Database Users

Screen Comparisons: Contrast Ratio

I've been trying to understand the relative differences between the IPS displays used in the IPAD 2 and the Transformer, the Super PLS display of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the TFT used in the XOOM. I settled on contrast ratio as an objective means of comparison.
Article 1 XOOM: 750
Article 2 XOOM: 597!
iPad 2: 775
Galaxy Tab 10.1: 830
Transformer: 763
Article Quote: "Contrast ratio is also better on the Galaxy Tab 10.1: 830:1 vs 763:1 on the Eee Pad Transformer."
What surprises me the most out of all this, besides the XOOM discrepancies , is that the contrast of the Galaxy Tab 10.1 display is not as incredible as we were lead to believe. It compares favorably with IPS, but isn't really leaps and bounds better. In fact, it might have equivalent or slightly lower contrast than an IPS display, or conventional display but better viewing angles.
Interesting quote: "On the other hand IPS (and PLS) has significantly lower contrast ratios compared to the best VA based panels that Samsung and other manufacturers have used in high-end phones for years."
Side note is that the multiple contrast ratios for the XOOM screen might reflect the multiple screen sources/manufacturers that were used in different XOOMs.
Sources:
http://galaxytablife.com/2011/06/eee-pad-transformer-vs-galaxy-tab-10-1-comparison/
http://www.tabletreaderinfo.com/content/Motorola-Xoom-Tablet-Review/Screen.htm
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4191/motorola-xoom-review-first-honeycomb-tablet-arrives/2
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1291980086

The most important things to me on a tablet screen:
1. Color reproduction. Is it uniform and even? This leads me to
2. Viewing angles, top, bottom, left and right. Does the screen stay relatively sharp or does the image dissolve/wash out?
3. No back-light bleed. This is inexcusable regardless of the lectures people spout out about it being inherent to the technology. It's not when the product is designed correctly.
The panel in the GTab 10.1 is beautiful. It meets my criteria where the xoom failed on all of them and the iPad failed miserably on back-light bleed.
Contrast ratio to me is just a number. I have tolerances for all my electronics devices and to me, the panel on the Samsung is the clear winner in the tablet race. Let's hope the build quality follows suit. I'm already starting to get annoyed at how long a full charge takes.

The screen looks amazing! The only thing I noticed is that the screen calibration is a
little bit oversaturated. I'm planning on using mine as a photography/design portfolio and have noticed color shift when compared to my calibrated monitor.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using XDA Premium App

I had Xooms (with both screen versions Auo and Sharp), an I pad and now a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the screen on my tab is far and awy better than all of them.
The Xoom has 2 screen fkavors, Sharp and Auo optronics. the screen mfg by Sharp had much better color saturation and better contrast, but unfortunately for me, a ton of light bleed due to a defect in the panel.
Specs only tell part of the story.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

lordwinkevin said:
The screen looks amazing! The only thing I noticed is that the screen calibration is a
little bit oversaturated. I'm planning on using mine as a photography/design portfolio and have noticed color shift when compared to my calibrated monitor.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When Samsung releases the kernel source, supercurio can start developing his Voodoo Sound and Screen tweaks for the SGT 10.1, which will make color reproduction much more realistic.

I'm new with android and this is awesome to hear. I also own the iPad 2 and Datacolor made an in app color calibrated picture viewer called SpyderGallery but an overall screen color calibration would be awesome!
Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

matt310 said:
The most important things to me on a tablet screen:
1. Color reproduction. Is it uniform and even? This leads me to
2. Viewing angles, top, bottom, left and right. Does the screen stay relatively sharp or does the image dissolve/wash out?
3. No back-light bleed. This is inexcusable regardless of the lectures people spout out about it being inherent to the technology. It's not when the product is designed correctly.
The panel in the GTab 10.1 is beautiful. It meets my criteria where the xoom failed on all of them and the iPad failed miserably on back-light bleed.
Contrast ratio to me is just a number. I have tolerances for all my electronics devices and to me, the panel on the Samsung is the clear winner in the tablet race. Let's hope the build quality follows suit. I'm already starting to get annoyed at how long a full charge takes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I threw these numbers out there because, so far, almost all the info on PLS panels used in the Galaxy Tab 10.1 has been primarily subjective. Its totally new technology.
However, recently, Samsung has started to develop the PLS Panels for use in stand-alone computer monitors, and some reviewers are beginning to analyze and reveiw the technology. This is a really interesting article, and "sheds some light" (to make a bad pun) on the PLS panel technology used in the Galaxy Tab 10.1, how it works and some of its pros and cons:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/monitors/display/samsung-sa850.html
Remember this is a stand alone PLS monitor, so one would expect its performance would exceed that of an integrated tablet screen, but they found a contrast ration of only 545:1. Thats pretty bad in my opinion. They try to theorize why this occurs:
"The low contrast ratio may be due to the poor uniformity of the backlight. The picture based on the results of my measurements shows a bright spot in the center of the screen, just where I measured the contrast ratio. That spot is not as bright as the bottom left corner, though.
Although the extent of the variation in brightness is exaggerated in the picture for illustrative purposes, the monitor is obviously far from ideal, especially with black. Talking about the exact numbers, the average nonuniformity of brightness for black is 8% whereas the maximum deflection from the base level is as high as 45%! For white, the average and maximum are 3.6% and 8.3%, respectively. It’s hard to say why the monitor is so good with white and so poor with black....."
So, disturbingly, they found the first dedicated PLS prototype monitor to have POOR contrast ratio!! Not what you would expect. They theorize that it might be due to poor backlighting, but it is worrisome.
To summarize what the reviewers found after examining this prototype PLS monitor:
Highs:
•Low response time, good color rendering, excellent viewing angles
•Full coverage of the sRGB color space
Lows
•Low contrast ratio
•Poor uniformity of backlight for black
If this review is accurate, these first panels seem to show that the PLS technology is good, but not great. Its an OK alternative to IPS but really not that stellar in its performance. Its biggest advantage seems to be that it is a cheap alternatative to IPS that has much better viewing angles.
Remember, one of the biggest selling points cited by Samsung was cost! Its cheaper to produce than IPS. That may be a larger motivation to Samsung than increased performance.
Of course, how this translates to the performance of our own toys is debateable, but its something to think about beyond the subjective impressions we have already heard.

That's definitely interesting. Perhaps the larger the panel, the greater the difficulty in achieving a uniform amount of back-light. I have definitely experienced this with clouding and flash-lighting on TV sets (and mainly the reason I switched to plasma - I'd rather roll the dice with image retention than sit and stare at uneven back-lighting during movies)
Have you read about the issues Samsung's having with the panel thickness on the GTab 8.9? There's not much other than a translated-from-Korean report, but it seems the company (and panel suppliers) use a very thin "G1F" touch panel for the 10.1, and may be forced to use a (40%!) thicker application (GFF) for the GTab 8.9 due to either shortages in supply or complications in the manufacturing process.
^I think that bit is a key factor when comparing display performance - anything that sits on top of the actual pixels will contribute to the clarity of the content being displayed. Here's the article: http://tablets-planet.com/2011/06/10/samsung-to-use-lower-quality-dispalys-on-some-galaxy-tab-8-9s/

matt310 said:
That's definitely interesting. Perhaps the larger the panel, the greater the difficulty in achieving a uniform amount of back-light. I have definitely experienced this with clouding and flash-lighting on TV sets (and mainly the reason I switched to plasma - I'd rather roll the dice with image retention than sit and stare at uneven back-lighting during movies)
Have you read about the issues Samsung's having with the panel thickness on the GTab 8.9? There's not much other than a translated-from-Korean report, but it seems the company (and panel suppliers) use a very thin "G1F" touch panel for the 10.1, and may be forced to use a (40%!) thicker application (GFF) for the GTab 8.9 due to either shortages in supply or complications in the manufacturing process.
^I think that bit is a key factor when comparing display performance - anything that sits on top of the actual pixels will contribute to the clarity of the content being displayed. Here's the article: http://tablets-planet.com/2011/06/10/samsung-to-use-lower-quality-dispalys-on-some-galaxy-tab-8-9s/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Very interesting article. Especially considering that there has been a lot of talk about the quality control of the existing 10.1 panels. There have been threads about moisture under the screen, dust under the screen, lots of people with dead pixels. Haven't encountered nearly so many screen anomalies in other device forums. Wonder if that's the reason the GTAB 10.1 is so scarce in many places. Perhaps there are problems producing the 10.1 screens.
Oh and I went Plasma for all my TV's as well for the same reason, in addition to the faster response time. Even my video gaming TV is a Plasma. And I have never had a single problem with image retention.
Edit: Looks like another website has an article about the screen supply problem, only this time relating specifically to the GTAB 10.1. They speculate on a change in GTAB thickness if they can't make enough of the screens.
http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-to-be-thicker-than-ipad-2-due-to-supply-shortage-10158766/
Maybe soon there will be THREE versions of the GTAB 10.1: The 10.1, the 10.1v and the 10.1 series 2 extra thick!

I just found dust on my screen. Its definitely behind the glass panel.
Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1

Slashgear is rife with editorial errors. that article misquotes the one I linked earlier. They even have published content that indicates it's the 8.9 and not the 10.1 affected but the different panel thickness:
http://www.slashgear.com/galaxy-tab...tter-screen-in-some-areas-at-launch-10158611/
Either way, I doubt the US will see the thicker screen - they continued shipping AMOLED phone displays here despite a worldwide shortage, causing many other markets to receive Super LCD screens instead.

Pentile Matrix reloaded

Most reasonable people viewing the GNote pentile screen say it is bright, has high contrast, deep blacks and a sharp image.
It is a 24bit Millions of colours screen.
So why the hatred of pentile?
It's got me f#^ked.
Maybe it is due to old arguments that date back years.
There is an old controversy going around between pentile and LCD proponents, which is apples vs oranges because there are pentile lcd's and rgb oled's.
The controversy is, that pentiles use less sub-pixels and therefore should be rated as such in lower pixel density.
This ignores how vision works, which essentially is an illusion.
To disagree is to dismiss basic Buddhism and modern psychology as well as film theory on visual perception.
At the level of pixels, the illusion of vision breaks down for lcd as well as pentile screens.
So while looking at a pentile screen with a magnifying glass can be scary, it is the same for rgb's.
So why did Samsung go back to using the pentile matrix instead of RGB for the Note?
Only guessing, but some of the advantages of pentile are;
Cuts power consumption in half for equivalent brightness, or
Doubles screen brightness for equivalent power
Achieves higher resolution
Provides flexible settings for color control and power savings
Increases cost savings potential and yield for manufacturers
Accelerates adoption of next-generation devices
Makes text easier to read
nuvoyance.com
Contrary to the hype, pentiles allow higher resolution, all the while using much less power. Talk about a no-brainer.
One of the limitations of the pentile is a cross hatched pattern seen on the edge of some images, like a border between red and white, when seen up close(with a magnifying glass). This is so at lower pixel densities but "for higher pixel densities you stand to gain from PenTile" ; is the PenTile matrix bad for you?
More technical info:
PenTile blog
OLED-A

Achieve higher resolution - yes, but already given a 1280 x800 resolution, would you prefer it to be pentile or RGB?
No one is complaining about pentile can give higher resolution, its not like we want 800x480 RGB over 1280x800 pentile. But already given the phone is 1280x800, people would rather it be super amoled plus instead of pentile super amoled.
While pentile consumes less power, super amoled screens sucks power like crazy. It is a fact. But that said, i still think the screen is gorgreous. however if you let me choose - RGB over pentile any day.

GALAXYNOTE said:
Achieve higher resolution - yes, but already given a 1280 x800 resolution, would you prefer it to be pentile or RGB?
No one is complaining about pentile can give higher resolution, its not like we want 800x480 RGB over 1280x800 pentile. But already given the phone is 1280x800, people would rather it be super amoled plus instead of pentile super amoled.
While pentile consumes less power, super amoled screens sucks power like crazy. It is a fact. But that said, i still think the screen is gorgreous. however if you let me choose - RGB over pentile any day.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Given a 1280 x800 resolution, I would prefer it to be pentile as it will look better.
Perceived resolution.
Pentile consumes 50% less power than RGB.

Xaddict said:
Pentile consumes 50% less power than RGB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well if you are not talking about super amoled, then yes a pentile layout consumes theoretically 33% less power.
If you are strictly comparing pentile RGBG/RGBW to RGB, pentile looks like sh*t i gotta say. At least my atrix did.

Pentile also ages better than sRGB amoled, because the lifespan of the organic amoled subpixels are different from color to color. The pentile ages better because there are simply more subpixels of the color which has the lowest lifespan.

epicfailguy2 said:
Pentile also ages better than sRGB amoled, because the lifespan of the organic amoled subpixels are different from color to color. The pentile ages better because there are simply more subpixels of the color which has the lowest lifespan.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The color which has the lowest lifespan is blue, from what i can recall)
How does RGBG or RGBW have more blue subpixels than RGB? (I am only asking just wanted to know.)

GALAXYNOTE said:
Well if you are not talking about super amoled, then yes a pentile layout consumes theoretically 33% less power.
If you are strictly comparing pentile RGBG/RGBW to RGB, pentile looks like sh*t i gotta say. At least my atrix did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, comparing the Note screen(pentile) to the SGII screen(rgb), opinions vary, but the Note screen looks better to me.

GALAXYNOTE said:
The color which has the lowest lifespan is blue, from what i can recall)
How does RGBG or RGBW have more blue subpixels than RGB? (I am only asking just wanted to know.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More green than blue.

Xaddict said:
Well, comparing the Note screen(pentile) to the SGII screen(rgb), opinions vary, but the Note screen looks better to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I gotta agree with you on that. My gf had a SGS II and that blue tint bugged the hell outta me. I dont know what they done to it, but i dont think it was a problem with it being RGB.

Pentile suffers from strange color tints on whites.
Hard time rendering shades of gray.
Strange artifacts in low-light conditions.
Ofc all noise is camouflaged by the high resolution.
I would trade for the S-LCD screen of the Rezound any-day,
the only problem with that screen is that it could use abit deeper blacks.

MartijnMM said:
Pentile suffers from strange color tints on whites.
Hard time rendering shades of gray.
Strange artifacts in low-light conditions.
Ofc all noise is camouflaged by the high resolution.
I would trade for the SRGB screen of the Rezound any-day,
the only problem with that screen is that it could use abit deeper blacks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think this is related to OLED and not Pentile.
The Note screen does seem bluish to me when seen from an angle.
I don't see problems with grey on the Note.
I have view gradients to test the 24bit resolution and if viewed in a 24bit app, 24bit images look fine, otherwise not, but this is not an intrinsic fault of the Note's screen, only of the low res images or apps.

I'm not going to go back through and quote people, but some people said some things that are downright incorrect. Pentile does NOT "increase the resolution." It does exactly the opposite, decreasing it. Pentile has half the red subpixels and half the blue subpixels that RGB does; that means overall, pentile only has 2/3 the pixel elements that an RGB screen has. You can't display more information with fewer pixel elements.
The unpleasant artifacts I notice on pentile screens are small text, lines, graphics, appear fuzzy and sometimes colored on the edges, and when I look at solid colors that use red and blue (i.e.just about everything but solid green) especially white, I get this screen door effect. It's almost like there's a bit of checkerboard pattern to the solid color rather than being uniform. Hold your phone closer to your face and look at a solid white area, especially try to find a solid white area that is next to a solid green area with the brightness turned up all the way and you'll really see what I'm talking about.
Pentile doesn't necessarily use less energy than RGB. There are fewer subpixels, but they're twice as large and put out twice as much light. Energy in = light out. So in theory, the energy should be exactly the same. Perhaps they've found some way to do pentile a little more efficiently on some phones, but it's not an overall rule at all.
Pentile is used because it allows them to make the blues twice as big. Since they had a problem with short life span on those, making them twice as big made them hardier, longer lived, and higher yields in the manufacturing process. That's the ONLY reason for pentile. You could say this allows manufacturers to build higher resolution displays than they otherwise would be capable of (since they're cheating and using larger blues than an RGB would have) but a 1280x800 pentile is NOT "higher resolution" than a 1280x800 RGB! According to definition, they're the exact same resolution, but in reality, the pentile is lower in resolution.
RGB is ALWAYS better than pentile as far as image quality. The reason the Note's screen looks better than the SGSII, even though the SGSII had RGB, is simply because it has a much higher resolution. The benefits from that outweigh the negatives of pentile.
Here's a pic I put together showing the differences, even though you can find the same thing elsewhere on the net:

Thanks for summing that up =) Can we go on now and accept Sammy's gone cheap on us?

I really am not too bothered about what screen the phone uses as long as it looks good, i do think to me it looks fantastic. Lovely and bright and it displays a fantastic picture. If people dont like a particular screen a phone uses then they have the choice not to buy it. Some posts in here are very informative so in that respect thanks. However people that ***** about the phones screen (not necessarily in this thread) have the choice to return it and wait for the screen of their choice to come out.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

maxh said:
The unpleasant artifacts I notice .......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The general public isn't noticing these artifacts, which makes me think they made the right decision on this one. After all, the General public would definitely notice a higher battery drain. I won't pretend to know the technical details about why Pentile battery usage < RGB.
maxh said:
Hold your phone closer to your face and look at a solid white area .... with the brightness turned up all the way and you'll really see what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably - but it's not interesting if that's not how you generally use your phone.
I wish I could find the interview, but they interviewed a samsung executive who was quite candid about the whole thing. He said quite clearly that Amoled + is sharper than Pentile. But he said that they went Pentile because in terms of sharpness, Amoled is good enough (i.e. still fantastic) - production is better (i.e. it's cheaper to make) and uses less battery power.
And they are correct. I've watched/read many many reviews of the GNote. For the most part, they all rave about the Screen, complain about the price, and are happy with the battery.
It would have been a mistake to put AMOLED+ in, and have the reviews (still) rave about the Screen, be even more turned off by the price, and only be 'okay' with the battery. (perhaps even complaining about it, saying 'Luckily it has a huge battery, because otherwise you'd be toast)
The GNote is already a niche device - you want to widen its appeal as much as possible.
- Frank

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy with my Note, including the screen. Search my posts and you'll see me say that several times. I'm a long time pentile hater from the day I first powered on my nexus one and started wondering what was wrong with the screen. Yet I've said several times that the Note's so awesome and the screen otherwise so beautiful that I'm able to overlook the pentile layout.
However I'm not going to read people claiming that pentile is better than RGB without speaking up, because it's not.

maxh said:
Pentile does NOT "increase the resolution." It does exactly the opposite, decreasing it
...
Pentile is used because it allows them to make the blues twice as big. Since they had a problem with short life span on those, making them twice as big made them hardier, longer lived, and higher yields in the manufacturing process. That's the ONLY reason for pentile. You could say this allows manufacturers to build higher resolution displays than they otherwise would be capable of (since they're cheating and using larger blues than an RGB would have) but a 1280x800 pentile is NOT "higher resolution" than a 1280x800 RGB! According to definition, they're the exact same resolution, but in reality, the pentile is lower in resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
(This isn't meant to be a hostile response, I apologise if it comes across that way - it's absolutely not intended)
It doesn't directly, no. But you then go on to point out exactly how it enables much higher pixel densities - in an RGB layout each sub-pixel is the same size, so they need to make the blue sub-pixel at a viable size (as you said,) then make green and red sub-pixels that are the same size again.
On a PenTile screen, they can print the blue sub-pixel at it's required size, but the green component can be much smaller - and as a result, you can fit more pixels into the same space. If you compare the Galaxy Nexus's 316ppi PenTile screen to the S2's 216ppi RGB screen, you'll find that the blue and red sub-pixels are actually of a comparable width.
Sure RGBRGB is technically superior to RGBG in terms of image quality, but after a certain pixel-density:distance ratio, it just doesn't matter anymore, and allows for a greater pixel density regardless of display technology.
As a point of curiosity (I know you gave this first point, I'm just elaborating,) resolution is a measure of the number of horizontal or vertical alternating black and white lines a display can produce while maintaining a certain level of contrast. PenTile screens actually are their advertised resolution. However low-density RGBG will lose some detail in reds, but greens are still fine, and the human eye can't see enough detail in blue to tell a difference there. That's in general though - obviously there are biological differences in people, and that is where the legitimate complaints come from - not from holding a phone 3 inches from your face.
As for whether RGB or PenTile is better - consider that the Galaxy Nexus's 4.65" screen could fit either 1280x720 RG/BG pixels, or 960x540 RGB pixels, and it's too dense to be able to tell the difference in sub-pixel arrangement. I think PenTile actually is better in that case.

small dots and big dots
okay so everyone is forgetting that not so long ago printers used to print using
only one size dot of ink. well the picture from same size dots looked grainy. so the print people came up with different size dots of ink to make the pictures look
amazing. i look at the pentile displays the same way. in comparison the
screens on rgb screens look blocky to me and those on pentile look smoother and
less grainy. iphone just shrank the dots to where the human eye can't detect
them. but i believe to acheive the same thing on a larger screen isn't very
pratical. that's where different size pixels will make images appear smooth.

Some great info that dispels some pentile myths can be found here - http://pentileblog.com/uncategorized/pentile-for-720-hd-oled-smartphones/.
Put simply, a lot of the criticisms of pentile displays are only relevant to particular implementations, and not necessarily to the technology.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

I looked at the Note screen under a loupe and I could see a serrated edge along the top of white text on a black bacground. If I looked at it normally I couldn't tell. In this case the pentile doesn't bug me.
What DOES bug me is the low color depth that the Note displays. It is odd as it is inconsistant. If I look at photos it is fine. Some apps though look like the color depth is drastically reduced. Two apps to test are Angry birds Rio, and Google Sky. In AB look at the sky and clouds on the title screen, the shades all blend smooth on other devices (checked on an Infuse). On the Note there is severe color loss and much banding evident. Same with google sky There are these sky gradients, smoother on other OLED screens like the Infuse, much more bandy on the Note. I don't know why on some things like photos the note looks fine, but in many apps color loss and banding is evident. Maybe it is some weird incompatibility of the apps? Maybe they mis-read the screen capability and drop to low color mode? I don't know but it is weird and bothers me much more than the pentile matrix.

6.3" screen on the Note 3!? Some thoughts and perspectives:

Personally, after having done a little number crunching, I don't think it's really all too far fetched to imagine the Note 3 having a 6.3" screen, assuming certain things happen. Here's my thinking:
The physical dimensions of the current Note 2 (not the screen) are 151mm tall by 80.5mm wide, which yields a hypotenuse of ~173.3mm.
A ~6.3" (160mm diag) 16:9 ratio screen would be about 139.5mm tall by ~78.4mm wide, which can just about squeeze into the current body's form factor, if you remove the physical buttons and go with a ~1mm bezel on the sides (compared to the current ~5.7mm bezel).
A ~1mm bezel is insane, and honestly I doubt it's a realistic expectation. However, if the Note 3 returns to the original Note's width of ~83mm, that would make room for a ~2.3mm bezel on a 6.3" screen. That's still insanely thin, but maybe just about doable.
Now, here's another thing to consider: Screen Resolution.
As it currently stands, it's much easier to make a higher resolution LCD display than an AMOLED display (which is why our 5.55" AMOLED displays are only 720p when there are 5" 1080p LCD's). It's currently difficult for AMOLED to match those levels of pixel density before running into quality issues like we've seen in previous AMOLED generations. That's to be expected; AMOLED technology is still relatively new compared to LCD, so we're still working on perfecting it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think we've yet seen an RGB (not PenTile) AMOLED display break the 300ppi barrier yet. So far, the Note 2's display has the highest RGB pixel density that we've ever seen yet (again, the key here is RGB, not PenTile).
If the Note 3 has a 6.3" screen, and if indeed it's going to be 1080p, then that would mean a pixel density of ~350ppi. I believe that jumping from the current ~265ppi (RGB) to ~350ppi (RBG) is incredibly significant, and possibly unrealistic actually... So this, to me, suggests one of two likely possibilities:
A.) A 6.3" 1080p PenTile display.
or
B.) An RGB (using the current sub-pixel layout in the Note 2) display, but at lower than 1080p resolution; perhaps something like 1600x900 instead.
Option B would yield a ~291ppi density, and seems like a realistic and reasonable improvement from the current generation.
Either option is seems like a reasonable possibility, however, in my personal opinion, I would bet that the 1080p PenTile option seems more likely.
So, to sum everything up, here's what I would predict for the Note 3 for dimensions and screen:
Chassis:
151 - 155 mm Height
83 - 85 mm Width
8 - 10 mm Depth
Buttonless/Full touch screen design
Screen:
6.3" (160mm) Diagonal, 16:9
1080p PenTile SAMOLED (More likely)
or
1600x900 RGB SAMOLED (Less likely)
maybe
1080p RGB SAMOLED (Least likely, but who knows!)
I know a lot of this may have been boring, but I hope it was informative, and perhaps brings some more clarity to the rumors that have been floating around.
Let me know your thoughts!

My thoughts are there is already a thread about this.
Sent from my GT-N7100

i would really want a non pentile screen and a 1080p screen...

Nice thorough post.
I personally won't buy a larger form factor. So, whatever the max screen size is within the current physical dimension is what it should be.
If the form factor goes larger I might as well buy a 7" tablet.

Most said that the Note 2 size was too large.
After, was considered a normal phone size for them.
Note 3, might have the same procedure.

My thoughts are that if it actually turns out to be 6.3" then they better call it 'Galaxy tab mini'

The note 2's screen at first was a bit of a handful but I've gotten used to it now I've had it for a few months but 6.3".....that's a bit over the top in my opinion.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium

If the display isn't downgrade from rgb, and is close to 6inches without much dimensions bigger then i will upgrade to it.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium

The problem with a 6.3" device, IMO, would be:
Should one hold it like a phone (one-handed) or like a tablet (two-handed)?
I guess the design of the device should hold the answer (bevel and of course dimensions).
I believe this is yet again a wait-and-see moment for Samsung. When the original Note was launched, everyone had their comments. But the sales proved, one way or another, that "phablet" is feasible. 5.3" isn't really too big! Now we stretched it to 5.5" and the sales are now even stronger! So if they can find a way to make the user experience feasible for a 6.3" phone-tablet hybrid (or whatever marketing they employ for that device), then who's to say now that it's good or not?
I'm happy with my 5.5" Note II. If the Note III proves to be successful at 6.3", that's a nice feat. But I'm sticking to my Note II (for the next two years!)

I'd prefer if Samsung stuck with physical buttons as soft keys on screen take up a lot of real estate. It would be a waste to have a large screen that has a 1/2" row permanently used by buttons.
Not to mention that soft keys get in the way of gaming and are often inadvertently pressed.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2

Simple..
Penta-Core Processor
3 Gigabyte of RAM
..
Profit!
I don't know why but I want it..

EP2008 said:
I'd prefer if Samsung stuck with physical buttons as soft keys on screen take up a lot of real estate. It would be a waste to have a large screen that has a 1/2" row permanently used by buttons.
Not to mention that soft keys get in the way of gaming and are often inadvertently pressed.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1

@rbiter said:
My thoughts are there is already a thread about this.
Sent from my GT-N7100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I respectfully disagree. Whereas the other thread talking about the Note III merely links to an outside source regarding potential screen size, and then asks the simple "Will you buy it?" question, my thread here, though on a related topic, goes into much greater detail behind the speculations for the Note III, and encourages a much broader discussion about the screen technology in particular.

If Samsung does go with a 6.3" screen design for the Note III, I hope that they finally stop using the Phone UI across the whole platform and instead go with something more like the Phablet UI (like on the Nexus 7). Maybe even incorporate certain PA features like per-app-density and per-app-layout etc.

Gof fig they would want to make it bigger. :silly: I like the 5.5 and would love to see them work bettering the guts of the phone. More power!!!!!!!!!

EP2008 said:
I'd prefer if Samsung stuck with physical buttons as soft keys on screen take up a lot of real estate. It would be a waste to have a large screen that has a 1/2" row permanently used by buttons.
Not to mention that soft keys get in the way of gaming and are often inadvertently pressed.
Sent from my Galaxy Note 2 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
great

I like idea of a bigger screen, but remember the Note 1 was uncomfortable to hold (in one hand) for me. Although the Note 2 was only slightly narrower it was a massive difference and I have never had issues holding it in one hand. The slight curvature change also helped here. 6" might be my comfort limit

No thanks

Jade Eyed Wolf said:
So, to sum everything up, here's what I would predict for the Note 3 for dimensions and screen:
Chassis:
151 - 155 mm Height
83 - 85 mm Width
8 - 10 mm Depth
Buttonless/Full touch screen design
Screen:
6.3" (160mm) Diagonal, 16:9
1080p PenTile SAMOLED (More likely)
or
1600x900 RGB SAMOLED (Less likely)
maybe
1080p RGB SAMOLED (Least likely, but who knows!)
I know a lot of this may have been boring, but I hope it was informative, and perhaps brings some more clarity to the rumors that have been floating around.
Let me know your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly IMHO I think they would keep their button layout. They are trying to make their product lineup using standard elements.
Secondly, I doubt that they would go back to pentile AMOLED. they have faced too much heat with that piece of tech. And also doing 1080p on a non-pentile AMOLED is way tough for a new tech like it is. So lower res is the way they'll go.
Other than that I agree with your predictions.

The phone is already too big for most people.. would be crazy if they make the phone any bigger.

Note 12.2 screen has 4 Million less subpixels...

The Note 12.2 uses a pentile [RB][GW] subpixel layout vs the TabPro 8.4 which has full [RGB].
Pentile screens use just 2/3 of the subpixels compared to full RGB.
Accordingly subPixel counts:
Note 12.2 ... 2560x1600x2 gives about 8 million sub pixels
tabPro 8.4 ... 2560x1600x3 gives about 12 million
Disappointing for a device priced so high with a 'Pro' tag?

SonicTab said:
The Note 12.2 uses a pentile [RB][GW] subpixel layout vs the TabPro 8.4 which has full [RGB].
Pentile screens use just 2/3 of the subpixels compared to full RGB.
Accordingly subPixel counts:
Note 12.2 ... 2560x1600x2 gives about 8 million sub pixels
tabPro 8.4 ... 2560x1600x3 gives about 12 million
Disappointing for a device priced so high with a 'Pro' tag?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i believe that the actual experience of using the tablet and getting the best out of it matters more than the on paper calculations

I have a Nexus 10 and a Note Pro 12.2 and can't tell any difference in pixel density so quit complaining about paper specs. It's a great tabet!

rkirmeier said:
I have a Nexus 10 and a Note Pro 12.2 and can't tell any difference in pixel density so quit complaining about paper specs. It's a great tabet!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Turn that in to PPI and it doesn't look so bad. The gross PPI for the N12.2 is 247. The addition of the white sub-pixel (25% of the total count) reduces the RGB pixels by 8% each leaving them at 227 PPI each. The iPad Air is at 264 PPI and the net RGB for the N10.1-14 is 274 (gross is 299) resulting in the N12.2 having 14% fewer RGB pixels per inch than the iPad and 17% less than the N10.1-14. It's 24% less than the N10 which uses a RGB stripe display. Whether those PPI reductions are comparatively noticeable depends more on individual visual acuity and the distance the device is viewed from than anything else. Some reviewers commented on the display being less sharp when compared to the Tab|Pro 8.4/10.1 and N10.1-14.

Same here. No perceived difference in sharpness/quality with my Nexus 10.
Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk

BarryH_GEG said:
Turn that in to PPI and it doesn't look so bad. The gross PPI for the N12.2 is 247. The addition of the white sub-pixel (25% of the total count) reduces the RGB pixels by 8% each leaving them at 227 PPI each. The iPad Air is at 264 PPI and the net RGB for the N10.1-14 is 274 (gross is 299) resulting in the N12.2 having 14% fewer RGB pixels per inch than the iPad and 17% less than the N10.1-14. It's 24% less than the N10 which uses a RGB stripe display. Whether those PPI reductions are comparatively noticeable depends more on individual visual acuity and the distance the device is viewed from than anything else. Some reviewers commented on the display being less sharp when compared to the Tab|Pro 8.4/10.1 and N10.1-14.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All these calculations are a waste of time and effort. I can't tell the difference side by side so no one is going to be able to honestly perceive that one is better then another... These kind of arguments and numbers are only for haters or people who can't afford a device but want to convince themselves they really don't want it because of some technical specs that can't be perceived in real world usage/conditions.

Look it is what it is.
Samsung used a pentile screen in the 12.2 . Pentile screens have 2/3 of the sub pixels of a normal RGB display.
The display quality of the TabPro 8.4 is incredible, 1078 sub pixels per inch,
whereas the 12.2 pentile display clocks in at 494 sub pixels per inch.
As others have noted, the 12.2 Note screen is more than usable, but it's inferior to a full RGB display.

SonicTab said:
Look it is what it is.
Samsung used a pentile screen in the 12.2 . Pentile screens have 2/3 of the sub pixels of a normal RGB display.
The display quality of the TabPro 8.4 is incredible, 1078 sub pixels per inch,
whereas the 12.2 pentile display clocks in at 494 sub pixels per inch.
As others have noted, the 12.2 Note screen is more than usable, but it's inferior to a full RGB display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you are not getting one ?!
As I said actual experience matter than paper specs and calculations etc. I have seen no one disappointed about the screen not on here or in a YouTube video but you . everyone is charmed by the beauty of the screen and happy with it . those calculations are not a deal breaker for anyone around here and if you are not happy with what you would get with the note pro you could simply get the 8.4 tap pro its a personal reference .
Sent from my SGH-I777 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

SonicTab said:
Look it is what it is.
Samsung used a pentile screen in the 12.2 . Pentile screens have 2/3 of the sub pixels of a normal RGB display.
The display quality of the TabPro 8.4 is incredible, 1078 sub pixels per inch,
whereas the 12.2 pentile display clocks in at 494 sub pixels per inch.
As others have noted, the 12.2 Note screen is more than usable, but it's inferior to a full RGB display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but you are being stupid. Stop analyzing the specs and actually try out the devices. No way you can perceive any difference under normal operating conditions. I truly feel sorry for you...

It's an lower quality display. The difference can be seen, and stated and is unexpected in a premium product.
If your charmed by the product or unable to see the difference, all the better.
Maybe Samsung has judged its target audience correctly.

SonicTab said:
Look it is what it is.
Samsung used a pentile screen in the 12.2 . Pentile screens have 2/3 of the sub pixels of a normal RGB display.
The display quality of the TabPro 8.4 is incredible, 1078 sub pixels per inch,
whereas the 12.2 pentile display clocks in at 494 sub pixels per inch.
As others have noted, the 12.2 Note screen is more than usable, but it's inferior to a full RGB display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SonicTab said:
The Note 12.2 uses a pentile [RB][GW] subpixel layout vs the TabPro 8.4 which has full [RGB].
Pentile screens use just 2/3 of the subpixels compared to full RGB.
Accordingly subPixel counts:
Note 12.2 ... 2560x1600x2 gives about 8 million sub pixels
tabPro 8.4 ... 2560x1600x3 gives about 12 million
Disappointing for a device priced so high with a 'Pro' tag?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually the way pentile and rgb stripe displays render information is totally different. Rgb use an entire pixel (rgb) to create an image. Rgbw displays render on the subpixel level. The pixels actually have no locked in grid they must conform to but rather work with all those around them to render the same resolution image as rgb with 2/3 of the subpixels. There is no discernable difference except that rgbw actually conforms to the process of the human eye better and thus can achieve better color parity with real life.
PenTile® technology is biomimetic, meaning it is designed to compliment the complex mechanics of the eye-brain system. As a simple example of eye mechanics consider how the eye utilizes the color blue. The eye has cone receptors that sense color and brightness, and discern patterns. These cones are sensitive to different wavelengths of color—primarily red, green, and blue. The blue cones detect mostly color (chroma) information, while the red and green cones do most of the work resolving images by discerning luminance, edges, and structural details of images, as well as contributing to color vision. The red and green cones are used independently, each cone seeing a "dot" of black and white—ignoring its color to produce high resolution luminance perception—and are used in opposition, comparing the amount of red versus green, to produce low resolution color perception.
If there was an obvious disadvantage I doubt one of the largest and most successful electronics companies to ever exist would not use pentile. Or have you all forgotten that the NOTE 3 pentile is hailed as the best screen on a phone period (with regards to new 2k screens coming this year) even beating out all lcd rgb competition?
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

SonicTab said:
Maybe Samsung has judged its target audience correctly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^This.
Measurement is objective, but enjoyment is subjective.

Duly.noted said:
Actually the way pentile and rgb stripe displays render information is totally different. Rgb use an entire pixel (rgb) to create an image. Rgbw displays render on the subpixel level. The pixels actually have no locked in grid they must conform to but rather work with all those around them to render the same resolution image as rgb with 2/3 of the subpixels. There is no discernable difference except that rgbw actually conforms to the process of the human eye better and thus can achieve better color parity with real life.
PenTile® technology is biomimetic, meaning it is designed to compliment the complex mechanics of the eye-brain system. As a simple example of eye mechanics consider how the eye utilizes the color blue. The eye has cone receptors that sense color and brightness, and discern patterns. These cones are sensitive to different wavelengths of color—primarily red, green, and blue. The blue cones detect mostly color (chroma) information, while the red and green cones do most of the work resolving images by discerning luminance, edges, and structural details of images, as well as contributing to color vision. The red and green cones are used independently, each cone seeing a "dot" of black and white—ignoring its color to produce high resolution luminance perception—and are used in opposition, comparing the amount of red versus green, to produce low resolution color perception.
If there was an obvious disadvantage I doubt one of the largest and most successful electronics companies to ever exist would not use pentile. Or have you all forgotten that the NOTE 3 pentile is hailed as the best screen on a phone period (with regards to new 2k screens coming this year) even beating out all lcd rgb competition?
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PREACH.
The only other image related difference, I believe, is that the tab can record HD video at a higher fps. The camera only weighs in at a craptastic 8 MP, and I don't use my tablet, of all things, to film video. The s-pen, on the other hand, is fantastic for graphic work.

rkirmeier said:
Sorry but you are being stupid. Stop analyzing the specs and actually try out the devices. No way you can perceive any difference under normal operating conditions. I truly feel sorry for you...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is this stupid? We are not talking about a $100 or a $200 device; this is the most expensive Android tablet where EVERYTHING should be premium. When the build quality is already meh, not having 2560x1600 at standard RGB stripe for a LCD is a kick to the teeth.
The comparison with the Note 3 is asinine, because this is not 1080p AMOLED on a 5.7" screen where the tradeoffs with Pentile are more than worth it. 2560x1600 RGB is only 227 ppi, Pentile reduces it to 2/3 to 150 ppi. The claim you make that people can't see the difference like Retina iPad is ridiculous.
My brother has the 12.2 which I have actually used it so don't use the "you didn't tried it out hurr hurr" excuse to shut people up. Straight edges are clearly blurrier than my iPad Air. But hey if you like Samsung to continue selling you inferior specs at high prices be their guest.

But at the end it's not the pixel density. If you get the same effect with new technique, you don't need so high density. But as you said you see the difference in straight edges so probably buyers should then first check the screen do they see the same or not.
Sent from my N8000.

I have the note 3, note 10.1 2012 and the note pro 12.2, the note pro is much better than my note 3 and my note 10.1 2012 combined. If you want to complain about ppi, then you should complain about the first note 10.1. 1280 x 800 on a 10.1 inch screen vs 2560 x 1600 on a 12 inch screen. Considering the first note 10.1, that is a screen upgrade to me.
Sent from my SM-N900P using XDA Premium HD app

Metallic Palladium said:
How is this stupid? We are not talking about a $100 or a $200 device; this is the most expensive Android tablet where EVERYTHING should be premium. When the build quality is already meh, not having 2560x1600 at standard RGB stripe for a LCD is a kick to the teeth.
The comparison with the Note 3 is asinine, because this is not 1080p AMOLED on a 5.7" screen where the tradeoffs with Pentile are more than worth it. 2560x1600 RGB is only 227 ppi, Pentile reduces it to 2/3 to 150 ppi. The claim you make that people can't see the difference like Retina iPad is ridiculous.
My brother has the 12.2 which I have actually used it so don't use the "you didn't tried it out hurr hurr" excuse to shut people up. Straight edges are clearly blurrier than my iPad Air. But hey if you like Samsung to continue selling you inferior specs at high prices be their guest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good, I hope you don't buy a 12.2 for this reason. No one really cares and it's your loss... I firmly stick by my claims, I have better then 20/20 vision and at normal viewing distance (i.e. 18inches or so) it's impossible to tell the difference. You go ahead and stick face right up to the tablet screens and compare them side by side finding that under non normal usage it's technically possible to see a slight difference if that is what you need to do. 99.9% of people who want this tablet have no issue with the screen cause if you take away the specs and evaluate the screen under normal usage conditions it's as good as anything on the market. If you think your little online rant about the resolution is going to force Samsung to make a screen that meets your specs you need a reality check. I'm going to enjoy my Note 12.2 and in a year from now Samsung will likely release a newer upgrade model with a "better" screen (as that is what happens every year) that may meet your technical requirements. Until then you enjoy your little iPad Air and I'll me enjoying my Note 12.2!

How is this thread still going? Either you buy one, or you don't. I bought it, and I'm never looking back. It has all the functionality I need, plus things I've not yet gotten around to messing with. It's an awesome tablet. If subpixels are what you're in the market for, then you have done your homework and know this isn't what you need.
This is what I need. Very pleased.
Thank you, and goodnight.

Metallic Palladium said:
How is this stupid? We are not talking about a $100 or a $200 device; this is the most expensive Android tablet where EVERYTHING should be premium. When the build quality is already meh, not having 2560x1600 at standard RGB stripe for a LCD is a kick to the teeth.
The comparison with the Note 3 is asinine, because this is not 1080p AMOLED on a 5.7" screen where the tradeoffs with Pentile are more than worth it. 2560x1600 RGB is only 227 ppi, Pentile reduces it to 2/3 to 150 ppi. The claim you make that people can't see the difference like Retina iPad is ridiculous.
My brother has the 12.2 which I have actually used it so don't use the "you didn't tried it out hurr hurr" excuse to shut people up. Straight edges are clearly blurrier than my iPad Air. But hey if you like Samsung to continue selling you inferior specs at high prices be their guest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung FIRMLY believes that pentile is a better screen technology than lcd they are the ones driving it's development. It is more akin to how the human eye actually works and it is easier on the eyes. The number of sub pixels is the same just one per every four is white, It is 30% more energy efficient and it requires fewer sub pixels to display at the same resolution, the human eye will see it the same as a higher resolution. To be technical though gentile displays have ZERO sub pixels. Each individual subpixel is rendered separately. They are not in pre defined groups and can be combined into any number of logical pixels. So technically the screen is using 12,288,000 individual pixels.*
conventional RGB stripe displays render (draw) images by assigning a color and luminance (brightness) to an entire RGB-triplet as a whole pixel, adjusting its three RGB subpixels to set a single addressable point. Images on a PenTile RGBW™ panel are subpixel rendered, meaning they are drawn at the subpixel level (the individual points of light), rather than to the whole pixels of an RGB stripe display. In fact "pixels" in the traditional sense have been eliminated in PenTile RGBW™ displays; individual subpixels are not restricted to use in one pixel group, but instead participate in multiple "logical" pixels in their surrounding vicinity.
Subpixel rendering dramatically increases addressability and enables the sophisticated image processing used in PenTile RGBW™ displays.
That is from nouyance the company that invented pentile and rgbw They also say
PenTile® technology is biomimetic, meaning it is designed to compliment the complex mechanics of the eye-brain system. As a simple example of eye mechanics consider how the eye utilizes the color blue. The eye has cone receptors that sense color and brightness, and discern patterns. These cones are sensitive to different wavelengths of color—primarily red, green, and blue. The blue cones detect mostly color (chroma) information, while the red and green cones do most of the work resolving images by discerning luminance, edges, and structural details of images, as well as contributing to color vision. The red and green cones are used independently, each cone seeing a "dot" of black and white—ignoring its color to produce high resolution luminance perception—and are used in opposition, comparing the amount of red versus green, to produce low resolution color perception.
The PenTile RGBW™ layout uses each red, green, blue and white subpixel to present high-resolution luminance information to the red and green cones, while using the combined effect of all the color subpixels to present lower-resolution chroma (color) information to all three cone types. Combined, this optimizes the match of display technology to the biological mechanisms of human vision.
Other human-vision factors such as the logarithmic representation of luminance values, variable resolution between the center and edge of vision, and the separation and compression of brightness and color differences are also exploited in the design of PenTile RGBW™ displays.
The human eye perceives the resolution of the PenTile RGBW™ panel as the same as an equivalent RGB stripe panel, yet the PenTile®*panel uses one-third fewer subpixels. Consider the figure below to understand how this is accomplished.
At the top is the PenTile RGBW™ layout; at the bottom RGB stripe. The circle at the bottom center demonstrates the finest pattern of vertical black and white lines an RGB stripe display is capable of rendering. This requires three columns (R + G + B) be turned "on" and an equivalent width of three columns be turned "off" to write one cycle of a black and white line. From a suitable distance this collection of color subpixels appears to the eye as a white line.
The top center circle shows the equivalent pattern of vertical black and white lines written to the PenTile RGBW™ layout. From a distance the array of color subpixels in two columns will appear to the eye as a white line, identical to that generated by the RGB stripe layout, and the following two columns will write the corresponding black line. With only four columns being used to accomplish the same linear cycle that required six columns for legacy RGB stripe, two columns are saved. Hence, PenTile RGBW™ technology maintains the same resolution with one-third fewer columns, one-third fewer subpixels and one-third fewer transistors in the array. This results in wider columns and improved aperture ratio (ratio of transmissive area of a subpixel to the total area of that subpixel).
The circles on the right of the figure demonstrate the finest pattern of black and white lines which may be written horizontally to RGB stripe (bottom) and PenTile RGBW™ (top). Note that both layouts require the same number of rows for horizontal lines.
from this information we can see that a rgb display and a rgbw pentile are equal in displayed resolution and the pentile is more efficient. In black and white images and full color media Petite and rgb are 100% indistinguishable and only when displaying text against a fully saturated background (color text against a solid Colored background) or a sudden transition between two colors can a difference be seen and these are almost unnoticeable on high density displays like the Note 2014 or Note 12.2 pro. What you call drawbacks to pentile I call progress and efficiency. If I can't see a difference there isn't one. Only mine is bigger and more useful with better battery life. I owned the 2014 and work around and begrudgingly sell ipad airs on regular basis. I also have perfect vision in one eye and nobody I have EVER had come into my store has seen the 12.2's Screen as anything short of magnificent. Yes I suppose if you get close enough to your screen that you can barely focus on it that You could see a difference but ya Know I have a life and at normal viewing distances it is flawless. I mean I guess I better not buy a laptop anytime Soon since their dpi's are lower than an ipads right? Or if I want something really worth owning I need that 20" 4K tablet. And my TV is only 1080p? Its 50" THAT'S ONLY 44 DPI OMG I BETTER TRASH IT!!! Forget viewing distances I can't believe I enjoy this crap. I need at least an 8K tv to get a good dpi now I just need to wait about 6 years before I can own a tv again. And a 100" tv? Give me 16k and we can talk.

ExtremeRyno said:
How is this thread still going? Either you buy one, or you don't. I bought it, and I'm never looking back. It has all the functionality I need, plus things I've not yet gotten around to messing with. It's an awesome tablet. If subpixels are what you're in the market for, then you have done your homework and know this isn't what you need.
This is what I need. Very pleased.
Thank you, and goodnight.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you said what i wanted to say exactly last night but i decided not too since things are getting awkward and pointless since he clearly is decided not to buy it but also the thread seems to be to make people stop buying the device based on some quality calculations

AMOLED screens and Xperia devices

The lack of AMOLED is currently the only reason I haven't switched to a Sony device yet, so I just wanted a thread to gauge interest in having AMOLED screens on future devices.
I know the pros and cons of both AMOLED and LCD/IPS so there's not much point discussing those unless you really want to.

Don't necessarily care for it. More interested in a 5.5 or 5.7 inch screen.

Amoled can be better for the battery but I dislike the screen burn that occurs after a year or so. (Can vary based on how much phone is used.)
Sent from my SM-G900P

AMOLED looks real nice but between burn in and extra battery drain on light colors, I'll stick with LCD.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk

I much prefer IPS over AMOLED. AMOLED is overly saturated and typically in a pentile subpixel arragement leading to an inferior amount of subpixels.
IPS is one of the reasons I prefer Sony devices.

I can still see the pixellation in AMOLED screens, even in the Galaxy S5. Most people don't notice it, but I do - and because I know it's there, it will always bother me. AMOLED has poor color reproduction, and the screen has the potential to burn in (review units at any big box store are almost invariably burned in, even after only two weeks of constantly being on).
IPS LCD is the only thing I will consider.

IPS+ LCD is the best vivid display with true-to-life colours, especially with x-reality and Triluminos display.

Gorgenapper said:
at any big box store are almost invariably burned in, even after only two weeks of constantly being on).
IPS LCD is the only thing I will consider.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
npaladin2000 said:
AMOLED looks real nice but between burn in and extra battery drain on light colors, I'll stick with LCD.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Burn in has stopped being a problem a long time ago. I have a Note 2, no burn in issues, nor on my Note 1 before, or Galaxy S2 or Galaxy S before that.
You should have the screen auto switch-off after 10 minutes (or less) anyway, it will just drain the battery. The reason you see demo models getting burn in is because they never switch the screen off. I thought that was obvious, but I guess not..

wrsg said:
Burn in has stopped being a problem a long time ago. I have a Note 2, no burn in issues, nor on my Note 1 before, or Galaxy S2 or Galaxy S before that.
You should have the screen auto switch-off after 10 minutes (or less) anyway, it will just drain the battery. The reason you see demo models getting burn in is because they never switch the screen off. I thought that was obvious, but I guess not..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, but even if you don't consider burn-in, AMOLED definitely has it's tradeoffs. LG, Sony, Apple, HTC all use IPS LCD. Off the top of my head Samsung and Motorola are the only companies using AMOLED in high end devices, definitely the minority, not the majority.
Also keep in mind that the Note 2 does not use the typical pentile matrix that most AMOLED panels use

se1000 said:
Right, but even if you don't consider burn-in, AMOLED definitely has it's tradeoffs. LG, Sony, Apple, HTC all use IPS LCD. Off the top of my head Samsung and Motorola are the only companies using AMOLED in high end devices, definitely the minority, not the majority.
Also keep in mind that the Note 2 does not use the typical pentile matrix that most AMOLED panels use
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because it's the minority doesn't make it inherently bad. It's less used because it's more expensive, which is why Samsung and Motorola devices are usually more expensive than the others.
It has its tradeoffs but it also has benefits, less battery draw, more comfortable on the eyes, better contrast (imo). A lot of it is subjective, but I just want to raise awareness of the benefits and hopefully get more people asking the companies for AMOLED.

The day Sony introduce AMOLED, that's the day I will for sure stop supporting them.

Less battery draw is situational. Only when you're dealing with dark apps will there be less battery draw, since black pixels draw no power on AMOLED. Looking at Facebook or websites or other things with a lot of bright or white backgrounds requires more pixels to be lit up, thereby consuming more power.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk

npaladin2000 said:
Less battery draw is situational. Only when you're dealing with dark apps will there be less battery draw, since black pixels draw no power on AMOLED. Looking at Facebook or websites or other things with a lot of bright or white backgrounds requires more pixels to be lit up, thereby consuming more power.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Untrue
http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/oleds-ready-for-the-mainstream

wrsg said:
Untrue
http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/oleds-ready-for-the-mainstream
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That article was from TWO THOUSAND AND NINE!!!!!! A lot has changed for both technologies. Overall, I would say AMOLED and LCD are pretty close, with the edge actually going to LCD these days. Just lookup different devices with the same specs and look at screen on time figure. For example, the G2 had better screen on time figures than the S4 by a long shot (and I believe the S5 as well)
I'm in no way saying that AMOLED is bad by any means, I'm just saying that it isn't a superior technology either.
Personally as long as a screen has +400ppi it's really going to be sharp from any reasonable viewing distance. IPS has made strides in contrast ratio and color accuracy (gamut). AMOLED has improved in green/blue cast, and the ppi increases have negated the pentile issue.
In the end, a good screen is a good screen.

wrsg said:
Untrue
http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/oleds-ready-for-the-mainstream
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should understand that battery drain doesn't only comprise of the display itself. You must take other things into considerations. (wakelock, background apps, etc.) And if you really talk about display wise, it's true that AMOLED display allows better saturation in terms of colours and also better contrast ratio due to the no-black-pixel lighting up, but on light surfaces it still suffers on battery drain. You want a phone without such issues? Just go back to Nokia 3310 then
And if AMOLED screen is as expensive as an IPS+ LCD screen, I suggest you go check with factories and see how much it's actually made. From my source, they would either practically be the same price, or IPS+ screen tends to be slightly more expensive.
Display is always personal preferences. I'd rather an IPS+ screen due to the natural colors that it produce and it really stands out on the Z2/Z3 as I had hands-on on both of them. And if you are going to discuss this, why not head towards the General Android section? There will be a hell lot of people which will be throwing a lot of facts out making you understand better. No point making this discussion here. Not like Sony will ever go for AMOLED display. They'd rather the real colors then over-saturated and unnatural colors.

I don't want a phone with AMOLED, because the color representation isn't accurate as IPS.
What I would like to see is a phone with LCD IPS display lightened by RGB LED, most LCD panels use WLED (white LED).
RGB LED increase the color representation and color contrast.
When you see small tracks on a solid color picture (from light blue to dark blue for example) it's a problem that RGB LED don't suffer from.
Sent from my Xperia Z2 using Tapatalk

I wouldn't say IPS is a deal breaker to me but, oh man, Z3 would be catching my attention much more with a Amoled display. I was using a Galaxy s4 and now I'm on moto g (gave the s4 to my wife) and I really miss the dark blacks. The blacks on ips is just a light gray.

As the Note4 Display has just been tested as the best mobile display currently available, there is no reasonable argument not to opt for AMOLED in the future - except availability and price.
This includes brightness, color accuracy AND brightness as well as efficiency!
Based on our extensive Lab tests and measurements, the Galaxy Note 4 is the Best performing Smartphone display that we have ever tested. It matches or breaks new records in Smartphone display performance for: Highest Absolute Color Accuracy, Highest Screen Resolution, Infinite Contrast Ratio, Highest Peak Brightness, Highest Contrast Rating in Ambient Light, and the smallest Brightness Variation with Viewing Angle. Its Color Management capability provides multiple Color Gamuts – a major advantage that is not currently provided by any of the other leading Smartphones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note4_ShootOut_1.htm

Bäcker said:
As the Note4 Display has just been tested as the best mobile display currently available, there is no reasonable argument not to opt for AMOLED in the future - except availability and price.
This includes brightness, color accuracy AND brightness as well as efficiency!
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note4_ShootOut_1.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, people seem to be either grossly misinformed or because X brand uses LCD instead of OLED, they've either become a fanboy of the former or opponent of the latter. Samsung's newer AMOLEDs are hands down the best mobile displays available. There isn't even any competition, to claim otherwise is silly.
They offer far better blacks, contrast ratio (which is vital on a mobile - daylight and outdoors), much wider colour gamut (and accuracy) than any *mobile* IPS panel and lower power draw. Aside from this, pixel responsiveness is effectively instant; for motion, games and overall fluidity and responsiveness they are MASSIVELY better than IPS .. this is the reason the Samsung phones seem so smooth (not because they're faster or have some kind of software or driver based special sauce). Also, because the panel is less brittle, it's less likely to suffer catastrophic damage or the glass/plastic cover smash or crack. They also use fewer toxic substances than LCDs.
As far as I'm concerned, the only other game in town is Sharp's IZGO technology. This because it can potentially eliminate bezels much more easily than competing display tech (see latest Sharp phones), and it reduces IPS-like panels' power draw.
The Quantom Dot filters in Amazon's Kindle tablet do improve colours and blacks a little, but it's really expensive at the moment, and is perhaps a better partner for VA panels, which have much deeper blacks and better contrast than IPS (Sony uses QD filters in their Triluminos VA panel TVs). Also they use Cadmium Selenide, and Cadmium is a very nasty substance.
Emissive Quantum Dot (once they have eliminated Cadmium) is perhaps the holy grail, in a few years time, since it should have none of the longevity issues of OLEDs, and all of the low power, (potentially) low cost, high gamut, high responsiveness benefits.
Anyway, for now I'll be happy with my Z3 Compact that'll be arriving early next week, and use it to complement my Jolla, hopefully with a Sailfish port in due time .... but a Samsung AMOLED screen on a Z4 or 5 Compact would only make it more desirable, in my view.

mudnightoil said:
this is the reason the Samsung phones seem so smooth
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Frankly that is a laughable statement, as Samsung Android devices are anything but smooth given their TouchWIZ-based bloat.
mudnightoil said:
The Quantom Dot filters in Amazon's Kindle tablet do improve colours and blacks a little, but it's really expensive at the moment, and is perhaps a better partner for VA panels, which have much deeper blacks and better contrast than IPS (Sony uses QD filters in their Triluminos VA panel TVs).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Xperia Z3 is supposed to be using Triluminous technology that includes quantum dots. That will probably have to be confirmed once the phones are released, since in the past there have been Triluminous phones without incorporating quantum dots, but the possibility exists.
While there are some things I like about AMOLED, unless you have content optimized for it, it's very battery inefficient. And the most popular smartphone applications are generally things like Facebook, web browsing, and a few other things that still don't offer a "dark" mode optimized for AMOLED, that minimizes the number of lit background pixels. White backgrounds are not a friend of AMOLED. .