Hi all,
I know this article has been floating around here for some time, but this I found rather interesting:
Some have raised points along the lines of Samsung Galaxy S2 phones already having a smoother UI and indicating that they are doing something different vs. the Galaxy Nexus. When comparing individual devices though you really need to look at all of the factors. For example, the S2's screen is 480x800 vs. the Galaxy Nexus at 720x1280. If the Nexus S could already do 60fps for simple UIs on its 480x800, the CPU in the S2's is even better off.
The real important difference between these two screens is just that the Galaxy Nexus has 2.4x as many pixels that need to be drawn as the S2. This means that to achieve the same efficiency at drawing the screen, you need a CPU that can run a single core at 2.4x the speed (and rendering a UI for a single app is essentially not parallelizable, so multiple cores isn't going to save you).
This is where hardware accelerated rendering really becomes important: as the number of pixels goes up, GPUs can generally scale much better to handle them, since they are more specialized at their task. In fact this was the primary incentive for implementing hardware accelerated drawing in Android -- at 720x1280 we are well beyond the point where current ARM CPUs can provide 60fps. (And this is a reason to be careful about making comparisons between the Galaxy Nexus and other devices like the S2 -- if you are running third party apps, there is a good chance today that the app is not enabling hardware acceleration, so your comparison is doing CPU rendering on the Galaxy Nexus which means you almost certainly aren't going to get 60fps out of it, because it needs to hit 2.4x as many pixels as the S2 does.)
To be complete, there is another big advantage that the GPU gives you -- many more drawing effects become feasible. For example, if you are drawing a bitmap in software, you basically can't do anything to it except apply an offset. Just trying to scale it is going to make rendering significantly slower. On a GPU, applying transformations well beyond simple scales is basically free. This is why in the new default Holo themes in Android we have background images -- with hardware accelerated drawing, we can afford to draw (and scale) them. In fact, if the hardware path is not enabled by the app, these background images will be turned off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is kinda the same as with the Prime and the T700/other high-resolution tablets, isn't it? I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty obviously since the Tegra3 GPU isn't very good (yes, it is fine but I'm not sure for those high-res screens?). However I could be completely wrong..
I agree. It's the same with a gaming computer. Just because ur monitor has 1080p doesn't mean u can play all games in that rez. U will need a much more powerful gpu. I am certain though the tegra3 can support 1080p but it won't be smooth as 720p like our device. Unless u lower the rez but how would u on an android. Furthermore how ugly games would look who aren't optimize for 1080p.
Nvidia always!
The question isn't whether there's going to be a performance hit, it's what the performance hit looks like. If it's invisible in everything but gaming, I'd bet a lot of people will go for the HD display and gamers will stick to the lower res. If it's obvious in UI performance and transitions, it makes the benefit of the HD screen a little more questionable. The new chip in the iPad3 and Samsung's new Exynos chip won't make you choose (on paper). Benchmarks are useless except for bragging rights.
I have been saying this since people were trying to compare the new acer and samsung back in Dec. The higher the resolution, the more power and resources it takes. Also you have to look at the app market right now. What app's are out that will use that 1080p display...NONE as of now. Once they (1080p tablets) are released, it will be a few months before most apps will adapt to the new higher displays.
I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display- there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish. Just bumping up the resolution while not working on improving the true render process (in case of games or animations) does not make any sense to me.
A retina display just for the heck of it is not a great idea, at least to me.
For what it's worth, ICS is supposed to be fully hardware accelerated, so the Tegra 3 could be enough to power the higher resolution for everything but games.
Anandtech (who I probably trust the most when it comes to hardware evaluations) seemed to suggest in an early preview that the higher resolution *may* perform ok:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5348/...-with-asus-1920-x-1200-tablet-running-ics-403
That said, there are still questions as to the benefit of such a high resolution on a 10" form factor designed to be held only 1-2' away from your face. They didn't bump up to 1920 x 1200 resolution monitors until 24" LCDs and up.
The real issue is that games on Android don't let you pick a resolution for them to run at. Almost all run at the full Res of the screen, which means slideshow on a 1080p Prime.
avinash60 said:
I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display- there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish. Just bumping up the resolution while not working on improving the true render process (in case of games or animations) does not make any sense to me.
A retina display just for the heck of it is not a great idea, at least to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, there is just no point..... there is more important things to improve than pixel count....
Thanks, at least I am not alone on this idea. It seems like when the news came that the iPad 3 is going to have a retina desiplay all the manufacturers didn't care anymore and just were thinking "We also need that!". I am comparision the text from thread with my HTC Sensation which should have a better DPI:
Transformer Prime: 149
The new Prime: 218
HTC Sensation: 260
and from NORMAL viewing distance both look great. However, when i come closer the pixels on the Transformer Prime are a little visible where the Sensation stays sharp. However the phone has a better DPI then the new res. panel so I'm not sure how that is.
I'm sure it will look some better, but I am not sure if it is worth the wait (again) and also the possibilty of the new Prime itself can't keep up with its own resolution..
Oh, again not trying to defend the Prime here.. I have to return it anyway because of backlight bleeding and am not sure if I want a new one or my money back, however if I see this result I think the resolution is just pure marketing.. I mean who is going to sit with its prime 5 cm from their heads.. lol.
http://androidandme.com/2012/01/news/hands-on-with-the-acer-iconia-tab-a510-and-zte-7-tablets/
Watch the video on Acer Iconia a510 (unannounced tablet). 1080p that comes with this tablet... does look a bit sluggish.
Just to add my galaxy nexus is 316 dpi..... unless your 2in from the screen...there really isn't much difference.
Also, I love how laptop and desktop DPI is half what most phone/tabs are and people are having a fit......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#ASUS
Seems to run pretty good since it is still a pre-production model, however not as smooth as the Prime with ICS yes..
Danny80y said:
Just to add my galaxy nexus is 316 dpi..... unless your 2in from the screen...there really isn't much difference.
Also, I love how laptop and desktop DPI is half what most phone/tabs are and people are having a fit......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#ASUS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, exactly what I mean.. you can see it if your very close to the screen, but why would you do that, lol.
Oh, btw.. for the iPad 1&2 it still is 132, which is much lower then our Transformers (149,5), never heard real complaints about that.
>What app's are out that will use that 1080p display...NONE as of now
eBooks & PDFs. Sharper texts. More texts. One can conceivably view 2 pages side-by-side (16:10 / 2 = 8:10, or close to the 8.5:11 printed page).
With display mirroring, you get 1:1 pixel ratio when plugged into a HDTV via HDMI. This makes above use-case (high-density text consumption) much more feasible. Ditto for remote access.
Gaming perf will take a hit. Then again, gaming isn't exactly an Android forte right now, or for mobiles in general. The bulk of games are casual stuff, geared for handset resolution.
One can argue that hardcore Android gaming will prosper over time, and FPS perf will matter more. There are problems with this line of thought. First, is simply the assumption that Android will prosper on tablets, which given current sales is hardly a forgone conclusion. Second, are the fast advances in hardware and their correspondingly short lifespan. GPU-wise, the Teg3 isn't the fastest even now. By the time we get to see enough hardcore games, we'd be on Teg 5 or 6, or their equivalent. Teg3 will be old news.
But sure, if shooters and frame count are your thing, then 720p sounds like a plan, at least for the Teg3.
>I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display
Some don't see the need for GPS in tabs either. Some don't use the cams. Different people have different uses. You shouldn't generalize your use to be everyone else's.
Rest assured that when it comes to marketing, toys with lo-res display will be viewed as inferior. Bigger is better. It's the same thing with quadcore vs dualcore vs single-core. Do you actually need a quadcore?
>there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish
This argument has been bouncing around ever since Apple's Retina Display. Per this PPI calculator, 1920x1200 is 224ppi on a 10.1". Reportedly, people can discern 300ppi at 12" distance, given 20/20 vision. The real test is simpler and much less theoretical: walk into a store and compare the TF201 and TF700 side-by-side, and see if you can discern the difference.
>Anandtech (who I probably trust the most when it comes to hardware evaluations) seemed to suggest in an early preview that the higher resolution *may* perform ok:
Anandtech is good for chip-level analysis. For (mobile) system hardware and use-case analysis, he's just as green as many other tech blogs. Note the gaffs on the Prime testing wrt GPS and BT/wifi coexistence. I do see signs of improvement, however. They came out with a new Mobile Benchmark suite, whatever that means.
>The real issue is that games on Android don't let you pick a resolution for them to run at.
The real issue is that Android is still a nascent OS for tablets. HC was a beta which never took off. ICS was just released. The bulk of Android apps & games are still for handsets.
I have been concerned about this as well. Tegra 3's GPU is fine enough for a 1200x800 tablet, but it's going to be stretched at 1080p (this is nearly the resolution that my desktop runs at!).
I'd love a higher-resolution display, but it's a luxury (well, a tablet itself kinda is already, but even more so). It's not as if 1280x800 is cramped and blocky. I'm happy to wait a bit longer for 1080p tablets to mature and come down in price.
(I'd rather have 2GB RAM, actually.)
Well, perhaps this new release will coincide with a bump in the specs of Tegra 3. By the time the new tablet comes out, I would assume that's been almost half a year.... That's usually about the time span that nvidia would come out with a refresh of a chip design (well, they do this with their desktop GPUs, so not a great comparison, but it's possible?). So in the end perhaps the question of performance will be moot because there will be a faster Tegra 3 and more RAM in the new higher resolution tablets.
Just a thought.
Don't underestimate.
Let's wait a review or test.
Probably the Tegra 3 is more than capable of handling this kind of resolution in terms of playing HD movie, high profile compression, etc.
I saw several tests on current prime, and it has no problem with HD videos.
My only concern is battery life ... that's all.
I expect the 1920x1200 will result worse battery life, unless ASUS pump up the battery capacity or any other improvement.
JoeyLe said:
Hi all,
I know this article has been floating around here for some time, but this I found rather interesting:
This is kinda the same as with the Prime and the T700/other high-resolution tablets, isn't it? I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty obviously since the Tegra3 GPU isn't very good (yes, it is fine but I'm not sure for those high-res screens?). However I could be completely wrong..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
gogol said:
Don't underestimate.
Let's wait a review or test.
Probably the Tegra 3 is more than capable of handling this kind of resolution in terms of playing HD movie, high profile compression, etc.
I saw several tests on current prime, and it has no problem with HD videos.
My only concern is battery life ... that's all.
I expect the 1920x1200 will result worse battery life, unless ASUS pump up the battery capacity or any other improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Asus has already stated that battery life will be pretty much the same as the current Prime...So that should equal shorter battery life.I'll stick with my Prime for now.No Need in buying another tablet right now IMO.I'm waiting to see what Samsung brings to the table.
hyunsyng said:
Well, perhaps this new release will coincide with a bump in the specs of Tegra 3. By the time the new tablet comes out, I would assume that's been almost half a year.... That's usually about the time span that nvidia would come out with a refresh of a chip design (well, they do this with their desktop GPUs, so not a great comparison, but it's possible?). So in the end perhaps the question of performance will be moot because there will be a faster Tegra 3 and more RAM in the new higher resolution tablets.
Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think they can bump the specs within the generation of a chip. The only thing that can happen till then is that Asus finds an economical way to add 2GB memory to the device, Nvidia improves the production capabilities of Tegra 3 and we get a better yield of the chips. The spec increase can only happen from one generation to the next.
I think the performance will be fine. Even the battery life.
Most of the battery usage screen-wise is from the backlight, which will be the same.
Also, not much more power may be used necessarily either, especially if it doesn't end up taxing the Tegra 3 as much as we think it will. As far as we know, our 1200x800 displays may not even be taxing the Tegra 3 that much. If anything, the article shows that the Tegra 3 may be more qualified to handle that high a resolution with little to no performance degradation. There are demos on youtube of a tegra 3 device playing 1440p movies just fine, all while driving a second screen at the same time.
Of course I too don't feel the need for something that high of a resolution on a 10 inch screen, but I'll never really know until I see one in person.
Related
While sitting around waiting on a prime to actually (maybe never?) arrive, I hesitate slightly at the thought of the full HD becoming the standard resolution on tablets soon. Partly this seems silly to me as the storage capacities on tablets hardly seem up to the task of holding files for that resolution, and streaming options for full hd stuff is pretty limited currently.
So a few thoughts:
Anyone with a prime even feel any lack in the current resolution? I read no indication of such, and wonder if it will even be very noticeable side by side with a full HD tab
If it was magically 1900x1200ish now, what use would that serve for you?
A lot of people's first inclination is to question how well a tablet would perform at that resolution, but I'm confident it will be decent or manufacturers wouldn't be jumping at the idea of doing it.
Please see these:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1411063
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=20842748&postcount=20
Higher resolution tablets probably perform much "worse" than the Prime at least not as good
The only case I would want higher resolution screen is for web browsing, especially in portrait orientation where 720 pixel wide is not enough to have a clear reading experience.
Other than that I could not care less. 1080p video is a non sense on a tablet right now cause if you want a full quality movie at this definition you need a files of 11gb wich is a pain to find and take wait to much space. Anything below that, or streamed, isn't better than the quality of a good 720p movie of 4gb.
In games I wish the extra power could be use to make games look good with bigger environnement rather than pushing more pixel.
3D game still looks awfull on mobile due to the lack of good lightning effect (Glowball on Tegra3 is promising in this regard compare to the A5 but I'm guessing A6 will provide those too)
johnchad14 said:
While sitting around waiting on a prime to actually (maybe never?) arrive, I hesitate slightly at the thought of the full HD becoming the standard resolution on tablets soon. Partly this seems silly to me as the storage capacities on tablets hardly seem up to the task of holding files for that resolution, and streaming options for full hd stuff is pretty limited currently.
So a few thoughts:
Anyone with a prime even feel any lack in the current resolution? I read no indication of such, and wonder if it will even be very noticeable side by side with a full HD tab
If it was magically 1900x1200ish now, what use would that serve for you?
A lot of people's first inclination is to question how well a tablet would perform at that resolution, but I'm confident it will be decent or manufacturers wouldn't be jumping at the idea of doing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a heated debate. The higher the PPI, the clearer everything displayed will be - especially text. It would also be able to display full 1080P. So if that's something you consider either good or important then a higher res screen's for you.
Those saying what the Prime has is good enough use two arguments. 1) The higher res will mean a performance hit and, 2) it will mean poor battery life.
Tablets with higher res screens so far all have been leaked to have 2GB of RAM. For all we know, the extra GB could be intended for graphics acceleration. As for battery life, a leak came out today about the tech Sharp is using for the iPad3. It's IGZO and has over 300PPI plus it's 30% more energy efficient. Sharp just converted a huge TV panel factory to produce phone and tablet displays and they're already supplying screens to all the big manufacturers. So if the tech is production ready enough for the iPad3 you could see it on more devices in the near future. I'm sure there will be some announcements at CES.
So let the debate rage on...
http://gigaom.com/apple/apple-reportedly-using-new-display-tech-for-ipad-3/
https://www.semiconportal.com/en/archive/news/main-news/sharp-to-introduce-new-igzo-te.html
If I'm not mistaken, these high-res panels are also in short supply. If that's true, then their price will be much higher. Short supply + high demand = higher prices. Simple economics. I'm also pretty sure that the 2GB RAM on the Android tablets is to accommodate a larger frame buffer, and the iPad 3 will have to have 1GB RAM over its current 512MB.
All that means significantly higher prices. I don't expect any of these higher-res and higher-RAM tablets rumored to come out to be anywhere near the price of the Prime. I think the iPad 3 will be significantly more expensive and the iPad 2 will remain as a "lower-price" option (and won't go any lower in price than the Prime at 32GB, or the OG Transformer at 16GB). The Android tablets will be priced at $599 or more for 32GB, and there will remain Prime-equivalent devices at $499 or less. Hell, if Samsung/Motorola/HTC come out with high-res versions, they'll probably be $899.
For me, $499 is the max I want to spend on a tablet by itself, and I'm also not terribly sure that I'd want a tablet without the ASUS keyboard dock concept. I sure wouldn't pay $599 for a Tegra 3-based tablet with 1900X1200 pixels to push--SOMETHING has to give performance-wise. And I also like the extra brightness of the IPS+ screen more than I want higher resolution.
So, in short, the Prime's resolution is fine for me. And the screen is just luscious--bright and with uncanny viewing angles. Could it be a bit higher-res, to make text a little sharper maybe? Sure, but I wouldn't want it so badly that I'd be willing to put up with lower performance.
I'm completely satisfied with Prime display. I thought my Ipad had a great display but the Prime shows its display is clearly the best out of any tablet today in the market. major reviewers said so also like Engadget and Anandtech. Prime display is even better than ipad 2. prime has more PPI than it. plus prime has the highest contrast ratio of any tablet and the brightest. plus the viewing angles on this device is sick! lol. everything looks great to me on the display. especially when I recorded 1081p video using the rear camera. I was amazed at the quality and detail of video and display. I think Tegra3 has hit the sweet spot/optimal spot with the Prime and its resolution. we get great performance and a great display with atatanding battery life. Prime has set the new standard and set the bar high for next generation tablets to compete at.
My personal opinion on this:
Prime's screen is totally perfect
Higher resolution will have some impacts which are:
You need better/brighter backlights to compensate the additional pixels
You have heaver battery drain due to more pixels
You need a better GPU (not only more RAM) to push all those pixels (not to talk about those crazy 2K and 4K screens)
Text is easier to read on 720p/1080p displays
I wouldn't see a difference between a 720p and a 1080p display in that size playing a movie
In order to use those screens for 1080p movies you'll need more than 32GB of memory (an average Bluray 1080p rip has about 10-15GB )
Those are my initial thoughts on that topic...
Conclusion: In my opinion 1080p screens are not worth the effort yet.
I think the notion of Full HD 1080p on a 10.1" tablet is all marketing talk.
Not only is it a waste as far as video playback goes not being able to see the detail in the HD given the small screen, it will also tax the device's processor trying to render everything to 1920x1080, I can see a desktop PC dual core CPU having no problem with, but a low-powered ARM CPU.
Notice most 1080p laptops aren't smaller than 15".
To me its about app compatibility.
As it is Android already has WAY less tablet apps than iOS- Android tablets are a secondary development platform. That means that High-Res Android tablets will be (at best) the third tablet development platform, which means not great support.
I have the same issue with the GNex. Sure a 720p screen in a phone is nice, but MANY MANY Android apps are made for WXGA. Some don't even fill the full screen at 720p, or their interface breaks down. Due to how few phones have 720ps screens initially by the time the app market is full of apps ready for 720p the GNex will be obsolete hardware.
Whoever buys these high-res Android devices is taking the hit for all of us. By being an early adopter these people will literally feel every growing pain of the Android market as it catches up to high-res screens.
Meanwhile I am trying to get on what I call a "Low PPI Plateau." Between my SGS2 and a Transformer Prime I will have the two most common Android resolutions with hardware meant to maximize those resolutions.
By the time I am ready to leave my Low PPI Plateau not only will the hardware will have caught up to high-res needs, but also the market will be full of compatible apps.
1080p and above screens on a panel that is ~10" will show modest improvements in clarity, moreso with text, but even then it's very marginal for the cost, battery, and performance hit those tablets are going to take.
hell, i have a 27" 1080p monitor and a second 1280x1024 17" secondary monitor and even that that size, the quality of the two screens are very similar.
i feel like 80% of the whole high res panel is just marketing and of course once apple increases their screen res, everyone and their mother NEEDS to have the highest resolution screen that can be pumped out and charged on to their credit cards.
kokusho said:
The only case I would want higher resolution screen is for web browsing, especially in portrait orientation where 720 pixel wide is not enough to have a clear reading experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 800, not 720. For me more problem is tiny letters than resolution while reading websites portrait on 800x1280 resolution.
Full HD resolution would be great for connecting to TV - you would have no rescaling then.
Best Resolution for Tablet
The TFP screen is about 1M pixels, and a full 1080p screen is over 2M pixels. So a processor would have to work 2x as hard to move the 1080p screen around as those in a 720p screen, roughly. That would show up as slowth, somewhere, or heat, or something. So you'd want to get some goodness out of that - it looked better,etc.
People are different. Some see like hawks, others with less resolution. Some people will have trouble seeing the difference between 720p and 1080p, at distance, whereas others will see a marked difference. I'm on the 720p is OK end of that spectrum.
I have noticed, that when lying in bed, that my tablet at viewing distance subtends about the same angle as the HD TV on the other side of the room. So, aside from focusing my eyes, 720p is pretty good for both.
As for the new Tegra3 tablets coming out, I'd rather have the power show up as frame rate, or image manipulation speed, or extra application processor cycles. I'm quite happy with the design center of the TFP, screenwise.
Goodness, this discussion again.
1) Let's hold off on making comments with an air of certitude about hypothetical products we know close to nothing about. OP, if you really want to know what the impact of a higher resolution screen is on the performance and battery life of a tablet, I suggest you wait until those products actually come into existence and feedback (from reviewers and consumers) on them actually exists. Sitting here making comments about how higher resolution is for sure going to kill performance and battery life is ridiculous. Tablet makers are not idiotic, of course they are going to bump up other specs in order to compensate; it's how tech always works. Companies always come out with some crazy spec and people wonder "can they really pull that off?" and a lot of times they do. It's the nature of tech. What would be appropriate to say is "I'm concerned about the challenge that higher resolution will present to battery life and performance". That's reasonable. It's not reasonable to instantly dismiss the challenge as impossible. I would suggest that these tablet makers are going to at least be aware of the challenges and try to meet them. See? I'm not going to guarantee one way or another what the ultimate outcome will be.
2) If 2nd gen tablets in 2012 manage to incorporate higher resolution without impacting battery life or performance, could that at all be a bad thing? The negativity in this thread about higher resolution is centered on the hypothetical side effects. But by itself, could higher resolution be possibly perceived as a bad thing? I'm not talking about the degree by which it is an improvement over what we already have (as everyone has their own opinion on how much of a difference a higher resolution display will have), I'm talking about purely if it's "better" or "worse". As to that, I don't understand how any logical person could say that higher resolution (in and of itself) is worse than what we currently have.
Cliffs notes: if you want to see how these high res tablets are going to be, wait till you can actually see what they actually will be. Sounds lame? Yeah. But true. Hypothetical discussions are fun and all, but they aren't anything you should make your decisions on. I would have gotten the Prime if I based my decision on the hypothetical discussions that I got myself all hyped over. For me, the real world Prime did not live up to the hypothetical Prime I really wanted. What it all boils down to is what the real world end product is, and that's what you should make a decision on.
The Janitor Mop said:
Goodness, this discussion again.
1) Let's hold off on making comments with an air of certitude about hypothetical products we know close to nothing about. OP, if you really want to know what the impact of a higher resolution screen is on the performance and battery life of a tablet, I suggest you wait until those products actually come into existence and feedback (from reviewers and consumers) on them actually exists. Sitting here making comments about how higher resolution is for sure going to kill performance and battery life is ridiculous. Tablet makers are not idiotic, of course they are going to bump up other specs in order to compensate; it's how tech always works. Companies always come out with some crazy spec and people wonder "can they really pull that off?" and a lot of times they do. It's the nature of tech. What would be appropriate to say is "I'm concerned about the challenge that higher resolution will present to battery life and performance". That's reasonable. It's not reasonable to instantly dismiss the challenge as impossible. I would suggest that these tablet makers are going to at least be aware of the challenges and try to meet them. See? I'm not going to guarantee one way or another what the ultimate outcome will be.
2) If 2nd gen tablets in 2012 manage to incorporate higher resolution without impacting battery life or performance, could that at all be a bad thing? The negativity in this thread about higher resolution is centered on the hypothetical side effects. But by itself, could higher resolution be possibly perceived as a bad thing? I'm not talking about the degree by which it is an improvement over what we already have (as everyone has their own opinion on how much of a difference a higher resolution display will have), I'm talking about purely if it's "better" or "worse". As to that, I don't understand how any logical person could say that higher resolution (in and of itself) is worse than what we currently have.
Cliffs notes: if you want to see how these high res tablets are going to be, wait till you can actually see what they actually will be. Sounds lame? Yeah. But true. Hypothetical discussions are fun and all, but they aren't anything you should make your decisions on. I would have gotten the Prime if I based my decision on the hypothetical discussions that I got myself all hyped over. For me, the real world Prime did not live up to the hypothetical Prime I really wanted. What it all boils down to is what the real world end product is, and that's what you should make a decision on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right. But it will going to be a huge impact for the processor, it is more then 2 times as much pixels the CPU/GPU will need to handle. It is just as with Windows; my old PC worked fine in games on a 1280x1024 screen but with 1920x1080 (around 1.7 as much pixels) it just couldn't handle it anymore. So i'm not sure if the Tegra3 is going to handle that, the GPU in it just isn't really good. It does its job at 1280x800, but I'm really concerned how that is gonna be on 1920x1200; are they gonna scale games back? If that would be the case they could just as well use the cheaper 1280x800 panel and let $100 off the price.
However this is all speculation I think it is gonna be this way.
Also I wouldn't want to have either a Acer or Lenovo product; Acer's build quality and support is just very bad (23,3% of their portable products are defect within 2 years in Europe) and for Lenovo I'm really wondering if they even going to give their tablets updates, also the price will be pretty high I guess, also pretty high defect rate as seen below.
{
"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"
}
Higher resolution tablets would be nice, provided that they have the hardware to push that many pixels without slowdown. I'm all for high DPI, and I'm disappointed that we rarely get high densities on desktop monitors.
However, I don't think that a display resolution higher than 1280x800 would really add to the use-case of a tablet. It's not going to allow you to do things you couldn't otherwise do, and the DPI is already acceptably high to display plenty of information on screen. Higher DPI would allow for crisper graphics and text, which I'd definitely like to have, but it's already good enough that it becomes a "nice to have" feature rather than any kind of "must-have" for me.
I don't imagine that these putative high-DPI tablets will have a keyboard dock accessory like the Prime, and, for me, that's a "must-have".
>If I'm not mistaken, these high-res panels are also in short supply. If that's true, then their price will be much higher.
As yields get better over time, price will come down. So cost is a function of time. You're probably right for the initial crop, although I'd quibble over the "much higher" amount. Pricing constraints exist.
Much depends on pricing of 2012 iPad(s), since iPad pricing is literally the reference price for the rest of the tablet market. Apple didn't raise pricing for the iPhone 4 or iPod Touch when those got the Retina Display. From this, the guess is that the iPad $500 benchmark price will still apply for base 2012 model.
If the iPad3 has 2048x1536 res and is $500, Android vendors can't sell their tablets for lower res (1920x1200) at a higher price.
Low-end 10" Android tablets in 2012 will be around USD$350. That's the current price for the Xoom Family (down-specced Xoom), and announced price for the Acer A200 (down-specced A500). Then, there's enough room ($150) to shoehorn in a hi-res display, even if you have to cut corners elsewhere.
That said, Acer & others probably don't care much about the Android tablet market, given its lackluster market reception thus far. PC vendors--Acers/Asus/Dell/HP/et al--will be concentrating on Win8 tablets, since that has a huge existing userbase. Secondly, Win8 tabs aren't as constrained by iPad pricing, as they can do more, eg content creation.
>$499 is the max I want to spend on a tablet by itself
Yes, $500 has become the reference price for most consumers. That comes from the iPad pricing. I'd limit this mindset to "content-consumption" tablets, ie iOS and Android currently.
>Prime's screen is totally perfect
A widget is "perfect" until a better/faster widget comes along. As Jobs has succinctly stated, consumers don't know what they want until they see it.
>You need a better GPU
Teg3 can already run 1080p movies, which place a much higher demand on system resources than pushing around pixels on a UI. If the OS is sluggish, then it's an OS problem, which is the case for HC.
>You have heaver battery drain due to more pixels
This may be true. From the Russian rumor, the Acer A700 has a 10Ah battery, whereas the Prime's battery is 7.4V, 3.38Ah. I'm assuming the voltage for the Acer is 3.7V. Then, the A700 has a 37Wh vs the Prime's 25Wh batt, or roughly 50% more capacity.
>Notice most 1080p laptops aren't smaller than 15"
Tablets are held closer to your eyes, hence they can use higher res. Tablets are also used as e-readers; higher res = sharper text = less eye fatigue.
>To me its about app compatibility.
Android is already awashed with many different screen res. That's why the big emphasis in ICS for res-independent apps.
>The negativity in this thread about higher resolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias
JoeyLe said:
You're right. But it will going to be a huge impact for the processor, it is more then 2 times as much pixels the CPU/GPU will need to handle. It is just as with Windows; my old PC worked fine in games on a 1280x1024 screen but with 1920x1080 (around 1.7 as much pixels) it just couldn't handle it anymore. So i'm not sure if the Tegra3 is going to handle that, the GPU in it just isn't really good. It does its job at 1280x800, but I'm really concerned how that is gonna be on 1920x1200; are they gonna scale games back? If that would be the case they could just as well use the cheaper 1280x800 panel and let $100 off the price.
However this is all speculation I think it is gonna be this way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're fine to say you're afraid it might be that way. It's the people saying with absolute certainty that it will be that way that are out of line.
Personally, I'm not too excited for this Acer or Lenovo tablet either. If they're rocking the same GPU the Prime has, I'm probably not buying either. My ultimate interest is in what Samsung comes out with in 2012. I just like their approach. And I have a feeling they are going to come out with killer specs based on early information. If anyone can pull off higher resolution (and the rumored resolution is VERY high), I think it would be a company with the size of Samsung. And as I said before, I'm going to wait to see how it actually performs before I judge it.
Of course I would want a higher resolution screen, provided the tablet still performs decently. I mean... who wouldn't?
I think a lot of this discussion centers around people trying to justify their current Prime purchase, instead of waiting for the next greatest thing. The tablets that come out next year will probably be better than the Prime, in many aspects. Including beautiful high resolution screens where no pixel is discernable. Of course I would love one. But my Prime is suiting me well right now, and I don't *need* a higher resolution screen. And I don't want to play the waiting game for another tablet, because I needed one right now. That's that.
Guess we'll see!
tbns said:
Of course I would want a higher resolution screen, provided the tablet still performs decently. I mean... who wouldn't?
I think a lot of this discussion centers around people trying to justify their current Prime purchase, instead of waiting for the next greatest thing. The tablets that come out next year will probably be better than the Prime, in many aspects. Including beautiful high resolution screens where no pixel is discernable. Of course I would love one. But my Prime is suiting me well right now, and I don't *need* a higher resolution screen. And I don't want to play the waiting game for another tablet, because I needed one right now. That's that.
Guess we'll see!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To see no pixel at 10.1" the average person would need far more then 1920x1200. This "only" gives a DPI of 224.17. 1280x800 gives 149.45. The iPad 1 and 2 have 131.96. (The higher the better). A average person can't see the pixels at a DPI of 320.
JoeyLe said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love stats and don't consider myself either a fan or a detractor of Asus. But what you posted isn't relevant unless we're having a conversation specifically about laptops. Desktops, mobos, and tablet results could be very different and are most likely produced in different facilities. Also, there's no timeframe on your chart and one or two bad product launches (Asus' or others) can skew the results tremendously. Nice chart though.
---------- Post added at 02:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 PM ----------
tbns said:
Of course I would want a higher resolution screen, provided the tablet still performs decently. I mean... who wouldn't?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's human nature to defend your choices and purchases. Right up until the time you don't.
So I was at CES Thursday and Friday and tried to visit most of the tablet boots and have played with several tablets with qualcomm snapdragon s4, Intel atom, Omap and I few other chinese branded ones. And by far the smoothest and fastest out of all of them was the tegra 3 devices. In particular the Acer a510. TFP IMO comes in 2nd. Acer is super smooth did not lag nor stutter. TFP I do see some stutter from time to time and flicking through home screen is faster and but not as butter smooth as the a510. I'm not sure how to explain it better. It seems to be better hardware accelerated.
Iconia A510 (charges though some micro usb I havent seen before that you can plug the regular charger or micro usb. The charging adapter had a rating of 12v output.
{
"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"
}
They were demoing a game at the qualcomm booth running snapdragon s4 and I was surprised at how it stuttered and was not very smooth via HDMI. I recorded this since this was the processor I was looking forward to being one of the best out there.
Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jhiyYIfu7Y&list=UUHqepxR6_suYYKySqKxymDg&index=2&feature=plcp
I didnt record the TFP showing Shadowgun via HDMI since most of us know how super smooth that is. I'll see if I have a video of the a510 though. I did record however this ZTE 7 (7inch tablet) by ZTE with Tegra 3. I assume this is how the 7 inch prime is going to be as far as performance (I never found the asus 7 prime anywhere).
ZTE 7
Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMIFnjHkGCY&feature=youtube_gdata_player
The Fujitsu tablets were water proof but wow it is laggy as heck. I didn't spend a lot of time there and kinda made fun of a staff who didn't even know what OS it was running. lol. She was damn hot though. Didnt get a pic of her unfortunately.
Also checked out the Archos tablets. I was a fan of archos before and had own an a70t. But even with ICS their new tablets are really awful slow IMO.
So anyway just thought I'd share this with you guys and be happy that we have tegra 3 devices.
I've always said 2012 will be the year of The Prime & Tegra3. That new Acer looks kinda bulky. not as sexy looking as the prime. Thanks for the info. I wish you would've pulled the apk for that BladeSlinger demo..lol. what was the name of that fighting game that was playing on Snapdragon devices? Qualcimm trying to copy Nvidia Tegrazone and coming with a gaming site app for their chips also.
So if you said the snapdragons were laggy, then new 7 in. Memo from Asus may not be a good buy. its going tl have the same snapdragon chips in them I believe. it will be dual core in the memo. plus memo will only have a regular Tft Ips screen. not Super IPS + like in the prime. plus memo will be 3g.
edit: your video links aren't working. it goes to YouTube then says sorry Malformed video ID or something
The acer is slightly thicker but not by much. it only looks like it cause of the edges is not as tapered as the Prime. But center thickness is almost the same to me. I do like that it was more comfortable to hold since the edges didnt feel sharp on your palms. But yea definitely prime is slicker looking. As far as the Demo game it crashed on me a lot and wasnt playable after the video intro. So prob wasnt worth grabbing.
I'm not sure what that game was on the snapdragon device. The also had mc3 on the other side via HDMI and it was laggy too. With the Asus 7 inch prime I'm pretty sure its tegra 3 (every Nvidia rep told me that anyway) so we dont have to worry about it being laggy. If its anything like that zte 7 then it should be pretty fast.
Ill recheck the videos...
There are two memo models coming. One with Tegra3
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Well thinner isn't always better. For me anyways. I kinda like a little meat
on the tab. Feels solid. For that size though you would think they would have
a full size USB port?? Or did they do away with that? I seen they had the
A700 out as well. Looks like some nice hardware.
Specs on the 7in. Asus Memo pad that has Dual Core 1.2Ghz Snapdragon
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=2938&c=asus_eee_pad_memo_3d_me370t_32gb
demandarin said:
Specs on the 7in. Asus Memo pad that has Dual Core 1.2Ghz Snapdragon
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=2938&c=asus_eee_pad_memo_3d_me370t_32gb
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I shouldve been more clear with my post. I was referring to this one.
http://www.engadget.com/photos/asus-eee-pad-memo-370t/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398672,00.asp
I"m on the market for a tablet and am definitely considering the Transformer as I can take the keyboard to school and use it to take notes easier.
However, I do like the look, and price of the transformer prime and would prefer a smoother UI than the 1080p screen of the Prime 700t (unless the HD screen look THAT amazing)
Did tegra 3 run smoothly on the 1080p tablets? And also are the wireless issues THAT bad on the tf201 that would encourage me to buy the 700t?
mikeymop said:
Did tegra 3 run smoothly on the 1080p tablets? And also are the wireless issues THAT bad on the tf201 that would encourage me to buy the 700t?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not so sure about the 1080p ones as they didn't have any of them out for display. It mightve been in one of the rooms but didn't get a chance to find them. I was really looking for the asus 7 inch 370t with tegra 3. My first time at CES so I really didnt know where to go.
Anyhow 1080p on a 10 inch tablet does sound nice but its gonna be overkill IMO. Its gonna be mostly bragging rights and to the naked eye its probably gonna be hard to dicern the difference. And its most likely going to use more processing hence use more battery power. Then you have to worry about app compatibility and either wait for app to catch up or some cases apps might not ever be updated. There are already several threads about prime vs t700 so maybe you may want to give those threads a visit if you want others opinions between the 2 devices.
Re: Acer Iconia A510 - Did you check with an Acer rep and find out why they only showed it in the Nvidia booth? Don't Acer have their own booth?
Re: Asus 370T - Ditto. Should've buttonholed an Asus rep and get the low-down on it.
Anyway, both should be out in Q2 as announced, unless something happens.
>Anyhow 1080p on a 10 inch tablet does sound nice but its gonna be overkill IMO.
One can say the same thing about the Tegra 3. Should you need a quadcore just to have a smooth UI?
I mainly read texts in portrait mode on a 1024x600 7". ePubs are OK, but PDFs suck, as is web browsing. Resolution (169 dpi) is too low for the size. Was gonna give up on 7", but the upcoming 1280x800 (215 dpi) should make 7" viable again for my use.
I think that's what it boils down to. For text, 1080p on 10.1" (also 215 dpi) is better. For graphics/games, 720p is better. Regardless, 1080p will become the standard res once supply ramps up, one, because everybody needs to keep up with the iPad, and two, like you said, it's "nice to have" even though you don't actually need it (like you don't actually need a quadcore).
e.mote said:
Re: Acer Iconia A510 - Did you check with an Acer rep and find out why they only showed it in the Nvidia booth? Don't Acer have their own booth?
Re: Asus 370T - Ditto. Should've buttonholed an Asus rep and get the low-down on it.
Anyway, both should be out in Q2 as announced, unless something happens.
>Anyhow 1080p on a 10 inch tablet does sound nice but its gonna be overkill IMO.
One can say the same thing about the Tegra 3. Should you need a quadcore just to have a smooth UI?
I mainly read texts in portrait mode on a 1024x600 7". ePubs are OK, but PDFs suck, as is web browsing. Resolution (169 dpi) is too low for the size. Was gonna give up on 7", but the upcoming 1280x800 (215 dpi) should make 7" viable again for my use.
I think that's what it boils down to. For text, 1080p on 10.1" (also 215 dpi) is better. For graphics/games, 720p is better. Regardless, 1080p will become the standard res once supply ramps up, one, because everybody needs to keep up with the iPad, and two, like you said, it's "nice to have" even though you don't actually need it (like you don't actually need a quadcore).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't really check with Acer (not sure if they had a booth). All the Halls were so massive that it got very cumbersome trying to walk back and forth. So whatever I remembered I visited. Didn't dawn on me to look for Acer.
Asus 370t - went back on friday to hunt Acer booth down. They had a very tiny booth but no one was in it. Just display of a prime, processors, and forgot what else (no 370t for sure) but whatever they had were behind glass. I was new to CES so I didn't know where to go from there. I really wanted to see this thing in person too. After CES was over then I thought maybe theyre in one of the rooms. But it was too late...CES was over....
Nvidia reps had no ETA on when Acer a510 nor the 370t will be released. Makes sense since theyre just the processor manufacturer.
Screen res IMO only matters with screen 32 inches and up. How clear do you really need a text to be. My laptop is 15 inch and is 1280x800 and its perfect for when I surf or play some games on it. But I remember when I used to have a celeron processor and hated it. I couldnt run alot of games and it was slow. I'm a gamer so for me Id rather have faster processor than higher res screen unless ofcouse were talking tvs that are 40" and up. Also advantage of quadcore is HDMI out to your TV. I have a Tegra2 acer a100 and its choppy on my TV. It's like watching a low frame rate movie. Compared the prime which barely lags at all. Not only when scrolling and such but opening/closing apps and even watching movies over HDMI. Everything just runs as it should with quad core. Now the real question is, do we really need anything higher than quadcore?
First, thanks for the report and the pics & vids.
>Screen res IMO only matters with screen 32 inches and up.
Discernible resolution depends on viewing distance. TVs' are 6-10' typical; desktop monitors about 2-3'; laptops probably 18-24"; tablets 12-18"; phones 12" or less.
It also depends on what's displayed. TVs display movies--moving graphics--and the eyes have a harder time discerning fine details, as comparing to, say, static black text on white background.
As said, 1080p-on-10" matters more for readers than gamers. But if display is migrated (via HDMI) to a large-screen TV, then 1080p is desirable for everyone. Low-framerate concern should be resolved with faster SoCs--and they're progressing at a pretty fast pace, thanks to competition.
One can say HDMI-connection is a small part of tablet use, which is true for now. But there are upcoming techs that will allow wireless connections to TVs (Intel WiDi, or even 802.11ac), so TV connections will be much more convenient, therefore more popular in the near future. (The TF700 will not have high-speed wireless, so this argument is more about "future tablets" than the TF700 specifically.)
Really, there is no dispute that a higher res is desirable for everyone. While you may not see a use for higher res currently, we're only scratching the surface of the tablet's potential functionality. Recall Gate's "640K ought to be enough for anybody" quote. If there's a point to argue, it'll be how much a 1080p tab is worth. Asus says it's +$100. I think the final say will lie with the iPad 3. It will determine pricing for the rest of the market.
>My laptop is 15 inch and is 1280x800
This brings up another point, which is that all of the above is about functionality. But whether a product gets feature X is more about increased SELLABILITY, rather than about increased functionality. Increased resolution is a very good selling point for tablets, as it's simple to understand. Most all TVs now are 1080p, even on small sets where one can't see the difference. Vendors can't sell 720p sets any more.
Laptops could have better res. One reason that they don't is that screen res was never a selling point, for whatever reason. It's mainly CPU.
It's different for tablets, because Apple is the standard bearer. Other vendors are trying to beat it on specs, since they can't (yet) compete on ecosystem. Once iPad goes to QXGA as expected, every vendor will have to follow, or risk being perceived as inferior (even more than they are now). This is regardless of whatever functionality the higher res offers. In short, Apple sets the standard.
To reiterate, there is a real functionality benefit for 1080p-on-10" now--for reading. Sharper text = less eye strain. (BTW, one casualty of the increased res will be e-ink, which is already suffering in sales relative to color Nooks and Kindle Fire.) I think e-reading will be an increasingly more popular use, given the ongoing migration to e-books. Apple's e-textbook announcement today underlines this sea change.
smoothness > resolution. Thats how it is for me.
High dpi surely is nice for text, but one of the biggest advantages over paper is that you can adjust the size of the text to you liking. And i like big letters. Smaller text profits much more from higher resolutions than when you zoom in anyway. Another point where i dont need 1080p on 10.1".
I played 320x240 software rendered games on my PC with a 17" CRT back in the days. I can take 1280x800 on 10.1" anytime
Retina display is just a marketing thing imho. Yeah you can hold the thing directly in front of your eye and dont see pixels. But you will never do that while actually using the device.
Smoothness is something that you notice everytime as soon as you start the device. But in my opinion smoothness has much more to do with good software optimization than with hardware. I have used a lot of different roms on my DesireHD with 1ghz singlecore cpu. I used some roms that were very minimalistic and still totally laggy. Right now i have a bloated sense 3.5 port on it and its iphone-ish smooth all the time. Only because of tweaks and software optimization from the rom chefs.
Prime will have bootloader unlock tool -> it will have custom roms -> win.
I knew the new snapdragon chipset was gonna underperform against the competition like it always does. Snapdragon SoC's are the only reason why I'm not pulling the trigger on any LTE phones.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
xAnimal5 said:
I knew the new snapdragon chipset was gonna underperform against the competition like it always does. Snapdragon SoC's are the only reason why I'm not pulling the trigger on any LTE phones.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a good move. If you haven't heard the government actually trying to shut down LTE/4g networks. It interferes too much with other frequencies. It really interferes with BT. The companies were supposed to come up with a solution but all of the so called solutions have been disapproved so far by government.
>I knew the new snapdragon chipset was gonna underperform against the competition like it always does.
What current games or apps are there that can't be run acceptably on a Krait, as versus, say, a Tegra 3? When you say underperform, are you talking about strictly benchmark differences?
>smoothness > resolution
With current Android, smoothness isn't so much a function of resolution as it is a function of the OS maturity. Many of the things you mentioned are UI-related, and it shouldn't take a quadcore to get a smooth UI.
>you can adjust the size of the text to you liking. And i like big letters.
By reading, I'm referring to long-form reading, eg books & periodicals. If you adjust font size for larger, many hard-layout texts will need larger than the display size, which in turn would need panning. You can't do the zoom/pan thing for every page of a book, as opposed to a web page.
As you said, that's where higher res has the most benefit in allowing smaller texts to still be legible, and not requiring panning.
In thinking about it, Apple's push into e-textbooks makes more sense, in that confirms the iPad3's higher resolution. E-textbooks with hard layouts would be a poor experience with the iPad's current 1024x768 res.
>Retina display is just a marketing thing imho.
Many aspects are marketing influenced, and have little to do with functionality--eg the Prime's aluminum shell. It looks and feels "more quality" than plastic, hence marketing dictates it will sell better. But it functions worse than plastic. In that sense, arguing about functionality is somewhat academic and not reflective of how product decisions are made.
I'm feeling somewhat disappointed on Asus's decision to move the transformer towards the direction the ipad is taking by making slight hardware changes and massively bumping up the display.
I remember when apple invented the 'retina display' buzzword for ips panels a few years ago - marketing them as having the most pixels your eyes can see from a holding distance. Now apple is keeping the tablet the same size and bumping up the pixel density 4 times with suspected plans of marketing that as being better. How? They've already stated more pixels would be redundant.
At this point the tablet to buy isn't looking like the ipad 3 or the tf700, lenovo is sweeping in with the ideapad k2 to offer more hardware changes (usb on the tablet, 1.7ghz t3, fingerprint scanner, possible keyboard dock) as well as a high def display.
What kind of change will these displays provide? Drastic?
Cons
decreased battery life slight
slightly decreased performance..
more screen defects ( however you would never notice a dead pixel! being so small)
higher cost of the tablet most high resolution tablets will start at 599 including the iPad3
most people will not be able to tell the difference
Media in that format (2k) would fill your 32gbs so quickly!
Less vivid colors/contrast ratio/refresh rate? (correct me if I am wrong)
Pro's
about Twice the amount of pixels! (4x the pixels in the case of the iPad3)
sharper text!
better looking movies if you can fit them on the tablet!
Bragging rights?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Can you actually see the pixel difference on a 1920x1200 screen over the primes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've counted them (the pixels) and the difference is that the count took two times as long!
But seriously, there is a point when it would be hard to see a difference, where more pixels would NOT really make a clearer screen.
I was offered a full refund on my prime and dock and am thinking about taking it... and seeing what MWC has to offer... maybe the samsung galaxy note 10.1 or something else lenovo maybe.....
maybe they will pull something off and release a Nexus tab
or windows 8......
idk what to do but I want this things headaches gone.....
Wordlywisewiz said:
I was offered a full refund on my prime and dock and am thinking about taking it... and seeing what MWC has to offer... maybe the samsung galaxy note 10.1 or something else lenovo maybe.....
maybe they will pull something off and release a Nexus tab
or windows 8......
idk what to do but I want this things headaches gone.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Useless post...
Sent from my ROOTED Transformer Prime
Yes
10char
Wordlywisewiz said:
I was offered a full refund on my prime and dock and am thinking about taking it... and seeing what MWC has to offer... maybe the samsung galaxy note 10.1 or something else lenovo maybe.....
maybe they will pull something off and release a Nexus tab
or windows 8......
idk what to do but I want this things headaches gone.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am sorry that you are having problems with the Prime. However nothing you have said is actually relevant to the conversation that this thread was started with. Please try to keep on-topic, there are plenty of other threads where you can discus your tablet problems.
With regards to pixel density... it very much depends on how you use your Prime. If you read a lot on the Prime and have noticed pixelation in small text, then yes, upping the pixel density would improve your tablet experience. If you mainly watch videos then you probably won't notice the extra pixels on the size of screen that the Prime has.
The exact same debate took place when 1080P TV's came out. People that already bought 720P used the same defenses as to why 1080P TV's are overkill. 80% of high-def TV's sold last year were 1080P. Does anyone not think Apple's going to spend a gazillion dollars convincing the world life as we know will end if you don't have a retina (HD) display? Asus, Acer, and Samsung aren't introducing HD displays because it's practical, it's to combat Apple. How many of you expect your next phone to be qHD or 720P? And its only got a 4-5" display. Whether you personally care or not, tablets with HD displays are going to become the norm (potentially impacting the resale value of those that don't have it).
Wordlywisewiz said:
Cons
decreased battery life slight
slightly decreased performance..
more screen defects ( however you would never notice a dead pixel! being so small)
higher cost of the tablet most high resolution tablets will start at 599 including the iPad3
most people will not be able to tell the difference
Media in that format (2k) would fill your 32gbs so quickly!
Less vivid colors/contrast ratio/refresh rate? (correct me if I am wrong)
Pro's
about Twice the amount of pixels! (4x the pixels in the case of the iPad3)
sharper text!
better looking movies if you can fit them on the tablet!
Bragging rights?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is 1920x1200 = 2k?
And because the prime has that resolution doesn't mean there will be a lot of content using the extra 120 pixels lol.
it will be 1080p content with black bars on top and bottom, no difference in file sizes at all.
I guess it depends. In my opinion its all about what you're used to. For example, i'm used to gaming on a PC. There you use Anti-Aliasing on the games in 1080p, so i'm used to perfectly sharp images without any jagged edges. If I see the same games on a Xbox i always think the graphics are horrible, while most people think there are some amazing looking games on the xbox...
And i used to play Tomb Raider 1 on my old PC in 320x240 on a 15" CRT monitor. That was bad dpi. I still enjoyed it very much
So atm i have a 27" PC/TV combo monitor with 1080p. Thats what my eyes are used to. So my prime looks sharper to me than my PC monitor, and i think my PC monitor is more than sharp enough i hope you see now where i'm getting. I also cant tell the difference in dpi from my 800x480 4.3" phone to the iphone display...
What i'm trying to say, no one needs that kind of resolution. Its just nice to have, and once you got used to it, you probably dont wanna go back. All things aside, I think the Prime's screen is absolutely beautiful.
So if I had to compare 2 devices with different resolution the one very sharp, the other very very sharp I would look on all the other features first.
For example if the TF700T would have like 1 hour less battery life and would be heavier i'd still go for the Prime.
If we're talking RUMOURED ipad 3 resolution, well just think about this. Watching movies in that resolution (you first had to get them somehow, as far as i know all movies are max 1920x1080 today?) would be pretty sharp right. But because of a screen format that hasnt been used anymore since 10 years you will only be using a very small part of that screen to actually watch that movie.
Now everyone has to decide for themselfs, but for me there are FAR FAR more important features than resolution (especially if the difference is barely visable for me).
But people have spent huge amount of money on unuseful tech for lesser reasons
Off course yu can see the difference. Just take a look at your phone display(800*480 or higher), you'll notice that it's much sharper than any tablet screen.
The biggest "problem" of resolutions that high is that the graphics processor has to deal with much more pixels(in our case 2304000(1920*1200)/10024000(1280*800)=2,25 times).
In the case of games this could mean games running at less than half the speed(FPS), assuming it has the same CPU/GPU combination.
YoMarK said:
Off course yu can see the difference. Just take a look at your phone display(800*480 or higher), you'll notice that it's much sharper than any tablet screen.
The biggest "problem" of resolutions that high is that the graphics processor has to deal with much more pixels(in our case 2304000(1920*1200)/10024000(1280*800)=2,25 times).
In the case of games this could mean games running at less than half the speed(FPS), assuming it has the same CPU/GPU combination.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it won't have the exact same GPU, and the iPad 2 has a pretty ridiculously powerful PowerVR GPU. However I question Apple's choice to use GPUs that tend to focus on polygon performance instead of fill rate performance particularly when they're looking to dramatically increase screen resolution.
Apple is running out of things to say is best with the iPad / iPhone short of gimmicks like Siri and "retina" displays. They're going to pay for it in other areas though, they're going to need to have a GPU with a killer fill rate, and though the current SGX543MP2 can probably manage, doubtless they'll cram something that eats even more power into the iPad 3.
The thing that most Apple users don't know is that most of the tablet apps they'll be buying off the market won't make use of the high resolution or the processor, as the majority will have been built to run on the now-comparatively-pathetic iPad 1. At least we're seeing THD apps that make use of the additional processing power our tablets have to offer. I've yet to hear of Apple app developers doing the same, though I assume it'll have to happen at some point.
And finally, to answer the question of the OP, I highly doubt there will be any noticeable difference at the distance most of us hold a tablet. It's a little different for the iPhone; with a 3.5 inch screen you have to hold it a lot closer if you're reading text because it's that much smaller. Comparing smartphone display resolution to tablet display resolution is rather pointless as we hold them at different distances from our face depending upon the size of the display and the text / images on the screen.
Holding my TFP at its general 2-foot viewing distance, I'm hard pressed to make out any individual pixels, and my vision is 20/20. I won't be trading in my TFP for an iPad because of of difference in pixel density I may never even notice!
ickkii said:
I'm feeling somewhat disappointed on Asus's decision to move the transformer towards the direction the ipad is taking by making slight hardware changes and massively bumping up the display.
I remember when apple invented the 'retina display' buzzword for ips panels a few years ago - marketing them as having the most pixels your eyes can see from a holding distance. Now apple is keeping the tablet the same size and bumping up the pixel density 4 times with suspected plans of marketing that as being better. How? They've already stated more pixels would be redundant.
At this point the tablet to buy isn't looking like the ipad 3 or the tf700, lenovo is sweeping in with the ideapad k2 to offer more hardware changes (usb on the tablet, 1.7ghz t3, fingerprint scanner, possible keyboard dock) as well as a high def display.
What kind of change will these displays provide? Drastic?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I personally think that for most people these super high resolutions on small screens are pretty pointless. Maybe it's because I'm 35 and don't have the same vision I did 15 years ago
All I know is I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on my 70 inch TV
Of course you can... but who cares?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
pdanders said:
All I know is I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on my 70 inch TV
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Think from what distance you look at your TV. And then think from what distance you look at your tablet. Compare the relative sizes of the devices in your field of view. I use 23 inch screen for movies but I look at it from 50cm - it's bigger then than typical cinema screen (I'm nearsighted so I like it that way).
pdanders said:
I personally think that for most people these super high resolutions on small screens are pretty pointless. Maybe it's because I'm 35 and don't have the same vision I did 15 years ago
All I know is I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on my 70 inch TV
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Man you have the 70 lol? I was happy as hell when i got my 60" Samsung Smart TV a few months ago. Then they had to go and introduce the 70" & 80" Sharp LED's! Damn you Sharp hahaha!
I told my GF 60" is the biggest ill ever have to go. WRONG!
Wordlywisewiz said:
Cons
decreased battery life slight
slightly heavily decreased performance (compared to smaller displays)
more screen defects ( however you would never notice a dead pixel! being so small)
higher cost of the tablet most high resolution tablets will start at 599 including the iPad3
most people will not be able to tell the difference
Media in that format (2k) would fill your 32gbs so quickly! I think there is not even any 2K media (like cinema films) for end users available.
Less vivid colors/contrast ratio/refresh rate? (correct me if I am wrong)
Pro's
about Twice the amount of pixels! (4x the pixels in the case of the iPad3)
sharper text!
better looking movies if you can fit them on the tablet! You won't see that at "movie-distance"
Bragging rights?
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Corrected for you
Vcolassi said:
Man you have the 70 lol? I was happy as hell when i got my 60" Samsung Smart TV a few months ago. Then they had to go and introduce the 70" & 80" Sharp LED's! Damn you Sharp hahaha!
I told my GF 60" is the biggest ill ever have to go. WRONG!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now imagine if a TV of those size existed in the 1990s. It would weigh nearly a ton, resolution would be 640x480, and would probably cost about $3,999 dollars since anything over 36 inches was unheard of.
removed
10characters
The difference will be noticeable, but it's up to you whether you care enough to pay another 100 [insert currency here]. Was actually slightly disappointed with the display quality when viewing text on the TFP, but perhaps I'm just being ultra-picky. Can't be bothered to wait another 6 months at this point though.
I just bought a new TS Prime last week and have 30 days to return. I'm thinking of doing so in favor of the TS Infinity. I'm worried that if Asus is no longer shipping the prime due to "defects", that the development community on the Prime will be fade quickly and become very small. I'm curious to see if the new Transformers will be similar enough that roms for each will be easy to port over. Also a full HD screen would be nice but will I be sacrificing smoothness and a lot of battery life as a result?
I'm very torn. I have had no issues with the Prime I just got. Wifi is as good as my Nexus and my GPS locks on in less than 10 seconds every time (only tested indoors). A micro usb slot would be nice but it appears as if none of the new Transformers will have that either. So I'm just asking for some opinions on why I should keep my Prime or return it and wait for the Infinity. If I'm spending 500+ dollars on a device, I'd like it to be pretty future proof.
I don't know of any future proof devices for less than $500. I saw plans for a time machine on ebay but I don't know where to get the crystals.
Just keep the prime. It'll be fine. We already have great developement.
demandarin said:
Just keep the prime. It'll be fine. We already have great developement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While this is true ^ for people like me who mostly use their tabs for media, the 1200p screen is great.
Yeah but prime screen is just as good. No one will be able to tell the difference between a 1080P movie and a 720P HD movie on a 10.1 screen. Both will look great. The only difference is text will look a little sharper on infinity pad.
Not saying you, but people forgetting Prime was already crowned the best display out of any tablet before new Ipad arrived. So prime display is still great for watching media also.
Some people get stuck on the 1080P vs. 720P, too much, on a tablet if they want to use it for media. Human eye won't detect a difference in quality on a screen this size. On a big flat screen, yes. But even then its a slight increase in quality.
Now if you want it to read books and magazines then infinity display will be better for that and that's about it. Web pages and such still look very sharp and crisp on prime display. 1080P won't even be useful for gaming because there are no games running at that "true" resolution. THEN although tegra3 will handle it fine, if the exact same gpu or gpu clock speed is used, infinity pad will likely not perform as well as prime. Meaning prime will push faster FPS on games/movies..etc..
I keeping my prime till the new Asus Transformer pads with tegra4 release at end of year or Q1 of 2013. A prime to an infinity is not really much of an upgrade. Newer tegra4 transformer pads will likely have 1080p screen also. Then tegra4 will perform better than tegra3 at that same screen size resolution. Since tegra4 will be far more powerful than tegra3. IT HAS BEEN SAID Tegra4 will likely use same 4+1 core set except this time it'll be with Cortex [email protected] 28nm. Plus it's highly likely its gpu will be keplar based. Now that's something worth waiting for
Thanks, these replies have been quite helpful. Think I will stick with the Prime. I've kinda been falling in love with it. I guess there is always something new on the horizon. So the dockfor the prime won't be compatible with future models, correct?
One more thing, what is currently the best rom on prime. I'm new and just jumped on virtuous cause it seemed popular.
The only reason I'd think about upgrading is with regards to reading ebooks... Guess the better screen will shine on that area. But otherwise there is not much reason, wifi is good enough and couldn't care much less about GPS.
Apart from the screen there is not much reason to upgrade...
About roms, running WSG0.0.6 now which is one of my favourites although the Android Open Kang project rom from jermaine151 is very sweet as well.
>The only reason I'd think about upgrading is with regards to reading ebooks...
The higher res isn't needed for ebooks. If legibility is a problem, you'd just enlarge the fonts. Ebooks are mostly text-only, so content can be reflowed, and it will just fill more pages.
What higher res would be good for is documents with mixed (text+graphics) layouts, and not specifically designed for tablets, eg mags and scientific/academic/trade docs in PDF format. Because text can't be reflowed without messing up the layout, you may not be able to enlarge text font. Then, the higher res allows small text to be more legible. If these types of docs aren't on your menu, then "hi-res" confers no benefit in this area.
One can make the case that "hi-res" would benefit web pages with small text. That argument would work for small displays like smartphones and maybe 7" tabs, but a 10" with 1280x800 is already a larger display res than most web sites are designed for.
That iPad 3 has a "better" display than previous iPad is more due to its better color filters (which allows for richer colors) than its increased res. Hi-res is good to have as a spec, because a quad-XGA will always sound better than just XGA, and 1080p better than 720p. But by itself it's not good enough as an eyes-on benefit. Apple understood this, and also boosted the color rendition.
I'm interested in purchasing one, but for $500 and midrange specs it really needs to deliver on the screen for me. How is it? Im not so much concerned with resolution as much as precise color calibration thats not washed out or too warm/cold.
how does it look for you guys?
s1lenz said:
I'm interested in purchasing one, but for $500 and midrange specs it really needs to deliver on the screen for me. How is it? Im not so much concerned with resolution as much as precise color calibration thats not washed out or too warm/cold.
how does it look for you guys?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, this is not a midrange tablet, is a high end, don't get confused because is using the Snapdragon S4 Pro instead of the S600, there are not tablets that perform better than this one, also 2GB RAM, 1200p resolution (1920x1200), NFC, IR Port, Bluetooth 4.0, Dual Band WIFI a/b/g/n, microsd card slot upto 64GB. Check this review for more details about performance.
Also the screen is pretty good, has good viewing angles, great brightness, and pictures/videos looks awesome, the touch panel is very sensitive.
I'll see about getting some data when I get mine (should be Monday.) I don't have the fanciest calibration tools but good enough for the basics we're taking about here. I also have a calibrated desktop setup as well as a pile of other tablets and phones to compare to for subjective analysis.
This is not a midrange tablet. This is top of market right now.
I payed 700 for it. Plus another 150 on my country's customs. And it really really worth it.
When you have it on your hands, is just perfect!
Enviado desde mi SGP312 usando Tapatalk 2
sorry guys, i don't mean to offend but when I say midrange i mean:
- the resolution is still 1200p vs 1600p on the nexus 10
- the s4 chip, as great as it is, is devoured by the exynos 5250 in benchmarks which is in the nexus 10 (http://www.androidauthority.com/exynos-5-dual-benchmarks-125134/ reference)
when you're talking purely features (waterproof, lightest 10" tablet on the market, solid build, ir port, nfc, sd card slot, sim card lot) yes, you're right its top of the line. but as far as hardware specs go, to put it in perspective the next nexus 7 will either have an s4 pro or a 600 with the same resolution and cost roughly $300 less.
why does hardware matter? aren't those just numbers we geek over? well, often times manufacturers will push higher resolution screens on soc's that just aren't up to the task for it.
Like I said, I don't mind paying for the premium as I dont care about the resolution but I'm just concerned about the color accuracy. do the colors look washed out? is it like the nexus 7 and the nexus 10 which both have ips and (i forget samsung's proprietary panel used for the n10, which is supposively better then IPS), but in the end doesnt really matter because both screens are so horribly calibrated that its wasted?
the thing I'm actually pretty stoked about with this tablet running the S4 is that franco and paranoid android were able to create a nexus 4 color calibration kernel which works miracles for that screen. Coincidentally, thats the same chip used on the Z. I'm not sure how much support this tablet will have, but if Franco takes interest, the Xperia Z's screen will look spectacular after a color tweak...
I really hope the whites on mine aren't too warm. I would hate to turn this thing on and see it with that layer of pee-yellow on top that my 1st gen iPad and Galaxy Nexus suffered from.
As you said n10 screen got its own issues. There is question if there is need for such ppi in large devices we don't tend to hold close to face. And i wonder if future devices will chase after resolution knowing the price (atm there are only 3 android 10" tablets with HD+ screens. Color wise its very nice, warmer but not oversaturated like Samsung. However to know how it does compared to others we need to wait for RGB replication test.
In terms of speed XTZ is ahead of N10 in cpu (except single thread apps) raw power. N10 does better in browser test due to google optimalisation (in chrome or 4.2 i don't know). Mali is stronger raw what off-screen tests show. However on-screen n10 extreeme resolution works against it puting it behind http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_xperia_tablet_z-review-931p5.php .
So atm its high end, it wont be when tegra4 an s800 hit market.
s1lenz said:
sorry guys, i don't mean to offend but when I say midrange i mean:
- the resolution is still 1200p vs 1600p on the nexus 10
- the s4 chip, as great as it is, is devoured by the exynos 5250 in benchmarks which is in the nexus 10 (http://www.androidauthority.com/exynos-5-dual-benchmarks-125134/ reference)
when you're talking purely features (waterproof, lightest 10" tablet on the market, solid build, ir port, nfc, sd card slot, sim card lot) yes, you're right its top of the line. but as far as hardware specs go, to put it in perspective the next nexus 7 will either have an s4 pro or a 600 with the same resolution and cost roughly $300 less.
why does hardware matter? aren't those just numbers we geek over? well, often times manufacturers will push higher resolution screens on soc's that just aren't up to the task for it.
Like I said, I don't mind paying for the premium as I dont care about the resolution but I'm just concerned about the color accuracy. do the colors look washed out? is it like the nexus 7 and the nexus 10 which both have ips and (i forget samsung's proprietary panel used for the n10, which is supposively better then IPS), but in the end doesnt really matter because both screens are so horribly calibrated that its wasted?
the thing I'm actually pretty stoked about with this tablet running the S4 is that franco and paranoid android were able to create a nexus 4 color calibration kernel which works miracles for that screen. Coincidentally, thats the same chip used on the Z. I'm not sure how much support this tablet will have, but if Franco takes interest, the Xperia Z's screen will look spectacular after a color tweak...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A few things:
1. The S4 chip in the XTZ is actually more powerful than the Exynos 5250 Dual in the Nexus 10. The S4 in the link you used is a dual core MSM8960. The S4 chip in the XTZ is a quad core APQ8064. Coupled with the higher res of the Nexus 10, the performance of the Nexus 10 would be behind the XTZ.
2. This is a 10" tablet. Comparing it to the much faster paced 7" tablet market wouldn't make much sense, furthermore normally people get 10" tablets for different reasons than getting 7" tablets. While this is of course debatable, it would be more accurate to compare to up-and-coming 10" tablets like the new Tegra 4 tablets, which aren't slated to be released until Q3 2013 at least.
3. Screen-wise, I can't really comment since I don't have the XTZ yet (getting one on Thursday once it is released in my country). According to the reviews I read though, the colours are nice and sharp, and the screen has quite good viewing angles due to the gapless technology used in the screen. Quoted from androidpolice (http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/05/31/sony-xperia-tablet-z-review-a-surprisingly-good-tablet/):
The front of the Xperia Tablet Z is dominated by a 10.1-inch 1920x1200 LED-backlit LCD “Bravia Reality Display.” The Bravia-branded stuff is a post-processing engine for video and images, but the difference is extremely subtle. That’s not the important aspect of this panel anyway – more relevant is how it looks. In a word: good.
If I hold the Tablet Z uncomfortably close to my face, I can definitely see the pixels, but that doesn’t matter – you’ll never use a tablet like that. At a normal viewing distance – say 18-inches – the screen looks crisp and clear. Text is extremely readable and the pixels melt into lovely, fluid images. Because this is a gapless display, the viewing angles are much better than its smartphone counterpart.
The black levels are good on this device – better than the Nexus 7, for example. Below roughly 50% brightness, the blacks stay inky, but past that it starts getting a bit gray. It’s a far cry from AMOLED blacks, but it is above average when compared to other LCD panels (at least in my estimation).
We fetishize pixel density maybe a little too much. Having a higher resolution is great, but not at the expense of performance. This screen gets the job done, and does it well. You don’t need to stress about the raw resolution numbers being lower on the Tablet Z than the Nexus 10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4. It is possible Sony may include the white balance setting in Settings just like the Xperia Z. Other devs may of course implement this feature as well.
I saw one on display in a shop. The screen is very impressive, best android tablet screen I've seen so far. Not seen the Nexus 10 screen, but I've read enough about it's light bleed issues.
Vertron said:
I saw one on display in a shop. The screen is very impressive, best android tablet screen I've seen so far. Not seen the Nexus 10 screen, but I've read enough about it's light bleed issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say the screen is quite similar to the nexus 7. Its not as good as the TF700 but its perfectly satisfactory.
pandaball said:
A few things:
1. The S4 chip in the XTZ is actually more powerful than the Exynos 5250 Dual in the Nexus 10. The S4 in the link you used is a dual core MSM8960. The S4 chip in the XTZ is a quad core APQ8064. Coupled with the higher res of the Nexus 10, the performance of the Nexus 10 would be behind the XTZ.
2. This is a 10" tablet. Comparing it to the much faster paced 7" tablet market wouldn't make much sense, furthermore normally people get 10" tablets for different reasons than getting 7" tablets. While this is of course debatable, it would be more accurate to compare to up-and-coming 10" tablets like the new Tegra 4 tablets, which aren't slated to be released until Q3 2013 at least.
3. Screen-wise, I can't really comment since I don't have the XTZ yet (getting one on Thursday once it is released in my country). According to the reviews I read though, the colours are nice and sharp, and the screen has quite good viewing angles due to the gapless technology used in the screen. Quoted from androidpolice (http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/05/31/sony-xperia-tablet-z-review-a-surprisingly-good-tablet/):
4. It is possible Sony may include the white balance setting in Settings just like the Xperia Z. Other devs may of course implement this feature as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for this, you bring up some excellent points. I'm going to take a wait-and-see approach to see if Franco or Faux will take any interest in this tablet and develop a kernel for it. Unfortunately, for that to happen I think the community is going to have to pool together some cash, like they did for the Oppo Find5...
pandaball said:
A few things:
1. The S4 chip in the XTZ is actually more powerful than the Exynos 5250 Dual in the Nexus 10. The S4 in the link you used is a dual core MSM8960. The S4 chip in the XTZ is a quad core APQ8064. Coupled with the higher res of the Nexus 10, the performance of the Nexus 10 would be behind the XTZ.
2. This is a 10" tablet. Comparing it to the much faster paced 7" tablet market wouldn't make much sense, furthermore normally people get 10" tablets for different reasons than getting 7" tablets. While this is of course debatable, it would be more accurate to compare to up-and-coming 10" tablets like the new Tegra 4 tablets, which aren't slated to be released until Q3 2013 at least.
3. Screen-wise, I can't really comment since I don't have the XTZ yet (getting one on Thursday once it is released in my country). According to the reviews I read though, the colours are nice and sharp, and the screen has quite good viewing angles due to the gapless technology used in the screen. Quoted from androidpolice (http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/05/31/sony-xperia-tablet-z-review-a-surprisingly-good-tablet/):
4. It is possible Sony may include the white balance setting in Settings just like the Xperia Z. Other devs may of course implement this feature as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. I had believed in benchmarks before I used the N10 (and some chance with N7 also), Antutu and especially Quadrant are garbage. However, I still believe in the traditional benchmarks like Geekbench, Sunspider or BrowserMark (I don't use chrome, intead Ocean Browser and Dolphin which is not Google optimization and the browser benchmarks are superior). My friend bought the Tablet Z and it is somehow laggier than N10 and N7. I know we can blame the UI for it, but even it lauching apps, N7 and N10 are blazing fast.
In the real world performance, N10 (throttling fixed) > Tablet Z
3. Yes it's nice and sharp indeed, much better than XZ smartphone. The viewing angle is very good but still slightly worse than iPad 4 or N10. Texts are crisp, not as sharp as iPad 4 and N10 when comparing besides but it's satisfying when used stand alone.
Some extra opinions:
- In my country, 16GB 3G Tablet Z costs about $950 (with some stuff like external speakers and headphones which equivalent to ~$150), while 16GB N10 (shipped from other countries) costs $460
- The audio from speaker on Xperia Z is bad for a tablet, considering Youtube, movies are used frequently on tablets. The two front facing stereo speakers of N10 are not as good and Note 10.1 but still very inspiring.
- The lightweight is extremely lovable on Tablet Z. I felt a little bit hard when coming black to my not very heavy N10.
The screen is great. I was a little bit worried about it not being as high ppi as iPad/etc. I ordered it without seeing it.
I am completely happy with the screen. Colors, viewing angles are all very good. I even turned off the mobile Bravia engine.
If you are worried about the ppi/color anything, don't be. Screen is great.
hung2900 said:
1. I had believed in benchmarks before I used the N10 (and some chance with N7 also), Antutu and especially Quadrant are garbage. However, I still believe in the traditional benchmarks like Geekbench, Sunspider or BrowserMark (I don't use chrome, intead Ocean Browser and Dolphin which is not Google optimization and the browser benchmarks are superior). My friend bought the Tablet Z and it is somehow laggier than N10 and N7. I know we can blame the UI for it, but even it lauching apps, N7 and N10 are blazing fast.
In the real world performance, N10 (throttling fixed) > Tablet Z
3. Yes it's nice and sharp indeed, much better than XZ smartphone. The viewing angle is very good but still slightly worse than iPad 4 or N10. Texts are crisp, not as sharp as iPad 4 and N10 when comparing besides but it's satisfying when used stand alone.
Some extra opinions:
- In my country, 16GB 3G Tablet Z costs about $950 (with some stuff like external speakers and headphones which equivalent to ~$150), while 16GB N10 (shipped from other countries) costs $460
- The audio from speaker on Xperia Z is bad for a tablet, considering Youtube, movies are used frequently on tablets. The two front facing stereo speakers of N10 are not as good and Note 10.1 but still very inspiring.
- The lightweight is extremely lovable on Tablet Z. I felt a little bit hard when coming black to my not very heavy N10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me, I don't really look at benchmarks. They're after all synthetic. Even browser benchmarks are affected far more by the Javascript engine behind it than the hardware. Chrome runs terribly in Sunspider and the like, while the stock browser with the Nexus 10 runs very fast, benchmark-wise. However I would much rather use Chrome than the stock browser app any day because of its usability
As for UI, I'm going to take the Tablet Z for a spin before I get it, see how fluid (or not) it is. I'm most probably getting it unless there are showstopper bugs - Nexus 10 is not available in my country, and the Exynos 5 Dual is simply not powerful enough to power the screen imo.
I'll post a review of it if (once) I get it. Going to touch on some of the concerns I see here I'll probably draw some comparisons to the other tablets I've used as well (Asus TF201, Nexus 7, Xperia Tablet S). Granted, they're previous gen but they provide a point of comparison
ABT4 said:
The screen is great. I was a little bit worried about it not being as high ppi as iPad/etc. I ordered it without seeing it.
I am completely happy with the screen. Colors, viewing angles are all very good. I even turned off the mobile Bravia engine.
If you are worried about the ppi/color anything, don't be. Screen is great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did the same thing and I'm a little worried. June 6th release, this comment is making me more at ease though.
pandaball said:
For me, I don't really look at benchmarks. They're after all synthetic. Even browser benchmarks are affected far more by the Javascript engine behind it than the hardware. Chrome runs terribly in Sunspider and the like, while the stock browser with the Nexus 10 runs very fast, benchmark-wise. However I would much rather use Chrome than the stock browser app any day because of its usability
As for UI, I'm going to take the Tablet Z for a spin before I get it, see how fluid (or not) it is. I'm most probably getting it unless there are showstopper bugs - Nexus 10 is not available in my country, and the Exynos 5 Dual is simply not powerful enough to power the screen imo.
I'll post a review of it if (once) I get it. Going to touch on some of the concerns I see here I'll probably draw some comparisons to the other tablets I've used as well (Asus TF201, Nexus 7, Xperia Tablet S). Granted, they're previous gen but they provide a point of comparison
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm in the same boat. Nexus 10 16GB costs more than the latest 16GB iPad. After being blown away by everything about the tablet and how much better it is, imo, than the Nexus 10, it was a no brainer since it's the same price as the 16GB iPad. Plus I picked up a 64GB SD card and the total cost is still lower than a 32GB iPad... and I get a 80GB tablet instead. Can not wait for this to arrive.
s1lenz said:
Thanks for this, you bring up some excellent points. I'm going to take a wait-and-see approach to see if Franco or Faux will take any interest in this tablet and develop a kernel for it. Unfortunately, for that to happen I think the community is going to have to pool together some cash, like they did for the Oppo Find5...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm hoping the same. Franco's gamma and color tool did wonders for what I felt was a very washed out screen on the n4.
I think the screen on the xtz is pretty good but a little too warm. I'd pay good money for a screen calibration tool.
Zb134 said:
I'd pay good money for a screen calibration tool.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This, so much.
violet grays
I've seen 3 Tablet Z in a shop in Moscow, and the screen was the only issue which stopped me from buying one. The whites where slightly yellowish which I could get used to, but the grays were of purple tint!
I even made a side-by-side screen comparison between Sony Experia Tablet Z, Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 and iPad 4. I opened the same web page on every device and compared the colors as well as the text quality.
Samsung has a cooler white point, which means the whites were slightly bluish, the grays were also a little bit cool but ok. The text quality has been foreseeably lower than on other devices since Note 10.1 has lower resolution.
iPad is the best in terms of readability and color accuracy - white is quite neutral, gray is gray. The text is rendered very clean.
Sony Experia Tablet Z's white was noticeably more of yellow tint and the shades of gray were all slightly violet. In general, it looked like washed-out old picture. The text was crisp but I'd say has been not so comfortable for my eyes as on the iPad.
Moreover, one of 3 Sonys had more of violet hue than the other two! The salesperson whom I showed this difference told me it was a preproduction item just for demonstration, and the other two were for sale. Which also shows that the tablet really has this issue.
That was a big disappointment for me which prevented me from byuying the Tablet Z. I wish I know if there is a way to calibrate the tablet's screen.
the screen is stunning anyone who says other wise is being very petty. colours great sharp and very vibrant
ash6783 said:
the screen is stunning anyone who says other wise is being very petty. colours great sharp and very vibrant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Colours are great, sharp and very vibrant indeed.
But still there are problems I described above.