Database Users

HTC One screen reviews: One comes with different display types

HTC One Display Brightness
The HTC One uses an adaptative contrast mechanism for the screen brightness that is in operation even when auto-brightness is off. This mechanism means that brightness settles after each picture change only after a 4-5 seconds, which means that measurements that are taken too quickly can overestimate brightness by 15%, which is why there is a wide fluctuation across all reviews.
At which level brightness settles depends on the average picture level. You can sometimes observe this while browsing: when the content displayed varies between dark and bright content, an adjustment is visible.
In my measurements below, I have indicated the brightness range as well as the typical settled brightness for the standard 100% Voodoo test pattern.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
HTC One Black Levels
Like with brightness, black levels also fluctuate due to the adaptative contrast mechanism:
Content with darker average picture level will be dimmed
Content with brighter content will will brightened
Overall black levels will fluctuate between 0.29cd/m² and 0.55cd/m², so dynamic contrast will be around 1700:1 whereas ANSI (or intra-picture contrast) will be around 1000:1.
Color Temperature: Three phones, three different display calibrations.
Unit 1 (silver)
Fabricated on 12th March 2013 at factory Tierra del Fuego Factory in Argentina (Serial: FA33CWxxxxxx, Panel ID JDI C2_2)
Display: color temperature slightly on the cool side
White color temperature: 6950K (some meters will incorrectly measure this up to 350K higher, especially if not using the right spectral file for the type of display)
Black Level: 0.37cd/m² to 0.50 cd/m²
Black Level (typical voodoo test pattern): 0.43 cd/m²
White Point: 370cd/m² to 490cd/m²
White Point (typical voodoo test pattern): 435cd/m²
Typical Contrast (without adaptative mechanism): 1000:1
ANSI Contrast: 1100:1​Unit 2 (silver)
Fabricated on 3rd April 2013 at Hsinchu, Taiwan factory (Serial: HT343Wxxxxxx, Panel ID JDI C2_2)
Display: neutral color temperature, slightly lower contrat:
White color temperature: 6550K (some meters will incorrectly measure this up to 350K higher, especially if not using the right spectral file for the type of display)
Black Level: 0.50 cd/m² to 0.64cd/m²
Black Level (typical voodoo test pattern): 0.52 cd/m²
White Point: 400cd/m² to 530cd/m²
White Point (typical voodoo test pattern): 466cd/m²
Typical Contrast (with adaptative mechanism): 900:1
Typical ANSI Contrast: 970:1​Unit 3 (black)
Fabricated on 12th April 2013 at factory Tierra del Fuego Factory in Argentina (Serial: FA34CWxxxxxx, Panel ID JDI C2_2)
Display: Even cooler color temperature unit 1 but same brightness and contrast
White color temperature: 7200K (some meters will incorrectly measure this up to 350K higher, especially if not using the right spectral file for the type of display)
Black Level: 0.37cd/m² to 0.50 cd/m²
Black Level (typical voodoo test pattern): 0.43 cd/m²
White Point: 370cd/m² to 490cd/m²
White Point (typical voodoo test pattern): 435cd/m²
Typical Contrast (without adaptative mechanism): 1000:1
ANSI Contrast: 1100:1​Comparison of warmest color temperature on Unit 2 (left) vs. coolest on Unit 3 (right):
Based on the collective reviews of the HTC One including my own measurements, it is now clear that HTC One displays can have different display characteristics in terms or color temperature, contrast and brightness. Even displays with the same Display ID have can have widely fluctuating brightness and color temperature depending on factory calibration.
Settled brightness between 390cd/m² and 475cd/m²
Color Temperature between 6550K to 7350K
ANSI contrast between 930:1 and 1100:1
Currently available reviews for the HTC One Display
Neutral Color Temperature
20.03.2013 GBR pcpro: 481cd/m² brightness | 1202:1 contrast (measured with i1 Display Pro)
20.03.2013 DEU Computerbase.de: 483cd/m² brightness | 1100:1 contrast | 6,600K white temperature (measured with DTP94)
26.03.2013 FRA 01net.fr: 485 cd/m² | 0,29 cd/m² | 1679:1 contrast | 6638K white temperature (measured with Minolta CA-210 and DTP94)
26.03.2013 FRA [email protected] (see below): 466 cd/m² | 0,52 cd/m² | 939:1 contrast | 6650K white temperature (measured with i1 Pro 2)
Medium-High Color Temperature
26.03.2013 DEU [email protected] 463cd/m² brightness | 1073:1 contrast | 6934K white temperature (measured with i1 Pro)
02.04.2013 DEU notebookcheck.com: 488.9cd /m² brightness | 0.23 cd / m² black level | 2117:1 contrast | 7205K white temperature
26.02.2013 RUS 3dnews.ru: 382cd/m² and 1,258:1 contrast | 6,938K white temperature (measured with Spyder 4)
High Color Temperature
14.03.2013 GBR uk.hardware.info: 426cd/m² brightness | 977:1 contrast | 7,820K color temperature (measured with i1 Display Pro)
26.02.2013 RUS 3dnews.ru: 453cd/m² and 1,328:1 contrast | 7,598K white temperature (measured with Spyder 4)
14.03.2013 NLD Tweakers.net: 489cd/m² | 1159:1 contrast | 8,166 color temperature (measured with i1 Display Pro)
26.03.2013 DEU [email protected] 420cd/m² brightness | 1060:1 contrast | 8,130K color temperature (measured with Chroma 5)
28.03.2013 RUS [email protected] 492cd/m² brightness | 1189:1 contrast | 7980K white temperature
Unknown color temperature:
14.03.2013 USA laptopmag: 463cd/m² brightness
19.03.2013 DEU Notebookjournal: 385cd/m² and 1100:1 contrast
19.03.2013 DEU PC Welt 447cd/m² brightness | 1711:1 contrast
20.03.2013 DEU Chip.de: 479cd/m² brightness | 1020:1 contrast
21.03.2013 FRA Les Numériques 460cd/m² | 1568:1 (measured with i1 Pro or i1 Pro 2 tbc.)
21.03.2013 FRA 01.net 480cd/m² brightness | 1,655:1 contrast (measured with Konica Minolta CA-210)
23.03.2013 BGR GSMArena: 647cd/m² brightness | 1541:1 contrast
Having said that, there are still different display calibrations out there, I myself measured "settled" brightness
I will try and keep this updated with new tests to confirm where each screen type can be found.
For reference, here are the luminance ranges of the color testing devices listed above.
i1 pro__________________________ 0.20 cd/m² to 300 cd/m²
i1 pro 2_________________________0.20 cd/m² to 1200 cd/m²
Chroma 5/Sencore Color Pro V_______0.01 cd/m² 1000 cd/m²
Spider 3/4_______________________0.02 cd/m² 5000 cd/m²
i1 Display 2______________._____._.__0.02 cd/m² 3000 cd/m²
i1 Display 3/i1 Display Pro/C6___._____0.003 cd/m² 1200 cd/m²
Konica Minolta CA-210______________0.01cd/m² 1000 cd/m²

Own screen measurements
Here are measurements I conducted today at a Vodafone shop.
White Balance
First of all, let me say that the readings were conducted by i1 Pro, which is certified until 300cd/m². Overall the readings will be very accurate for color temperature, black level, gamma and chromaticty, but maximum brightness may be off by a small margin (to be confimed tomorrow). Unfortunately Calman did not respond to me regarding my license upgrade to Calman5, so I could not use the Chroma5 for this measurement.
I will conduct new readings with the Chroma 5 likely tomorrow. The results are quite close to the PCpro review in terms of brightness and very close to the Russian review in terms of white color temperature (in fact nearly identical). Overall contrast falls in line with most reviews.
White point / maximum brightness: 445cd/m²
Back Level: 0.43cd/m²
Contrast (dynamic): 1034:1
Average gamma: 2.1
White color temperature (read the color tmperature section below): 6934K (same as Russian Review)
Black color temperature (read the color tmperature section below): 8882K
Average color temperature: 7353K
Overall the white balance is good but not perfect.
Color Temperature
The observed white balance translates into color temperature slightly on the cold side but it is colder at low stimulus and warmer towards the white point, which is important for a pleasing browsing experience:
I think displaying color temperature across the whole spectrum is important. Some reviews only mention one value, which can be the average or the white point temperature, but it is hard to interpret taken on its own.
Color decoding / Chromaticity
As far as color accuracy is concerned, the HTC One's display I tested had fairly accurate colors. Only the most critical viewers will detect thes imperfections in daily use.
Based on this measurement, this is more of a type 2 display, however I am not sure about the white point

Sites and reviewers test differently. I think if you look at the One X's performance you'll see it varied from site to site too.
Here's GSMArena's testing methodology. You can see how other sites might test differently and get different results because of it. It's more accurate to compare multiple devices on a single site than it is a single device across multiple sites. Assuming each site uses the same standardized tests a One X to SGS3 comparison on tweakers.net would be more relevant than a One X's performance off tweakers.net compared to a SGS3's peformance off GSMArena.
An important note about AMOLEDs is due here. As AMOLED units have the ability to completely switch off individual pixels, their black level readings are 0, which gives them an infinite contrast ratio under the testing conditions.
When we measure we take two readings off each device - first with the display brightness set to 50% and then with the brightness setting pushed all the way up. We test the handsets in complete darkness, because when ambient light is present, the luminance levels of the blacks displayed goes up, and affects the perceived contrast ratio.
Contrast ratio is very heavily influenced by the black levels of a display. While a brighter display would normally have an advantage, it will usually be unable to compensate for insufficiently deep blacks.
Our sunlight legibility test aims to show you how legible each screen remains in bright environments, where screen reflectivity matters as much as its natural contrast and brightness. We use fixed studio lighting to simulate sunlight falling on the phone screens and measure the contrast ratio of each of them, when faced with this powerful light source. We measure each display with brightness turned up to 100%.​

Re: HTC screen reviews: HTC One comes with different display types
Gsmarena is Bulgarian, not American

Here's a way to find the display type that doesn't require root.
1. Reboot the phone twice to get a clean "last_kmsg" file
2. Use any file manager that gets you to the root directory
3. Navigate to the /proc folder
4. Find "last_kmsg"
\
5. Open it on the device or send it to a PC and open it as a text file. Your looking for "panel_id" and "panel_vendor." It's a long ass file so you're better off using an editor with a search feature to search on "panel."
Since there aren't many vendors making 1080P panels I'll bet all One's use the same panel type and it's probably from Renasis (Sharp) like the XZ and DNA.
The AUO (Acer) display on the Teg3 One X is "0x4940014"
The Sharp display on the Teg3 One X is "0x294000f"
The Sony display on the One XL is"0x18103" (The One XL only uses the Sony panel)
The AUO (Acer) display on the One X+ is 0x944a03 (The One X+ only uses the AUO panel)
The DNA uses a Renasis (Sharp) panel (only) but I can't find the ID

jasahu said:
Gsmarena is Bulgarian, not American
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks I was looking for that information yesterday but could not find it. Do you know if this is the parent or did the testers also receive a Bulgarian unit?

BarryH_GEG said:
Sites and reviewers test differently. I think if you look at the One X's performance you'll see it varied from site to site too.
Here's GSMArena's testing methodology. You can see how other sites might test differently and get different results because of it. It's more accurate to compare multiple devices on a single site than it is a single device across multiple sites. Assuming each site uses the same standardized tests a One X to SGS3 comparison on tweakers.net would be more relevant than a One X's performance off tweakers.net compared to a SGS3's peformance off GSMArena.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you with regards to black levels but not for brightness.
Brightness cannot move by more than 10% depending on measurement device or testing protocol
Calibration usually never reduces brightness either by more than 15%, except of course if you are calibrating an AMOLED to neutral color temperature.
The fact that there are several display types makes no doubt to me, as HTC like many others used that approach in the past and the brightness results are too different.

BarryH_GEG said:
Here's a way to find the display type that doesn't require root.
1. Reboot the phone twice to get a clean "last_kmsg" file
2. Use any file manager that gets you to the root directory
3. Navigate to the /proc folder
4. Find "last_kmsg"
\
5. Open it on the device or send it to a PC and open it as a text file. Your looking for "panel_id" and "panel_vendor." It's a long ass file so you're better off using an editor with a search feature to search on "panel."
Since there aren't many vendors making 1080P panels I'll bet all One's use the same panel type and it's probably from Renasis (Sharp) like the XZ and DNA.
The AUO (Acer) display on the Teg3 One X is "0x4940014"
The Sharp display on the Teg3 One X is "0x294000f"
The Sony display on the One XL is"0x18103" (The One XL only uses the Sony panel)
The AUO (Acer) display on the One X+ is 0x944a03 (The One X+ only uses the AUO panel)
The DNA uses a Renasis (Sharp) panel (only) but I can't find the ID
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great stuff I will go to the shops and check it out. Why can't you find the ID on the DNA?

I made a thread about this earlier, but I only got troll responses.
Hope this thread receives actual input, this is kind of an important thing for me.

Hate to throw a spanner in the works here, but it may also be that different firmwares are producing different default colour temperatures. With the One X there were indeed three manufacturers of screen. For the European models it was Acer and Sharp. Acer had been colour fidelity, but less uniform, and not as bright. The sharp was a light cannon, but very cool colour temperature, and better uniformity. However, HTC reduced the disparity through firmware updates!
Therefore, the only true way is if we can find a reliable way of finding the vendor code such as in the log file.
Also I can tell you that I had a Sony Xperia last year. Even though all the screens are made by Sony, there was a huge variance between two supposedly identical phones, as I found out when I compared to a friends.
---------- Post added at 01:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:30 PM ----------
BarryH_GEG said:
The AUO (Acer) display on the Teg3 One X is "0x4940014"
The Sharp display on the Teg3 One X is "0x294000f"
The Sony display on the One XL is"0x18103" (The One XL only uses the Sony panel)
The AUO (Acer) display on the One X+ is 0x944a03 (The One X+ only uses the AUO panel)
The DNA uses a Renasis (Sharp) panel (only) but I can't find the ID
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely spot on accuracy here. I confirmed the One X+ my wife bought had an identical characteristic to the One X Acer screen I had before. However they seem to have improved the uniformity issues from my original One X.
I also have a suspicion that at least my One uses a Sharp panel and has a number of characteristics similar to the Sharp screen used on the One X. It has a colour temperature that is a bit on the cool side for sure. Although I haven't measured yet, I have a keen eye, and I would have said it was a little over 7000K. I also compared it to my wife's One X+ and it is a bit cooler, but not rediculous (nothing like the S3 which was wildly off). We may find a future firmware update corrects this if the variance between One's with sharp panels is not too severe.

jonstatt said:
Hate to throw a spanner in the works here, but it may also be that different firmwares are producing different default colour temperatures.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even if it were true, battery life will still fluctuate depending on the screen type you have, and it is something end users have no control over once the device has been purchased, so may as well test his before purchasing...

puremind said:
Even if it were true, battery life will still fluctuate depending on the screen type you have, and it is something end users have no control over once the device has been purchased, so may as well test his before purchasing...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're sort of on a witch hunt. HTC hasn't used two panel vendors on a single device since the Teg3 One X. When they did, none of the characteristics of the phone (EG: power draw, benchmarks) were any different. You're basing all your assumptions on tests conducted by eight different reviewers, using eight different methodologies, and using eight different sets of conditions.
Here's how the Teg3 One X fared in some of those same reviewer's tests. They were all testing a One X with the AUO panel because HTC didn't provide review samples that had the warmer Sharp panel (for good reason). And from being on the One X forum I assure you, as much as that phone was picked apart with a microscope, it there were any impacts to anything but color temperature because of the two different displays it would have been on the front page.
And if you performed the same analysis you did to reach your conclusion on any phone you'd see similar deviations. The deviations are there but it's differences in the reviewer's testing, not the devices themselves. By all means carry on but I think when people begin posting their panel ID’s it’ll most likely show a single display type.

BarryH_GEG said:
You're sort of on a witch hunt. HTC hasn't used two panel vendors on a single device since the Teg3 One X. When they did, none of the characteristics of the phone (EG: power draw, benchmarks) were any different. You're basing all your assumptions on tests conducted by eight different reviewers, using eight different methodologies, and using eight different sets of conditions.
Here's how the Teg3 One X fared in some of those same reviewer's tests. They were all testing a One X with the AUO panel because HTC didn't provide review samples that had the warmer Sharp panel (for good reason). And from being on the One X forum I assure you, as much as that phone was picked apart with a microscope, it there were any impacts to anything but color temperature because of the two different displays it would have been on the front page.
And if you performed the same analysis you did to reach your conclusion on any phone you'd see similar deviations. The deviations are there but it's differences in the reviewer's testing, not the devices themselves. By all means carry on but I think when people begin posting their panel ID’s it’ll most likely show a single display type.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please be honest about this. It is not even debatable that maximum brightness has an impact on battery life. Just to prove my point. Take this test:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/handys/2013/htc-one-im-test/5/
Battery time at maximal brightness (383cd/m²): 277 min (4:37)
Battery time at 200cd/m²: 322 min (5:22)
That's 16% more battery for a 58% decrease in brightness. Therefore, if you do the maths, this means an 11% difference in battery performance for web browsing/HD Video between the 650cd/m² model and the 385cd/m² model.
If you apply this to the current GSM Arena battery charts, which were created based on the top brightness model (650cd/m²), you can see that the HTC One climbs further up on the chart.
And this factor is even an underestimation for the GSM charts, because they measure standard definition video as opposed to HD, so the impact of screen brightness in their testing environment should be even more, probably around 20% between the two devices.

puremind said:
Please be honest about this. It is not even debatable that maximum brightness has an impact on battery life. Just to prove my point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you know what brightness settings each of the reviewer’s used when they tested battery life? I'm willing to bet it's not maximum brightness and that all the phones each of them test are set to some equivalent level that the reviewer applies consistently.
And what you're saying is debatable. Each of the reviewer's data you're quoting is correct; based on their testing methodology. What I'm saying is that the same display is performing within 10+/-% (normal deviation) and that 382cd/m2 from 3Dnews is the same as 647cd/m2 from GSMArena. The display's not performing any differently, it's how their testing that's causing variations. The swings in the One X comparative I provided show that. Do you honestly believe if the delta on One X displays at max brightness was 386 vs. 550 that the owners of the less bright display(s) wouldn't notice? There are 100 pages discussing the difference between the warm Sharp panel vs. the cool AUO panel so it’s not as if owners aren’t conscious of their display’s performance.
So you’re taking something that’s meant to be viewed vertically (EG: comparing multiple devices performance against each other on GSMArena where the same methodology was used) and trying to make it horizontal by taking a single device's results from eight different reviewers and comparing them. It can't work because, again, they all use different methodologies for each of their tests. No analysis based on an undefined or inconsistent baseline can ever be compared. There are just too many variables that can (and do) skew the results. And here’s how to prove this. If you ran the same analysis across the same eight sites for the XZ you’d get a similar result to what you got for the One. Same for any other phone. If what you’re representing were true every device produced would have three display types and wild swings in battery life based on huge variations in brightness. We know that’s not the case because it would be all over each devices respective XDA forum.
Here's one of GSMArena's battery tests.
The web browsing test is performed using an automated script which reloads a webpage every ten seconds. There are no flash elements on the web pages, so the playing field is even. The brightness of the phones' displays is set to 50% and we use a Wireless N router placed a few meters away to get full connectivity bars.

BarryH_GEG said:
You're sort of on a witch hunt. HTC hasn't used two panel vendors on a single device since the Teg3 One X. When they did, none of the characteristics of the phone (EG: power draw, benchmarks) were any different. You're basing all your assumptions on tests conducted by eight different reviewers, using eight different methodologies, and using eight different sets of conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No disrespect, but you don't seem to be intimately familiar with screen calibration. The difference between the top level of observed brightness and the lowest one is huge. Not difference is testing conditions, protocol or testing devices can explain such a difference (650cd/m² to 385cd/m²).
If testing devices had such error margins, it would be a well known fact amongst professional calibrators, and no one would hire their services because essentially eye calibration would not be any less accurate than measured calibration...Please be serious.
As someone who had calibrated many displays, and repeated measurements with different measurement devices and under different conditions, please trust me when I say that brightness measurements are very stable and reliable, using even the cheapest colorimeters (chromaticity and black levels are more sensitive to the device used but brightness is easy).

This thread makes me nervous. When the One X come out, I had access to several handsets at once, all of which displayed different tints when on boot screen or recovery screen. Some white some yellowed.
Is this the same with the One? Are there cool and warm screens?

puremind said:
No disrespect, but you don't seem to be intimately familiar with screen calibration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No disrespect, but you don't seem very familiar with comparative analytics which are the crux of your conclusions.
This is from the site you posted with the lowest cd/m2 score for the One. The One's performance against the One X+ matches up to GSMArena's comparison of the same two devices even though GSMArena's relative cd/m2 score for both devices was almost double. If the One's they each had didn't have screens that were performing similarly the deviation against the One X+ would have been pretty obvious to both of them.
Maximum brightness has remained virtually unchanged from the HTC One X +: was 373 cd / m 2, was 10 candelas more. But seriously change the contrast: on the already considerable 862:1 she grew up in half and is now 1258:1.​

BarryH_GEG said:
Same for any other phone. If what you’re representing were true every device produced would have three display types and wild swings in battery life based on huge variations in brightness. We know that’s not the case because it would be all over each devices respective XDA forum.
[/I]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who spoke about wild swings in battery life? I gave you a figure (11% for a 58% difference in brightness) based on 1 testing environment, 1 testing device, 1 reviewer. The difference is there. In fact, I even have no doubt that the difference could be more when testing SD videos instead of HD videos like in the test I quoted or that this percentage could be higher when starting from a much higher brightness point.
I read the GSMArena testing setup. Based on this, the difference is probably even larger than in my estimate for their own setting. As you said, not all settings will produce the same differences. The GSM set up for video testing was less demanding in terms of video processing, therefore the impact of screen brightness should be even greater!
The fact that battery life is impacted by maximum screen brightness is just not debatable, especially if what you say is true and it is only one and the same display. This actually precludes any other factors such as different display energy efficiency between different display models from making the brighter display brightness somehow equally energy efficient than the lower brightness display.
If what you say is true, then the battery difference is just not questionable. if screens had been different, I could have agreed that the brighter screen could have been as energy efficient due to different technology, but as it stands, light must be produced with energy and more light with more energy..

BarryH_GEG said:
No disrespect, but you don't seem very familiar with comparative analytics which are the crux of your conclusions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparative analytics reinforce my point - the computerbase setup is actually more forgiving for screen brightness than the GSMArena one (focus on HD Video means the proportion of battery loss explained by brightess vs. that explained by video processing is less vs the GSM Arena setting), so based on comparative analytics, the difference would be even greater than 11%. That will teach me for understating battery improvements in my table just to not appear to arbitrarily inflate my results!

puremind said:
If what you say is true, then the battery difference is just not questionable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course it is. Your assumption, based on a flawed comparative resulting in a flawed conclusion, is that each One built could have a display that varies from 382-647cd/m2 and therefore battery performance could vary accordingly. I'm saying there's most likely a single panel used on the One and the difference in brightness between any two panels is no more than 10+/-% due to manufacturing tolerances and that all One's will have similar battery life when used the same way. If you're right this thread will balloon in to 100+ pages and end up a sticky because the lucky winners of the "screen lottery" you're describing that draw 382cd/m2 displays will be up in arms. If I'm right this thread will die out fairly quickly as the deviation you're hypothesizing only exists on paper.

[Q] Outdoor visibility

S5 didn't really excite me as much as previous galaxy releases but I would still be willing to upgrade if the outdoor visibility has improved even a bit, which is something they claimed. Can anyone that has the phone or has played with it (outdoors or at least near a window with the sun up) confirm that it has better outdoor visibility when compared to S4? If it IS better, is the difference negligible or comparable to that of an IPS LCD?
e: been looking online for reviews and hands-on videos but none seem to touch on the topic
e2: Found an article finally. All signs point to a much better screen all around
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...-OLED-screen-to-date-can-hit-698-nits_id54767

cl_l said:
S5 didn't really excite me as much as previous galaxy releases but I would still be willing to upgrade if the outdoor visibility has improved even a bit, which is something they claimed. Can anyone that has the phone or has played with it (outdoors or at least near a window with the sun up) confirm that it has better outdoor visibility when compared to S4? If it IS better, is the difference negligible or comparable to that of an IPS LCD?
e: been looking online for reviews and hands-on videos but none seem to touch on the topic
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S4 has the lowest glare coefficient of any device DisplayMate has seen. The S5 will most likely be better.

I did a bit of research on this today. Even posted a similar question just minutes after you did.
The S5 has 500 nits brightness. The S4 struggled to hit 300 nits. So, the S5 should be ~40% brighter. As long as the screen isn't overly reflective, then the S5 should be light years better for daylight / sunlight visibility.
What I'd like to know is how it compares to the Note 3 which is the current leader [for Android] when it comes to daylight visibility. I'd also like to know how the S5 compares with the Xperia Z2.

S4 has the lowest light reflection coefficient (least glare) of anything ever tested at DisplayMate. They haven't tested the Note 3, but with the higher brightness I guarantee the S5 will be on top.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SolarTrans said:
S4 has the lowest light reflection coefficient (least glare) of anything ever tested at DisplayMate. They haven't tested the Note 3, but with the higher brightness I guarantee the S5 will be on top.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds great. I don't know about other people but in the Miami sun it's usually hard to see my S4 on auto-brightness with power saving turned off

Ah. It's brightness was fairly low, but the glare was also insanely low. With the S5 being so bright, it should be pretty good
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

cl_l said:
S5 didn't really excite me as much as previous galaxy releases but I would still be willing to upgrade if the outdoor visibility has improved even a bit, which is something they claimed. Can anyone that has the phone or has played with it (outdoors or at least near a window with the sun up) confirm that it has better outdoor visibility when compared to S4? If it IS better, is the difference negligible or comparable to that of an IPS LCD?
e: been looking online for reviews and hands-on videos but none seem to touch on the topic
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its way brighter outdoor.

One review I read said that the M8 on auto was impossible to use in the sun with polarized sunglasses. The S5 has had no issues on everything I've read.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SolarTrans said:
One review I read said that the M8 on auto was impossible to use in the sun with polarized sunglasses. The S5 has had no issues on everything I've read.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So far so good for me on the S5.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Found this article and remembered posting a question here. For those of you that are still curious: http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...-OLED-screen-to-date-can-hit-698-nits_id54767

Samsung Display also talks about things like the diamond pixel arrangement of the display, and its power efficiency (27 percent more efficient than Full HD LCD displays of the same size). It’s basically another confirmation, this time from the horse’s mouth, that the Galaxy S5 has one of the nicest displays ever seen on a smartphone, and also goes to show how far Samsung’s AMOLED displays have come in a matter of four years.

[Q] Sunlight readable vs. Note 3 ? Which is better in sunlight? [ANSWERED]

Guys, the Note 3 is the best Android superphone for being able to read the display outside in direct sunlight / daylight.
My Galaxy S4 sucks in comparison and I need my next phone to be better.
Has anyone compared the S5 to the Note 3 in this regard? Is the S5 just as good as the Note 3?

Looks like the S5 tested better in sunlight than the current leader in this category, the Note 3.
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_S5_ShootOut_1.htm
There are many more important and challenging issues for displays than just pixel resolution. For the Galaxy S5, Samsung has instead concentrated on improving the Maximum Brightness, Screen Reflectance, performance in High Ambient Light, Absolute Color Accuracy, Viewing Angles, display power efficiency, and running time on battery. We’ll cover these issues and much more, with in-depth comprehensive display tests, measurements and analysis that you will find nowhere else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

The S5's AMOLED screen retains its full HD resolution while getting a very slight size increase to 5.1 inches, and it looks as sharp and as vibrant as ever, with strong colours and good viewing angles. We didn't get a chance to pit it against the Barcelona sun, but it seemed bright enough to cope with outdoor use.

HTC One Display - Luck of the Draw...

HTC did it again but worse. Last year displays were different in color temperature but maintained similar contrast. This year the difference in display calibration is worse.
Before receiving my own unit, I tested 2 devices in the shops. The first one had worse contrast and too low gamma (less punchy brightness transition from dark to light tones). I was disappointed with the display (let's call it Type A).
Later on, I went to another shop and the display looked gorgeous. Higher contrast, accurate gamma and more neutral greyscales (let's call it type B).
Today I received my unit and unfortunately, the display was Type A display. Here are the results of the "poorer display". Unlike last year, it is not possible to determine the actual display ID by looking this up in the last_ksmg file in the proc folder under the root. The access is denied. So unless we root a device, we cannot determine the display ID.
As can be seen below, the color temperature and greyscale accuracy is mediocre. Contrast is only average. Chromaticity overall is good but red is oversaturated.
Brightness: 503cd/m²
True Contrast: 1,000:1
Dynamic Contrast: 1378:1
White Color Temperature: 7395°K
Average Color Temperature: 7417°K
Note that on this display, the i1 Dislay pro used by many press reviewers will overestimate color temperature by 5.5% on this particular display. So if you see values around 7900°K, this is broadly equivalent to the 7,400°K that I (and Anandtech) measured. UK Harware review probably also had a Type A display however the contrat values are likely due to methodology.
Although I haven't tested extensively, I can already tell that the dynamic brightness adjustment is still taking place, though it works differently v. last year's implementation. This is why the contrast values observed in the press reviews very widely between 980:1 and over 2300:1!
I will be measuring Type B displays in the shops to nail down the differences based on the same methodology (100% Voodoo Test patterns).
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Greyscale
Color Space
Currently available reviews for the HTC One Display pending
Tests in English
25.03.2013 BGR GSMArena: 567cd/m² Brightness | 1,256:1 Contrast
26.03.2013 USA Anandtech: 497cd/m² Brightness | 1,300:1 Contrast | 7,341 Color Temperature (Delta E = 5.2)| Chromaticity: excelllent (Delta E = 3.87)
20.03.2013 GBR pcpro: Brightness not mentioned | 1,687:1 Contrast (measured with i1 Display Pro)
14.03.2013 GBR uk.hardware.info: 508cd/m² Brightness | Black Level: 0.2cd/m² | 2,541:1 Contrast | 7,856K Color Temperature (measured with i1 Display Pro)
25.03.2013 USA laptopmag: 447cd/m² Brightness | Chromaticity: Good (Delta E = 6.1)
German
20.03.2013 DEU Computerbase.de: Not yet published DTP94)
04.04.2013 DEU PC Welt 454cd/m² brightness | 2,555:1 contrast
31.03.2013 DEU Chip.de: 482cd/m² brightness | 1420:1 contrast
02.04.2013 DEU notebookcheck.com: Not yet published
Dutch
02.04.2013 NLD Tweakers.net: 505cd/m² | 1,624:1 contrast | 7,005 color temperature (Delta E = 7.7)| Excellent Chromaticity (Delta E = 4,78) (measured with i1 Display Pro)
Russian
26.02.2013 RUS 3dnews.ru: Not yet published (measured with Spyder 4)
03.04.2013 RUS [email protected] 486cd/m² brightness | 988:1 contrast (1300:1 dynamic) | 8,000K white temperature
French
03.04.2013 FRA Les Numériques 480cd/m² | Contrast 1279:1 | Chromaticity: good (Delta E = 4,5) (measured with i1 Pro or i1 Pro 2 tbc.)
02.02.2013 FRA 01.net 527cd/m² brightness | 2,509:1 contrast (measured with Konica Minolta CA-210)
For reference, here are the luminance ranges of the color testing devices listed above.
i1 pro__________________________ 0.20 cd/m² to 300 cd/m²
i1 pro 2_________________________0.20 cd/m² to 1200 cd/m²
Chroma 5/Sencore Color Pro V_______0.01 cd/m² 1000 cd/m²
Spider 3/4_______________________0.02 cd/m² 5000 cd/m²
i1 Display 2______________._____._.__0.02 cd/m² 3000 cd/m²
i1 Display 3/i1 Display Pro/C6___._____0.003 cd/m² 1200 cd/m²
Konica Minolta CA-210______________0.01cd/m² 1000 cd/m²

Apparently the HTC One's diplay latency is record breaking - measured at 46ms.
Source: Lesnumeriques.fr
It is not at the 1-20ms recommended by Microsoft but it is a great step forward considering the fact that modern devices barely go below 70ms. The previous record was held by the Note 3 with 67ms.
Newer devices:
Note 3: 67ms
LG G2: 110ms
iPhone 53: 75ms
Here is an overview for older devices:
It will be interesting to track the performance of other devices: S5, Z2, etc...
Source
Lesnumeriques.fr

Microsoft explained that high performance touch performance is becoming increasingly key aspect of a mobile device's user experience.
Microsoft report on Display latency
So it is certainly great News that the HTC One is getting closer to perfection.

Is the new M8 like the M7 having sharp and jdi as it's suppliers? I'm thinking mine is a jdi from comparison with my sharp M7.

robt772000 said:
Is the new M8 like the M7 having sharp and jdi as it's suppliers? I'm thinking mine is a jdi from comparison with my sharp M7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Their marketing said JDI. Sharp models came later in the year last year, early production were all JDI.

Guys how do you find the colours on the m8.... My reds are way over saturated... Is there a way to make them cooler?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

StickyGeko said:
Guys how do you find the colours on the m8.... My reds are way over saturated... Is there a way to make them cooler?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reds are not oversaturated. What you mean is the grey balance is too warm. Saturation and greyscale Balance are two different things.
None of the Displays on the M8 are overly warm. They are actually cooler than the norm. If you feel there is a red push, then probably you are coming from an AMOLED Display wich typically have more green and blue but is incorrect.

No.... What I mean is the reds are over saturated.... I have an n4.... The reds on my m8 are way off, side by side with n4, HTC 8s, nexus 7 and a galaxy tab3...m8 reds are way off, maybe I have a defective unit.... I just wanted to see if anyone else had the same issue
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

StickyGeko said:
No.... What I mean is the reds are over saturated.... I have an n4.... The reds on my m8 are way off, side by side with n4, HTC 8s, nexus 7 and a galaxy tab3...m8 reds are way off, maybe I have a defective unit.... I just wanted to see if anyone else had the same issue
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you see that on the color red? What do you mean by reds are cooler?
Saturation has nothing to do with color temperature. It has to do with the intensity of the color, not ist hue (which can be shifted toward other colors). For example, a red that is too blue move slightly towards purple and a red that is too green moves slightly towards orange.
Hence my question. If you say your reds are too cool, then it must mean they are too purple.
Saturation means how intensive the color is. If the reds are undersaturated they move towards grey and if they are oversaturated, they move towards "more intense" red. Overaturation cannot be described as cooler but you said your reds were cooler, so probably you mean your color temperature is too cool, hence greys and intermediary colors are shifted towards blue?
As you can see from the Review listed above, the M8 can have color temperature that is on the cool side (>7000K), however this varies from unit to unit, last year color temperature varied from 6,500K to 8,000K with Color temperature decreasing over time (probably because the intensity of the blue pixels decreased faster before settling).
If you feel your display is too cool, it is not a defect, it is luck of the draw. Many people actually prefered the slightly bluer displays last year because they had slightly larger contrast.but also because most displays are cooler by nature (since sunlight is warm and will cancel out the coolness when looking at the display outdoor.
The N4 had excellent grey balance, so probably your eye got used to a more neutral display. Wait a little bit and see how your perception adjusts. If you really don't like it, then return your device and purchase another one...
So far only a few reviews measured color temperature, and the values ranged from 7000K (pretty neutral) to 8,000K (cool) but it is also possible that some displays will have lower temperature (it was the case last year). I will receive my device tomorrow, so I will let you know how my unit stacks up.

StickyGeko said:
No.... What I mean is the reds are over saturated.... I have an n4.... The reds on my m8 are way off, side by side with n4, HTC 8s, nexus 7 and a galaxy tab3...m8 reds are way off, maybe I have a defective unit.... I just wanted to see if anyone else had the same issue
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on my test above, the reds are indeed oversaturated and the display is on the cool side, but both are independent. The reds can be oversaturated without being cool and the display can be cool without oversaturated reds.

Added my own detailed review of the display to the original post.

@puremind do you keep in mind that the M7/M8 feature dynamic contrast? maybe that's what's affecting the results?

hamdir said:
@puremind do you keep in mind that the M7/M8 feature dynamic contrast? maybe that's what's affecting the results?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dynamic contrast is only affecting constrast, not color temperature. I noted that in my post (and also under one of the Russian tests in my list) and the the contrast is 1,000:1 vs 1,300:1 dynamic.
Still these results are not so good on the Type A display.
Also I did compare two units in store, so I can really tell one unit had a much much better display. Last year displays were broadly equivalent except for brightness but this year the Type A display is quite poor (by my picky standards) and cannot compete with Samsung S5's Display. The 2.1 gamma means intermediary colors are a bit washed out. The display is not punchy and has no depth. So be careful what you get! My unit will go back. This is the display type tested by Anandtech, as they noted the same issues.

How do we determine what screen we have?
If reds don't appear to be over saturated can we assume we have the type B screen?

Yea i noticed different feedback about the screen as well...sigh

Maedhros said:
How do we determine what screen we have?
If reds don't appear to be over saturated can we assume we have the type B screen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Red oversaturation is not the most visible aspect. The lack of punchiness and slightly washed out intermediary colors and lack of contrast is easier to spot.
When I am back from London I will measure type B and I expect to see correct gamma and higher contrast.
If you have rooted your phone you can use ES explorer or root explorer to view the last_ksmg file in the root's proc folder. If you look for Display ID you should find it there. It will likely say JDI something or Sharp something.
However it is not guaranteed that the display manufacturer will be different as JDI have a track record of having wide variance in terms of display characteristics. Still the displays are different enough that they could be from different manufacturers.
If anyone has access to a rooted device and can do the test it would be very helpful. Please comment what your subjective impression of the screen is and provide your display ID.

puremind said:
Red oversaturation is not the most visible aspect. The lack of punchiness and slightly washed out intermediary colors and lack of contrast is easier to spot.
When I am back from London I will measure type B and I expect to see correct gamma and higher contrast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you,
Could you also take pictures comparing the two models if possible?
Without context it is slightly difficult to determine what exactly constitutes "lack of punchiness and slightly washed out intermediary colors and lack of contrast."
Sorry - I'm not a bit of a noob when it comes to displays and colors!

Maedhros said:
Thank you,
Could you also take pictures comparing the two models if possible?
Without context it is slightly difficult to determine what exactly constitutes "lack of punchiness and slightly washed out intermediary colors and lack of contrast."
Sorry - I'm not a bit of a noob when it comes to displays and colors!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't posses both units. The other display type is in store and I am traveling to London the whole week. If I spot a good display at the airport or somewhere else I can shoot a comparison.

This is what I have ... Singapore Grey variant
mdss_dsi_panel_init: Panel Name = m8 1080p sharp/NT35595 cmd mode dsi panel
mdss_dsi_panel_init:1006 Continuous splash flag not found.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And another place name mentioned as "mdss_dsi_m8_sharp_novatek_35595_1080p"
To my naked eyes, it looks ok but little on the warm side (yellowish whites)

Sony have the best solution to this. You can change the colour balance in normal settings.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

How bright is it?

I've read reviews that claim:
- Not as bright as the Note 5
- Just as bright as the Note 5
- As dim as the Nexus 6 (last years)
- Dim, but bright when adaptive brightness turned off.
So, anyone know for sure? A cd/m2 measurement would be great. The brightness of the original Nexus 6 was a big disappointment.

hatcyl said:
I've read reviews that claim:
- Not as bright as the Note 5
- Just as bright as the Note 5
- As dim as the Nexus 6 (last years)
- Dim, but bright when adaptive brightness turned off.
So, anyone know for sure? A cd/m2 measurement would be great. The brightness of the original Nexus 6 was a big disappointment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Friends on what you consider dim/bright to be.
Majority say no problem in bright sun, so it's "bright" enough.

There is an app for the Nexus 6 to blast the screen real bright when outdoors. I have not tried it, but I've read ppl like it. If the P is not bright enough I'm sure an app will be available for cranking the brightness up.

356 nits ....but im hoping it can be more based on many of the (almost as bright as note 5)
Nexus 6 was 270.....so much broghter than last year, but much dimmer than note 5.
By Much i mean 30% more than last year but 30% less than note 5.....

I think it should be fine. Nexus 5 is 400 but I have never turned it above 75% even outdoors. 356 would be at the high end but I have no worries about it.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Brightness seems to be pretty sad unfortunately :-/
http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/Google-Nexus-6P-Review_id4110
Another thing we have to point out is its poor visibility outdoors when the sun is present – it washes out tremendously to the point that it’s unusable unless we shield it. Achieving a maximum luminance of 356 nits, it’s not as potent as the Nexus 5X mark of 487 nits, and nowhere close to the blinding 593 nits reached by the iPhone 6s Plus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

I heard you turn off adaptive brightness mode and the phone gets brighter, like it said above.

Wait this is less brighter than the LG G3.......and the LG G4 is the one I have and it's the darkest most uncomfortable handset to use with minimal sun.... wtf??? *cancels order* I'm just gonna wait for nexus I/O 2017 this is horrible... but I doesn't make sense why every reviewer says it's the brightest screen they've seen thus far....smh
Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk

You have to take into account that brightness isn't the only thing that matter for readability under very high ambient luminosity.
Screen reflectivity, contrast and color saturation are as important as brightness. And the LG G4 (like most of the LCD) is very reflective, not even close to an AMOLED in contrast and can't achieve the same saturation that what is possible with an AMOLED panel.
In fact, if you go read a GSMArena review, you will see that under direct sunlight, the G4 isfar less readable than a Motorola Nexus 6...

Reflectivity etc is important, I agree. But I am hoping that the nits readings are with the standard adaptive brightness etc on. The mid 300s isn't as great as I'd like, and is around the overall average.
Nevertheless, the UK winter is coming and sunlight readability becomes a moot point!

I agree that 350nits is average at best.
But the biggest problem, IMO, is that the display on the 6P seems to be not as close to the glass as the latest Samsung devices. This will lead to an higher reflectivity.

Brightness
RidinNerdy said:
Wait this is less brighter than the LG G3.......and the LG G4 is the one I have and it's the darkest most uncomfortable handset to use with minimal sun.... wtf??? *cancels order* I'm just gonna wait for nexus I/O 2017 this is horrible... but I doesn't make sense why every reviewer says it's the brightest screen they've seen thus far....smh
Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats a big problem IMO. The brightness level is pitiful. Why Google?
Anyone trying to defend the brightness is out of touch. The tests from a few posts
above is conclusive. I held off ordering to see if there were any things that would come up
in initial reviews. Battery life seems also to be hit and miss.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Google-Nexus-6P-battery-life-test-score-average-in-active-use_id74853
CC

Very poor brightness
Just got the 6P. Don't like the brightness at all. Am coming from the G3 and it's really sad. The Galaxy S6 is awesome. I always keep the phone at max brightness. Damn the battery, I say. I thought initially that perhaps the adaptive brightness setting was enabled. But it's not.
On paper it's brighter than the Nexus 6. But looking at them side by side, I don't see it even remotely brighter.
I hope that it's not really a limitation in the hardware and can be increased with a software mod.

i just walked outside in california sun at 1:00pm. i can read texts just fine. might have hard time looking at dark images because well black is...not lit... but i rather have little dimmer screen to preserve battery life and plus less prone to burn-ins.

os2baba said:
Just got the 6P. Don't like the brightness at all. Am coming from the G3 and it's really sad. The Galaxy S6 is awesome. I always keep the phone at max brightness. Damn the battery, I say. I thought initially that perhaps the adaptive brightness setting was enabled. But it's not.
On paper it's brighter than the Nexus 6. But looking at them side by side, I don't see it even remotely brighter.
I hope that it's not really a limitation in the hardware and can be increased with a software mod.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well. That's sad to hear :/ I guess I'll stick with my $250 500+ cd/m2 Idol 3.