Related
So currently these 3 types of display techs(mainly their variants like Super AMOLED, Super Clear LCD, Super IPS LCD, LED Backlit LCD,IPS TFT etc) are the main kinds of display technologies which can be seen on the latest phones.
I have a few doubts regarding this topic.
1- Which technology gives the best color reproduction?
I know AMOLED sucks at this field.What about Super IPS n LED Backlit LCDs n TFTs?
2-Which one has the best viewing angle?
3-What is all this pentile matrix stuff about AMOLED Displays?
4-Longevity,which one lasts long without noticeable degradation?
5-One technologies main advantages/disadvantages over another
yzak58 said:
So currently these 3 types of display techs(mainly their variants like Super AMOLED, Super Clear LCD, Super IPS LCD, LED Backlit LCD,IPS TFT etc) are the main kinds of display technologies which can be seen on the latest phones.
I have a few doubts regarding this topic.
1- Which technology gives the best color reproduction?
I know AMOLED sucks at this field.What about Super IPS n LED Backlit LCDs n TFTs?
2-Which one has the best viewing angle?
3-What is all this pentile matrix stuff about AMOLED Displays?
4-Longevity,which one lasts long without noticeable degradation?
5-One technologies main advantages/disadvantages over another
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1 amoled has very good contrast. but pixel density also important. Phone could have anyone of these displays and have varying dpi
2 IPS has the best viewing angle
3 i heard of that I've have to google it.
4. Longevity has too many variables. depends on use quality and always random dud phones so idk.
5. depends on what you want it for reading vs watching video the size of the screen quality of a product. you can get knockoff iphone with rentina like display doesn't mean cheap phone will last longer then a lessor display. It's more of a personal choice than an overall one better than another.
1. Depends if you're looking for real life looking colors or bright, vibrant colors. Out of the box AMOLED is the latter, while all LCD's are the former. However, all these screens can be adjusted (Android phones anyways), so it's not such a huge issue.
2. IPS LCD has the best viewing angle, but AMOLED is so close behind it's not a deal breaker. All other LCD's would be behind them, but the amount of which depends on the quality of the panel. iPod Touch viewing angle is terrible, while Xperia Play's is amazing for an LCD.
3. Pentile is just a different sub pixel arrangment. It can apply to LCD or AMOLED, it's just seen more on AMOLED's because it makes those displays last longer. Pentile screens don't look quite as crisp as RGB layout screens, but it's harder to notice with the 720p displays out there now.
4. Traditionally AMOLED doesn't last as long as LCD, but it seems to be panel specific. Some AMOLED panels can last really long. All in all you shouldn't see issues within a 3 year phone contract with either.
5. Totally personal preference. I like AMOLED's myself, mainly for the infinite black levels, vibrant colors, and very good viewing angles. Some people like LCD's because the colors out of the box are more natural. Also some like how there are 720p RGB layout LCD's on phones. AMOLED hasn't been able to do this yet, it has to resort to pentile for those resolutions. Then again, it's hard to notice at ~320 PPI
Ips > Amoled > LCD > tft
Sent from my U8150 using XDA
How about super amoled?
Sent from my GT-I8150 using xda premium
Personally i seem to prefer SLCD over SAMOLED, the whites are bluish and there's a weird hue in all colors except black in amoled, not sure why but the blacks are true blacks which is not the case in lcd where all colors are perfect except black is kind of grayish because of the back light.
Rick_1995 said:
Personally i seem to prefer SLCD over SAMOLED, the whites are bluish and there's a weird hue in all colors except black in amoled, not sure why but the blacks are true blacks which is not the case in lcd where all colors are perfect except black is kind of grayish because of the back light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My AMOLED colors were slightly off when I got my phone (a little on the warm side). With a quick color tweak the colors look amazing now, along with the true blacks.
noisyzero said:
How about super amoled?
Sent from my GT-I8150 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Super Amoled Plus and super LCD are the higher end panels and bring out the best of each technology. However nothing beats a good ips panel in my books. The colors are flawless, and the viewing angles impeccable. That is all I need.
Sent from my U8150 using XDA
Rick_1995 said:
Personally i seem to prefer SLCD over SAMOLED, the whites are bluish and there's a weird hue in all colors except black in amoled, not sure why but the blacks are true blacks which is not the case in lcd where all colors are perfect except black is kind of grayish because of the back light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AMOLEDs provide true black because in this technology, each pixels produce its own light(unlike LCDs,in which a single lightsource illuminates the entire screen). And when black is needed to be produced,that individual pixel is completely shut down,thus zero light is emitted.Hence true black.
@Allanitomwesh
Ips > Amoled > LCD > tft
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry about the resurrection, but what aboit IPS TFT?
in case of motorola xoom2?
not a fan of AMOLED screen burnouts
ChinchilaO said:
@Allanitomwesh
Sorry about the resurrection, but what aboit IPS TFT?
in case of motorola xoom2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically IPS is a really good TFT panel. Like how a maybach and a c200 are both Mercedes. IPS being the maybach ofcourse.
And technically an LCD is also tft. But then it starts getting confusing if you go down that road.
Sent from my U8150 using xda app-developers app
amoled is much more colourful than the others.
A I-Phone 4 looks really pale beside a Galaxy S or a Galaxy S2.
Amoled has limited life-time and looses brightness.
The power consumption is dependent extremly on the brightness of the colour.
Martin L. said:
amoled is much more colourful than the others.
A I-Phone 4 looks really pale beside a Galaxy S or a Galaxy S2.
Amoled has limited life-time and looses brightness.
The power consumption is dependent extremly on the brightness of the colour.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Power consumption is EXACTLY what interests me most about this. I remember reading a couple of years ago that Sony Walkmans using OLEDs offered vibrant colours while using far less power than LCDs. The trouble is I'm having trouble finding more information on this now that I'm looking at OLEDs in smartphones. Is this true, does OLED use less power, does it not use a backlight like LCD?
I'm dying to know because I bought a cool phone a few months ago, but hadn't learned about battery usage/capacity and now I HATE the phone for it. I'm looking at the OLEDs e.g. on the Motorola RAZRs (with 2000 mAh batteries) and I'm curious about them.
UPDATE: I just found a simple document composed from companies and organisations involved in OLED production which, they say is designed to eradicte myths on this. You can see the document here, and on power consumption, my brief understanding is this:
LCD: uses maximum power to display any image
OLED: uses minimal power on darker images, maximum power on brighter/whiter/colourful images - white/very bright images use more power than LCDs
This leads me to think that switching to OLED can only result in at least some benefit in battery life, no? I think most of us on Android are conscious of the use of black and white in the UI, wallpapers etc. so something like this would help. Is it a significant benefit? A backlight on a TV plugged into the wall is fine, on a smartphone I can see why it's a battery-killer. I note the caveat about OLEDs using more power for white and very bright images, but the way I see it, unless you're using a white wallpaper, this isn't an issue. I speculate a power saving when all is accounted for.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...sD8gJk&sig=AHIEtbR1--xI02ZyDoQZKtuuUS-sv_aKPA
So, if a TFT display is considered not quite as good as an AMOLED or an SLDC…how could a difference be noticed between the Xperia Z’s TFT display, the SGS4’s AMOLED and the HTC Butterfly’s SLDC3 – all 5 inches, all 1920x1080? Battery life/colour reproduction/daylight visibility?
Thanks for the input.
decision
I'm sorry for breakin' in this late, but... I hope to help in the future decisions.
We're mixing some things here:
LCD is a technology. AMOLED is another technology.
TFT is a sub technology that must be applied under one of the mentioned before.
TFT is an array used to feed large displays (a mobile phone is already a large display).
Since phone displays are "large" either LCD or AMOLED need an active controller to maintain brightness in each pixel.
This is A BIG difference between OLED (PMOLED) and AMOLED.
As SharpnShiny mentioned mp3 players/walkmans (small displays) can use OLED which use much lesser power than AMOLED.
In OLED/AMOLED displays each pixel produces it's own light, which can be a good power saving if most of the image is black or dark, because, in black the pixel just doesn't light up.
In LCD there's permanently (monitor ON) a "backlight". Even if the image is black! What the display does is block the backlight when it needs black.
About power consumption in either cases... I don't think there's a really noticeable difference because it depends a lot on the usage!
UPDATE: Sometimes the best way to save battery is to tweak several settings (including the Kernel) as the display brightness levels and thresholds.
dreis911 said:
I'm sorry for breakin' in this late, but... I hope to help in the future decisions.
We're mixing some things here:
LCD is a technology. AMOLED is another technology.
TFT is a sub technology that must be applied under one of the mentioned before.
TFT is an array used to feed large displays (a mobile phone is already a large display).
Since phone displays are "large" either LCD or AMOLED need an active controller to maintain brightness in each pixel.
This is A BIG difference between OLED (PMOLED) and AMOLED.
As SharpnShiny mentioned mp3 players/walkmans (small displays) can use OLED which use much lesser power than AMOLED.
In OLED/AMOLED displays each pixel produces it's own light, which can be a good power saving if most of the image is black or dark, because, in black the pixel just doesn't light up.
In LCD there's permanently (monitor ON) a "backlight". Even if the image is black! What the display does is block the backlight when it needs black.
About power consumption in either cases... I don't think there's a really noticeable difference because it depends a lot on the usage!
UPDATE: Sometimes the best way to save battery is to tweak several settings (including the Kernel) as the display brightness levels and thresholds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! That's what I intend to say. It seems many people misunderstanding about TFT.
TFT is not a panel technology in comparison with TN, MVA, IPS, PLS, AVS, AMOLED,....
1- Which technology gives the best color reproduction?
I know AMOLED sucks at this field.What about Super IPS n LED Backlit LCDs n TFTs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In other hand, Led-backlit is a similar case, it is a type of backlight, cause the LCD need the illumination. And there are 2 kind of LED, Edge and full-array. In mobile, almost is edge-led because of low cost and thickness. Full-array Led backlit only appear in several high-end TV models. The older tech is CCFL, which consumes more power
It means that a new LCD display which uses IPS panel also include a TFT layer and an edgeLed-backlit.
Sorry if any typo mistake. My bad English
Does anyone here know much about SAMOLED? I read in a phone review that it's more a marketing term than actual performance difference over AMOLED, but I'd prefer to double check that. For anyone who hasn't seen that term, the S is for Super (don't laugh yet!). I think the Motorola RAZR i and the Samsung Galaxy S III Mini are using SAMOLEDs.
I've been comparing my new and old phone screens when considering this thread. I have to say I prefer the TFT LCD screen more than anything. Even with a lower resolution, the images (video and static) is beautiful to me. My RAZR i has a higher resolution but a pentile matrix SAMOLED. It reminds me of phones 5 years ago, the matrix gives the impression of cheap pixel displays in my opinion - but I keep reading it's amongst the most battery-saving screens in the mainstream smartphone market and for that I am greatful.
I get noticeable battery drain difference by turning down the brightness on my AMOLED screen.
Decreased brightness also extends the life of the display.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app
good work
SharpnShiny said:
Does anyone here know much about SAMOLED? I read in a phone review that it's more a marketing term than actual performance difference over AMOLED, but I'd prefer to double check that. For anyone who hasn't seen that term, the S is for Super (don't laugh yet!). I think the Motorola RAZR i and the Samsung Galaxy S III Mini are using SAMOLEDs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. SAMOLED is the Super AMOLED from Samsung.
I wouldn't dare to say that it's just a marketing stuff... Because it's a little about "sub-pixels" and their layout. I would say thay the AMOLED technology is there with Samsung's engineering so that picture could get better.
Pennycake said:
I get noticeable battery drain difference by turning down the brightness on my AMOLED screen.
Decreased brightness also extends the life of the display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I meant in my last post, under the UPDATE statement. Also try to tweak your phone's clock (if you haven't done it yet).
Mine (a poor 600MHz ZTE Blade) is working from 245MHz to about 650MHz depending on the load (from underclock to overclock).
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.
So I've had the op3 since it's launch in 2016 and it's been a great phone that has slowly deteriorated in recent times in terms of battery life especially and I've become less impressed with it's display recently especially when I compared it to a Nokia 7 plus display which is 402 ppi and LCD,but I found the display noticably crisper on it compared to the op3
My op6 is on its way now and I'm hoping to see a good difference in the display.I see that the display for op6 is also 402 ppi compared to 401 on the op3.
The op3 display is okay but colors kind of look washed out at times and the blacks don't look that black, It's never sharp and crisp,
Has anyone compared the two and found a noticable difference,maybe the display has gotten better since the op5 ??
Supposedly the op6 has a surprisingly good display for only being 1080p.
I'm coming from a Galaxy S8 with a QHD screen and find the OP6 screen to be perfectly crisp and fine, loving it
I also came from a QHD Samsung. The OP6 display is great, despite the lower resolution.
One criticism of it would be the max brightness is hardly enough outdoors. Just a little brighter would help. Samsung was much brighter, but I've never seen a OP3 to compare with. Otherwise, the OP6 display is nice.
I compared them both side-by-side.. Not a lot of difference in terms of sharpness.. Better color reproduction on op6.. Whites are more pronounced,a bit brighter too.
I'm coming from a 3t and I was surprised by how big of a difference there is, somehow op6 screen looks much sharper
Samsung and apple before going QHD (or "retina"): "That's just a meme no one actually needs that!"
Them now: "Everyone else's phone sucks ass we have way more pixels than them lolololololol!"
It's decent 1080p, great depending on what phone you coming from. Not usable on bright sunny days. Been a week and eyes still trying to adjust.
Perfer my note 8 screen. Night and day. Take 30minutes less of sot.
manus31 said:
So I've had the op3 since it's launch in 2016 and it's been a great phone that has slowly deteriorated in recent times in terms of battery life especially and I've become less impressed with it's display recently especially when I compared it to a Nokia 7 plus display which is 402 ppi and LCD,but I found the display noticably crisper on it compared to the op3
My op6 is on its way now and I'm hoping to see a good difference in the display.I see that the display for op6 is also 402 ppi compared to 401 on the op3.
The op3 display is okay but colors kind of look washed out at times and the blacks don't look that black, It's never sharp and crisp,
Has anyone compared the two and found a noticable difference,maybe the display has gotten better since the op5 ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I came from OnePlus 3t and the difference was unbelievable , brightness in daylight is much better, lower brightness at night is more achievable and the biggest difference I found between the 2 when put next to each other is the whites. After 1.5 year the 3T gives a yellowish white while the 6 gives a true white color
joosef93 said:
I came from OnePlus 3t and the difference was unbelievable , brightness in daylight is much better, lower brightness at night is more achievable and the biggest difference I found between the 2 when put next to each other is the whites. After 1.5 year the 3T gives a yellowish white while the 6 gives a true white color
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds promising,looking forward to comparing to my op3 when my six finally arrives this week.I do notice the yellowy,gray whites on the op3
Got my op6 this morning,don't see any great difference in display,so far not really impressed with the phone at all,pretty much the same as op3 with faster processor
=dave= said:
I'm coming from a Galaxy S8 with a QHD screen and find the OP6 screen to be perfectly crisp and fine, loving it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's great to hear. I've had to pay for a VERY expensive screen replacement on my S8 because there were no tempered glass protectors available. I just cannot bear to use a naked screen for fear of micro scratches.
My OP6 will be delivered tomorrow.
I have a request to make. How does netflix and prime video play on the OP6? does it play in HD ? The 5T had problems playing HD content when it released and none of the reviews of the 6 ive seen talk about that.
manus31 said:
Got my op6 this morning,don't see any great difference in display,so far not really impressed with the phone at all,pretty much the same as op3 with faster processor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there are so many differences between these two phones...
design, camera, features, soc, size, notch, treble, seamless updates, no home button...
How can you say its the same phone with another SoC?
matze19999 said:
there are so many differences between these two phones...
design, camera, features, soc, size, notch, treble, seamless updates, no home button...
How can you say its the same phone with another SoC?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well...because it is still rectangular !
matze19999 said:
there are so many differences between these two phones...
design, camera, features, soc, size, notch, treble, seamless updates, no home button...
How can you say its the same phone with another SoC?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes,all this is true,I was referring more to the display,it's pretty much the same as the op3,the user experience also, I notice zero improvement in speed,although I know there is, battery is pretty much the same for me so far too,saying all that though I'm still happy because I know OnePlus will continue to optimize
Have the op6 over a week now and the display is definitely better somewhat than the op3.
Do think that content has a lot to do with it,hd images look much more crisp than ones with standard definition.
For example the OnePlus stock wallpapers don't look that great and are washed out,but if I use wallpapers from apps like backgrounds and Zedge they look amazing
I also came from OP3. The display on OP6 is much much better. OP6 screen is better outdoor compare to the 3.
The OP6 is very fluid.
I am actually dissapointed with OP 6 display to the point I am thinking of selling the phone. What bothers me the most is the PWM brighteness regulation bellow 25% witch such a low frequency. But I read it is common for all OLEDs so if you were happy with OP 3 you will be with this one.
manus31 said:
Got my op6 this morning,don't see any great difference in display,so far not really impressed with the phone at all,pretty much the same as op3 with faster processor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
I also came from OP3. Compared the display side by side, and to be honest, there is barely a difference. The biggest difference is that the OP6 is better in daylight. I would say the display picture quality has not moved much since the 2016.
The biggest difference for me was the battery life. I simply love it.
TheNetwork said:
Samsung and apple before going QHD (or "retina"): "That's just a meme no one actually needs that!"
Them now: "Everyone else's phone sucks ass we have way more pixels than them lolololololol!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A meme? you mean a gimmick? Lol
Amoled or OLED screens are overrated, Poco-f1 screen doesn't lag behind in any circumstances.:cool
Yeah, but it drains more power even with an all black setup.
Hemudon said:
Amoled or OLED screens are overrated, Poco-f1 screen doesn't lag behind in any circumstances.:cool
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lo. I wonder if you have ever used a Samsung device with sAMOLED display? Just place both a sAMOLED and a LCD display side by side and see the difference.
Rowdyy Ronnie said:
Lo. I wonder if you have ever used a Samsung device with sAMOLED display? Just place both a sAMOLED and a LCD display side by side and see the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Previous phone was Galaxy S8, I don't find much of the experience difference.
IPS LCD and AMOLED displays has advantages and disadvantages
IPS LCD has that AMOLED doesn't have:
-Sharpness and Clarity is good
-Natural Colors (AMOLED is little saturated on Colors)
-Can recover to accidental burns or screen burns (AMOLED cannot recover on screen burns thus leaving white marks)
-Longer pixel life (AMOLED's pixel quality degrades over time)
AMOLED has that IPS LCD doesn't have:
-Improve battery life as turning off pixels without backlight (Good for Dark Themed apps, videos, photos)
-Brightness and Contrast is good
-Good Viewing angles
-Always-on Display (IPS LCD cannot support this due that it uses backlight rather than turning off black pixels thus increasing power consumption)
Verdict:
No clear winner. It is the preference of both users and the manufacturer on what type of display they want to use. This is why Xiaomi uses IPS LCD Displays because it is cheaper than AMOLED ones. The target is being a budget flagship-tier phone thus achieving it.
Rowdyy Ronnie said:
Lo. I wonder if you have ever used a Samsung device with sAMOLED display? Just place both a sAMOLED and a LCD display side by side and see the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah best done with a gray picture so you can see the burn in on the oled. After some burned oled I only buy IPS screens.
I can't understand the "true black" hype as there is no such thing in real life and as the brain even can interpret white as black if the contrast is right.
As long as OLED tends to burn in, it's a no-go for me.
faeArai said:
Yeah best done with a gray picture so you can see the burn in on the oled. After some burned oled I only buy IPS screens.
I can't understand the "true black" hype as there is no such thing in real life and as the brain even can interpret white as black if the contrast is right.
As long as OLED tends to burn in, it's a no-go for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Three reasons why Xiaomi should go the OLED route :
True black :
Here's an example of true black :
On you Poco, go to full screen settings and turn off the notch. Now to two top corners are rounded as the bottom ones. Now go to a dark room, as if you were using your phone at night. Well you still see the top corners of your phone's screen on. Of course that color is black, but it's awful. (In a dark room you see it better, but I see it in the sun as well).
Always-On-Display or AOD :
You can't have AOD on an ips panel. End of the story.
Brightness :
Outside in full daylight, I constantly have to block sunlight off the screen and put it right up to my face to see what's on it. OLED is way brighter.
Bonus :
Dark mode is here in the MIUI beta and coming to everyone later. MIUI 11 will have it out of the box. This means phones with OLED screens will have a great battery advantage over ips.
Also - OLED and AMOLED tend to use very low PWM which may give you a headache/migraine.
For instance - Xiaomi Mi 8 with AMOLED panel has backlight that flickers at 100 Hz, Samsung S9+ has AMOLED panel with backlight that flickers at 215.5 Hz while Pocophone has a backlight that flickers at 2315 Hz (source - notebookcheck reviews)
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Why-Pulse-Width-Modulation-PWM-is-such-a-headache.270240.0.html
Rowdyy Ronnie said:
Lo. I wonder if you have ever used a Samsung device with sAMOLED display? Just place both a sAMOLED and a LCD display side by side and see the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They have pros and cons, both of them. While sAMOLED has better contrast, black colour, and often better viewing angles, IPS has most of the time better colour accuracy and it's better to look at while exposed to direct sunlight. I mean, you use the one which suits you the best. Unfortunately, Xiaomi uses probably some cheat IPS panels, so they look worse compared to some higher end phone with IPS panels.
True black is just an excuse ??
And amoled panels aren't bad or anything. They are just over rated and people say. Amoled- amoled l. Look it's not that a big of a deal.
And battery consumption difference is just minor
Like 3 or 4% through dark mode in amoleds too
So what's the hype
I just said Poco-f1 LCD panel is just as good as OLED
If not it's only a difference of 19-20
Nothing more
Ill always prefer lcd. When i bought the phone i had to keep it on over night for data transfer via wifi as i had no pc , to keep the wifi transfer app alive i had to keep screen timeout to never, on morning i noticed lcd retention all over the screen ?(similar to amoled burn in but not permanent), had it been an amoled surely my screen would have to be replaced day 2 of buying a new phone. I had to use the phone screen a lot but the Lcd retention went away completely after around 8 hrs:victory:, so no amoled ever unless they fix burn in!
lol this thread is like a circlejerk. my poco f1 has crappier display than my a2. it has the lowest quality lcd possible. this comes from someone who has used over 37 android smartphones throughout this decade with many being top tier flagships.
But poco F1 has a comparatively dim display even for an LCD. Under heavy sunlight it becomes difficult to see the display. On S10 for example you can clearly see it in any condition. That is why they bumped up the brightness in the poco X2