330
Battery of LG G2: Non-removable Li-Po 3000 mAh battery
Battery of Nexus 5: Non-removable Li-Po 2300 mAh battery
It seem the only advantage of N5 over G2 is latest android version plus nice build quality or design while LG g2 has better camera, slightly bigger screen and better battery life. If price is same then what i should go for ?
Thank you
Rajaasim1980 said:
I cannot decide between two latest LG phones. I currently own a note 2 and i am looking a phone with big nice screen but at the same time pocket/hand freindly nature
Nexus 5 Screen : True HD IPS Plus 4.95 inches (~445 ppi pixel density)
LG G2 Screen: True HD-IPS LCD 5.2 inches (~424 ppi pixel density)
Nexus 5 Camera: 8 MP , 3264 x 2448 pixels, autofocus, optical image stabilization,HDR+, LED flash,video recording [email protected], 1.3 MP front facing camera
LG G2 camera: 13 MP, autofocus, optical image stabilization, LED flash, [email protected] video recording, HDR, stereo sound rec., video stabilization, 2.1 MP front facing camera with [email protected]
LG Android OS, v4.2.2 (Jelly Bean), Nexus ANdroid version: 4.4
Chipset, RAM and memory option is same
CPU/GPU of LG g2: Quad-core 2.26 GHz Krait 400, Adreno 330
CPU/GPU of Nexus 5: Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400,Adreno 330
Battery of LG G2: Non-removable Li-Po 3000 mAh battery
Battery of Nexus 5: Non-removable Li-Po 2300 mAh battery
It seem the only advantage of N5 over G2 is latest android version plus nice build quality or design while LG g2 has better camera, slightly bigger screen and better battery life. If price is same then what i should go for ?
Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nexus 5 is a slightly stripped down G2. So if price is the same, go for the G2..unless you must have pure Android.
I had a G2 for about a month, it was a great phone and the LG UI wasn't bad at all, I liked it better than TouchWiz and Sense.
Only reason I returned it was it had some major thermal throttling issues for me, couldn't play a graphic intensive game for more than 15-20 minutes before framerates starts dropping by half or more. Also the speaker on it was horrendous, almost comical how bad it was. Battery life was awesome but I attribute that to the specialty GRAM that it had (which the Nexus 5 doesn't) and also the big 3000mAh battery. So yeah, if you can get a G2 for the same price, it's a better spec'd device.
Dan37tz said:
The Nexus 5 is a slightly stripped down G2. So if price is the same, go for the G2..unless you must have pure Android.
I had a G2 for about a month, it was a great phone and the LG UI wasn't bad at all, I liked it better than TouchWiz and Sense.
Only reason I returned it was it had some major thermal throttling issues for me, couldn't play a graphic intensive game for more than 15-20 minutes before framerates starts dropping by half or more. Also the speaker on it was horrendous, almost comical how bad it was. Battery life was awesome but I attribute that to the specialty GRAM that it had (which the Nexus 5 doesn't) and also the big 3000mAh battery. So yeah, if you can get a G2 for the same price, it's a better spec'd device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for reply. May be your specific model was faulty if you had heat issues while playing games more than 20 minutes. These boht phones were built by LG so there should not be any quality difference..
I dont get this pure android thing. Can not we get same pure Google experience in Lg g2 by rooting and installing any custom AOSP/CM/AOKP ROM?
I have heard android 4.4 is more power efficient(less process and background services eating juice) than previous jelly bean versions so would it make any difference? Its strange how iphones give better battery life even when its only 1600mAh. Google should think about it. Either removable battery or non removable battery with at least 7-8 hours screen on time as we see in note series
I am actually getting Lg g2 cheaper on contract phones..Lg g2 is 26 pounds per month while nexus 5 is 27/28 pounds per month on 24 months contract
Rajaasim1980 said:
Its strange how iphones give better battery life even when its only 1600mAh. Google should think about it. Either removable battery or non removable battery with at least 7-8 hours screen on time as we see in note series
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Strange? surely not. My Nokia 6310 could go 2 weeks between charges, it had what, 1100mAh's?
The key to battery life in a phone comes down to two things;
1. Capacity of the battery
2. How much your phone does // thus, how much power your phone uses
Go figgure
Rajaasim1980 said:
Thanks for reply. May be your specific model was faulty if you had heat issues while playing games more than 20 minutes. These boht phones were built by LG so there should not be any quality difference..
I dont get this pure android thing. Can not we get same pure Google experience in Lg g2 by rooting and installing any custom AOSP/CM/AOKP ROM?
I have heard android 4.4 is more power efficient(less process and background services eating juice) than previous jelly bean versions so would it make any difference? Its strange how iphones give better battery life even when its only 1600mAh. Google should think about it. Either removable battery or non removable battery with at least 7-8 hours screen on time as we see in note series
I am actually getting Lg g2 cheaper on contract phones..Lg g2 is 26 pounds per month while nexus 5 is 27/28 pounds per month on 24 months contract
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
dannstarr said:
Strange? surely not. My Nokia 6310 could go 2 weeks between charges, it had what, 1100mAh's?
The key to battery life in a phone comes down to two things;
1. Capacity of the battery
2. How much your phone does // thus, how much power your phone uses
Go figgure
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think you got the point. did you?
I am not fans of apple but i was comparing ios battery with android(battery of two smart phones with different operating system )your nokia 6310 dont have display of iphone s or nexus 5 and same is true for surfing web and watching online videos, playing games etc lol
its mostly 3g and display, games which drain battery which old phones dont have it tahts why they stay longer even with less power
go figure it out my freind
Rajaasim1980 said:
I dont think you got the point. did you?
I am not fans of apple but i was comparing ios battery with android(battery of two smart phones with different operating system )your nokia 6310 dont have display of iphone s or nexus 5 and same is true for surfing web and watching online videos, playing games etc lol
its mostly 3g and display, games which drain battery which old phones dont have it tahts why they stay longer even with less power
go figure it out my freind
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, no, I did get your point, hence my reply.... it seems like it is you who has missed my point.
I didn't say you were a fan of apple. Whether you are, or are not is beside the point... it won't affect anyones battery life. I'm not bashing apple here, I'm a tech fan... that's all tech, regardless of who made it.
You know what is strange? How you explain this -------->
Rajaasim1980 said:
your nokia 6310 dont have display of iphone s or nexus 5 and same is true for surfing web and watching online videos, playing games etc lol
its mostly 3g and display, games which drain battery which old phones dont have it tahts why they stay longer even with less power
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And then go on to find it strange how
Rajaasim1980 said:
iphones give better battery life even when its only 1600mAh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now, I'm going to leave this one to you, seeing as you quite rightly understand
Rajaasim1980 said:
your nokia 6310 dont have display of iphone s or nexus 5 and same is true for surfing web and watching online videos, playing games etc lol
its mostly 3g and display, games which drain battery which old phones dont have it tahts why they stay longer even with less power
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, with your own reasoning, is it really that strange that a phone running iOS with a 1600mAh battery has a comparable run time to a phone running Android with a 2300Mah battery?
dannstarr said:
Oh, no, I did get your point, hence my reply.... it seems like it is you who has missed my point.
I didn't say you were a fan of apple. Whether you are, or are not is beside the point... it won't affect anyones battery life. I'm not bashing apple here, I'm a tech fan... that's all tech, regardless of who made it.
You know what is strange? How you explain this -------->
And then go on to find it strange how
Now, I'm going to leave this one to you, seeing as you quite rightly understand
So, with your own reasoning, is it really that strange that a phone running iOS with a 1600mAh battery has a comparable run time to a phone running Android with a 2300Mah battery?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
let me clarify it for you
My point was ios optimize hardware in such way that it use less power than android even when you do same tasks like when you play same graphics intensive games, surf 3g/4G/WiFi internet or watch online videos on HD display, talk time or any other multitasking . I was asking how 1600 mAh battery of iPhone give more time of surfing web, playing games on HD display as compare to android?
Your bringing nokia old phones was irrelevant here because they dont have HD display or 3d games or 3g internet e. It would make sense if you compare battery life of latest nokia lumia 1520 with latest devices of apple or android
Rajaasim1980 said:
let me clarify it for you
My point was ios optimize hardware in such way that it use less power than android even when you do same tasks like when you play same graphics intensive games, surf 3g/4G/WiFi internet or watch online videos on HD display, talk time or any other multitasking . I was asking how 1600 mAh battery of iPhone give more time of surfing web, playing games on HD display as compare to android?
Your bringing nokia old phones was irrelevant here because they dont have HD display or 3d games or 3g internet e. It would make sense if you compare battery life of latest nokia lumia 1520 with latest devices of apple or android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They dont optimise the hardware tho, do they... I can sit there browsing the web on an ios device, and the battery goes down just as fast as when i do the same from a comparable android device. That is because, when you actually use those things, the 3g, the screen etc they use power, no matter who's logo is placed on them. Lets talk about an ios device that uses an ips panel display, against an android with ips panel display. You think that just because one is used by apple that it somehow magically requires less power to run? no, no it doesn't.
Its when the phone is sat there, idle, that the iphone battery life will outshine android. You can leave an iphone untouched for days and the battery percentage hardly moves. That wont work with android.
Why? because when the phones are idle (screen off) android actually still has quite a bit to do... ios, not so much.
That is why my point about the 6310 is completely relevant... although yes, admittedly exaggerated... but i did that on purpose to help you see the point!
the 6310 easily goes 2 weeks without charging, right? the way you are talking, anyone would think that iphones go for days without being charged... fact is, android and ios users pretty much charge up their phones daily, and that has become an accepted norm
android and ios work differently, and have different power requirements. That isnt strange to me... it in fact, makes perfect sense... and my nokia 6310 shows that as a stunning example... it doesnt do anything like the amount of work that any android or ios device does, and lasts what 14 times as long, with a much smaller battery.
iphones are governed by the same basic physics principals that devices running android have to abide by, and there is certainly nothing magical or strange about their battery life
dannstarr said:
They dont optimise the hardware tho, do they... I can sit there browsing the web on an ios device, and the battery goes down just as fast as when i do the same from a comparable android device. That is because, when you actually use those things, the 3g, the screen etc they use power, no matter who's logo is placed on them. Lets talk about an ios device that uses an ips panel display, against an android with ips panel display. You think that just because one is used by apple that it somehow magically requires less power to run? no, no it doesn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea i think so because if you go and compare the battery life of iphone 5 and 5s with android phone of same specification but running with 1500/1560 mAh battery then you will see the difference. For example according to GSM arena Iphone 5s has only 1560 mAh battery but it give you 9.54 hours of web browsing while S4 has got 2600 mAh battery but it give you 7.24 hour of web browsing. How? Same is true is case of RAM because for iphone even 512MB or 1GB RAM will be enough and you will never face any lags because ios use less process and background services that drain battery as compare to android. I am not expert but its something which is common to notice. If you don't believe me then go read reviews and battery comparison and benchmark results
Rajaasim1980 said:
yea i think so because if you go and compare the battery life of iphone 5 and 5s with android phone of same specification but running with 1500/1560 mAh battery then you will see the difference. For example according to GSM arena Iphone 5s has only 1560 mAh battery but it give you 9.54 hours of web browsing while S4 has got 2600 mAh battery but it give you 7.24 hour of web browsing. How? Same is true is case of RAM because for iphone even 512MB or 1GB RAM will be enough and you will never face any lags because ios use less process and background services that drain battery as compare to android. I am not expert but its something which is common to notice. If you don't believe me then go read reviews and battery comparison and benchmark results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks are benchmarks, reviews are reviews and real life usage is real life usage. I have yet to use any phone that lives up to the amount of talk time, web browsing, idle time, etc that it is rated for. Too many factors for those numbers to be relevant in every day use. Benchmarks can be tricked with software, Samsung proved this.
I've used iPhones and I can definitely tell you without hesitation that they most certainly do not last any longer than android devices if the two devices are being used heavily. iPhones tend to idle better because of (not sure if it has been fixed in 4.4) a better implementation of location reporting and push notifications. As far as actual use, the two are equal. I have yet to meet an iPhone user who uses their phone with moderate to heavy use who doesn't carry their charger with them.
---------- Post added at 01:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 AM ----------
Based on your needs though , you may very well be more happy with the G2, there aren't more than a handful of phones on the market with comparable battery life. If it wasn't for price and 4.4 I would get the G2. Being that price will be the same for you, I would get the G2 if I were in your shoes.
Suggest some best gaming phones according to you
this review will summarize it all for my recommendation:
Digital Foundry: HTC One M9 review
performance is impressive as there are no additional pixels to push.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the face of 2.5K screens used in other flagship phones this year, the choice to avoid bumping the M9's screen resolution is a surprise. In some respects this is a plus point; we're fast approaching a point of diminishing visual turns, and a resolution bump only increases the burden on a processor. The gains would have been slight, unless you plan on pressing your nose up to the glass for a closer inspection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Refreshingly, the power doesn't come at the expense of overall clarity, either. Google and Motorola have attempted a similar trick with the Nexus 6, but at maximum volume the M9 is a clear front-runner in this area. The sound tech has a positive impact on call quality too, as the uppermost Boomsound speaker above the screen is used during calls and provides excellent results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The M9 is blessed with a fearsome arsenal of tech, but it has attracted some negative attention for generating excessive amounts of heat. It's true that when engaged in a particularly taxing activity the phone's casing becomes noticeably warm, but no more so than many of its cutting-edge rivals, and we suspect the reason it's more immediately obvious here is because the aluminium casing is channelling the heat more effectively. During our review we felt we pushed HTC's device to the limit, and it never got uncomfortably hot - something which was claimed in many early hands-on previews by other sites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With this much power to hand, HTC has clearly had to put measures in place to shackle this beast. Running at full pelt, the M9's internals would usually drain its 2840mAh in no time at all. To combat this, the phone attempts to strike a balance by giving you just enough power when you need it, but eases off the accelerator once things become too demanding. It's a problem every mobile maker faces, as battery technology simply isn't keeping pace with CPU evolution, and all that can be done is to cram bigger power cells into phones. While the M9 certainly isn't the most ravenous handset we've encountered, its stamina is hardly awe-inspiring. You'll almost certainly have to charge it every day if you intend to make the most of the Snapdragon 810 chipset's potential.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Games run very smoothly on the HTC One M9, a consequence of improving the processor while keeping the screen resolution the same as last year. The Boomsound speakers bring audio to life too, making this feel - at times - like a genuine console experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HTC's handset has the added advantage of expandability too; you can slot in a microSD card of up to 128GB in capacity. This will come as excellent news to those who want to use their phone as a multimedia powerhouse, although it should be noted that inserting a card containing a lot of content could impact the overall performance of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're willing to wait, I suggest waiting for the Note 5. (October/November).
If not, the M9 or the Note 4 are your best bets. The 5.0" M9 has a lower resolution and a slightly newer cpu/gpu, but the Note 4 has 5.7", 2K and an AMOLED screen. Especially the latter results in better colours and infinite contrast (black=black).
Tiny addendum to:
hamdir said:
HTC's handset has the added advantage of expandability too; you can slot in a microSD card of up to 128GB in capacity. This will come as excellent news to those who want to use their phone as a multimedia powerhouse, although it should be noted that inserting a card containing a lot of content could impact the overall performance of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dropping a .nomedia file in every folder you don't need to see in a media player excludes that folder, and the files and folders in it, from the indexing service. (You can still launch the files from the file explorer) This prevents the performance impact. I've got about 8.000 pdf files in one folder on my MicroSD, with the .nomedia file the folder is skipped and doesn't affect the device.
hamdir said:
this review will summarize it all for my recommendation:
Digital Foundry: HTC One M9 review
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
?thanks for providing me with such deep info. I will definitely follow up with it.......
ShadowLea said:
If you're willing to wait, I suggest waiting for the Note 5. (October/November).
If not, the M9 or the Note 4 are your best bets. The 5.0" M9 has a lower resolution and a slightly newer cpu/gpu, but the Note 4 has 5.7", 2K and an AMOLED screen. Especially the latter results in better colours and infinite contrast (black=black).
Tiny addendum to:
Dropping a .nomedia file in every folder you don't need to see in a media player excludes that folder, and the files and folders in it, from the indexing service. (You can still launch the files from the file explorer) This prevents the performance impact. I've got about 8.000 pdf files in one folder on my MicroSD, with the .nomedia file the folder is skipped and doesn't affect the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/Thanks for your valuable suggestion but i dont like Note series.I hope you won't mind......
@thebestappgames
Have you gotten your pic? There are so many smartphones for gaming this quarter of 2015. some Rankings
Care to look into the latest Nexus series? Nexus 5 and up.
ShadowLea said:
If not, the M9 or the Note 4 are your best bets. The 5.0" M9 has a lower resolution and a slightly newer cpu/gpu, but the Note 4 has 5.7", 2K and an AMOLED screen. Especially the latter results in better colours and infinite contrast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2k is not really a good thing as it wastes precious GPU power, but yea the screen overall is more gorgeous on the N4/S6
however there is one very imporant factor and that is GPU throttling, and the way HTC does it is better:
if you check the Anandtech reviews, the S6 has the exact gaming problem on every Samsung flagship, ie: jumping frame-rates, even though HTC throttles the GPU on the latest M9 base they do it with grace, it steadily slows down and eventually holds at the M8 speed (after 50 minutes), if you let it cool (for 2-5 minutes thanks to metal) it jumps back up and you start the cycle again, on the s6 the GPU throttling is constantly jumping up and down, which affects real world gaming:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The end performance actually ends up being quite similar to the One M8, but performance during the test is much higher than what we saw on the One M8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The one major issue here that is visible from the FPS vs time graph is that Samsung continues to struggle with graceful throttling as the GPU attempts to always target maximum performance, which causes a strong rise and fall in frame rate as the GPU goes through periods of high and low clock speeds determined by the thermal governor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With that said, there are still problems with Samsung Mobile’s drivers, as we see some pretty poor user experience from thermally throttled situations due to the oscillating behavior of GPU performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is why i prefer gaming on HTC since the M8 because they figured out how to do gaming finally after years of mess on Android, they know how to do it the iPhone way, Samsung is all about brute but no care about actual real world experience, a jumpy frame rate like that will kill any gaming experience
i dont kow if that affects the Note series though, I think the Note surely has better thermal release than the SGS6 due to its size and no glass
In general the best gaming Android gamer is either the M8 or M9, especially when we take audio into account
Taching said:
@thebestappgames
Have you gotten your pic? There are so many smartphones for gaming this quarter of 2015. some Rankings
Care to look into the latest Nexus series? Nexus 5 and up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/Nexus 5 is a good deal but I was thinking of MOTO Maxx. What do you say?
hamdir said:
2k is not really a good thing as it wastes precious GPU power, but yea the screen overall is more gorgeous on the N4/S6
however there is one very imporant factor and that is GPU throttling, and the way HTC does it is better:
if you check the Anandtech reviews, the S6 has the exact gaming problem on every Samsung flagship, ie: jumping frame-rates, even though HTC throttles the GPU on the latest M9 base they do it with grace, it steadily slows down and eventually holds at the M8 speed (after 50 minutes), if you let it cool (for 2-5 minutes thanks to metal) it jumps back up and you start the cycle again, on the s6 the GPU throttling is constantly jumping up and down, which affects real world gaming:
This is why i prefer gaming on HTC since the M8 because they figured out how to do gaming finally after years of mess on Android, they know how to do it the iPhone way, Samsung is all about brute but no care about actual real world experience, a jumpy frame rate like that will kill any gaming experience
i dont kow if that affects the Note series though, I think the Note surely has better thermal release than the SGS6 due to its size and no glass
In general the best gaming Android gamer is either the M8 or M9, especially when we take audio into account
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/You have given me so many options that its difficult for me to choose I am confused. You are having quite deap knowledge in this stuff can you tell me Is Motto Maxx a good option or not?
If the priority is gaming, I'd say go with a Nexus 6. Bigass screen, front-facing speakers. What more could you want?
Best eyecandy gaming experience -> S6 antutu 65k (but the battery is its dissea)
Best earcandy gaming experience -> m9 antutu 57k
Gaming over longer time -> note 4 antutu 41k
I dont know what to buy :/ i use s4 atm and playing heavy games like mc5 is crap compared to s6. But therefore battery is crap in s6.
Conclusion: be patient for note 5 to arrive this september. Ill probably still buy the s6 in two weeks because of its performance. And then later the note 5
Xperia Z1, Mi 4i, zenfone2,
Hi there,
There is a Z5 vs X camera review here:
https://recombu.com/mobile/article/sony-xperia-x-vs-xperia-z5-vs-samsung-galaxy-s7-camera-review
(actually, the article is Z5 vs X vs S7 review, but I don't pay much attention to the S7).
From what I can read, Z5 and X camera experiences are vastly similar.
Anybody with a link to another review comparing the Z5 and the X?
Also, the X doesn't support 4k camera recording? Crazy!
From what I read neither X model supports 4k recording mode. I am even wondering if it supports 1080p 120fps and/or 720p 240fps.. The SD820 can easily handle it, SD800 handles 55mbit 4k recording without problems. Also other brands using SD820 does 4k recording so we can rule out the SoC as being the problem. That leaves us with it being badly designed as in heat management, sensor gets to warm (strange considering previous Z phones) or just a business decision. All are stupid and bad decisions and it looks like they are going the Doro phone way.
That said that comparision is pretty much worthless. All the photos are downscaled and you cant see them in larger size so it only thing to compare is colors and exposure.
EQ2000 said:
From what I read neither X model supports 4k recording mode. I am even wondering if it supports 1080p 120fps and/or 720p 240fps.. The SD820 can easily handle it, SD800 handles 55mbit 4k recording without problems. Also other brands using SD820 does 4k recording so we can rule out the SoC as being the problem. That leaves us with it being badly designed as in heat management, sensor gets to warm (strange considering previous Z phones) or just a business decision. All are stupid and bad decisions and it looks like they are going the Doro phone way.
That said that comparision is pretty much worthless. All the photos are downscaled and you cant see them in larger size so it only thing to compare is colors and exposure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
even I watched a youtube video that showed Xperia X overheated after only 4mins of 1080p 60fps video recording!
I'm going to assume that was a defective device, but if this is going to be a widespread problem then SONY is done!
Daniel_GB said:
even I watched a youtube video that showed Xperia X overheated after only 4mins of 1080p 60fps video recording!
I'm going to assume that was a defective device, but if this is going to be a widespread problem then SONY is done!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that was a fake video. Looking at his comments he had a grief with Sony claiming all previous Xperia Z phones overheated in the same way amongst other ravishing comments. So we can disregard it when lots of people report it can record far beyond 4 minutes.
That said the X series do feel a bit like a 'pick parts of the shelf that are remaining and build a new phone' plus some added extras. They are going in the wrong direction and not listening to their users. They even calculate they will go at a loss this year on number of sold units.. Well of course! The definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different result!
Our z5's camera overheats the same, right? I just tested it, 25 C ambient temperature, [email protected], it stops before 4 min mark. Doesn't it do the same for everyone?
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
millicent said:
Our z5's camera overheats the same, right? I just tested it, 25 C ambient temperature, [email protected], it stops before 4 min mark. Doesn't it do the same for everyone?
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no, actually my Z5p can record up to 40mins of 4K video without any overheating message or thermal throttle at the same ambient temperature!
I only get full storage error after 40mins+!
Daniel_GB said:
no, actually my Z5p can record up to 40mins of 4K video without any overheating message or thermal throttle at the same ambient temperature!
I only get full storage error after 40mins+!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then you've got a very special device. Most of us struggle with getting 5 minutes of 4K video.
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Lambo_car16 said:
Then you've got a very special device. Most of us struggle with getting 5 minutes of 4K video.
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're not supposed to film yourself inside a sauna.. :laugh: Try it again with normal ambient temperature.
EQ2000 said:
You're not supposed to film yourself inside a sauna.. [emoji23] Try it again with normal ambient temperature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am supposed to be able to film in a normal room temperature of 19°C, however. Like I said, I can't do more than 5 minutes. The camera on this device is a major dissapointment — you'd they would've be fixed most of the problems after 4 generations.
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Lambo_car16 said:
I am supposed to be able to film in a normal room temperature of 19°C, however. Like I said, I can't do more than 5 minutes. The camera on this device is a major dissapointment — you'd they would've be fixed most of the problems after 4 generations.
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's really weird mate! my room temperature is usually between 21-25C and I can reach more than 40min of 4k!
the device temp becomes steady around 52C, what is your temp when you get the warning? (I use cpu temp to monitor it, it's free)
Daniel_GB said:
that's really weird mate! my room temperature is usually between 21-25C and I can reach more than 40min of 4k!
the device temp becomes steady around 52C, what is your temp when you get the warning? (I use cpu temp to monitor it, it's free)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will try again but if I recall, even since I bought it there were video reviews that showed 4k video recording stopping well before 10 mins mark. I remember trying it last winter, 17-20 degrees C, it stopped at around 5 minutes.
update: I tried the 4k outside, breezy, 22 deg C. I stopped it myself after 10 mins, CPU was at 52 C from 40 on idle. Also my phone is in its spigen case, filmed on external sdcard.
I imagine the ambient temperature to make or break the difference. I will try some other time inside at 25 degrees or more, I expect the camera to stop working before 10 minutes. I know it did so in the past.
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
Will s8＋ have longer battery life than s7 edge?
Samsung claims the battery life will be relatively the same:
https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s8-battery-claims/
It's kind of hard to really say if their claims will be accurate or not as there's multiple factors to consider. Firstly, the 8+ battery is 100 mAh smaller than the S7e, and it also has both a larger display, and more pixels in its display, which effects battery life dramatically. However, with a new, supposedly markedly more efficient processor, it's perfectly possible that it will be able to offset the loss of mAh and the larger display.
At very least, I think it's safe to say it will not have longer battery life than the S7e.
CConn882 said:
Samsung claims the battery life will be relatively the same:
https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s8-battery-claims/
It's kind of hard to really say if their claims will be accurate or not as there's multiple factors to consider. Firstly, the 8+ battery is 100 mAh smaller than the S7e, and it also has both a larger display, and more pixels in its display, which effects battery life dramatically. However, with a new, supposedly markedly more efficient processor, it's perfectly possible that it will be able to offset the loss of mAh and the larger display.
At very least, I think it's safe to say it will not have longer battery life than the S7e.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a shame really, that's what we get for the current trend of slim is better. It's all about the aesthetics now...well that and the lessons learned from the Note 7 debacle. I'm sure they are nervous about making big changes in the battery department. Hopefully one of those battery breakthroughs that often get reported in the tech news see the light of day sooner rather than later.
I never get more than around 5 hours screen on time with any of the Galaxy series that I have owned. Even if I'm just doing light browsing and shut everything off lol. The Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus I have now gets me 7-9 hours and that's pretty insane, even with more intensive stuff. Pity it's not that great a phone. The camera sucks compared to my old S7. Oh well, at least the battery charges fast and there is an abundance of portable battery packs these days.
i hope it's the same, because i am tired of my S6 battery life, have to charge it 2-3 times everyday
abdelha said:
i hope it's the same, because i am tired of my S6 battery life, have to charge it 2-3 times everyday
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it would have lost 20-30% of its max capacity by now. That's another problem with batteries that has been going on for far too long. That's something that needs innovation and fast.
Highspeed123 said:
It's a shame really, that's what we get for the current trend of slim is better. It's all about the aesthetics now...well that and the lessons learned from the Note 7 debacle. I'm sure they are nervous about making big changes in the battery department. Hopefully one of those battery breakthroughs that often get reported in the tech news see the light of day sooner rather than later.
I never get more than around 5 hours screen on time with any of the Galaxy series that I have owned. Even if I'm just doing light browsing and shut everything off lol. The Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus I have now gets me 7-9 hours and that's pretty insane, even with more intensive stuff. Pity it's not that great a phone. The camera sucks compared to my old S7. Oh well, at least the battery charges fast and there is an abundance of portable battery packs these days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eh, I think it might just be that cellphone manufactures have a mark they want to hit with battery life, and don't usually seem too interested in extending it beyond that. Every major flagship now seems to be in that 4-6 SOT range without much variance. Whether it be the iPhone, or G6, or Moto phones, they all seem to end up in that ballpark.
Personally, I get 4-5 hours of SOT with my S7 - and if I'm using my phone constantly using wi-fi, I can get get almost 6 hours of SOT under it. If the 8+ can be 15% better than that, like it should be, I'll be quite pleased.
CConn882 said:
Samsung claims the battery life will be relatively the same:
https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s8-battery-claims/
It's kind of hard to really say if their claims will be accurate or not as there's multiple factors to consider. Firstly, the 8+ battery is 100 mAh smaller than the S7e, and it also has both a larger display, and more pixels in its display, which effects battery life dramatically. However, with a new, supposedly markedly more efficient processor, it's perfectly possible that it will be able to offset the loss of mAh and the larger display.
At very least, I think it's safe to say it will not have longer battery life than the S7e.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will be shorter on the S8. What Samsung are not telling people is that the battery stats for the S7 were done at it's full 1440p resolution (because Nougat was not out and resolution could not be changed at that time). The S8 battery stats are done using it's "default" resolution of 1080. So the numbers are manipulated to look similar but they are not comparing the same resolution, so the S8 will last LESS than the S7 if you run it at its 1440p resolution. IMO Samsung are intentionally misleading people to hide this fact.
ewokuk said:
It will be shorter on the S8. What Samsung are not telling people is that the battery stats for the S7 were done at it's full 1440p resolution (because Nougat was not out and resolution could not be changed at that time). The S8 battery stats are done using it's "default" resolution of 1080. So the numbers are manipulated to look similar but they are not comparing the same resolution, so the S8 will last LESS than the S7 if you run it at its 1440p resolution. IMO Samsung are intentionally misleading people to hide this fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't create your own facts. You need to provide a credible source to back up your claims. I personally don't believe it. Same res, similar battery and a less power hungry SoC. I'm pretty sure they have been further optimising their software too (for what that's worth). I'm almost certain that the battery will be on par with last year's model. I can't see any reason why not.
Highspeed123 said:
You can't create your own facts. You need to provide a credible source to back up your claims. I personally don't believe it. Same res, similar battery and a less power hungry SoC. I'm pretty sure they have been further optimising their software too (for what that's worth). I'm almost certain that the battery will be on par with last year's model. I can't see any reason why not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly, you can't just assume that they were talking about 1080p resolution, we have to wait and see....
---------- Post added at 11:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:04 AM ----------
Highspeed123 said:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it would have lost 20-30% of its max capacity by now. That's another problem with batteries that has been going on for far too long. That's something that needs innovation and fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they say that their new battery can hold 95% of its age even after two years....
Highspeed123 said:
You can't create your own facts. You need to provide a credible source to back up your claims. I personally don't believe it. Same res, similar battery and a less power hungry SoC. I'm pretty sure they have been further optimising their software too (for what that's worth). I'm almost certain that the battery will be on par with last year's model. I can't see any reason why not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Credible source? Samsung's own documentation credible enough for you? They state the "default" resolution is 1080 in the documentation. They are NOT going to state that and then provide battery stats based on 1440 are they, now THAT would be stupid.
You'll see soon enough once someone does a good test of 1440p vs s7 at 1440p and 1080p vs s7 at 1080p. Don't say you weren't warned.
Highspeed123 said:
You can't create your own facts. You need to provide a credible source to back up your claims. I personally don't believe it. Same res, similar battery and a less power hungry SoC. I'm pretty sure they have been further optimising their software too (for what that's worth). I'm almost certain that the battery will be on par with last year's model. I can't see any reason why not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree, I actually had the same suspicion as ewokuk.
I think it comes down to what is the default resolution the phone is shipping with.
The S8 and S8+ ship with FHD res, which is why I think their stats are for this resolution. What's the default res on the S7?
ewokuk said:
Credible source? Samsung's own documentation credible enough for you? They state the "default" resolution is 1080 in the documentation. They are NOT going to state that and then provide battery stats based on 1440 are they, now THAT would be stupid.
You'll see soon enough once someone does a good test of 1440p vs s7 at 1440p and 1080p vs s7 at 1080p. Don't say you weren't warned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are talking about things as if they are fact when in reality, you are making your own opinions.
Yes the default is 1080p so what? That just means the phone is set at FHD out of the box. Not that they did battery tests at that resolution. You need facts before telling people it's a reality. You putting two and two together is not a fact.
If you look at it from a more intelligent point of view, the battery is pretty much the same, the SoC is more battery efficient. Minus the larger screen battery drain and it should even out to be on par with the S7. What makes you think it will be worse battery life when you consider the hardware?
Mate, it'll be the same or not far off in either direction. The battery life of Samsung phones isn't great and people already know that. It's going to be average as usual. It's a pointless conversation. The phone will be bought by many regardless.
---------- Post added at 11:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 AM ----------
Dat Noob said:
While I agree, I actually had the same suspicion as ewokuk.
I think it comes down to what is the default resolution the phone is shipping with.
The S8 and S8+ ship with FHD res, which is why I think their stats are for this resolution. What's the default res on the S7?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 1080p, as introduced by Android N. It didn't start that way however as it was launched with a default of QHD. The point is, there is nothing to suggest it will have worse battery life because the hardware says otherwise. It's an opinion until we have a definitive answer through testing and reviews. I can't say it will be more or less, it's only my OPINION that it will be on par with the S7. Ewokuk is pushing his suspicion as fact so I replied. That is all.
Edit- Just want to add that changing the resolution barely makes any difference to the battery life if any. It still has a QHD screen even if you change the res. You can't change the pixel count. It's more about giving you better performance in games etc. We will have to see.
Highspeed123 said:
You are talking about things as if they are fact when in reality, you are making your own opinions.
Yes the default is 1080p so what? That just means the phone is set at FHD out of the box. Not that they did battery tests at that resolution. You need facts before telling people it's a reality. You putting two and two together is not a fact.
If you look at it from a more intelligent point of view, the battery is pretty much the same, the SoC is more battery efficient. Minus the larger screen battery drain and it should even out to be on par with the S7. What makes you think it will be worse battery life when you consider the hardware?
Mate, it'll be the same or not far off in either direction. The battery life of Samsung phones isn't great and people already know that. It's going to be average as usual. It's a pointless conversation. The phone will be bought by many regardless.
---------- Post added at 11:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 AM ----------
It's 1080p, as introduced by Android N. It didn't start that way however as it was launched with a default of QHD. The point is, there is nothing to suggest it will have worse battery life because the hardware says otherwise. It's an opinion until we have a definitive answer through testing and reviews. I can't say it will be more or less, it's only my OPINION that it will be on par with the S7. Ewokuk is pushing his suspicion as fact so I replied. That is all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh come now, are you seriously telling me you think they set the default resolution to 1080 and then tested and made public battery expectations based on 1440 (AND didn't bother to tell people that these were based on 1440)? Wake up man, the company isn't THAT stupid, in fact the way they have done it is quite clever (enough to fool many people clearly). It won't be long until I am proved right when the proper tests come out. :good:
As for changing the resolution not having much effect on battery, that is only the case if all you do is browse the web. At 1080p it is still lighting up the full 1440p pixels yes, but it does not have to do the increased calculations to display a sharper image. This is why a graphics card on a pc (which does work in exactly the same way) can output a higher FPS when you lower the resolution.....it has far few calculations to do......but the monitor is still using the same number of pixels. The more graphically intense your usage, the worse the battery drain will be at 1440. So that will be videos and games like you say.
ewokuk said:
Oh come now, are you seriously telling me you think they set the default resolution to 1080 and then tested and made public battery expectations based on 1440 (AND didn't bother to tell people that these were based on 1440)? Wake up man, the company isn't THAT stupid, in fact the way they have done it is quite clever (enough to fool many people clearly). It won't be long until I am proved right when the proper tests come out. :good:
As for changing the resolution not having much effect on battery, that is only the case if all you do is browse the web. At 1080p it is still lighting up the full 1440p pixels yes, but it does not have to do the increased calculations to display a sharper image. This is why a graphics card on a pc (which does work in exactly the same way) can output a higher FPS when you lower the resolution.....it has far few calculations to do......but the monitor is still using the same number of pixels. The more graphically intense your usage, the worse the battery drain will be at 1440. So that will be videos and games like you say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, I'm saying that you don't know the battery life by looking at a spec sheet and neither do I. It's your opinion vs my opinion. Neither of our opinions are facts until proven.
I know how resolution works, how hardware works and you are correct in some ways. It's just that testing on the S7, while changing resolution has proven to not make a big difference in battery life. Why that is, I don't know. Maybe it's not truly changing the res as you would when setting it on your PC. All I know is that I didn't gain much in terms of battery when I tried it
What would be causing the S8 to have inferior battery life over the S7? The hardware suggests it should be around the same, forget about resolution and look at it that way. As you say and I agree with, we will have to wait and see.
Highspeed123 said:
Nope, I'm saying that you don't know the battery life by looking at a spec sheet and neither do I. It's your opinion vs my opinion. Neither of our opinions are facts until proven.
I know how resolution works, how hardware works and you are correct in some ways. It's just that testing on the S7, while changing resolution has proven to not make a big difference in battery life. Why that is, I don't know. Maybe it's not truly changing the res as you would when setting it on your PC. All I know is that I didn't gain much in terms of battery when I tried it
What would be causing the S8 to have inferior battery life over the S7? The hardware suggests it should be around the same, forget about resolution and look at it that way. As you say and I agree with, we will have to wait and see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing I most disagree with ewok here about is how much effect the screen resolution has on battery life. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the S8 ends up having less battery life than the S7, but from what I know about phones, that will be FAR more likely due to screen size, processor, and the overall optimization of the phone than the screen resolution.
I mean, just as evidence of that, look at the Exynos and Snapdragon versions of the S7. Despite having the same screen resolution, size, etc., the Snapdragon variant of the phone ended up with poorer battery life due to poor optimization of the processor.
Hi,
Wich resolution you use ? (1080P/1440P)
And why ?
Please say if you have an S8 or S8+.
It would be Better if you are on Oreo (Samsung have working on it in Oreo for less difference on both resolution )
I use 1080p cant see the difference im on s8
Mads4295 said:
I use 1080p cant see the difference im on s8
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank, you are on Oreo?
1440P oreo. can see the diffirence in resolution, but not in the battery
deraiz12 said:
Thank, you are on Oreo?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes im on Oreo
1440p for sure. If I need to last battery like for a long time (and forget my powerbank) i´ll just probably use battery saver - 720p. Don´t see reason why use 1080p anyway...
Problems with facebook on 720p. Pictures and videos are cropped.
I have seen big difference in smoothness .
For compared in fhd+ my s8 is more fast than mate 9 of my wife and In qhd+ the mate 9 win .
There's minimal battery difference between running it in fullhd+ and qhd+, the only way you would find some battery savings is if you play games a lot. I'm on oreo beta exynos
1440p. I'd rather it look better than get an extra 15 minutes of battery life
Wow...I can't believe people aren't using the full quality of the screen. You do realise the battery difference is negligible right? Whether you use FHD or QHD+, the display is still having to power up all the pixels. You save maybe 15 minutes of battery, nothing more, by using FHD.
Personally I can definitely see the difference in visual quality.
the_scotsman said:
Wow...I can't believe people aren't using the full quality of the screen. You do realise the battery difference is negligible right? Whether you use FHD or QHD+, the display is still having to power up all the pixels. You save maybe 15 minutes of battery, nothing more, by using FHD.
Personally I can definitely see the difference in visual quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes agree with you but in term of performance the difference are no negligible.
Wtf are you guys talking about? The gpu is always running and rendering for full resolution. From what I understand, this "Screen resolution" setting is nothing like the "Screen resolution that you observe in Windows OS...". The difference is just the percieved resolution (BY APPS!!!) similar to what is done on MacOS..
malimukk said:
Wtf are you guys talking about? The gpu is always running and rendering for full resolution. From what I understand, this "Screen resolution" setting is nothing like the "Screen resolution that you observe in Windows OS...". The difference is just the percieved resolution (BY APPS!!!) similar to what is done on MacOS..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but I don't agreed with you .
The operation of the gpu is the same as that on video games. If you play in FHD or QHD the request for power is not the same and you need a gpu/cpu more powerful .
A pixel is a pixel is a pixel. The higher the resolution, the "smaller" they seem.... You are still powering on all the pixels regardless ofthe resolution... The resolution, as it was mentioned before, is for the apps to use for scaling (if you ever develop anything for Android, read this article https://developer.android.com/guide/practices/screens_support.html)
Resolution has little to no effect on battery, everyone stop crying about it...
1440p because I wasn't raised in a barn.
Haha! I just had to put that. I do use it but I have no good reason.
I have to agree with an earlier post that the higher resolution would impact performance.
I tried the highest resolution and I agree, everything looks much better and has close to 0 impact on battery life (if that's your thing) but I did notice a significant drop in performance.
That being said on 1080 there 0 lag, while on the higher resolution there's lag even in basic apps like messaging or contacts.
But that's my experience.
I don't really care that much about battery life on the s8 as it always got me through a whole day of usage, regardless of the settings, but I do care about performance.
I am 99% sure changing the resolution has an impact on gpu.
It's correct that I doesn't impact display power consumption but the gpu has to render more, so it will impact gpu performance.
Just my 2cents