Impact on battery life - FHD+ v.s QHD+ - Samsung Galaxy S8 Questions and Answers

Hello,
I searched around this forum and didn't find anyone talking about this topic yet, so thought I would start one. Has anyone done any tests or observed the difference in battery usage between FHD+ v.s QHD+ screen resolution on their S8/S8+? Also, can anyone actually tell the difference between the two different resolutions?
Thanks

I can tell a very slight difference in resolution, my fiance has the same phone, so I set them to the two different resolutions and pulled up the same webpage. Next to each other the text is crisper, but not worth the hour and a half SoT that I lose for it.

I can see a clear difference when reading a pdf version of a tabloid size newspaper. Fonts are too fuzzy when using FHD but on QHD they look sharp.

On FHD+ I often notice the icons are fuzzy, they have blurred edges, et cetera. Did not notice any battery impact so far though.

If you want to see clear difference, use it with VR glasses, here even QHD is not enough, you can still clearly see individual pixels even in QHD and forget about FHD, the pixelation is actually distracting. As far as battery goes, I think it depends on a usage: If you play graphic intensive game I can see how rendering extra pixels can affect battery, but often this may be offset by higher frame rate. In more static displays I don't see how this should be making much of the difference, I think all pixels light up regardless of the resolution and it just takes more GPU power to process more pixels, but I could be wrong.

fonix232 said:
On FHD+ I often notice the icons are fuzzy, they have blurred edges, et cetera. Did not notice any battery impact so far though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed fuzzy icons on my s8 also however I am using a custom icon set and nova launcher. I was able to fix the fuzzyness by re-selecting/resetting the icons for each shortcut on my launcher. Now regardless of the resolution chosen the icons stay sharp. Maybe the same will work for you if you're also using custom icons that is.

JaeMelo said:
I noticed fuzzy icons on my s8 also however I am using a custom icon set and nova launcher. I was able to fix the fuzzyness by re-selecting/resetting the icons for each shortcut on my launcher. Now regardless of the resolution chosen the icons stay sharp. Maybe the same will work for you if you're also using custom icons that is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For some reason, even though I'm the highest level tinkerer when it comes to that, I prefer to stick to the stock launcher and icons with the S8. So it was with stock icons.

I know this is the S8 forums, but I've been testing this for the past week or so on my S8+, and I consistently get an extra 1-1.5 hours of SoT when its set at FHD+ vs QHD+. I personally can't tell a difference between the two 99% of the time. Everything is still pretty sharp for me on Nova and a custom icon set (Vopor).
Still not sure which resolution to settle with. It's nice having the extra SoT, but I also feel like I should be making the most out of the gorgeous screen; even if I can't tell a difference most of the time lol... I get about 4-4.5hrs total SoT on QHD+, as opposed to 5-5.5hrs SoT at FHD+.

I have the Canadian Snapdragon version. I set it to FHD+ once and got about 1-1.5 hours more SOT. The text is noticeably more fuzzy, like it's always out of focus. I already get 6 hours SOT with WQHD+ so I just stuck with that.

pete4k said:
If you want to see clear difference, use it with VR glasses, here even QHD is not enough, you can still clearly see individual pixels even in QHD and forget about FHD, the pixelation is actually distracting. As far as battery goes, I think it depends on a usage: If you play graphic intensive game I can see how rendering extra pixels can affect battery, but often this may be offset by higher frame rate. In more static displays I don't see how this should be making much of the difference, I think all pixels light up regardless of the resolution and it just takes more GPU power to process more pixels, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You actually hit it pretty close. All pixels on the screen are used regardless. Just a bigger sample size with FHD. However, QHD will use a little more battery if you are changing the image on the display. For the fact that it has to draw that many more pixels each time the image changes. Which is millions of pixels. But I believe a lot of static image changing is done by the cpu and not the gpu. where gpu is used mainly for constant motion on screen.
But honestly part of the reason they have such high resolution is for VR. That and to make more sense of taking UHD pics and videos. Most people won't notice a working difference between the two through regular use unless they keep it really close to their face, or have very good eye sight.
So you will see it use some extra battery. Not a detrimental amount more unless you are a heavy user of games and whatnot. Or if you force GPU rendering, then you should see a big difference in battery

RevoWution said:
I know this is the S8 forums, but I've been testing this for the past week or so on my S8+, and I consistently get an extra 1-1.5 hours of SoT when its set at FHD+ vs QHD+. I personally can't tell a difference between the two 99% of the time. Everything is still pretty sharp for me on Nova and a custom icon set (Vopor).
Still not sure which resolution to settle with. It's nice having the extra SoT, but I also feel like I should be making the most out of the gorgeous screen; even if I can't tell a difference most of the time lol... I get about 4-4.5hrs total SoT on QHD+, as opposed to 5-5.5hrs SoT at FHD+.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm... yes, that is the dilemma for me as well. I could tell that FHD looks slightly more fuzzy compared to QHD. Facebook and Whatsapp apps showed more washed out texts when comparing the two, for example. Would be nice to get more feedback from the others

I am using QHD+ on the S8+, as it is a little larger than the S8. As a techie, using a display at non native resolution is unbearable Kidding, with pentile, you can not tell anyway. I am having good to great battery life and I like small fonts - so I do definetly see a difference and therefore amusing the higher resolution.

I set mine to HD. That's not an option in the poll though.

I enjoy the extra battery life so FHD+ ftw. And on the occasion when I do consume 2160p content on YouTube I simply drag down the quick settings/notification pane and change the phone from Optimized to Entertainment. No big deal.

VaderSS said:
I set mine to HD. That's not an option in the poll though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cause no sane person would set their S8 to HD

lotreaglesfan said:
Cause no sane person would set their S8 to HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or someone with old eyes that can't tell the difference...

Whenever I go into phone maintenance and enable the battery saver thing it tells me I only save like 15mins by switching from WQHD+ down to FHD+ so that's doesn't seem worth it at all. Anybody else seeing the same... It actually tells me most of my battery savings (around a hour) would come from disabling the AOD.

Hmm all this time I've been thinking the difference between fullhd+ and qhd+ would be significant, guess il be changing it to the latter then.

Not even thinking about that lol just i can see the screen and its bright and great i dont care else

FHD+ is my way to go.
I've had it on QHD+ for the last 2 weeks but I never really found any difference and the "fuzzy" things got fixed when I changed the DPI so I have no problema at all. Even if FHD+ provides 30 minutes more of battery life I take it.

Related

More then 7h of video on 1 charge!

Holy S-AMOLED!
http://blog.gsmarena.com/samsung-i9...ours-of-video-playback-puts-critics-to-shame/
and EIGHT days standby time!
http://www.scribblelive.com/Event/Samsung_Galaxy_S_Launch?Page=0
Also read that this morning, extremely impressive. With the sceren set at 50% its probably still as bright as most others set much higher too...
I'd love to know what other processes were running in the background as well.
Just imagine how long this phone will last with no heavy video load running......
isn't anybody questioning the credibility of this?
like how is that even possible with the specs the Galaxy S has. the processor and the Super AMOLED alone would automatically drain tons
its only got 100mAh more than the Desire stock battery. and the Desire from most accounts wont be able to do nearly that much without killing its 1400mAh battery
Ziostilon said:
isn't anybody questioning the credibility of this?
like how is that even possible with the specs the Galaxy S has. the processor and the Super AMOLED alone would automatically drain tons
its only got 100mAh more than the Desire stock battery. and the Desire from most accounts wont be able to do nearly that much without killing its 1400mAh battery
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually that is the opposite.
By changing the processor to a 45nm as opposed to the 65nm which other phones use makes this on it's own a huge energy saver.
Next, the screen is Super AMOLED. SA uses only a fraction of the energy found on AMOLED screens. The proof in this is you can turn the screen brilliance down to only 50% and still have a very clear and accurate appearance.
So with those two and the extra 100mAh you start to see why it will last considerably longer.
I read somewhere that the hummingbird does 300mW while the Snapdragon does 500mW at full load. Dat shure must account or a great deal batteryperformance,
Beards said:
Actually that is the opposite.
By changing the processor to a 45nm as opposed to the 65nm which other phones use makes this on it's own a huge energy saver.
Next, the screen is Super AMOLED. SA uses only a fraction of the energy found on AMOLED screens. The proof in this is you can turn the screen brilliance down to only 50% and still have a very clear and accurate appearance.
So with those two and the extra 100mAh you start to see why it will last considerably longer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the tidbits!!!
btw. how reliable are these Super AMOLED screens.
Ziostilon said:
thanks for the tidbits!!!
btw. how reliable are these Super AMOLED screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Without question, Super AMOLED is the future and as far as reliability is concerned it is far better than TFT and much better than AMOLED which uses an additional glass to trap the AMOLED screen ~ hence why the i9000 is manufactured very thin.... it does not need this extra glass which in turn provides
a 20% brighter screen.
80% less sunlight reflection.
20% reduced power consumption.
other possible factors:
- Divx/Xvid decoding requires less CPU
- Hummingbird GPU supports hardware decoding with very low power requirements
and EIGHT days of standby time!
(link added in first post)
They are indeed brighter... but are 20% brighter than the other AMOLED screens... Capacitive TFTs however are 50% more brighter than the AMOLEDS...
Also, the galaxy has a very low screen ppi (pixels per inch) - somewhere around 233 ppi compared to iPhone 4's 326 and the droid's 260 (approx) hence it appears pixellated ....
What makes the S-AMOLED screen a winner here is the awesome contrast ratio which puts all other phones to bitter shame.. hence the vibrance in video quality and a much better viewing experience compared to other smartphones..
WTF, I have only 12-15 hours of battery endurance with little WiFi surfing and thats it ! I even use Juice Defender so my data and WiFi are always OFF when the screen is OFF. I really dont know how to get at least 24 hours like Ive had on my Xperia X10 Maybe ADW is draining or what ?
EDIT: Nvm noticed this was a necro.
richiebm said:
Also, the galaxy has a very low screen ppi (pixels per inch) - somewhere around 233 ppi compared to iPhone 4's 326 and the droid's 260 (approx) hence it appears pixellated ....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
233ppi is not anywhere close to being very low ppi by any sane persons standards, in fact it is a very high ppi compared to many devices (both mobile and full sized).What makes it appear pixellated is more likely the Pentile subpixel matrix.
7 hrs it totally realistic. I tested playing a 720p mkv of Avatar for 1 hour and it only used 15% battery. so 90% would be 6hrs and a HD 720p video would be much more intense than a divx video.
Wow! That's actually very impressive... I doubt seeing battery life that good myself though...
TNStrangelove said:
233ppi is not anywhere close to being very low ppi by any sane persons standards, in fact it is a very high ppi compared to many devices (both mobile and full sized).What makes it appear pixellated is more likely the Pentile subpixel matrix.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The human eye is not insensitive to a resolution of 233 ppi. We can clearly perceive pixel densities less than 572 ppi, beyond which it becomes impossible to differentiate each pixel. (source : displaymate)
The point is, when compared to other smartphone displays in the market, galaxy has the lowest...
Also, the galaxy has a high power consumption for white color...
Here is an in depth article on the head and tail of Smartphone displays right from TFTs to OLEDs..
bit.ly/aE8wFP - (courtesy Displaymate)
damirbusic said:
WTF, I have only 12-15 hours of battery endurance with little WiFi surfing and thats it ! I even use Juice Defender so my data and WiFi are always OFF when the screen is OFF. I really dont know how to get at least 24 hours like Ive had on my Xperia X10 Maybe ADW is draining or what ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There must be some app that's running in the background. With little to no surfing, you should at least get 2 days out of it.
Maybe try to flash again (with complete wipe and everything) without installing any app. Then check whether the issue is still there. If yes, then there's a problem with your battery.
richiebm said:
The human eye is not insensitive to a resolution of 233 ppi. We can clearly perceive pixel densities less than 572 ppi, beyond which it becomes impossible to differentiate each pixel. (source : displaymate)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm aware that you can see pixels in a 800 by 480 4 inch screen however to call it pixelated is false it has a higher DPI than my computer monitor which I never notice as being pixelated. By a display being pixelated I mean that it is regularly noticeable without trying. In this sense the hd2 is not pixelated but the galaxy s is despite the Hd2 having a LOWER ppi than the galaxy s. This is due to the pentile matrix.
richiebm said:
The point is, when compared to other smartphone displays in the market, galaxy has the lowest...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is patently false I can name 3 high end smartphones off the top of my head with lower ppi than the galaxy s (evo, desire hd, Hd2) the point is having a screen which you can see pixels if you try does not make it "very low dpi".
richiebm said:
Also, the galaxy has a high power consumption for white color.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This however is correct, three times the power for white. No power for black.
TNStrangelove said:
This is patently false I can name 3 high end smartphones off the top of my head with lower ppi than the galaxy s (evo, desire hd, Hd2) the point is having a screen which you can see pixels if you try does not make it "very low dpi".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right.. Perhaps I should have said.. it is lower compared to a few other smartphones.
Also, the viewing distance being around 20 cms should make little or no difference whether its the retina display or the S-AMOLED....
I did a bit of research on the pentile matrix and I think the noticeable pixels are infact due to that only. A proprietary technology from Samsung, it is solely responsible for the very high contrast ratio between black and white colors; and for the low power consumption. It uses sub - pixel rendering and human eye limitations to achieve those features, but compromising on the pixel density.
Yet, most of my battery usage is due to the display and my phone can survive without a recharge for only around 40-50 hours... Maybe its a bit less but better than most of the other phones out there!

[Poll] Wqhd or Fhd?

What are you using?
Did you feel much difference?
FHD for power saving under 15%. WQHD for everything else.
With a live wallpaper like "Solar System Your World" from Google Pixel, if it's FHD you can see the pixels moving.
There's absolutely no reason at all to run anything other than WQHD. Power saving are negligible.
djsonoman said:
FHD for power saving under 15%. WQHD for everything else.
With a live wallpaper like "Solar System Your World" from Google Pixel, if it's FHD you can see the pixels moving.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello,
How did you manage to install that lwp on your phone? I found a thread on xda and I install the apk but I can not find the wallpaper later to turn it on...
the_scotsman said:
There's absolutely no reason at all to run anything other than WQHD. Power saving are negligible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/thread
arnes_king said:
Hello,
How did you manage to install that lwp on your phone? I found a thread on xda and I install the apk but I can not find the wallpaper later to turn it on...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://mega.nz/#!MMpSmA7b!Cb0OdZi3hIvH_XOGvPG__fX3pb1AFK3ZGm9k-X4eVPY
Android 7.0 required. Install like any other app alongside Google Wallpapers from Playstore.
I use the Gear VR, therefore use wqhd.
I use WQHD simply because why have an AMOLED WQHD screen if you won't use it?
Also, what with the usefulness of fast charging, I've found the power changes to be negligible.
tried both, WQHD preferred, especially when you look at the icons and all other stuff on the phone
Yesterday my phone went into a constant reboot loop. I let it go until the battery died because I couldn't do anything else. When I charged it back up it went to a previous backup and lost all my customizations.
Now I cannot put it into wqhd. If I try it just crashes the settings app any advice?
I switch between the two and I've noticed something, I can't tell the difference lol they both look the same to me lol 2nd the battery ? dies a bit quicker running WQHD
The only real difference in battery life between the two is if you spend the majority of your phone usage time playings graphics intensive games. Without games the battery savings from FHD are negligible/nonexistent
For me , both the same . i've been tested and same battery and results .
well this thread is getting more exciting.. let's compare the battery life results between QHD and FHD .. or even with HD
Anyway to decrease screen resolution in marshmallow safely?
WQHD ofc as if you don't game the power saving is not worth to have blurry image. It's just too little of a difference + the phone feels faster/more fluid on wqhd. FHD is if you game more to have better framerate and battery life as the GPU will have a lot less stress. For general use either resolution is of a no problem for that GPU. Cheers!
So why does the power saving profiles want to decrease screen resolution? I'm currently testing, though. I really don't see any big difference in terms of quality between WQHD and FHD.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
m0yP said:
So why does the power saving profiles want to decrease screen resolution? I'm currently testing, though. I really don't see any big difference in terms of quality between WQHD and FHD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you will be able to tell more if your wallpaper is a picture you have taken with your camera and not just a bad quality one from Google etc
Wqhd is a lot better
Go to change your power saving mode and customise it
It will tell you even if you go down from qhd to just hd it will only save you 4 minutes of battery
az

This seems a bit shady imo. Native Resolution @ only Full HD from the box.

Samsung is advertising S8 and S8+ 2960 x 1440p the device defaults to Full HD+ and can be changed to Quad HD+ (WQHD+) in the settings. My concerns are why? Battery life? Better bragging rights concerning performance? I am going to play with one today and will report back on if it makes a difference switching but I wonder if reported battery life from Samsung is going off of Full HD or the full pixel count. It sucks to even have to question this.
Yup I've been posted about this for a few days now. They are being incredibly misleading and they are doing it on purpose to disguise the **** battery life. The Samsung battery life is using FHD I am pretty sure because on their spec sheet they say that the "default" resolution is FHD, which will then be what their rated battery life stats are based on. Of course they then have people comparing the S7 stats vs the S8 but the S7 ones were based on it running its native 1440p resolution because at the time of release, the ability to change resolutions did not exist, it came in Nougat. So effectively Samsung are being extremely sly. You have battery life stated on the S8 which is basically the same as the S7, and what they obviously don't want people to figure out is that the S7's was 1440p and the S8's was 1080.
How much difference that makes will be interesting. It will obviously make less difference on browsing and light use (but might still but noticaeble) and a lot more difference on video and games.
Of course the other issue is they keep touting how good this 1440p display is in all the advertising......but it doesn't run at 1440p by default does it? Noooooo, because the battery is ****!
Why use max hd it's only any use in vr
It uses FHD resolution by default
The Galaxy S8 and S8+ have QHD+ screens like its predecessors. Unlike its predecessors, however, Samsung is tuning down the screen resolution to 1080p by default. This is for power efficiency purposes, as it decreases the number of pixels that need you be rendered. This is the same optimization that Sony used on the Xperia Z5 Premium, but that had a 4K screen.
Of course, when the content calls for it, the Galaxy S8 switches to its native QHD resolution. And you can always set it to use QHD all the time. It’s just something you have to keep in mind if the user interface looks a tad too big for your eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.slashgear.com/8-things-to-know-about-the-samsung-galaxy-s8-30480276/
I see nothing shady or misleading but that is me.
RMXO said:
https://www.slashgear.com/8-things-to-know-about-the-samsung-galaxy-s8-30480276/
I see nothing shady or misleading but that is me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What has an article written by slashgear got to do with Samsungs underhand tactics regarding battery life?
---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 PM ----------
bayfisher1958 said:
stock in android 7....can be reset to qhd.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
huh?
I took a few pics and very closely eye balled the settings while going through them. I have a true dedicated theater room I spared no expense on and literally a HUGE freak when it comes to imperfections with any display. Options are HD+ 1480 x 720, FHD+ 2220 x 1080 (out of the box) and WQHD+ 2960 x 1440 and you can tell a difference but it didn't bother me. Obviously the higher resolution is sharp and starts to fall off from there. In a blind test you would be able to notice at regular viewing distance imo however its not at all distracting and my guess is no one will ever question the beauty of the screen at even 720 to hunt down settings outside of people like us. Having said that, when I locked the demo unit it reverted back to WQHD+ so I compared at the screen resolution option right there.
ewokuk said:
What has an article written by slashgear got to do with Samsungs underhand tactics regarding battery life?
---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 PM ----------
huh?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its your opinion and others that Samsung is underhand tactics with battery life. not everyone feels the same as you.
RMXO said:
Its your opinion and others that Samsung is underhand tactics with battery life. not everyone feels the same as you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not opinion its fact. If they weren't trying to make it look better than it is, they would provide a like for like comparison with the S7 instead of conveniently showing battery life stats that are almost the same as the S7........and leaving out the key detail that they are completely different resolutions and not comparable at all. It was pretty clear something was up during the reveal event when they VERY quickly flashed up the mah of each battery and then quickly skipped past it without mentioning the battery life at all.
I still don't see what relevance an article by slashgear has to do with anything. It's an article written by slashgear, barely mentions battery at all and provides no comment on the battery stats vs the S7.
Your argument is like saying its our opinion that the earth is round but not everybody believes it.....doesn't matter what they believe, it's just a fact. If they wanted to be open about it, they would have provided battery life stats for the higher resolution so that it can be directly compared to the S7, instead they provide a 1440 screen, go on about thish high resolution screen in all the advertising, then set the default resolution to 1080 and quietly provide battery stats that are based on 1080, but don't actually ever tell you that the stats are based on this, because that would make it clear it isn't a fair comparison to the same stats they provided for the s7.
Umm sorry to break it to you but the Galaxy S7 with Nougat also defaulted to the lower resolution and it made ZERO difference to battery life. There is plenty of reviews and comments about this. Though it does make a difference in some apps and games where the scaling works better at 1080 resolution as higher than that and the assets are so small they are harder to use with a touch screen. So instead of stating facts with no actual facts why don't we wait till some real reviews come out and test the battery before we jump to conclusions.
ewokuk said:
It's not opinion its fact. If they weren't trying to make it look better than it is, they would provide a like for like comparison with the S7 instead of conveniently showing battery life stats that are almost the same as the S7........and leaving out the key detail that they are completely different resolutions and not comparable at all. It was pretty clear something was up during the reveal event when they VERY quickly flashed up the mah of each battery and then quickly skipped past it without mentioning the battery life at all.
I still don't see what relevance an article by slashgear has to do with anything. It's an article written by slashgear, barely mentions battery at all and provides no comment on the battery stats vs the S7.
Your argument is like saying its our opinion that the earth is round but not everybody believes it.....doesn't matter what they believe, it's just a fact. If they wanted to be open about it, they would have provided battery life stats for the higher resolution so that it can be directly compared to the S7, instead they provide a 1440 screen, go on about thish high resolution screen in all the advertising, then set the default resolution to 1080 and quietly provide battery stats that are based on 1080, but don't actually ever tell you that the stats are based on this, because that would make it clear it isn't a fair comparison to the same stats they provided for the s7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i never said anything is facts, i said i don't believe what you're saying. You are coming out like its facts, so show me the facts! While I do understand your concerns but you're making it out to be facts when there isn't any yet.
bnathan said:
Umm sorry to break it to you but the Galaxy S7 with Nougat also defaulted to the lower resolution and it made ZERO difference to battery life. There is plenty of reviews and comments about this. Though it does make a difference in some apps and games where the scaling works better at 1080 resolution as higher than that and the assets are so small they are harder to use with a touch screen. So instead of stating facts with no actual facts why don't we wait till some real reviews come out and test the battery before we jump to conclusions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BIngo!
The one thing people seem to overlook with lowering the resolution is the positive effect it has on the processor. Samsung may very well have it set at FHD out of the box for better performance power for the general user. Obviously, they also say it very slightly improves battery life - but by all accounts - and even my own experience with my S7 - it's pretty negligible.
If you don't mind, I would love some clarification on the S7's ability to change the resolution:
First: doesn't the display draw power because it needs to produce light? Don't 2 pixels at half brightness create the same amount of light as 1 pixel at full brightness (since this is an OLED screen) or is that single pixel more power efficient because power draw isn't linear?
Second: does it physically turn off pixels or does it just change the DPI because turning off anything but 1/2 looks incredibly bad so I'm assuming it just changes the DPI. If it does just change the DPI than the power draw from the display should not change much but the GPU usage should fall.
Isn't the resolution also a function of the power savings plan settings which was new in the S7? The power savings plan also throttles the SoC and limits data speeds.
my 2 cents
When switching resolutions on my S7 Edge I haven't noticed any battery increase or decrease. So I just keep it at QHD
zathus said:
When switching resolutions on my S7 Edge I haven't noticed any battery increase or decrease. So I just keep it at QHD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it's more about gaining performance, especially in games where you wouldn't really notice the lower resolution anyway. It's also easier on the eyes for some people in certain applications as the UI elements don't shrink so much.
It's nice to have the choice. When I swap between QHD and FHD phones the difference is negligible, certainly you can see a slight sharpness decrease if you look hard enough. Just not enough to warrant the loss in performance for many people.
There is a reason Apple haven't increased their screen resolutions yet. The need just isn't there for the average user. VR is the biggest reason for a higher res, that's something that definitely benefits from it. Again, not everybody has that need.
Personally, I like choice. I'll be switching between both depending on what I am doing.
Highspeed123 said:
I think it's more about gaining performance, especially in games where you wouldn't really notice the lower resolution anyway. It's also easier on the eyes for some people in certain applications as the UI elements don't shrink so much.
...
Personally, I like choice. I'll be switching between both depending on what I am doing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really disagree on most points.
First, the myth that people won't notice the difference, they will. In the near future when screens keep improving, you will notice how bad a low res screen looks so having QHD is nice in future proofing.
The UI elements can be changed by changing the DPI which Samsung did from the Note 4 to the Note 5 (Note 5's UI has smaller elements, they are both 1440p) so there are obviously people at Samsung working to make the UI visible and accessible and the resolution isn't a problem for them.
The performance hit isn't that big to be honest, it comes down to hardware and software optimization, a slight change in DPI will not make much of a difference.
And one last point, it's nice for phones to have great displays because it puts focus on display technology and increases research on those areas.
aalxx said:
I really disagree on most points.
First, the myth that people won't notice the difference, they will. In the near future when screens keep improving, you will notice how bad a low res screen looks so having QHD is nice in future proofing.
The UI elements can be changed by changing the DPI which Samsung did from the Note 4 to the Note 5 (Note 5's UI has smaller elements, they are both 1440p) so there are obviously people at Samsung working to make the UI visible and accessible and the resolution isn't a problem for them.
The performance hit isn't that big to be honest, it comes down to hardware and software optimization, a slight change in DPI will not make much of a difference.
And one last point, it's nice for phones to have great displays because it puts focus on display technology and increases research on those areas.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, I wasn't saying that phones shouldn't have a QHD screen. I was merely suggesting that it's nice to have a choice and Samsung has provided it. There is of course a slight difference between the two but because of the smaller screens phones have, there comes a point where the resolution doesn't make a difference anymore. 1080p to 4k on a TV is nice but even that isn't a huge leap, even on my 75 Sony.
The real difference comes from other areas such as colour and HDR. QHD is pretty much the max you'll ever need unless it's for VR.
I have had many phones and there is only a small difference between QHD and FHD but it is there. I will be using QHD for browsing the Internet and photo viewing etc and I will drop to FHD for gaming. Options are a good thing.
The difference in battery use between FHD and QHD is so small it's not really noticed. The reason FHD is default is because a lot of apps look sbetter in FHD.
ewokuk said:
but it doesn't run at 1440p by default does it? Noooooo, because the battery is ****!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that statement backed up by real world testing of S8 battery life or are just guessing?
dezborders said:
Is that statement backed up by real world testing of S8 battery life or are just guessing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very educated guessing for 2 reasons.
First: small battery/screen size ratio. Compared to the 3600mAh for 5.5in on the S7 Edge, the S8's 3000mAh for 5.8in is ridiculous.
Second: the new design. This happened the last time Samsung changed the design with the S6, the battery life was horrid on that. Plus this design seems to rely a lot on looking a thin and slick phone from the future and that has probably compromised the battery life.
Edit: and also the 10nm process isn't enough to make a difference, you could remove the processor from the S7 Edge entirely and there wouldn't be a difference comparable to 600mAh because the main power draw on any phone is the display.

resolution changing

So it's been shown in screenshots that the s8 has resolution controls for the screen. Does anyone know if this is truly changing the resolution to the point where it benefits battery to downscale
Well, if it's anything like the S7, there will be a slight effect, but most report it as being barely noticeable.
Samsung lists their UHD display taking 30 minutes off the phone's battery life compared to the FHD display. So instead of say, 15 hours, you'll get 14.5 hours. And that's really in a static environment. In real world usage, it's highly doubtful it'll be noticeable.
The one place I have seen a difference in changing the screen resolutions is performance - having to push around less pixels has definitely benefited the speed of my S7. I actually have my screen turned down to HD without any problem.

Clarity/resolution

The LG V60 ThinQ has a crazy crisp display. Just kidding, this is automated text so who knows if this screen is any good. So, you be the judge! A higher rating indicates that it's extremely sharp and clear, and that you cannot see pixels with your naked eye.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
Very clear. The resolution is lower than my V30, I think, but it's not noticeable to me.
I honestly don't notice the lower resolution and because of that always had my previous phones set to 1080p to save battery.
Auto brightness has been a problem though, in low light the screen throttles back to 1% far too aggressively and 1% is too dim even in a pitch black room.
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
The larger screen size and lower resolution combine for a noticeably lower DPI count, but I happen to think that higher (than 1080p) resolutions on (relatively) smaller phone displays are mostly a waste of battery life.
YMMV, but in my experience, there comes a point where the human eye can only resolve so much and the bump in the resolution of small screen displays just becomes overkill. I'll take battery life over resolution and even refresh rate any day, though I imagine higher resolution displays with higher refresh rates will only become more efficient over time, and I'll likely change my tune eventually.
I went from the V30+ to the V60 at the beginning of this month, and I feel like the new phone is a substantial upgrade over the older one in just about all categories that matter. And that's even considering that the former was rooted and the latter can't be!
The display is crisp enough, though clearly not cutting edge. Colors look at least as good as those of the V30. Viewing angles are fantastic without any noticeable (to me) color shift. It's probably the best we could have expected knowing that the display is relatively modest compared to this phone's 20202 (and some 2019) peers. And if you're fine with that, this shouldn't stop you from considering the phone. If, however, you DO want higher resolutions and higher refresh rates, you already know this phone's not for you and that you've got multiple options.
Mejilan said:
Viewing angles are fantastic without any noticeable (to me) color shift.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm seeing very drastic color shift when viewing at about 45°, more noticeable on white screens. It's a greenish yellowish shift.
Otherwise I agree with the rest of your post. 1080p is plenty resolution and I'm fine with 60Hz refresh.
Mr_Mooncatt said:
I'm seeing very drastic color shift when viewing at about 45°, more noticeable on white screens. It's a greenish yellowish shift.
Otherwise I agree with the rest of your post. 1080p is plenty resolution and I'm fine with 60Hz refresh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are there display variances across production runs, or something? Because I can't seem to reproduce this fault.
I'm not TERRIBLY sensitive to such things, but from what you say, it sounds like it should be blatantly obvious to the eyes.
And I don't suffer from any kind of color blindness that could possibly impact me.
Mejilan said:
Are there display variances across production runs, or something? Because I can't seem to reproduce this fault.
I'm not TERRIBLY sensitive to such things, but from what you say, it sounds like it should be blatantly obvious to the eyes.
And I don't suffer from any kind of color blindness that could possibly impact me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't seen anyone else complain of this, so not site if it's an issue with mine specifically or what. Here's a short video I made that hopefully demonstrates the color shift.
https://youtu.be/naGHasaIjp0
Mr_Mooncatt said:
I haven't seen anyone else complain of this, so not site if it's an issue with mine specifically or what. Here's a short video I made that hopefully demonstrates the color shift.
https://youtu.be/naGHasaIjp0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh. How did you get a plain white background to show up like that? (I suppose I can Google one up).
I'd like to test my phone out and see if I can get similar results.
It's a little hard to see in a YT video, but I definitely noticed SOME shift on your screen that I don't think I've ever seen on mine.
I imagine the effect is even more noticeable in real life, with the phone right in front of you.
Mejilan said:
Huh. How did you get a plain white background to show up like that? (I suppose I can Google one up).
I'd like to test my phone out and see if I can get similar results.
It's a little hard to see in a YT video, but I definitely noticed SOME shift on your screen that I don't think I've ever seen on mine.
I imagine the effect is even more noticeable in real life, with the phone right in front of you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use this app.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iudesk.android.photo.editor
It's a photo editing app, but you can start a new image from scratch and select a background color. I set it to pure white, then zoomed in on it to fill the screen. It's definitely easier to see in person. I tried using by wife's Note 9 for the video, but I couldn't select a better refresh rate on it to prevent the banding.
Mr_Mooncatt said:
I use this app.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iudesk.android.photo.editor
It's a photo editing app, but you can start a new image from scratch and select a background color. I set it to pure white, then zoomed in on it to fill the screen. It's definitely easier to see in person. I tried using by wife's Note 9 for the video, but I couldn't select a better refresh rate on it to prevent the banding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried it out, and while I did notice a dimming or darkening of the white background at extreme tilts, I figure that's normal.
Doesn't quite look like what your YT video shows, but I'm not sure if that's down to the difference between watching a YT video of something and watching it yourself directly.
I've had the V30 and now this and I'm as happy with the screen on this one as I was with the V30. I couldn't care about the refresh rate. It's not like I'm watching a 60" screen. Overall it's a very good screen.
Mr_Mooncatt said:
I'm seeing very drastic color shift when viewing at about 45°, more noticeable on white screens. It's a greenish yellowish shift.
Otherwise I agree with the rest of your post. 1080p is plenty resolution and I'm fine with 60Hz refresh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I pissed that it's 1080P, however, people who say a 90+ refresh rate is noticeable is just experiencing placebo.
The human eye will never notice that.
Sent from my LG-H932 using XDA Labs
BROKEN1981 said:
I pissed that it's 1080P, however, people who say a 90+ refresh rate is noticeable is just experiencing placebo.
The human eye will never notice that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had higher resolution screens, and I can tell no difference between them and 1080p. Even 720p is hard to notice a difference.
When it comes to refresh rates, most people see a noticeable difference between 60Hz and 90Hz. My last phone was selectable between those two and 120Hz, and I couldn't tell a difference between 90Hz and 120Hz.
I can see the difference in resolution between the V30 and V60, it's just that 1080p on a phone doesn't bother me.
It falls in my "good enough" range. These aren't 55+ inch television displays, after all.
I also can definitely see the difference between a 60 Hz refresh rate vs a 90 Hz or 120 Hz refresh display.
my problem is with notifications in the top pull down... its virtually useless in landscape mode...

Categories

Resources