Weekly poll results: The ideal display is a flat 120Hz panel of 1080p resolution
- Z
- ZolaIII
- g8$
- 17 Jan 2021
MK, 17 Jan 2021Hope this news get to more manufacturers. A display should ... moreNothing in life is 100% so to have a 100 DCI P3 so for that you would need a really great cinematic display tuned to REC2020 which exides the DCI P3 specification. Accurate colors and even more importantly accurate grays.
- b
- blue.sun
- 0CN
- 17 Jan 2021
Woohoo, 17 Jan 2021You are blindly ignoring the fact that perceiving the diffe... moreThat's what I am talking about. You have a direct comparison of the phones. If someone put a device in front of you, you could never tell the real resolution.
I have iPhone 8 and Xperia XA2 and although I have really good eyes, I don't see any difference. Yes, I could probably try some super-high-resolution content on both devices to test them, but why? Watching 4K on a phone? Seriously?
No, this is all about being spec-slaves. People think that they can see the difference, although they really can't. The same with expensive audio devices or high performance cars. Only a few are really able to use the high performance.
- Z
- ZolaIII
- g8$
- 17 Jan 2021
Currently the best gaming monitors with advertised 360+ Hz rate reach 4 ms frame time which is equal to 250 Hz. On the other hand there are 60 Hz displays which have lag of 10 ms (100 Hz equivalent) doing processing internal on 120 Hz and displaying it at 60 Hz (Panasonic GX810 series TV 60 Hz and Asus 360 Hz monitor). I am talking about real mesured responses times. So the only time you will see any difference between the two is when you have a huge frame drop in games but if you have a good enough GPU you won't see it anyhow because there won't be a big deep in the first place (with V-sync). Hardly anyone can say how 6 ms at best will make a competitive advantage. And that's the only scenario when you need either lower frame time lag or higher refresh rate now keep in mind how 360 Hz will cost you 6x more GPU power and you won't get anything in the end. So that's what it should be called as clever engineering.
- S
- Shadocx
- 33D
- 17 Jan 2021
blue.sun, 17 Jan 20211440p on a 6.5" phone? As if you really could see the ... moreI have to disagree about this one, 720p is very bad, especially on those huge displays.
- S
- Shadocx
- 33D
- 17 Jan 2021
Hello Life, 17 Jan 2021A 75 inch 8k tv has PPI of 117. Even if you consider the d... moreExactly, I feel like people who can notice the difference between 1440p and 1080p put their face into their phones.
It's a little less sharp on OLED but it's still barely noticeable.
- D
- AnonD-558092
- IBQ
- 17 Jan 2021
OEMs will see that and think they can charge premium rates for lower resolution panels. This poll doesn't make sense, a price category should have been specified. For flagships, we've had QHD for over half a decade. Everyone should know that price won't significantly matter. And those seriously saying it will affect battery life don't know a thing. Render resolution ha minimal impact outside games (and with the crap pay-2-win games on mobiles, it's not even worth mentioning).
I hate consumer tech. People fall for everything companies tell them, regardless of evidence that clearly state otherwise, and then companies sell worse products and claim it's better somehow and everyone just agrees without questioning it.
- L
- LG Superfan
- 6Pf
- 17 Jan 2021
The ideal for me would be 6.7" waterfall display with 1080p with as high refresh rate as SoC can handle
- W
- Woohoo
- rKp
- 17 Jan 2021
blue.sun, 17 Jan 20211440p on a 6.5" phone? As if you really could see the ... moreYou are blindly ignoring the fact that perceiving the difference is subjective as everyone's eyes aren't the same.
I for example can clearly tell the difference b/w MY 5" 16:9, 1080p LCD & my mom's 5.86" 19:9, 720p LCD, and my dad's 6.18" 19:9, 1080p LCD is also noticeably sharper. My Lumia 730 with a 4.7" 16:9 720p OLED is also less sharp (but still a really good display for the price back then) than my 5" LCD and my grandma's 6.4" 19.5:9 1080p SAMOLED is almost as sharp as my dad's phone.
- ?
- Anonymous
- PE3
- 17 Jan 2021
Bounty shark, 17 Jan 2021For the people who are complaining The 1080p is a good re... moreyou say like the price actually decreased ? The last 1080p galaxy s cost only $649 at launch.
- t
- tomo100brt
- 0x1
- 17 Jan 2021
I love how Sony manage screen resolution. 4K when you need it and FHD when you don't need 4K. 120 Hz panel is good too and yes, there is difference that you can see. Samsung made exelent 120 Hz panel and that is screen adjustebel auto refresh rate. Combine Sony 4K panel and Samsung screen adjustebel auto refresh rate and you get ideal screen.
For now XPERIA 5 II screen is just what I need.
- W
- Woohoo
- rKp
- 17 Jan 2021
A new Razer Phone with a 18/19:9 6-6.4" screen (slimmer bezels but retaining the dual ffss, like 5 II) would be ideal.
I mean the original Razer had a 120Hz 1440p LCD with a SD835, so I don't u understand what the problem was with the S20 series, bcoz the Find X2 Pro also did it earlier.
- b
- blue.sun
- 0CN
- 17 Jan 2021
1440p on a 6.5" phone? As if you really could see the difference. People, don't be silly. Without side by side comparison you have no see even 720p and you talk about necessity of 1440? Oh, please...
- M
- MK
- XP@
- 17 Jan 2021
Hope this news get to more manufacturers. A display should also have:
1. 100% DCI P3 Color gamut.
2. Accurate colors (∆E
- ?
- Anonymous
- Skb
- 17 Jan 2021
Now matter how the Samsung marketing vs is trying to sell it, of course a 1080 panel is a downgrade. Just like switching to a 4k panel is an upgrade. But I would settle for a 90hz 2k panel with hdr. 4k makes no sense on such a small screen
- j
- jNO
- NY%
- 17 Jan 2021
This 120hz marketing marketing gimmick should get over our heads, just like the quad camera nonesense. I am disappointed.
- B
- Bounty shark
- n9}
- 17 Jan 2021
For the people who are complaining
The 1080p is a good resolution because :
1. The display will use less power than a 1440p display which is great for an everyday user
2. Many popular games still can't run 1440p perfectly and their capped at 40 fps
3. (Last and the most important)THE PRICE
- ?
- Anonymous
- p@f
- 17 Jan 2021
When marketing wins useless 120hz while we still use crappy soc and mediocre photo and video quality. What a pity
- c
- cyberlord999
- JEF
- 17 Jan 2021
The ideal display is oled a flat 120Hz panel of 1080p resolution
- D
- AnonD-923722
- Kxf
- 17 Jan 2021
Lccy, 17 Jan 2021As someone who got one of the first 1440p phones, the lg G3... moreI am with you. Higher resolution LCDs also gives you an sharper screenshots, good for productivity. 1440p 60hz Grade A LCD over an 1080p 60hz Pentile Amoled. I prefer flat displays
- L
- Lccy
- n1h
- 17 Jan 2021
As someone who got one of the first 1440p phones, the lg G3 which is LCD do fully RGB, I was absolutely stunned by the resolution and sharpness, normally over time you get used to it, but even towards the end of it's life I still found it amazing. I found it sad how no one appreciated the difference and how a 1080p pentile oled on a 5.5 inch phone looked fine.
When I examined many people's galaxy s phones, they ran it at 1080p which I think is the default out the box, I think Samsung realised few people were running their galaxy s phones at 1440p.
I would be willing to bet if they ran at 720p, many people still wouldn't notice.
I would say 4k on a phone is overkill, I struggled to tell the difference when comparing my G3 to an Xperia xz premium when playing a 4k video, I haven't seen the xz interface running at 4k though.
The reason I am not bothered about 120hz is that I don't game, and I don't mind a slight loss on fluidness if it means crisper text and more detailed images.
I'd be happy with a flat 1440p RGB oled screen with adaptive display for 24hz video, unfortunately that's not happening.