Ok, I am reading all of these posts and EVERYONE for some reason or another thinks the Lumia 920 will have the best screen "by far". I think this is pure speculation and Nokia has you believing it will be the best. The only thing I can see that changed from any other device is they say it now runs at 60hz or the refresh rate is 60 and you can use it with gloves on so its super sensitive (which actually could end up being a flaw because it will be very easy to accidentally launch an app since anything that touches the screen will do it)
Have you guys that are saying it IS the best ever used a HTC One X screen? That screen is currently the best screen on any smartphone and I have a hard time believing that an IPS display with nokia's clearblack technology will beat the 8X screen because the 8X will be using the same exact Super LCD 2 screen that is found on the One X just with a smaller size and higher PPI.
I have used just about every device currently on the market and I can honestly tell you that the reviewers that have reviewed the One X are not incorrect when they almost always point out that the screen is the best they have ever seen on a mobile device. When comparing a One X next to my IPS display on my Nexus 7, the colors on the One X just pop and it really makes that IPS look bad. Also streaming a 720p mkv file from my NAS, the One X display blows the Nexus 7 away and all the other phones I have with Super Amoled HD or Super Amoled Plus screens.
I just wanna know what makes the Lumia the best? I think we have to see it in person to claim it is "the best screen by far"
timgt said:
Ok, I am reading all of these posts and EVERYONE for some reason or another thinks the Lumia 920 will have the best screen "by far". I think this is pure speculation and Nokia has you believing it will be the best. The only thing I can see that changed from any other device is they say it now runs at 60hz or the refresh rate is 60 and you can use it with gloves on so its super sensitive (which actually could end up being a flaw because it will be very easy to accidentally launch an app since anything that touches the screen will do it)
Have you guys that are saying it IS the best ever used a HTC One X screen? That screen is currently the best screen on any smartphone and I have a hard time believing that an IPS display with nokia's clearblack technology will beat the 8X screen because the 8X will be using the same exact Super LCD 2 screen that is found on the One X just with a smaller size and higher PPI.
I have used just about every device currently on the market and I can honestly tell you that the reviewers that have reviewed the One X are not incorrect when they almost always point out that the screen is the best they have ever seen on a mobile device. When comparing a One X next to my IPS display on my Nexus 7, the colors on the One X just pop and it really makes that IPS look bad. Also streaming a 720p mkv file from my NAS, the One X display blows the Nexus 7 away and all the other phones I have with Super Amoled HD or Super Amoled Plus screens.
I just wanna know what makes the Lumia the best? I think we have to see it in person to claim it is "the best screen by far"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not only is the refresh rate higher removing motion blur (as much as you can), but it uses nokia clear black tech (look at the 800). On top of that it is the brightest screen on any mobile device (can be viewed in direct sunlight). Nokia screens rock even the 808 screen rocks and that has pathetic ppi as its Symbian so imagine what hd will look like.
lumpaywk said:
Not only is the refresh rate higher removing motion blur (as much as you can), but it uses nokia clear black tech (look at the 800). On top of that it is the brightest screen on any mobile device (can be viewed in direct sunlight). Nokia screens rock even the 808 screen rocks and that has pathetic ppi as its Symbian so imagine what hd will look like.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your statement about the brightness is incorrect. At max it is 600 nits (best case scenario), the motorola droid bionic is 635.6 nits so it is not the brightest screen on any mobile device. Also the HTC One X was over 500 nits anyway so the brightness argument is pretty irrelevant.
timgt said:
I think we have to see it in person to claim it is "the best screen by far"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This sums it up. We can't know if the 920 will have the better display or if the 8X will have the better display until we see both.
It's also quite funny that you complain about people claiming that a phone will have a better display than another when they haven't seen them, and then you go on to imply that the 8X will have the better display.
You state that the 920 has IPS as if that's a bad thing? And you base that entirely on the fact that the N7 has an IPS display and you don't like it? The N7 has a low quality IPS display, of course it doesn't look that impressive. If you knew anything about display tech you would know that high quality IPS displays are some of the best out there. Most high end monitors are IPS displays.
Sent from my HTC Sensation using xda app-developers app
The Janitor Mop said:
This sums it up. We can't know if the 920 will have the better display or if the 8X will have the better display until we see both.
It's also quite funny that you complain about people claiming that a phone will have a better display than another when they haven't seen them, and then you go on to imply that the 8X will have the better display.
You state that the 920 has IPS as if that's a bad thing? And you base that entirely on the fact that the N7 has an IPS display and you don't like it? The N7 has a low quality IPS display, of course it doesn't look that impressive. If you knew anything about display tech you would know that high quality IPS displays are some of the best out there. Most high end monitors are IPS displays.
Sent from my HTC Sensation using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't imply the 8X will have the better display, im just sick of reading all over the place that the 920 has the superior display from people that haven't even touched a One X. I would love to see the 920 have the best display but I really see the LCD 2 screen hard to beat. The only place it falls short is Amoled Black levels.
I know not all IPS displays are as crappy as the Nexus 7, My Ipad 3 has a very good looking screen but I still think it falls a little short compared to the screen the One X offers.
We will just have to wait and see, people should dismiss this claim of the 920 having the best display. Without tech sites being able to do a side by side comparison with both device in hand we can't claim WE know which has the best display.
timgt said:
Your statement about the brightness is incorrect. At max it is 600 nits (best case scenario), the motorola droid bionic is 635.6 nits so it is not the brightest screen on any mobile device. Also the HTC One X was over 500 nits anyway so the brightness argument is pretty irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know anything about the Droid Bionic tbf you may be correct there, I also am not saying for fact as you said you have to see them in the flesh. Its the same with any spec on an unreleased product. We go by what is reported and compare that to the next and draw conclusions from that and from all the evidence as I said above it is fair to sy the lumia will have a better screen.
"It's 25% brighter than the next brightest smartphone display on the market" quote from Nokia, as I said it may be wrong I am just going on what is available. Also though not the 25% claimed 500 is about 83.3% of 600, that's still quite a jump.
timgt said:
I didn't imply the 8X will have the better display, im just sick of reading all over the place that the 920 has the superior display from people that haven't even touched a One X. I would love to see the 920 have the best display but I really see the LCD 2 screen hard to beat. The only place it falls short is Amoled Black levels.
I know not all IPS displays are as crappy as the Nexus 7, My Ipad 3 has a very good looking screen but I still think it falls a little short compared to the screen the One X offers.
We will just have to wait and see, people should dismiss this claim of the 920 having the best display. Without tech sites being able to do a side by side comparison with both device in hand we can't claim WE know which has the best display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you are saying that the One X display is better than the Ipad 3 display? Come on While I really like the One X Super LCD 2 I have to give it to the iPad 3, I think it is just the most gorgeous display around atm, be it on phone or tablet...Too bad I cannot afford one, but I have used it quite a bit in my office and compared to One X, S3 etc. and I think they don't even come close, even though they are even better on paper, like more ppi and stuff. In the end I think it comes down to user experience and personal preference.
Regarding the Lumia 920 - I do think it will probably have a better display than One X, iphone 5, 8x, S3 w/e. You will see the difference in sunlight, where, as someone already mentioned, even the 808 stands out. Just wait and see. About the super sensitive stuff - you might have a point here, I hope it is not going to end up overly uber sensitive. That being said, I do love the fact that you can use gloves, since I hate the hassle that is talking on the phone while skiing/being on a lift. Can lead to serious gloves losses and is obviously annoying :cyclops:
falconyx said:
I do love the fact that you can use gloves, since I hate the hassle that is talking on the phone while skiing/being on a lift. Can lead to serious gloves losses and is obviously annoying :cyclops:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a real issue lol. Other issues include things like going sailing/kayaking etc when you want your phone in a sealed waterproof bag. Or hiking/walking. I am fat and lazy so non of these affect me but my mum does all of it and would also love the great camera and big battery once again because she does all of this.
Trolololo Nokia again. Screen of xperia P is around 780-800 nits (RGBW ftw). I highly doubt that the lumia's screen is over 1000 nits.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Fighting over things that all of you have never seen in person or touched. Nice.
I tried nokia c6, e7, n9, neo, iphone 4s, evo 3D i give the evo 3D for best performance but with respect to nokia not a day passed it restarted itself or had any sort of problem with apps even android in n9 was awesome, i don't think people are exagerating about the 920 and 820 release
louis.b said:
Fighting over things that all of you have never seen in person or touched. Nice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No but I have not seen the lumia but I have seen though I didn't get to play with the 8x and it was about on a par with the one x. I also have a lumia 800 with clear black and the diff it makes is amazing, even with the lower res the same images just pop of the screen. I know a lot of people don't like the artificialness of it like the same as not liking beats audio etc. However I have seen enough of nokia and htc and Samsung to be able to put forth an argument with the info we have. I may be wrong and I will be the first to say it didn't live up but you don't need to drive a Ferrari to know its better than an impreza.
I actually recently acquired a one x and I still like the LG hd nitro screen better. It's more crisp and colors are really nice. I also think that screen gave the iPhone retina display a run for its money.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
The iPhone screen and the One X screen are overatted. Sense 4.0 makes the One V screen look nice.
Not that I am saying the Lumia 920 will have the best screen or anything because judging by the videos, the 8x and One X screen does look better still. The point is that most high end devices have pretty nice screens and none blow the other away. That is just fanboy talk. They are all quite close except for the deformed iPhone 5 screen. No one wants to watch movies on a bookmark.
I think they all will be close with the 8x taking it provided HTC gets to sensify wp8. If not, the One X probably keeps the crown or maybe the Optimus G. That screen looks sharp in videos too.
Tomatoes8 said:
The iPhone screen and the One X screen are overatted. Sense 4.0 makes the One V screen look nice.
Not that I am saying the Lumia 920 will have the best screen or anything because judging by the videos, the 8x and One X screen does look better still. The point is that most high end devices have pretty nice screens and none blow the other away. That is just fanboy talk. They are all quite close except for the deformed iPhone 5 screen. No one wants to watch movies on a bookmark.
I think they all will be close with the 8x taking it provided HTC gets to sensify wp8. If not, the One X probably keeps the crown or maybe the Optimus G. That screen looks sharp in videos too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you mean with all this?
Wow people are arguing that the One X has a superior screen to IPS, when the One X screen is a FREAKIN IPS screen. HTC has given it a fancy SUperLCD2 name to differentiate but it is still an IPS screen. The other high-end type of LCD screen is PLS, which Samsung puts in its tablets. It's similar to IPS but is cheaper to make. There's nothing else. HTC hasn't developed some newfangled LCD technology. The top tier is all IPS, with different variations and quality.
Comparing the One X to the Nexus 7 is stupid since it is a budget IPS screen. This was known since the beginning when DisplayMate ran tests that showed it clipped a lot of lower black shades. The One X ain't perfect either. It is overly warm and personally as a previous owner of the One X, I was not impressed by the contrast, viewing angles, nor the warm and sleepy look. The iPhone 5 and the iPad 3 have the best and most color-corrected displays on mobile right now. I know there will be many screaming bloody murder, and in fact there already are people doing so, that an Apple product is ever mentioned in a good light. The ability to reason escaped them long ago.
I can tell the Lumia 920 has a better display than the One X. How is that you say? Through many many youtube videos. People are gonna go blah blah you can't compare screens through a youtube video or that my screen sucks and it will never be able to showcase a better display. This thinking is flawed since experience shows to be otherwise and evety screen I've seen on youtube looks almost the same in real life. The One X looks warm and sleepy with average contrast on my computer. It was the same way when I got it in the mail and booted it up. The Lumia 900 has these awful blue live tiles on youtube videos, because it's Nokia's AMOLED tech and the colors are all wack. Same thing confirmed on literally half a dozen Lumia 900 models displayed at my local AT&T store. The iPhone 5 and iPad 3 screen are just as good in person as youtube videos suggest. Youtube videos will exaggerate any color imbalances or lack of sharpness and general screen quality. You need to look for the high quality hands-on videos, not the crappy blurry amateur porn looking ones with strange hues.
That's how I can tell the Lumia 920 is better than the 8X screen. The videos of the Lumia 920 make the colors look far more neutral, more colorful and bright, and much higher contrast and even looking. The 8X has the same screen as the One X, which doesn't have the same contrast, has a warmer and sleepier look (like the cinema mode on a TV), and just isn't as punchy.
katamari201 said:
Wow people are arguing that the One X has a superior screen to IPS, when the One X screen is a FREAKIN IPS screen. HTC has given it a fancy SUperLCD2 name to differentiate but it is still an IPS screen. The other high-end type of LCD screen is PLS, which Samsung puts in its tablets. It's similar to IPS but is cheaper to make. There's nothing else. HTC hasn't developed some newfangled LCD technology. The top tier is all IPS, with different variations and quality.
Comparing the One X to the Nexus 7 is stupid since it is a budget IPS screen. This was known since the beginning when DisplayMate ran tests that showed it clipped a lot of lower black shades. The One X ain't perfect either. It is overly warm and personally as a previous owner of the One X, I was not impressed by the contrast, viewing angles, nor the warm and sleepy look. The iPhone 5 and the iPad 3 have the best and most color-corrected displays on mobile right now. I know there will be many screaming bloody murder, and in fact there already are people doing so, that an Apple product is ever mentioned in a good light. The ability to reason escaped them long ago.
I can tell the Lumia 920 has a better display than the One X. How is that you say? Through many many youtube videos. People are gonna go blah blah you can't compare screens through a youtube video or that my screen sucks and it will never be able to showcase a better display. This thinking is flawed since experience shows to be otherwise and evety screen I've seen on youtube looks almost the same in real life. The One X looks warm and sleepy with average contrast on my computer. It was the same way when I got it in the mail and booted it up. The Lumia 900 has these awful blue live tiles on youtube videos, because it's Nokia's AMOLED tech and the colors are all wack. Same thing confirmed on literally half a dozen Lumia 900 models displayed at my local AT&T store. The iPhone 5 and iPad 3 screen are just as good in person as youtube videos suggest. Youtube videos will exaggerate any color imbalances or lack of sharpness and general screen quality. You need to look for the high quality hands-on videos, not the crappy blurry amateur porn looking ones with strange hues.
That's how I can tell the Lumia 920 is better than the 8X screen. The videos of the Lumia 920 make the colors look far more neutral, more colorful and bright, and much higher contrast and even looking. The 8X has the same screen as the One X, which doesn't have the same contrast, has a warmer and sleepier look (like the cinema mode on a TV), and just isn't as punchy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone is on crack. Like I said before, no matter how sharp the iPhone 5 display is, it loses on shape and a pathetic width alone. It makes everything look tall and skinny or really short and wide unless you zoom. That is an automatic fail.
Tomatoes8 said:
Someone is on crack. Like I said before, no matter how sharp the iPhone 5 display is, it loses on shape and a pathetic width alone. It makes everything look tall and skinny or really short and wide unless you zoom. That is an automatic fail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't get why you think this as it has just changes to a 16x9 aspect ratio, This is the same as most screens on new phones 720x1280 i think its the same as the one x though don't quote me on that but it is deffo the same as the upcoming htc 8x. I hate the iPhone i think its stupidly over priced over hyped and dull, but, the screen is still really nice though i found that the blacks are really grey.
lumpaywk said:
I don't get why you think this as it has just changes to a 16x9 aspect ratio, This is the same as most screens on new phones 720x1280 i think its the same as the one x though don't quote me on that but it is deffo the same as the upcoming htc 8x. I hate the iPhone i think its stupidly over priced over hyped and dull, but, the screen is still really nice though i found that the blacks are really grey.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has the same aspect ratio as the One X but 16.9 aspect ratio doesn't work for small screens. And since the iPhone 5 screen is no wider and only taller than their old 3.5 inch screen, they should have kept the 4:3 aspect ratio. The iPad uses 4:3 because that is the proper aspect ratio for IOS. The iPhone 5 screen is ugly as hell and just does not fit. It is the equivalent of using one of those skinny or fat mirrors at an amusent park as the mirror in your bathroom. It doesn't matter how nice the glass is it is still a circus mirror.
Tomatoes8 said:
It has the same aspect ratio as the One X but 16.9 aspect ratio doesn't work for small screens. And since the iPhone 5 screen is no wider and only taller than their old 3.5 inch screen, they should have kept the 4:3 aspect ratio. The iPad uses 4:3 because that is the proper aspect ratio for IOS. The iPhone 5 screen is ugly as hell and just does not fit. It is the equivalent of using one of those skinny or fat mirrors at an amusent park as the mirror in your bathroom. It doesn't matter how nice the glass is it is still a circus mirror.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
? If you have a 4:3 aspect ratio with a 1280x720 resolution, you would have rectangular pixels, very rectangular. In fact, almost every phone with such a resolution has rectangular pixels with the exception of the new iphone whose pixels are as close to properly squared as you're going to find. That means everything on the new iphone is properly proportioned, whereas on most phones, images are slightly widened in portrait and lengthened in landscape.
Related
Has anyone else seen the iphone 4 commercial saying the screen is the highest resolution screen ever on a phone?
I thought the vibrant had a better screen? It definitely looks better than the iphone four though.
The iPhone 4 does have the highest resolution ever. Samsung claims that the SAMOLED screens have better viewing angles and all that ****. Its really just what u think overall I guess.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
The pixels and the screen size on the iphone 4 have a better looking screen while the vibrant has a bigger screen but lesser pixels so yeah the iphone 4 screen is better but iOS sucks =]
the iPhone 4 has a 3.5 inch LCD screen has a resolution of 960 x 640
the vibrant has a 4 inch S-AMOLED screen that has a resolution of 800 x 480
the S-AMOLED screen displays colors clearer and truer and is easier to see in the sun, the iPhone 4 has an insane pixel density that makes things look cleaner
its a matter of preference really once you let an iPhone 4 owner watch Avatar on your vibrant they will be extremely jealous
That's pretty surprising.
The kid with the iphone 4 finally got pissed at me and quoted the commercial lmao.
But I still think the vibrant looks cleaner plus bigger screen=better.
We compared angry birds visuals on lowest brightness. I won
xSunny said:
The pixels and the screen size on the iphone 4 have a better looking screen while the vibrant has a bigger screen but lesser pixels so yeah the iphone 4 screen is better but iOS sucks =]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Better looking screen"?! Are you for real?
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?deskto...e.com/watch?v=xiO3s8NdQ34&v=xiO3s8NdQ34&gl=US
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
ive compared the I4 and Vibrant tirelessly after seeing my friends I4. I was blown away and confused by how good the I4 OS looks, its pretty shocking because there is nothing else like it, at least in the domestic mobile device arena. I was actually pissed off that my vibrant looked so much fuzzier, i almost stopped using it and just pulled out my old nexus I was so bummed.
But after I looked into it further it became clear that the I4's visual advantage is limited to the OS, which is definitely important but it doesnt include media, so the Vibrant's samoled does have an advantage in that department. Also, I think the I4 is much easier to see in daylight, the Vibrant is somewhat better than than the Nexus, which is virtually invisible under the sun, but the Vibrant is still no treat to use outside.
The I4 is far and away better looking as far as the operating system which basically includes all lines; apps and their icons, text, the browser, you cant see pixels, its not even close. Also, the old and new Iphones alike scroll without blurring like Android does (I believe its because of GPU acceleration which, if Im not mistaken, Android will add with Gingerbread?), it keeps its resolution while scrolling which makes a big difference visually, particularly in the browser. With Android phones, once you are pressing the screen to scroll in the browser, you can see a huge difference between pressing and not pressing, as soon as you let up the screen goes back to its optimal quality. But the Vibrant absolutely looks better with all media.
I4 has more pixels on a smaller screen with crazy pixel density, so that part really cant be personal preference, unless you prefer fuzzier lines/text. But it is relative, if the I4 didnt exist I would be wild for the Vibrants screen in media and the OS alike. But the I4 obviously has a better look in the OS alone, but not media.
tonomon said:
That's pretty surprising.
The kid with the iphone 4 finally got pissed at me and quoted the commercial lmao.
But I still think the vibrant looks cleaner plus bigger screen=better.
We compared angry birds visuals on lowest brightness. I won
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparing Angry Birds is a bad comparison - the iPhone version is not optimized for the iPhone4 display, I don't think. It's a lower resolution than the Android version.
Retina display has higher pixel density, and you have to try real hard to distinguish between the pixels, however if you put two screens together and just look at them without digging your nose into your phone you can hardly see that SAMOLED is a bit washed out compared to the Retina, but once you fire up a high quality video SAMOLED will take it any day due to its brightness and dynamic contrast. I do think colors on Sammy are over saturated like with almost all of their LCD/LED panels.
tehmanmuffin said:
the iPhone 4 has a 3.5 inch LCD screen has a resolution of 960 x 640
the vibrant has a 4 inch S-AMOLED screen that has a resolution of 800 x 480
the S-AMOLED screen displays colors clearer and truer and is easier to see in the sun, the iPhone 4 has an insane pixel density that makes things look cleaner
its a matter of preference really once you let an iPhone 4 owner watch Avatar on your vibrant they will be extremely jealous
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very true, my iphone 4 friends are jealous of my screen
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
yeah the iphone 4 have a better screen when we are talking about pixels but when it comes to watching video files, there's no way any other phone will beat our super duper amoled screen.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
DMaverick50 said:
ive compared the I4 and Vibrant tirelessly after seeing my friends I4. I was blown away and confused by how good the I4 OS looks, its pretty shocking because there is nothing else like it, at least in the domestic mobile device arena. I was actually pissed off that my vibrant looked so much fuzzier, i almost stopped using it and just pulled out my old nexus I was so bummed.
But after I looked into it further it became clear that the I4's visual advantage is limited to the OS, which is definitely important but it doesnt include media, so the Vibrant's samoled does have an advantage in that department. Also, I think the I4 is much easier to see in daylight, the Vibrant is somewhat better than than the Nexus, which is virtually invisible under the sun, but the Vibrant is still no treat to use outside.
The I4 is far and away better looking as far as the operating system which basically includes all lines; apps and their icons, text, the browser, you cant see pixels, its not even close. Also, the old and new Iphones alike scroll without blurring like Android does (I believe its because of GPU acceleration which, if Im not mistaken, Android will add with Gingerbread?), it keeps its resolution while scrolling which makes a big difference visually, particularly in the browser. With Android phones, once you are pressing the screen to scroll in the browser, you can see a huge difference between pressing and not pressing, as soon as you let up the screen goes back to its optimal quality. But the Vibrant absolutely looks better with all media.
I4 has more pixels on a smaller screen with crazy pixel density, so that part really cant be personal preference, unless you prefer fuzzier lines/text. But it is relative, if the I4 didnt exist I would be wild for the Vibrants screen in media and the OS alike. But the I4 obviously has a better look in the OS alone, but not media.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about, I've used my phone in direct sunlight in the middle of the day and the screen is easily readable with MINIMUM brightness, unless your screen is dirty and is being extra reflective because of it, this screen works amazing in the sun, on full its clear even with glare
Also, my vibrant's browser does not blur, I just tested it for a goods few mins and no bluring at all
And lastly on discussion, the i4's screen resolution + the smaller size of the screen kinda makes you think its sharper but its a smaller screen...does a higher resolution help it at all? Do you see any distinguishable difference from a lower res screen?
The only advantage i4 has is how dim and how bright the display can get because its an lcd however super amoled wins overall
Sent from my SXY-T959
Doesn't super-Amoled give a blueish tint on whites? on my i4 the browser sucks, it gives pattern checker board things when scrolling super fast, and on android i never got this.
IMHO overall the S-amoled is better, the colors are more vivid but it's funny how the maker of both displays is Samsung
Hexmaster93 said:
IMHO overall the S-amoled is better, the colors are more vivid but it's funny how the maker of both displays is Samsung
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol then samsung wins
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
kanwal236 said:
What are you talking about, I've used my phone in direct sunlight in the middle of the day and the screen is easily readable with MINIMUM brightness, unless your screen is dirty and is being extra reflective because of it, this screen works amazing in the sun, on full its clear even with glare
Also, my vibrant's browser does not blur, I just tested it for a goods few mins and no bluring at all
And lastly on discussion, the i4's screen resolution + the smaller size of the screen kinda makes you think its sharper but its a smaller screen...does a higher resolution help it at all? Do you see any distinguishable difference from a lower res screen?
The only advantage i4 has is how dim and how bright the display can get because its an lcd however super amoled wins overall
Sent from my SXY-T959
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had the blurry browser srolling on all my Google phones. Its more noticeable if you've used an iPhone for a while then used a Google phone for a while. Just go to this forum, and look at the arrows pointing right and the icons especially the envelopes to the left of the thread titles. Now slowly scroll, you'll notice the envelopes almost blinking, and the lines become jagged off and on. So when you scroll normally theres a subtle choppiness. But really its only annoying because iPhones don't do it they are smooth, I thinking its the gpu acceleration which we should have shortly. Android hadn't said why they have put off gpu acc so long. Or maqybe they have but I don't know about it. As far as sunlight it could he better but coming from a nexus I would say the vibrant is indeed a treat
I hope this isn't too off topic. I've over clocked and lag fixed my vibrant, I'm trying to show up this guy at my job that has iphone4 how do you run a benchmark test on iphone so we can compare? I'm at 1700 benchmark right now
Joshochoa187 said:
I hope this isn't too off topic. I've over clocked and lag fixed my vibrant, I'm trying to show up this guy at my job that has iphone4 how do you run a benchmark test on iphone so we can compare? I'm at 1700 benchmark right now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's linpack for iPhone, but it isn't made by the same company, so I am not sure how *valid* the comparison would be. There isn't really any universal benchmarking tools that exists on both platforms. So you are SOL at the moment.
Dunno why this turned into a iphone vs galaxy s post but here is a link for an unbiased view on both of these phones screens (scroll to bottom);
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9000_galaxy_s_vs_apple_iphone_4-review-500p3.php
Most people won't be able to tell the difference in my opinion. Now if you are blowing up pics and text you will probably will see the difference. The super amoled blew me away the first time I saw avatar on it, Iphone can't do that.
I know that there have already been posts about this but...... I played with my friends galaxy s - vodafone branded. Totally rubbish screen. Vibrant, oversaturated, and very very blurry - almost PSP screen blurry. It was awful, and text virtually unreadable. Then, both my parents got iPhone 4s. WOW. Screen is so sharp its beautiful. Atrix was looking great until I saw that it was RGBW rather than RGB. Why? Can anyone comment? Is it better/worse than galaxy s clarity wise? Better/worse than iPhone 4 clarity wise? Any photos MUCH appreciated. Thanks a lot
iPhone 4 > Motorola Atrix
iPhone 4 has a 3.5" screen with a resolution of 960 by 640.
Now this screen is just drop-dead gorgeous. And nobody can argue with that. It has a pixel density of 326 ppi. This is more than the human eye can see, and is thus named the 'Retina Display'
On the other hand, the Motorola Atrix is much newer and is running Android. It has a 540by 960 but a 4 inch display. This is considerably more blurry than the iPhone 4's display. It has a useless laptop dock but for $499 who will think to buy it?!?!?!?! It does not even have a proper OS on it!
Once you have used the iPhone 4 I can assure you that you will never return to the Motorola Atrix. Now if you are a gamer like me, then you need a good Applications Store. The Apple iPhone 4 has the Apple App Store with stunning applications with HD graphics. Whereas, the Motorola Atrix utilises the Android Market which has rubbish, useless, demo apps. The best application on the Android Market is probably Angry Birds, which has advertisements filling the screen and can become very buggy.
In conclusion, I believe that iPhone 4, albeit much older, is superior to the Motorola Atrix anyday. This shows how Apple remains victorious so far. Until the iPhone 5 is released.
Apple troll
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
holy fanboy batman!
yes, the pixel density of the iphone4 is better, but i assure you it's not so great you can't see it.
Trolls Trolls
Deary me, another appolyte . iSheep these days....
You have a point with the retina display being a higher PPI. Wow. It took a genius to figure that out. I'm trying to find out how much better it is, and I really can't take a trolls word for it :/
DarkyHero,
I want to thank you, I have not had a good laugh all day until reading your post.
kartik50,
First off i'd recommend to not pay any attention to trolls with some agenda and half baked inaccurate ideas.
But, moving on, in my family we have the Galaxy S, Iphone 4 and I have the Atrix. I do find the Iphone screen to be very good, no question about it however I personally liked the Galaxy S screen better. But that was until I got my Atrix. It was then I noticed how over saturated the Galaxy S looked (and as you said a little blurry, but not by much) when putting them side by side. As far as what one out of the three are the best? I think its personal preference and all 3 (to me) look very good. I'd pick the screen of the iPhone4 1st then the Atrix second. The Atrix is very sharp and clear and I'm having no complaints.
As far as the obvious far from fact-based claim from DarkyHero about the app market on Android.. I'm sure you recognize a troll for what they are.
I guess my eyes are just weird then. My freind standing right next to me, couldn't see any of the issues I could with the Galaxy s screen. We only looked at the Touchwiz Ui 3.0 text. However, iPhone blows me away. I have a 3GS right now, so I hope that the Atrix is far far superior. On a side note, Atrix vs Xperia Play? Both on Orange Uk, update months overdue.......
iPhone 4 wins as far as displays go. There isn't another mobile device on the market with a better screen. The Atrix has the best looking screen of any Android device, unless of course you like the oversaturated samsung super amoleds. The only use case where the Atrix's screen falls short is when brightness is cranked up to max, but there is honestly no need to do this unless you are trying to look at your phone in direct sun light.
I wish we were able to save you before the Apple troll showed up. Anyway.
iPhone 4 does have a beautiful screen, however, this 3.5" screen is way too small to enjoy. Once you try a +4" screen, you won't ever go back. Moreover, Atrix has the same footprint of iPhone 4, so you won't notice any extra bulk with the significantly bigger screen.
qHD is almost same as iPhone 4's screen resolution, so there should be no worries there either. As a matter of fact, given the widescreen you'll find on the Atrix, you'll see more pixels of your movies than you normally would on iPhone 4's square-ish display.
A BIG difference between iPhone 4 and Atrix is the dual-core Cortex A9-based Tegra 2 processor; you'll get a seemless FULL DESKTOP experience when browsing the web. With Opera Mobile 11, you'll be able to have iPhone-smoothness as well.
In response to darkyhero.
Is this a serious post? Or are you just this big of an idiot? The iTurd does not have a retina display, it was just marketing hype.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-retina/
I one minute Google search found this.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
wow!
Something tells me dhero has never used an atrix, been an android power user, played starfox 64 on their atrix with a wiimote, or understood the walled garden of apple's for what it is: a fortress of steve jobs devoid of hacking(the good kind), pornography, and meant for people of all ages, like the 13 year old darky hero here. Judging by your blind optimism for iOS and writing, maybe steve jobs was on the money making a sanitized kids toy. Oh wait its not a kids toy it shatters like a wine glass from 4 feet. Ok, I guess he just wants your money. Every year. You cannot even swap the damn batteries out, my last smartphone lasted me 3 years with 4 batteries. And yes it got five days of solid use with an extended battery...
Ugh don’t get me started on apple and their financial brilliance(their financial success often comes at the cost of their customers, *cough* apple tax *cough*).
So - clarity wise can anyone say its better than SGS? Also- I just saw a review from PhoneDog saying that Nexus S>Atrix? WTF? I mean lag lag lag lag thats all the Atrix was doing? I know there arent any custom roms - Damn you motorola! - but will there be fixes? I know what its like to get a cutting edge phone that became obsolete (samsung Tocco). BTW u guys reply FAST. Thanks!
Definitely. SGS has a 480x800 sceen. Clarity will definitely be better than that.
kartik50 said:
So - clarity wise can anyone say its better than SGS? Also- I just saw a review from PhoneDog saying that Nexus S>Atrix? WTF? I mean lag lag lag lag thats all the Atrix was doing? I know there arent any custom roms - Damn you motorola! - but will there be fixes? I know what its like to get a cutting edge phone that became obsolete (samsung Tocco). BTW u guys reply FAST. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't seen any lag on my phone. Granted, I'm coming from a Touch Pro, so anything should seem fast buuuut...
Get Opera Mobile from the marketplace for a web browser and it clips along pretty good.
So it's not android optimization for dual core? If thats the case, then why te f.u.c.k did Moto even put on blur?!
I have two screenshots with accompanying pictures of the screen for comparison:
http://www.mylilsite.net/images/atrix/homescreen1.png
http://www.mylilsite.net/images/atrix/homescreen1-t2i.jpg
You'll notice any solid color ends up being "checkerboarded" by the PenTile screen.
http://www.mylilsite.net/images/atrix/speakPrompt1.png
http://www.mylilsite.net/images/atrix/speakPrompt1-t2i.jpg
The gradient was already weird (blocky?) in the screenshot, but on the actual screen it just looks terrible.
I notice the PenTile color "checkerboarding" all the time in w/e apps or videos and it is a distraction but for me it isn't a deal breaker.
Thanks so much for posting these pics! You call it checkerboarding, I call it blurriness but this is it - the thing I saw on the galaxy s. Well if it's back.... Mainly this screen will be used for gaming, movies and web browsing. I'd say movies will be below par due to bad colour- gaming too and email mucked up due to pentile. Plz correct me- bc it's looking quite grim...
kartik50 said:
Thanks so much for posting these pics! You call it checkerboarding, I call it blurriness but this is it - the thing I saw on the galaxy s. Well if it's back.... Mainly this screen will be used for gaming, movies and web browsing. I'd say movies will be below par due to bad colour- gaming too and email mucked up due to pentile. Plz correct me- bc it's looking quite grim...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guys are high... I'm not experiencing any clipping like I did on the nexus one gallery. Quick pic for gallery and dolphin for browser.
Sent from my Motorola Olympus
ChongoDroid said:
You guys are high... I'm not experiencing any clipping like I did on the nexus one gallery. Quick pic for gallery and dolphin for browser.
Sent from my Motorola Olympus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is clipping?
The Atrix has a 4" display with 540 x 960 resolution. This is higher pixel density than almost every other phone on the market except the iPhone 4. The iPhone, however, only has a 3.5" display, and once you have used a 4" display for any length of time (or even a 3.7") it is very hard to loose that extra space. It is the highest resolution and pixel density android phone available (except for that Sharp one in Japan that is an NTT DoCoMo exclusive and uses the same display Sharp supply to Apple).
PenTile is laid out RRB GGB so you have RGB, just two lots of each. Unless you are insanely fussy about screens, you will not notice. Plus it will look better than most other screens purely for having a higher pixel density.
I wouldn't worry about it being PenTile. Have a look at this http://www.anandtech.com/show/4165/the-motorola-atrix-4g-preview/4 .
Many of the reviews of the titan refer to jaggies on text and visible pixels. I can't see anything like this, everytning is perfectly crisp and clear to me. Has anyone else seen these artefacts or are they a fantasy dreamt up by the reviewers, or maybe my eyes are even more screwed than I thought!!
Yes, you should go see a doctor now.
Nope havent noticed either.
It has a higher ppi than the iphone 3gs. Whoever says they think the screen is jaggy, or whatever, is deliberately nitpicking, IMO!
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
Looks fine to me. No jaggies. I have this phone on trial and it's better than I thought. Quality of build is great and the phone doesn't feel too big. Nice job HTC.
Agree with everyone here after a month of using the phone
Sent from my TITAN X310e using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
After ordering one on Saturday I went to AT&T to check out the screen. The screen is nice and big, but it's not as clear as the iPhone 4. It's most apparent when looking at webpages, I can read the smallest text on the iPhone 4 despite it's smaller screen because of the high PPI. I think I might enjoy the larger screen vs the higher PPI.
If you want to see an example of jagged pixels, check out your avatar on the Xbox Live page. It's very noticeable.
I do think wp7 need to increase the resolution for these large screen devices. The lives are just too big! Love the titan but can't get over how giant those live tiles are compared to my HTC Radar! The jagged text is not an issue unless you pt your eye close to the screen though.
Sent from my HTC Titan using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
I don't know about Titan,but when I compared the Radar side by side with my iPhone, they didn't have much of a difference except for when viewing a page completely zoomed out. The Radar showed jadgged pixels whereas iPhone didn't. but it isn't a big deal IMO. I couldn't read the iPhones text zoomed out because the screen is too small.
But I agree with the OP,some reviews just give the Titan a low score becaus of its dispay ppi which is ridiculous IMO. One of those sites is gsmarena.com. these guys didn't even know what ppi was lol but as soon as iPhone 4 was released,they paid a lot of attention to ppi and gave a low score to any dispay with 300 or lower ppi.
jeremyshaw said:
It has a higher ppi than the iphone 3gs. Whoever says they think the screen is jaggy, or whatever, is deliberately nitpicking, IMO!
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you can see it when reading documents or viewing icons in windows phone. It's really apparent when reading pdfs or anything on the light theme. It's a minor annoyance versus the focus s/flash and the lumia, but its not a huge deal breaker
As far as other sites, its their opinions. And they go through phones daily, so to go from a phone with higher pixel density, you sort of expect it in a lot of your smart phone usage. When its not there, it's quite peculiar to watch. For some its a huge negative, but i can also see how people have stated that it gives Windows a comical experience.
I actually agree with the other pages
I'd like to hear from people who currently own the SIII or have compared it directly to a HTC One X and iPhone 4 or 4S.
Specifically what I'd really like to know is how the screens of these devices compare to each other. From personal experience, I find the screen of the iPhone 4 and 4S to be a bluish hue whereas the One X has a wonderfully white display. (When both devices are at full brightness with auto brightness disabed.)
I'd like to know if anyone has experience comparing the SIII screen to the 4/4S and/or the One X. What I can tell from comparision videos so far is that the SIII has a bluish screen (a la the iPhone) compared to the One X.
Also, the issue the One X has with multitasking is well documented by now. Does the SIII share this issue?
Thank you in advance for any answers. After seeing the leaked next gen iPhone pics, I'm seriously contemplating getting the SIII when it comes to AT&T.
I am picky about screens. Or I should say, I became picky after owning the iphone 4.
The iphone 4 screen is 2 years old. It did not change for the iphone 4s.
Yet, it is still the king of the hill. The benchmark. Nice and bright with typical IPS viewing angles and a standard hdtv-like presentation (~500 nits) This does NOT speak to Apple's greatness. It only speaks to Apple's leverage and high standards for parts. They got exclusivity, and a high quality part, at a mass market price. Not sure if another maker could have gotten such a nice screen at an affordable price, nor am I sure if another maker would care to the degree that Apple does about using premium components. Colors are a bit undersaturated if you ask me. Thankfully other makers are now catching up to the iphone 4's display. But a tip of the hat to the iphone 4, which started it all and is still at the very top of the heap even 2 years later, an eternity in the smartphone world.
HTC One X, is the first screen that surpasses the iphone 4's screen, simply b/c it's bigger but maintains the same quality. I'd say that white is more truly white on the One X, and the screen is slightly brighter (~550 nits). Colors pop more and are more fully saturated. I would choose the One X or the iphone 4s screen soley based on your preferred screen size.
S3 I have not seen, but I have seen the Note's screen and Galaxy Nexus. My main issue is that they are not nearly bright enough. Blue cast, and of course the pentile matrix display. The matrix was easily visible to me, and the ovrriding reason why I downgrade the screens vs the One X and iphone 4. Next comes max brightness (~330 nits). You want a higher brightness when watching videos and using it in the sun. On the plus side, the blacks are the deepest they can be b/c the pixels are completely off. Can't beat that. Colors are very saturated, which is better than undersaturated. Also wonderful viewing angles.
My opinion is in the minority. Most people think that the S3's screen is wonderful and amazing. They are not bothered by the measurably less peak brightness, and the easily visible (to me) pentile matrix. I believe that IPS tech is still the superior one simply b/c it looks more natural, or maybe it's b/c what we're most used to, even outside of smartphone displays.
lamenramen said:
I am picky about screens. Or I should say, I became picky after owning the iphone 4.
The iphone 4 screen is 2 years old. It did not change for the iphone 4s.
Yet, it is still the king of the hill. The benchmark. Nice and bright with typical IPS viewing angles and a standard hdtv-like presentation (~500 nits) This does NOT speak to Apple's greatness. It only speaks to Apple's leverage and high standards for parts. They got exclusivity, and a high quality part, at a mass market price. Not sure if another maker could have gotten such a nice screen at an affordable price, nor am I sure if another maker would care to the degree that Apple does about using premium components. Colors are a bit undersaturated if you ask me. Thankfully other makers are now catching up to the iphone 4's display. But a tip of the hat to the iphone 4, which started it all and is still at the very top of the heap even 2 years later, an eternity in the smartphone world.
HTC One X, is the first screen that surpasses the iphone 4's screen, simply b/c it's bigger but maintains the same quality. I'd say that white is more truly white on the One X, and the screen is slightly brighter (~550 nits). Colors pop more and are more fully saturated. I would choose the One X or the iphone 4s screen soley based on your preferred screen size.
S3 I have not seen, but I have seen the Note's screen and Galaxy Nexus. My main issue is that they are not nearly bright enough. Blue cast, and of course the pentile matrix display. The matrix was easily visible to me, and the ovrriding reason why I downgrade the screens vs the One X and iphone 4. Next comes max brightness (~330 nits). You want a higher brightness when watching videos and using it in the sun. On the plus side, the blacks are the deepest they can be b/c the pixels are completely off. Can't beat that. Colors are very saturated, which is better than undersaturated. Also wonderful viewing angles.
My opinion is in the minority. Most people think that the S3's screen is wonderful and amazing. They are not bothered by the measurably less peak brightness, and the easily visible (to me) pentile matrix. I believe that IPS tech is still the superior one simply b/c it looks more natural, or maybe it's b/c what we're most used to, even outside of smartphone displays.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As someone who has compared the iPhone 4 and One X screens side by side, I agree entirely with your assessment. (I do think the One X has a definitive edge overall compared to the iPhone 4 screen.) However I think you'd need to see the SIII in person before making any assessments regarding it's quality. The impression I'm getting from HD YouTube videos is that the SIII screen possess a bluish hue, a la iPhone 4/4S, however the pentile display does not seem to produce a great deal of pixelation as I originally feared.
I've seen them all, and HTC One X's screen is definitely the best. You'll really notice the difference if you put them side-by-side for sure.
plisk3n said:
I've seen them all, and HTC One X's screen is definitely the best. You'll really notice the difference if you put them side-by-side for sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Screen aside, I don't like the One X. Multitasking issues. Camera bump on the back. Prefer the hardware home buttons of the iPhone and SIII.
Htc one x screen is awful. Is clean yes but colors r not natural. White is not clear white whilr black is grey.
I own both and I will say this:
The One X screen is amazing. It is pin sharp. Fonts looks amazing. Colours are very natural and look good. (Sorry Totòòò, I disagree with you, perhaps your screen was faulty)
But, the Galaxy is better in 9/10 ways. It's near impossible to notice the pentile matrix. You have to zoom in on a font to even notice, beyond regular reading levels. The One X screen is just that bit more sharp, where in the above scenario, you still cannot make out any dots. EDIT: Although I have found that different fonts yield different results. For example, the font used in the stock browser looks really good, even when zoomed in a fair bit. The font used in Chrome Beta, does not. I notice the pentile matrix a lot more when using this font.
The galaxy S3 screen has deeper colours (if you've seen AMOLED before you know what I mean), and I find it more pleasurable to look at.
The only detractor with the S3, is that when scrolling text on white backgrounds (e..g web pages), and scrolling it fast, the fonts tend to blur a little bit due to the pentile matrix. When you stop scrolling, the fonts are pin sharp. The One X did not suffer from this.
Overall (and believe me I am picky about my screens) I find the S3 screen to *just* have the edge over the One X screen, due to the fact the colours being that little bit more pleasurable to look at.
Of course, this is all subjective. YMMV. At the end of the day they are both very good screens.
One X shty multi is the same as Sensations, totally a disaster. Plus closed case, cannot change acu, no microsd and huge slowness. Seriously this phone sucks. SGS3 on the other hand, like SGS2 do not have such problems.
Damn, i want my gs3 what is going on with Samsung,is there anyone who got the pepple blue in EU delivered.
Sorry guys,of topic i know
No there's noone, because Samsung stopped deliverys of blue one for around three weeks! Get a white one, it's hot!
Wysyłane z mojego GT-I9300 za pomocą Tapatalk 2
Hello everyone, nokia lumia 920 has the best screen of the new iPhone5?
I am interested in the details of the display.
SuperXDADev said:
Hello everyone, nokia lumia 920 has the best screen of the new iPhone5?
I am interested in the details of the display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iPhone screen is no longer the best anymore. There are a lot of phones at this point has higher PPI than iPhone. In this case, Lumia 920 has more advanced technologies than iPhone. Fast refresh rate (the only 1 that has 60Mhz refresh rate screen), high PPI, ClearBlack for easy reading outside, IPS panel, and also super sensitivity.
spincel said:
iPhone screen is no longer the best anymore. There are a lot of phones at this point has higher PPI than iPhone. In this case, Lumia 920 has more advanced technologies than iPhone. Fast refresh rate (the only 1 that has 60Mhz refresh rate screen), high PPI, ClearBlack for easy reading outside, IPS panel, and also super sensitivity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Display of Lumia 920 is better of iphone5 in the details?
yes, i'm not sure what other details you want, but in every technical way, the l920's screen is better than the iphone 5. most newer android phones are better in many ways as well.
here's the ways its better:
higher pixel density (text is sharper, images are crisper)
higher refresh rate (images move smoother)
clearblack display (easier to read in sunlight)
supersensitive touch (can use with gloves, fingernails, or anything else that isn't your finger, as well as your finger)
spincel said:
iPhone screen is no longer the best anymore. There are a lot of phones at this point has higher PPI than iPhone. In this case, Lumia 920 has more advanced technologies than iPhone. Fast refresh rate (the only 1 that has 60Mhz refresh rate screen), high PPI, ClearBlack for easy reading outside, IPS panel, and also super sensitivity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a 60Hz display and pretty much every modern smartphone has a 60Hz screen. It's just marketing! As for Clearblack that was for the OLED screen in the 900, this one is IPS and is called PureMotion HD +
As for the screen quality itself I've found the colours are pretty damn good. Waiting for Display Mate to do their analysis though.
PyroCF said:
It's a 60Hz display and pretty much every modern smartphone has a 60Hz screen. It's just marketing! As for Clearblack that was for the OLED screen in the 900, this one is IPS and is called PureMotion HD +
As for the screen quality itself I've found the colours are pretty damn good. Waiting for Display Mate to do their analysis though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had read somewhere that they had gotten it to 23Hz? I may be wrong though.
They polarized (a layer? of) the screen so that it's easier to read in sunlight.
Also, although it's called PureMotion HD+ and they've dropped the ClearBlack name, they still reference to that type of display technology for darker blacks in comparison to other SLCD2 technologies (ex. HTC 8x/One X)
@OP, just recapping, but....
Better than iPhone because:
Bigger screen (more opinion than anything)
Higher pixel density (332 ppi vs iPhone 5's 326)
Ability to use screen with gloves (i.e. skin contact not required to operate screen)
The screen is essentially better in every way in comparison to the iPhone 5 other than the lamination that the iPhone has (i.e. the screen appears much closer to the surface of the glass itself when compared to the Lumia 920's). If you're REALLY looking into great screens, you should just go to Verizon and pick up their Droid DNA.
oceansaber said:
I had read somewhere that they had gotten it to 23Hz? I may be wrong though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry but do you even understand screen refresh rates? 23Hz would be appalling by anyone's standards.
The higher, the better for future reference!
PyroCF said:
I'm sorry but do you even understand screen refresh rates? 23Hz would be appalling by anyone's standards.
The higher, the better for future reference!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry thinking ms. My bad. I remember something about the PureMotion HD+ referring to having the smallest delay between touch and response. I don't know where, but there's a couple articles and stuff referencing it haha. It supposedly has the fastest response times of any screen for a smartphone on the market.
actually the lumia 920 is the first smartphone with a 60hz refresh rate and its response time is in the single digits
just check out some of the more detailed/reputable reviews and it will give you a compare of other brands, i can't recall which ones exactly as i read them in passing
and clearblack is nokias name for their polarization filter on screens
PyroCF said:
It's a 60Hz display and pretty much every modern smartphone has a 60Hz screen. It's just marketing! As for Clearblack that was for the OLED screen in the 900, this one is IPS and is called PureMotion HD +
As for the screen quality itself I've found the colours are pretty damn good. Waiting for Display Mate to do their analysis though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, I don't think every smartphone has 60Hz screen. As for the name, Nokia combine those techs into one and called it PureMotion HD+, which consists of:
1. WXGA resolution
2. IPS LCD with 60Hz refresh
3. ClearBlack technology for viewing outdoor
4. High PPI
5. Super sensitivity touch
So if you take all of them and combine them all, it is PureMotion HD+.
Every smartphone other than the Lumia 920 has a 30Hz screen. The 920 is the first phone with a 60Hz screen.
Clearblack is a combination of a polarizing layer to reduce glare and improve visibility in sunlight and also (iirc) they are also using an optically bonded stack, fuzing the digitizer to the cover glass.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express
Also iphone5 have a 30hz panel display?
Inviato dal mio Galaxy Nexus con Tapatalk 2
Misleading title !
adiliyo said:
Every smartphone other than the Lumia 920 has a 30Hz screen. The 920 is the first phone with a 60Hz screen.
Clearblack is a combination of a polarizing layer to reduce glare and improve visibility in sunlight and also (iirc) they are also using an optically bonded stack, fuzing the digitizer to the cover glass.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you cite this please? This would mean every other phone would look like it's running at 30fps which you would notice. Also clear black was marketing for nokias oled screens.
PyroCF said:
Also clear black was marketing for nokias oled screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and that's the phrase they marketed because that was all they had that was unique to them in the screen department. Now, they use Puremotion HD+, which includes ClearBlack along with a number of other technologies/features, as noted above. Nokia's own developer 920 spec page lists "ClearBlack" in both the description and the list of display technologies.
The screen is simply amazing. It puts any other smartphone screen I have seen to shame in actual real world usage.
This is the first phone I have owned that I can read the screen in the sun, with my sunglasses on. Amazing.
The viewing angles are incredible, the colors are bright and vibrant but not as saturated as AMOLED, and not as dull and lifeless as HTC Screens.
crawlgsx said:
The screen is simply amazing. It puts any other smartphone screen I have seen to shame in actual real world usage.
This is the first phone I have owned that I can read the screen in the sun, with my sunglasses on. Amazing.
The viewing angles are incredible, the colors are bright and vibrant but not as saturated as AMOLED, and not as dull and lifeless as HTC Screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny you mention this because coming from a Dell Venue Pro with an amoled screen that I've used for a year and half, I immediately noticed the terribly dull colors of my 920 screen. Now that I've used my 920 for a few days, I booted up my DVP for giggles and I couldn't help but notice how really overly saturated the colors were! I am truly enjoying my 920's screen as I think it is a good blend between SLCD and Amoled and outdoor viewing really kicks butt on this screen.
The source is from here http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/11/16/how-nokia-gave-the-lumia-920-the-worlds-fastest-screen/ which cites Nokia's Senior Technology Manager. The main take away from this is that the L920 LCD screen has a 9ms pixel response time while others on average is about 23ms. There is no mention of iPhone so we don't know what response time of iPhone screen is.
This is not about 60Hz vs 30Hz. It is about pure pixel response time which is critical in display moving objects in video of games. For comparison, your typical PC desktop LCD monitor need to have < 5ms response time to be comfortable for playing games. 23ms response time is only good for reading emails.
To recap, Nokia's screen has better pixel density than iPhone's retina display. Higher resolution than iPhone5. Maybe faster pixel response time and higher contrast than iPhone (we don't know until someone benchmarked it). Tradditionally, iPhone screens have very high color accuracy. We don't know what Nokia screen has.
I see so much hate for the iPhone here, actually iPhone screen is pretty good they both have 60hz, Lumia has a little higher PPI(but not noticeable) and can be used with gloves, iPhone in its own side has the in cell technology that take away the touch panel and implement it directly in, igzo technology that reduce battery usage.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
batna.antab said:
I see so much hate for the iPhone here, actually iPhone screen is pretty good they both have 60hz, Lumia has a little higher PPI(but not noticeable) and can be used with gloves, iPhone in its own side has the in cell technology that take away the touch panel and implement it directly in, igzo technology that reduce battery usage.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is nothing but fan boys citing from their side of marketing BS. I mean both sides. For example, you made it like iPhone5 invented in panel touch implementation. I'm not so sure. Samsung did it with its Super AMOLED Plus screen about two years ago to reduce the screen thickness and sun reflection. Apple probably just re-invented (like many of its claims) for LCD panels.