Quality test analysis shows Apple iPhone 5 display beating out the Samsung Galaxy S III
0. phoneArena posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:44
An analysis of the displays on the Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy S III by DisplayMate gives the edge to the recently released 4 inch screen on the iPhone; the company says that Samsung's OLED technology has yet to be refined to the same degree as LCD screens have...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
22. PhoneArenaUser posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:13 16 2
I always prefer LCD over OLED based displays. OLED based displays has to much and essential cons.
28. whysoserious posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:19 22 0
And sure enough, they haven't tested Nokia 920 yet.
30. PhoneArenaUser posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:22 8 1
And I believe that LG Optimus G display or maybe even LG's NOVA display beats them all. :P
Would be nice in the future to see LG Optimus G, HTC One X and Nokia Lumia 920 displays comparisons. :)
48. SmartGadgetS posted on 24 Sep 2012, 16:12 3 0
I love my SGS II's display. Its beautiful but a little "unreal" (oversaturated)
54. sniper1087 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 16:44 2 0
im pretty sure they will when they get hands on it but I will also point out Windows Phone 8X as well has the highest pixel density at 342 ppi
113. bigstrudel posted on 25 Sep 2012, 12:03 0 0
And it's the same Super LCD2 that's in the One X.
118. sniper1087 posted on 26 Sep 2012, 08:36 0 0
While it is, it doesn't 342ppi which is still good
116. romeo1 posted on 25 Sep 2012, 20:14 0 0
xperia s already has 342ppi ;)
119. sniper1087 posted on 26 Sep 2012, 08:48 0 0
Ok but does it have the same specs than the s3 like processor or ram? I I haven't read much into the xperia de line, and so is interesting.
120. romeo1 posted on 27 Sep 2012, 11:36 0 0
no the xperia s has an dual core 1.5ghz s3 chip and 1gb ram.
But the screen has 342ppi. the xperia v will have the s4 chipset also at 1.5ghz and also 4.3 inch screen with 342ppi with bravia engine 2
2. darkkjedii posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:47 34 5
I can care less who's beating who, all I can say is the ip5 is one heck of a phone and so is the gs3.
39. darkkjedii posted on 24 Sep 2012, 15:11 1 5
It's really a lot more crisp, with the screen having 44% more saturation. I'd say they're about even.
57. Jobes posted on 24 Sep 2012, 17:19 1 0
Zomg.. HTC Rezound is what 342?
58. rusticguy posted on 24 Sep 2012, 17:28 4 3
Steve Jobs spoke a lie (one of many) about iPhone and retina display ... read more here from the same person who runs the Displaymate)
So it's retina display if u hold yr phone 18" away from you ... else a BIG NO....
Let's cover all aspects when displaymate is quoted :)
66. darkkjedii posted on 24 Sep 2012, 18:10 0 1
Dude who cares? People are gonna just enjoy their phones nobody cares about conspiracy theories or all this other stuff that you're talking just enjoy your device and have fun with it.
86. Hemlocke posted on 24 Sep 2012, 21:01 0 0
It's funny, since DisplayMate lists 10.5" for "Retina Display" in the comparison. RTFA.
87. Mxyzptlk posted on 24 Sep 2012, 22:00 0 1
Whats your point?
90. rusticguy posted on 24 Sep 2012, 22:22 0 0
My mind refuses to accept what is factually not correct and is nothing but a high pitched sales "gimmick"
Someone said that even the macbook which is claimed as retina is indeed retina if you can balance it on your toe and then work :D
24. -box- posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:16 3 2
Wonder how it'll fare against the Lumia 920, as well as some of the androids with newer-displays (since the GS3 is about a half-year old now)? Guessing not as well.
44. Non_Sequitur posted on 24 Sep 2012, 15:41 0 0
I learned not to hate for BS reasons a while ago. You guys should do so as well.
3. MartinR posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:52 16 2
To bad they didn't compare it to the Note II. Which has the best Screen Samsung ever made....
13. issa8 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:01 14 0
It sho doesn't...the Note 2 uses a RGB matrix display and the GS3 and Note 1 use a PenTile display. Check it out in the new review:
e.php?m=Reviews.Images&f=name& id=119540&name=Samsung-Galaxy-Note-II-Review_025b.jpg&caption=&title =Image+from+%22Samsung+Galaxy+ Note+II+Review%22&popup=1
16. prakesh posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:04 4 0
+1 for you..
18. AliNSiddiqui posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:05 10 0
My bad... Sorry..
40. darkkjedii posted on 24 Sep 2012, 15:15 0 5
How can it be the same, but bigger? It's simple physics, something that's bigger is bigger, and therefor different. More vertical pixels= different, 4.0 vs 3.5= different, 44% more color saturation= different. U have been schooled.
10. Droid_X_Doug posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:57 3 1
+1 to you. I was about to make a similar post, but you beat me to it.
67. aoikemono27 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 19:00 0 0
You mean another "penTile" SuperAMOLED display? We should all adopt the philosophy of comparing unreleased products with actual tangible ones you can buy at a store. The Note II has the same low brightness and bad color accuracy of the S III, which is baltantly obvious just by looking at the videos.
6. PhoneCritic posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:54 14 5
Are they aware that Apple did not manufacture the display but that either LG or Sharp are the actual manufactures for a small sum of them and Samsung who has the greats capacity is the major manufacture of the IPS screens?
37. NexusKoolaid posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:55 2 0
The actual display screen is just one part of the puzzle - there's also the driver components, circuit board design and firmware/FPGA code. The point being that while Apple didn't make the display, it speced out the parts and made them all sing together.
70. aoikemono27 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 19:22 1 0
Sony makes the sensor for the iPhone, but the image capture on their own Xperia line is subpar to the iPhone. LG is one of the producers of the IPS panel that the iPhone uses, but the panels on their own LG phones can't seem to match. Some of these companies just simply manufacture the components. They didn't design them or have the rights to use them in their own products. Other's don't know how to utilize their own stuff with other components and polish it into a complete system that's superior.
26. -box- posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:18 2 4
That's like saying the chevy cruze is the best chevy small sedan to date... Not wrong, but not saying much.
31. OptimusOne posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:28 3 1
hey thumb down people:
he wasn't comparing ip5 to android phones he was comparing it to other iphones.
IP5 is defenitly the best otherwise isheeep wouldnt buy it and stay on their 4s's
11. bubbadoes posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:57 8 3
come on stretch that little dinky 4 inch screen to 4.8 like the GS3 and then you can compare... feature for feature...size. ram. speed.. google maps. sd. battery the GS3 is far more superior. the only addition for the 5 is lte... still lacking.... nfc...sd storage.. you are forced to buy the 32 or 64 gig version to make Apple even more rich
69. aoikemono27 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 19:17 0 0
The speed of the iPhone5 is faster in both benchmarks and real world usage. The S III still can't achieve the same smoothness. The battery is on par, but Samsung had to decrease the screen brightness drastically to achieve it. If you didn't bother to look at the charts, their AMOLED panel takes literally over 4x the power with the same screen area to achieve the same brightness. The iPhone5 has LTE and its the same chip as everyone else's. 4" is the perfect size for one-handed operation. Bigger size does not mean better. That's why there are so many screen sizes. It's a dumb metric. Otherwise people would be trying to cram tablets in their pocket and bragging how BIG and so much better their "phone" is.
The One X, Lumia 920, and other flagship phones don't have microSD slots. It allows for thinner and more robust builds. Samsung makes some of the worst snap-on back covers in the industry. Flimsy and creaking. The carrier stores have to tape them up because you can't attach a lock on them as the backcover will break off. Many users put cheap and slow microSD cards that slow down the entire system. That's why Google wanted to axe them in the Galaxy Nexus and why WP7 didn't offer microSD support. The embedded storage is faster and of higher quality. That's why it's more expensive.
Apple is rich because their high-end phones have high demand and they keep a very tight distribution infrastructure and pricing with suppliers. If you think the iPhone is expensive, you should look at the cost of other flagship phones like the Galaxy S III. They start at $600+ at launch and are just as high unlocked as an iPhone in international markets. The demand drives up the iPhone's price, but Apple doesn't benefit from it nor do they raise their wholesale price to dealers. Other phone companies have all the same opportunities. They just don't know how to do it properly to make money.
94. bigstrudel posted on 24 Sep 2012, 23:11 0 0
I thought 3.5 inches was the perfect size for one handed operation? Thats what Apple said before right?
111. sgogeta4 posted on 25 Sep 2012, 09:54 0 0
Apple says a lot of things...
95. ngo2dd posted on 24 Sep 2012, 23:42 0 0
You know benchmark scores has ALOT to do with the OS right? You can't test scores from two different OS and say they are comparable.
12. pkiran1996 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 13:59 11 2
They cannot criticise Samsung for the over saturation because that's the main reason they use AMOLED. Another word for over saturation is vividness - which some consumers such as me prefer.
38. Aeires (unregistered) posted on 24 Sep 2012, 15:03 0 0
I love the deep black that SAMOLED screens have. Both are outstanding, that's just one option I gravitate towards.
68. aoikemono27 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 19:01 0 0
They are a display calibration company. Of course they want accurate over exaggerated.
17. AppleConspiracy posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:04 9 2
Oversaturated colors of AMOLED are maybe inaccurate, but color accuracy is, believe it or not, needed only in professional photography/DTP, not in mobile.
Effect, in terms of atractivity, is actually more needed for mobile devices. It's like loudness in sound - boost lows and highs and you get very attractive sound, which is more pleasant to listen everyday than real, neutral sound that audiphiles and producers want - for job of course.
So this comparisons are uneccessary - the real thing comes from impression of the consumers in everyday use. I personally think AMOLED displays are more appropriate for aesthetics of mobile phone usage - because almost everything about them comes to that point eventually.
71. aoikemono27 posted on 24 Sep 2012, 19:32 0 1
Those are just your assumptions of what mobile displays should look like. Even companies like Nokia are putting high-resolution IPS displays on their flagship instead of sticking with their own OLED tech. Smartphones are used in various environments, especially outdoors, and LCDs can achieve dramatically higher brightness, because usability is very important. Then there's all the other caveats of using AMOLED, like the high power consumption, penTile matrix, and degradation of the panel itself. The market is not as obsessed with AMOLEDs as it use to be or as much as you would think. Otherwise Motorola, Nokia, and other companies wouldn't be switching to IPS right now even though AMOLED is "allegedly" the future. The dim brightness and gaudy colors that make me throw up are a turn off for a lot of consumers.
103. AppleConspiracy posted on 25 Sep 2012, 03:03 0 0
You could say that, but those are my attitudes as an industrial designer. I'm well aware of what makes qualitative dimension of visual representation in technology, I'm surrounded by pro equipment in that matter for my whole professional life. I know very well what IPS is, and what OLED is.
IPS LCD is certainly a superior screen than AMOLED in most categories, except three of them: response time, viewing angles and blacks.
However almost all of benefits of IPS LCD screen is not very important for mobile usage. I would say that AMOLED offers something utterly attractive that aesthetically acompanies that which modern smartphone really is - a fashion accessory and a toy.
That doesn't mean I don't recommend IPS in mobile usage. On contrary, I was so glad when someone (Apple) finally realized how good this is. I was suffering of bad screens for a decade before industry decided to go IPS on massive scale, only thanks to the boost of LG's production line by the great cooperation with Apple for iPhone 4.
I just wanted to tell that this comparisons are practically worthless. User experience, and most of it aesthetic experience is on the first place, and quality here doesn't equals what quality is for professionals that use this for a job.
BTW, Nokia doesn't make their own AMOLED screens. Those are Samsung's. And also, PenTile is not inherently tied with OLED tech, but for now there is still no efficient method for producing full RGB AMOLED matrix for high pixel densities.
21. Hallucinator posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:13 2 0
I'm pretty sure that if the reports were reversed you all would be celebrating your little victory, but since the apple display was"said" to be better you are making excuses. I'm not saying it is better because I've only used the Gs3 and not the ip5. I personally found the gs3 display to be very nice.
27. PhoneArenaUser posted on 24 Sep 2012, 14:19 1 3
Not me, I always said that I prefer LCD over OLED. :)