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.
Related
I have heard people say the pentile screens make edges look jagged etc. Is this true? I mean at something like 280+ppi I wouldn't think it would look jagged at all! Is it true?
It varies by device. I've not used a Note, but it should be similar to a Galaxy Nexus. The colors are visibly greener than the Super AMOLED+ (non-pentile) displays I've used, but the Nexus at least does not have the jagged edge issues that appear on the RAZR and some of the other qHD displays I've used. I don't know if it's because of the higher resolution/pixel density or some other property of the subpixel matrix, but I've never heard that particular criticism of a Note.
Not at this PPI.
Maroon Mushroom said:
Not at this PPI.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, only of you zoom in super super close on text.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
Also something to keep in mind is that pentile offers better outdoor performance and battery life
Maroon Mushroom said:
Also something to keep in mind is that pentile offers better outdoor performance and battery life
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just so I know, why is that?
ap3604 said:
Just so I know, why is that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the same reason people say it looks "bad" because it has less sub pixels so it will use less power. Though at this pixel density you would have to have a microscope because on my captivate you would have to be viewing red on black and be obnoxiously close to see it. Also it has better outdoor visibility because it can I believe get brighter then non pentile displays. For more info Google is amazing.
I have PenTile on my Photon 4G and while I can certainly see it, it doesn't bother me. When the brightness is turned way up you notice it more. I agree that at 1280x800 on a 5.3" display you're not going to notice it.
As others noted, PenTile RGBW has the advantage of offering more brightness for less power (due to the "W", I believe?) but it depends on the screen. The Droid 4 is PenTile, yet it is significantly darker than my Photon 4G (also PenTile) - both are Moto phones, so I was surprised by that difference. The Photon has the brightest, most outdoor-readable display (non-reflective) I have ever seen.
I can't recall reading anything other than "awesome" to describe the Note screen, though, so I think there's nothing to worry about here.
hausman said:
I have PenTile on my Photon 4G and while I can certainly see it, it doesn't bother me. When the brightness is turned way up you notice it more. I agree that at 1280x800 on a 5.3" display you're not going to notice it.
As others noted, PenTile RGBW has the advantage of offering more brightness for less power (due to the "W", I believe?) but it depends on the screen. The Droid 4 is PenTile, yet it is significantly darker than my Photon 4G (also PenTile) - both are Moto phones, so I was surprised by that difference. The Photon has the brightest, most outdoor-readable display (non-reflective) I have ever seen.
I can't recall reading anything other than "awesome" to describe the Note screen, though, so I think there's nothing to worry about here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The brightness of a LCD screen (almost all Moto Droid phones are PenTile LCD) is determined by the backlite light source, not the screen pixel layout. To LCD screens, the power usage is constant regardless of the screen pixels on of off unless you can also turn the backlite light down.
AMOLED doesn't have a backlite light source. It depends on each pixels to emit light itself.
Yeah, I forgot that there are multiple PenTile layouts. Most Moto phones are RGBW, while the Note screen is RGBG, so it doesn't have the same outdoor visibility/brightness advantage.
Hey guys,
Does anyone know if HTC HD2 is a non pentile screen and whether it's not as pixelated as Lumia 800?
The HD2 is a totally different display technology; nothing pentile as far as I remember. Besides that, I think the Lumia 800 screen is gorgeous.
EgoMaximus said:
Hey guys,
Does anyone know if HTC HD2 is a non pentile screen and whether it's not as pixelated as Lumia 800?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The HD2 has a standard IPS panel, it has the same resolution of the Lumia but it's bigger (4.3"). Basically you can expect some pixelation, weak contrast, bad viewing angles and worse power management. Overall the actually perceived pixelation should be on par, but you're likely to face screen ghosting issues on the HD2. Personally I'm not the greatest fan of Amoled screens, but compared to the unit in the HD2 the one packed by the Lumia wins by far IMHO.
The only big "concern" about the lumia 800 display is the pentile matrix - and the polycarbonate shells that seems not so resistent...
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
I tried to take a few photos of the HD2 vs the Lumia 800, but it's hard to get my cheap point-n-click to meter well across two such different displays. Seperately, I can get accurate colors on from the HD2, but cannot get good reproduction when taking shots of the Lumia 800.
The obvious difference is Clear Black. The HD2 looks dark gray when it should be black. The Lumia is... well... VERY black.
I personally prefer the way the HD2 shows the Nokia Blue theme. It's more... blue and less turquoisie. Magenta, OTOH, looks much better on the Lumia. It's vibrant and VERY magenta. On the HD2, it just looks like a cheap attempt at bright pink, but slanted toward a flat purple instead. A little too much blue in the display, overall, that lends to great blues and not so great pinks. Whites on the HD2 are cooler as well.
I, personally, don't give a crap about the pentile. I have to think about it and look for it in order to notice it.
The HD2 display will appear more pixelated simply by the decreased pixel density.
anseio said:
I, personally, don't give a crap about the pentile. I have to think about it and look for it in order to notice it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I came from an iPhone 4 and I think that we can say anything bad about the iPhone 4 but the display it's gorgeous and the pixel density produce clear and well shaped images, text that cannot be compared w/ the Lumia for obvious reasons but the PENtile display is a punch in the eye - an added one just after the poor resolution imposed by MS -.
suzughia said:
I came from an iPhone 4 and I think that we can say anything bad about the iPhone 4 but the display it's gorgeous and the pixel density produce clear and well shaped images, text that cannot be compared w/ the Lumia for obvious reasons but the PENtile display is a punch in the eye - an added one just after the poor resolution imposed by MS -.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As much as I detest Apple products, I agree that the pixel density is amazing.
Looking forward to Apollo, where that can change for WP7 devices for the better.
Thanks a lot guys!
Well I've always thought that the 800 screen would be miles better looking than my 710.
But after picking up a friend's of mine and playing around with it, I find it less satisfying to use than my 710 for some reason.
Some things I've noticed between them.
710 screen flickers(sorta like a those old fashion tv's, ctr or ctf I think). To see it, move your screen around quickly back and forth but don't move your eyes with it. Where the 800 screen doesn't have this. Not a big deal though on the 710 since I usually keep it still when using it.
The thing that threw me off and making me don't like the 800's screen is because there is like a dot of black in between all the pixels. It is really hard to explain it. I think its because of the lack of a backlight on the amoled screens, and there is nothing lighting up the area in between pixels.
I don't know if you guys understand what I am trying to say and if I am high or not but all you need to know is that my 710 screen looks better than the 800 screen even if the blacks are not truly black on the 710's tft, the overall experience on the 710 screen quality is superior to the 800.
It's because the 800 has a screen with pentile matrix. Google it and you will understand what those "dots" between those pixels are. It's simply because there are no "pixel" there. Sort of. The pixel layout differs from a traditional TFT.
What the 800 is superior at though is true black and more natural colors and much better contrast.
To me the 800 screen is far superior becuase of those things alone. Pentile matrix doesn't really bother me and there are a bunch of other phones that has it too. Galaxy Nexus. Samsung SIII to name just a few...
dannejanne said:
It's because the 800 has a screen with pentile matrix. Google it and you will understand what those "dots" between those pixels are. It's simply because there are no "pixel" there. Sort of. The pixel layout differs from a traditional TFT.
What the 800 is superior at though is true black and more natural colors and much better contrast.
To me the 800 screen is far superior becuase of those things alone. Pentile matrix doesn't really bother me and there are a bunch of other phones that has it too. Galaxy Nexus. Samsung SIII to name just a few...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it all comes down to opinions. In my own personal opinion, perfer the tft tonthe amoled. Unless they find a solution to the pentile matrix on the amoled, I won't ever use it lol.
I saw an amoled screen on my friend's galaxy 2 and thought it looked horrible also.
Pentile on Lumia 800 is terrible..
I too was against pentile screens before but I really wanted the 800 and after only a couple of days I was used to it. And ad I said I prefer the deep blacks and the excellent contrast over the extra sharpness.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express
To be honest I got nothing against TFT lcd panels in general. Colours look way more natural on them and the white is more real. My gf has the 710, so I can make all kinds of comparisons. When you look at pictures there's no contest: the 710 wins hands down: after all pictures have to represent reality, and amoled panels aren't that good at that. Even in the browser gradients of colour are generally kinda messed up on the 800, you don't really notice it until you put them side to side, it's astonishing. Anyway on this particular OS I gotta say that I still prefer amoled over lcd. Using the dark theme on an amoled panel is just awesome on WP7, the metro UI really deserves those deep blacks and punchy colors, with faint blacks this beautiful thing of design is wasted. The 710 may have more real looking colours, it has slightly less pixelation and sure it isn't affected by all of the artifacts that an amoled (especially pentile) unit suffers from, but the viewing angles are kinda poor: the display tends to become yellowish when angled and looks kinda discoloured at the edges. The Lumia 800 truly is a work of art, and its amoled panel is part of its nature: when it's laid on the table at the office and somebody calls you or something it really looks like a living thing. The 710 instead doesn't really draw that much attention, and there's no magic whatsoever when it lights up
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.
I thought this was very interesting, somewhat common sense to some of us geeks/nerds/smarties out there, and worth a share.
Origin: http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/16554/is-the-samsung-galaxy-s4-really-worth-it/
Despite the amazing features in recent mobile phones that include, high speed quad core processors, large screen sizes, high-fidelity Graphic Processing Units (GPUs) and innovative designs, the mobile phones manufacturers are desperately trying to surpass each other.
A number of marketing tactics are being used to get us all excited, and persuade us to upgrade our phones.
Due to the tremendous advancements in hardware and software technology and the challenges posed by a very competitive market, the smart phone manufacturers are left only with the screen resolution to boast about and as an immediate eye-catching feature for a potential upgrade.
Samsung is already making a big deal about the full High Definition (HD) resolution of its Galaxy S4 introduced this month. Although the S4 is not the first phone to be equipped with an HD resolution, the terrific success of the S2 and S3 makes it an appealing get-as-soon-as-possible feature for Galaxy lovers.
If you are charmed by the HD resolution and intend on throwing extra money to upgrade your phone to S4, let us first analyse if a full HD smart phone screen is really worth draining your wallet.
Resolution is the prime determinant of a screen’s clarity. HD resolution refers to a High Definition screen having either 1280 x 720 pixels (720p) or 1920 x 1080 pixels (1080p/full-HD) spread along the width and height of the smart phone’s screen.
The pixel is the elementary area of illumination on the screen. The image displayed is composed of pixels. Therefore, higher the number of pixels, the sharper and crisper an image appears on the screen.
For an immediate comparison, you can check the resolution of your old smart phone (For example a Nokia 6600, 176 x 208 pixels) and that of a recent smart phone (like the Samsung Galaxy S3, 720 x 1280 pixels). You will immediately notice that the high resolution produces a much clearer and sharper image.
Nevertheless, resolution is not the only factor responsible for a sharper screen. Keeping the resolution the same and increasing the screen’s size separates the pixels, thus resulting in lost sharpness.
What really matters for determining a screen’s quality is the number of pixels packed in a given area. The term Pixel Per Inch (PPI) represents how many pixels there are in one inch of a screen’s area; the larger the number, the better the screen’s quality.
As an example, Nokia 6600 launched in 2003 has a PPI density of 130, whereas, Apple’s iPhone 4, sensationalised and marketed by the brand name Retina Display, has a PPI of 330. This produces a much sharper and vibrant image on the screen and makes other older phones look lacklustre.
Increasing the resolution does increase the PPI, provided that the screen size is not increased significantly. Two smart phones having the same screen sizes but different resolutions will have different figures for PPI.
Does it mean increasing the PPI indefinitely will produce even sharper images on the screen? The answer is no.
Our eyes can determine the quality of the contents on a screen if the pixels are distinguishable at the normal viewing distance. The reason why Apple called their iPhone 4 screen ‘Retina Display’ was that the 326 PPI pixel density was so high that individual pixels were indistinguishable to the human eye at the normal viewing distance. However, Retina Display is no longer an industry-leading figure.
HTC was one of the companies to develop a display beating that of the iPhone 4 with HTC Rezound (342 PPI). Nevertheless, if you compare the screens of Iphone 4 and HTC Rezound, I can bet you won’t be able to tell the difference.
The reason is that the human eye cannot distinguish the difference in PPI when the figure reaches a saturation point of about 300 (slightly exaggerated, otherwise some studies suggest a threshold of 250 PPI). Therefore, having a PPI of more than 300 will not make any difference to normal human eye unless you use a magnifying glass or have the screen pressed up against your eyeballs to see the subtle difference (of course you don’t want to do that).
Even for people with 20/20 vision, a full HD resolution would be a waste because most people’s eye can’t resolve sharpness above 250 PPI. The same goes for observing the photos quality. The pixel details in a photograph is always spread over more than one pixel and never perfectly aligned with the pixel structure of the display. So it will not matter whether you view the photographs on a 1080p or 720p display; they will appear the same. If you come across a smart phone having a PPI above 350, safely take it as a marketing stunt. It is not going to make the smart phone’s screen any sharper.
Consequently, a full HD (1080p) resolution is no better looking than 720p resolution in smart phones. A full HD resolution is only better for tablets, laptop screens, or monitors where the human eyes can resolve such a high resolution. The smart phones having 720p resolutions and sizes ranging from 4.3 to 4.7 inches have PPIs within the range 312 to 341. This PPI range is more than enough. Therefore, Samsung’s claim to give a sensational screen experience is pretty pompous.
Whereas, a full HD resolution necessitates using larger screen size (at least 5 inches) which is pretty annoying for small-sized phones lovers.
Another issue is the increased power consumption. The extra features in electronic devices don’t come for free. The price usually has to be paid in terms of high power consumption. A full HD display makes more demand from the processor and the GPU, which in turn needs more power to help it cope.
Although, the S4 has much improved battery (2600 mAh) as compared to the S3 (2100 mAh), it is still not sure if we can get improved battery life as well. We must not forget that the Apple iPad 4′s screen has a higher than 1080p resolution (2048 x 1536, but a PPI of 264), and a battery rated as 11666 mAh, while the iPad2 has a less than 720p resolution (1024 x 768, 132 PPI). Yet both provide the same 10-hours of use before needing a recharge.
The only advantage of a full HD screen in smart phone is that it gives more space for user interface elements such as button and text. For example, a webpage can fit to the screen, but the size of the contents decreases due to high resolution. In most of the cases, the viewer has to zoom in the contents to view them easily.
Due to these reasons, I still prefer to stick to my Xperia S with 720p resolution and a PPI of 341.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting read. Though I can definitely tell there is a difference when comparing my lte and the HTC one side by side. That being said when they aren't side by side I can't tell.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
I would wager that you can only 'tell' because you read the spec .
My .02¢
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
scottspa74 said:
I would wager that you can only 'tell' because you read the spec .
My .02¢
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can see pixelation on my Evo's screen if I look closely. I can't see the same pixelation on the DNA's screen. There's a real difference, although you have to be a serious gadget nerd (like me) to care.
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
scottspa74 said:
I would wager that you can only 'tell' because you read the spec .
My .02¢
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly my thinking.
maxpower7 said:
I can see pixelation on my Evo's screen if I look closely. I can't see the same pixelation on the DNA's screen. There's a real difference, although you have to be a serious gadget nerd (like me) to care.
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly cannot tell the difference at all. Although I saw a slight difference between my 3D and this EVO LTE. Maybe because I knew the specs though =p. I'm a big fan of sleeping at night. Lol.
... Sent from my 'Maybe the LTEvo wasn't such a bad idea afterall,' using the XDA Developers app.