Samsung Galaxy S20 lineup won't support 120Hz above FHD resolution

14 January 2020
Samsung will limit the resolution if you choose to go with the 120Hz refresh rate mode.

Sort by:

  • s
  • saddameu
  • 0Up
  • 14 Jan 2020

i keep my s10 on HD, i have almost perfect vision and i can't tell any difference between hd and qhd+ , si a f... 6 inch phone. We had 20 inch monitors full hd and we couldnt see the pixels so give me a break. Full hd on a 7inch phone is already overkill and if i can't set the refresh rate on 90 hz, ill just stick to 60hz

    • ?
    • Anonymous
    • fIP
    • 14 Jan 2020

    Anonymous, 14 Jan 2020This is stupid. Obviously it will be more taxing. So for th... moreWell yeah but why remove it if you can have it as option? What a 1000 dollar phone cant have an extra option?

      • ?
      • Anonymous
      • fIP
      • 14 Jan 2020

      YUKI93, 14 Jan 2020I couldn't really care less about this. High frame rate ref... moreThen u need to check ur eyes

        • ?
        • Anonymous
        • fIP
        • 14 Jan 2020

        [deleted post]Of course we mourning
        We the potential costumer is not seeing the vlue over money that Samsung offering before
        Sells like hotcake yes, but dont expect it to sell a lot

          • ?
          • Anonymous
          • I8m
          • 14 Jan 2020

          This is stupid. Obviously it will be more taxing. So for those who are Actually pushing it they can lower the resolution. Solved. Wow that was hard

            People complain about the 120Hz issue but forget that they talk about a mobile phone. On a desktop PC, to support WQHD resolution, a powerful graphics card is needed, at least an nVidia RTX 2060. The phone has a much lower power budget, and for anything that moves, more than Full HD is infeasible. Of course, you could render basic 3D shapes in a simple scene, but I assume that is not what the people complaining have in mind.

              • S
              • Slizestyle
              • nU5
              • 14 Jan 2020

              That's actually good news.

                GrandMaster, 14 Jan 2020There were a group of people who said that higher refresh r... moreNot needed? Ask them to do some mobile gaming, let's see if they can say that same thing again.

                  I couldn't really care less about this. High frame rate refresh definitely works in mobile gaming, but that's about it. Honestly speaking, I cannot brain people who say that they can see the difference when scrolling the screen. I have compared 60Hz and 120Hz on Razer Phone 2 side by side, and I couldn't see any single difference between the two at all except when gaming.

                    • .
                    • .alpha
                    • ytx
                    • 14 Jan 2020

                    So Ultra will come with a worse telephoto camera even though it is the bigger phone?

                      • P
                      • Paul
                      • 8jg
                      • 14 Jan 2020

                      12MP main cameras is terrible as that will mean only around 8mp 16:9 which is better than 4:3 picture size. Samsung should have gone with 16mp main camera. Shame

                        • ?
                        • Anonymous
                        • CAr
                        • 14 Jan 2020

                        I believe if Samsung is limiting the 120hz option for wqhd, they should have at least allowed the public the to get 90hz on who.

                          Xda guyz will hopefully enable it. Not that I'm shopping for a sammy phone

                            AnonD-754814, 14 Jan 2020What did you mean by QHD resolution is fake ?The QHD+ resolution on pentile is "fake" (apart from black and white) as each sub pixel does not have at least one of each sub pixel, hence each pixel cannot produce all colors supported by the display alone, but instead relies on the neighbor pixel. Every other pixel has either RG or BG as sub pixels instead of all three RGB.

                            When setting Samsung devices to operate at FHD instead of QHD you don't really loose any sharpness, and what happens instead is the matrix is operating more like a RGB matrix would. Or rather RGGB per pixel, and the green are dimmer than when powering separate "pixels".

                            Take the S10 with a resolution of 1440 x 3040.
                            It has 4 377 600 pixels, but it does not have this number of each sub pixel.

                            It has 4 377 600 green sub pixels
                            It has 2 188 800 blue sub pixels
                            It has 2 188 800 red sub pixels

                            Total sub pixels, 8 755 200 and 50% of which are green.

                            A typical FHD+ resolution is 1080 x 2340. If a device either has a RGB LCD in FHD+ (i.e. vivo Z5i), or RGB OLED (i.e. LG G8-series I think) then it would look like this

                            It has 2 527 200 green sub pixels
                            It has 2 527 200 blue sub pixels
                            It has 2 527 200 red sub pixels

                            All 2 527 200 pixels can alone display/produce all colors supported by the display.
                            Total sub pixels 7 581 600, with an equal third of each kind.

                            As you can see, even the "higher resolution" QHD+ pentile matrix panel does in reality have fewer red and blue sub pixels compared to a FHD+ RGB matrix panel.

                            Another thing to note is that whilst QHD should have a lot more (77,8%) pixels and sub pixels than FHD, as far as sub pixels go the RGB FHD+ only has 13,4% fewer sub pixels than pentile QHD+ in total, and that's before even considering that a whopping 50% of the pentile sub pixels are green.

                              • ?
                              • Anonymous
                              • 0Wh
                              • 14 Jan 2020

                              GrandMaster, 14 Jan 2020There were a group of people who said that higher refresh r... moreMaybe they'll learn from Apple and their pastors invent a new dogma. "We pay, by the way, the highest price for a lower screen refreshment because it is the best for our god Samsung and therefore for us" :"D Pay more for less is always a good sacrifice!

                              Background: Applause from the flock everywhere!

                                Samsung, get out of here! What is that feature, a gimmick?! Useless.

                                  • ?
                                  • Anonymous
                                  • vjw
                                  • 14 Jan 2020

                                  Anonymous, 14 Jan 2020The only thing thats sad really is that the s20 lineup look... moreHave you been following the news? Apparently not.

                                    There were a group of people who said that higher refresh rates are not needed, such a waste, blah blah blah..... Just look at the comments now! What? Y'all got your eyes checked or something? Haha

                                      • D
                                      • AnonD-754814
                                      • uNV
                                      • 14 Jan 2020

                                      Marco M, 14 Jan 2020Not really. It's (almost certainly) a pentile, so the Q... moreWhat did you mean by QHD resolution is fake ?

                                        B0B, 14 Jan 2020lol that's pretty useless then. Always 90Hz would have been... moreNot really.

                                        It's (almost certainly) a pentile, so the QHD+ resolution is more fake than anything else. At least in FHD+ setting, it almost has one of each sub pixels per pixel (and double greens).

                                        Regardless of high refresh rate, Samsung's pentile QHD+ screen are best set at FHD+
                                        In this setting it most closely emulates a proper RGB matrix, and no battery is wasted on a resolution it cant provide in anything other than black or white.

                                          3 of 5