Related
I'm a Samsung fan (even with GPS and Froyo-gate) and have been a Captivate user for 6-7 months. I damn near have my mind set on the S II but that's until I saw the EVO 3D. That phone is niiicceee...
My question is, what's your favorite of the 2? Even though it's a a dual core Qualcom, isn't the EVO still A8 based while the Exynos is A9 so theoretically the S II should be a good percentage faster? The Mali400mp seems to be pretty beastly as well. How would you rate qHD vs SAMOLED+?
Lastly... what is the better advantage of the two: 3D camera capabilities vs NFC?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
qhd is just a resolution nothing else, it means 960x540 while galaxy s2 is 800*480
just another marketing crap tbh.
In terms of image quality, you will never be able to compare a proper oled to any lcd in the world, its just a different technology in a different league, since oled beats the crap out at every aspect, yes (including power consumption in sgs2 at least thats what ive read).
LCD since day 1 has not had any sucesss in image quality, it still stands behind CRT in many aspecs but 1, since its active matrix, the pixel static position helps lcd gain a better advantage at max res in sharpness over crt, and more luminance but thats just it.
OLED again beats lcd in every single aspect and if u like games, the oled 0.01ms pixel response time vs lcd top of the line 2.00ms (GTG) which actually means around 4-5ms real response time is just no competition, again in a whole different league, and no matter what other trolls around the forum try to tell you, yes even at 2ms(gtg) it blurrs like crap at 60fps in a 2d game or any game that u have to move ur camera angle often.
OLED
Ok, I am reading all of these posts and EVERYONE for some reason or another thinks the Lumia 920 will have the best screen "by far". I think this is pure speculation and Nokia has you believing it will be the best. The only thing I can see that changed from any other device is they say it now runs at 60hz or the refresh rate is 60 and you can use it with gloves on so its super sensitive (which actually could end up being a flaw because it will be very easy to accidentally launch an app since anything that touches the screen will do it)
Have you guys that are saying it IS the best ever used a HTC One X screen? That screen is currently the best screen on any smartphone and I have a hard time believing that an IPS display with nokia's clearblack technology will beat the 8X screen because the 8X will be using the same exact Super LCD 2 screen that is found on the One X just with a smaller size and higher PPI.
I have used just about every device currently on the market and I can honestly tell you that the reviewers that have reviewed the One X are not incorrect when they almost always point out that the screen is the best they have ever seen on a mobile device. When comparing a One X next to my IPS display on my Nexus 7, the colors on the One X just pop and it really makes that IPS look bad. Also streaming a 720p mkv file from my NAS, the One X display blows the Nexus 7 away and all the other phones I have with Super Amoled HD or Super Amoled Plus screens.
I just wanna know what makes the Lumia the best? I think we have to see it in person to claim it is "the best screen by far"
timgt said:
Ok, I am reading all of these posts and EVERYONE for some reason or another thinks the Lumia 920 will have the best screen "by far". I think this is pure speculation and Nokia has you believing it will be the best. The only thing I can see that changed from any other device is they say it now runs at 60hz or the refresh rate is 60 and you can use it with gloves on so its super sensitive (which actually could end up being a flaw because it will be very easy to accidentally launch an app since anything that touches the screen will do it)
Have you guys that are saying it IS the best ever used a HTC One X screen? That screen is currently the best screen on any smartphone and I have a hard time believing that an IPS display with nokia's clearblack technology will beat the 8X screen because the 8X will be using the same exact Super LCD 2 screen that is found on the One X just with a smaller size and higher PPI.
I have used just about every device currently on the market and I can honestly tell you that the reviewers that have reviewed the One X are not incorrect when they almost always point out that the screen is the best they have ever seen on a mobile device. When comparing a One X next to my IPS display on my Nexus 7, the colors on the One X just pop and it really makes that IPS look bad. Also streaming a 720p mkv file from my NAS, the One X display blows the Nexus 7 away and all the other phones I have with Super Amoled HD or Super Amoled Plus screens.
I just wanna know what makes the Lumia the best? I think we have to see it in person to claim it is "the best screen by far"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not only is the refresh rate higher removing motion blur (as much as you can), but it uses nokia clear black tech (look at the 800). On top of that it is the brightest screen on any mobile device (can be viewed in direct sunlight). Nokia screens rock even the 808 screen rocks and that has pathetic ppi as its Symbian so imagine what hd will look like.
lumpaywk said:
Not only is the refresh rate higher removing motion blur (as much as you can), but it uses nokia clear black tech (look at the 800). On top of that it is the brightest screen on any mobile device (can be viewed in direct sunlight). Nokia screens rock even the 808 screen rocks and that has pathetic ppi as its Symbian so imagine what hd will look like.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your statement about the brightness is incorrect. At max it is 600 nits (best case scenario), the motorola droid bionic is 635.6 nits so it is not the brightest screen on any mobile device. Also the HTC One X was over 500 nits anyway so the brightness argument is pretty irrelevant.
timgt said:
I think we have to see it in person to claim it is "the best screen by far"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This sums it up. We can't know if the 920 will have the better display or if the 8X will have the better display until we see both.
It's also quite funny that you complain about people claiming that a phone will have a better display than another when they haven't seen them, and then you go on to imply that the 8X will have the better display.
You state that the 920 has IPS as if that's a bad thing? And you base that entirely on the fact that the N7 has an IPS display and you don't like it? The N7 has a low quality IPS display, of course it doesn't look that impressive. If you knew anything about display tech you would know that high quality IPS displays are some of the best out there. Most high end monitors are IPS displays.
Sent from my HTC Sensation using xda app-developers app
The Janitor Mop said:
This sums it up. We can't know if the 920 will have the better display or if the 8X will have the better display until we see both.
It's also quite funny that you complain about people claiming that a phone will have a better display than another when they haven't seen them, and then you go on to imply that the 8X will have the better display.
You state that the 920 has IPS as if that's a bad thing? And you base that entirely on the fact that the N7 has an IPS display and you don't like it? The N7 has a low quality IPS display, of course it doesn't look that impressive. If you knew anything about display tech you would know that high quality IPS displays are some of the best out there. Most high end monitors are IPS displays.
Sent from my HTC Sensation using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't imply the 8X will have the better display, im just sick of reading all over the place that the 920 has the superior display from people that haven't even touched a One X. I would love to see the 920 have the best display but I really see the LCD 2 screen hard to beat. The only place it falls short is Amoled Black levels.
I know not all IPS displays are as crappy as the Nexus 7, My Ipad 3 has a very good looking screen but I still think it falls a little short compared to the screen the One X offers.
We will just have to wait and see, people should dismiss this claim of the 920 having the best display. Without tech sites being able to do a side by side comparison with both device in hand we can't claim WE know which has the best display.
timgt said:
Your statement about the brightness is incorrect. At max it is 600 nits (best case scenario), the motorola droid bionic is 635.6 nits so it is not the brightest screen on any mobile device. Also the HTC One X was over 500 nits anyway so the brightness argument is pretty irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know anything about the Droid Bionic tbf you may be correct there, I also am not saying for fact as you said you have to see them in the flesh. Its the same with any spec on an unreleased product. We go by what is reported and compare that to the next and draw conclusions from that and from all the evidence as I said above it is fair to sy the lumia will have a better screen.
"It's 25% brighter than the next brightest smartphone display on the market" quote from Nokia, as I said it may be wrong I am just going on what is available. Also though not the 25% claimed 500 is about 83.3% of 600, that's still quite a jump.
timgt said:
I didn't imply the 8X will have the better display, im just sick of reading all over the place that the 920 has the superior display from people that haven't even touched a One X. I would love to see the 920 have the best display but I really see the LCD 2 screen hard to beat. The only place it falls short is Amoled Black levels.
I know not all IPS displays are as crappy as the Nexus 7, My Ipad 3 has a very good looking screen but I still think it falls a little short compared to the screen the One X offers.
We will just have to wait and see, people should dismiss this claim of the 920 having the best display. Without tech sites being able to do a side by side comparison with both device in hand we can't claim WE know which has the best display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you are saying that the One X display is better than the Ipad 3 display? Come on While I really like the One X Super LCD 2 I have to give it to the iPad 3, I think it is just the most gorgeous display around atm, be it on phone or tablet...Too bad I cannot afford one, but I have used it quite a bit in my office and compared to One X, S3 etc. and I think they don't even come close, even though they are even better on paper, like more ppi and stuff. In the end I think it comes down to user experience and personal preference.
Regarding the Lumia 920 - I do think it will probably have a better display than One X, iphone 5, 8x, S3 w/e. You will see the difference in sunlight, where, as someone already mentioned, even the 808 stands out. Just wait and see. About the super sensitive stuff - you might have a point here, I hope it is not going to end up overly uber sensitive. That being said, I do love the fact that you can use gloves, since I hate the hassle that is talking on the phone while skiing/being on a lift. Can lead to serious gloves losses and is obviously annoying :cyclops:
falconyx said:
I do love the fact that you can use gloves, since I hate the hassle that is talking on the phone while skiing/being on a lift. Can lead to serious gloves losses and is obviously annoying :cyclops:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a real issue lol. Other issues include things like going sailing/kayaking etc when you want your phone in a sealed waterproof bag. Or hiking/walking. I am fat and lazy so non of these affect me but my mum does all of it and would also love the great camera and big battery once again because she does all of this.
Trolololo Nokia again. Screen of xperia P is around 780-800 nits (RGBW ftw). I highly doubt that the lumia's screen is over 1000 nits.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Fighting over things that all of you have never seen in person or touched. Nice.
I tried nokia c6, e7, n9, neo, iphone 4s, evo 3D i give the evo 3D for best performance but with respect to nokia not a day passed it restarted itself or had any sort of problem with apps even android in n9 was awesome, i don't think people are exagerating about the 920 and 820 release
louis.b said:
Fighting over things that all of you have never seen in person or touched. Nice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No but I have not seen the lumia but I have seen though I didn't get to play with the 8x and it was about on a par with the one x. I also have a lumia 800 with clear black and the diff it makes is amazing, even with the lower res the same images just pop of the screen. I know a lot of people don't like the artificialness of it like the same as not liking beats audio etc. However I have seen enough of nokia and htc and Samsung to be able to put forth an argument with the info we have. I may be wrong and I will be the first to say it didn't live up but you don't need to drive a Ferrari to know its better than an impreza.
I actually recently acquired a one x and I still like the LG hd nitro screen better. It's more crisp and colors are really nice. I also think that screen gave the iPhone retina display a run for its money.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
The iPhone screen and the One X screen are overatted. Sense 4.0 makes the One V screen look nice.
Not that I am saying the Lumia 920 will have the best screen or anything because judging by the videos, the 8x and One X screen does look better still. The point is that most high end devices have pretty nice screens and none blow the other away. That is just fanboy talk. They are all quite close except for the deformed iPhone 5 screen. No one wants to watch movies on a bookmark.
I think they all will be close with the 8x taking it provided HTC gets to sensify wp8. If not, the One X probably keeps the crown or maybe the Optimus G. That screen looks sharp in videos too.
Tomatoes8 said:
The iPhone screen and the One X screen are overatted. Sense 4.0 makes the One V screen look nice.
Not that I am saying the Lumia 920 will have the best screen or anything because judging by the videos, the 8x and One X screen does look better still. The point is that most high end devices have pretty nice screens and none blow the other away. That is just fanboy talk. They are all quite close except for the deformed iPhone 5 screen. No one wants to watch movies on a bookmark.
I think they all will be close with the 8x taking it provided HTC gets to sensify wp8. If not, the One X probably keeps the crown or maybe the Optimus G. That screen looks sharp in videos too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you mean with all this?
Wow people are arguing that the One X has a superior screen to IPS, when the One X screen is a FREAKIN IPS screen. HTC has given it a fancy SUperLCD2 name to differentiate but it is still an IPS screen. The other high-end type of LCD screen is PLS, which Samsung puts in its tablets. It's similar to IPS but is cheaper to make. There's nothing else. HTC hasn't developed some newfangled LCD technology. The top tier is all IPS, with different variations and quality.
Comparing the One X to the Nexus 7 is stupid since it is a budget IPS screen. This was known since the beginning when DisplayMate ran tests that showed it clipped a lot of lower black shades. The One X ain't perfect either. It is overly warm and personally as a previous owner of the One X, I was not impressed by the contrast, viewing angles, nor the warm and sleepy look. The iPhone 5 and the iPad 3 have the best and most color-corrected displays on mobile right now. I know there will be many screaming bloody murder, and in fact there already are people doing so, that an Apple product is ever mentioned in a good light. The ability to reason escaped them long ago.
I can tell the Lumia 920 has a better display than the One X. How is that you say? Through many many youtube videos. People are gonna go blah blah you can't compare screens through a youtube video or that my screen sucks and it will never be able to showcase a better display. This thinking is flawed since experience shows to be otherwise and evety screen I've seen on youtube looks almost the same in real life. The One X looks warm and sleepy with average contrast on my computer. It was the same way when I got it in the mail and booted it up. The Lumia 900 has these awful blue live tiles on youtube videos, because it's Nokia's AMOLED tech and the colors are all wack. Same thing confirmed on literally half a dozen Lumia 900 models displayed at my local AT&T store. The iPhone 5 and iPad 3 screen are just as good in person as youtube videos suggest. Youtube videos will exaggerate any color imbalances or lack of sharpness and general screen quality. You need to look for the high quality hands-on videos, not the crappy blurry amateur porn looking ones with strange hues.
That's how I can tell the Lumia 920 is better than the 8X screen. The videos of the Lumia 920 make the colors look far more neutral, more colorful and bright, and much higher contrast and even looking. The 8X has the same screen as the One X, which doesn't have the same contrast, has a warmer and sleepier look (like the cinema mode on a TV), and just isn't as punchy.
katamari201 said:
Wow people are arguing that the One X has a superior screen to IPS, when the One X screen is a FREAKIN IPS screen. HTC has given it a fancy SUperLCD2 name to differentiate but it is still an IPS screen. The other high-end type of LCD screen is PLS, which Samsung puts in its tablets. It's similar to IPS but is cheaper to make. There's nothing else. HTC hasn't developed some newfangled LCD technology. The top tier is all IPS, with different variations and quality.
Comparing the One X to the Nexus 7 is stupid since it is a budget IPS screen. This was known since the beginning when DisplayMate ran tests that showed it clipped a lot of lower black shades. The One X ain't perfect either. It is overly warm and personally as a previous owner of the One X, I was not impressed by the contrast, viewing angles, nor the warm and sleepy look. The iPhone 5 and the iPad 3 have the best and most color-corrected displays on mobile right now. I know there will be many screaming bloody murder, and in fact there already are people doing so, that an Apple product is ever mentioned in a good light. The ability to reason escaped them long ago.
I can tell the Lumia 920 has a better display than the One X. How is that you say? Through many many youtube videos. People are gonna go blah blah you can't compare screens through a youtube video or that my screen sucks and it will never be able to showcase a better display. This thinking is flawed since experience shows to be otherwise and evety screen I've seen on youtube looks almost the same in real life. The One X looks warm and sleepy with average contrast on my computer. It was the same way when I got it in the mail and booted it up. The Lumia 900 has these awful blue live tiles on youtube videos, because it's Nokia's AMOLED tech and the colors are all wack. Same thing confirmed on literally half a dozen Lumia 900 models displayed at my local AT&T store. The iPhone 5 and iPad 3 screen are just as good in person as youtube videos suggest. Youtube videos will exaggerate any color imbalances or lack of sharpness and general screen quality. You need to look for the high quality hands-on videos, not the crappy blurry amateur porn looking ones with strange hues.
That's how I can tell the Lumia 920 is better than the 8X screen. The videos of the Lumia 920 make the colors look far more neutral, more colorful and bright, and much higher contrast and even looking. The 8X has the same screen as the One X, which doesn't have the same contrast, has a warmer and sleepier look (like the cinema mode on a TV), and just isn't as punchy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone is on crack. Like I said before, no matter how sharp the iPhone 5 display is, it loses on shape and a pathetic width alone. It makes everything look tall and skinny or really short and wide unless you zoom. That is an automatic fail.
Tomatoes8 said:
Someone is on crack. Like I said before, no matter how sharp the iPhone 5 display is, it loses on shape and a pathetic width alone. It makes everything look tall and skinny or really short and wide unless you zoom. That is an automatic fail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't get why you think this as it has just changes to a 16x9 aspect ratio, This is the same as most screens on new phones 720x1280 i think its the same as the one x though don't quote me on that but it is deffo the same as the upcoming htc 8x. I hate the iPhone i think its stupidly over priced over hyped and dull, but, the screen is still really nice though i found that the blacks are really grey.
lumpaywk said:
I don't get why you think this as it has just changes to a 16x9 aspect ratio, This is the same as most screens on new phones 720x1280 i think its the same as the one x though don't quote me on that but it is deffo the same as the upcoming htc 8x. I hate the iPhone i think its stupidly over priced over hyped and dull, but, the screen is still really nice though i found that the blacks are really grey.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has the same aspect ratio as the One X but 16.9 aspect ratio doesn't work for small screens. And since the iPhone 5 screen is no wider and only taller than their old 3.5 inch screen, they should have kept the 4:3 aspect ratio. The iPad uses 4:3 because that is the proper aspect ratio for IOS. The iPhone 5 screen is ugly as hell and just does not fit. It is the equivalent of using one of those skinny or fat mirrors at an amusent park as the mirror in your bathroom. It doesn't matter how nice the glass is it is still a circus mirror.
Tomatoes8 said:
It has the same aspect ratio as the One X but 16.9 aspect ratio doesn't work for small screens. And since the iPhone 5 screen is no wider and only taller than their old 3.5 inch screen, they should have kept the 4:3 aspect ratio. The iPad uses 4:3 because that is the proper aspect ratio for IOS. The iPhone 5 screen is ugly as hell and just does not fit. It is the equivalent of using one of those skinny or fat mirrors at an amusent park as the mirror in your bathroom. It doesn't matter how nice the glass is it is still a circus mirror.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
? If you have a 4:3 aspect ratio with a 1280x720 resolution, you would have rectangular pixels, very rectangular. In fact, almost every phone with such a resolution has rectangular pixels with the exception of the new iphone whose pixels are as close to properly squared as you're going to find. That means everything on the new iphone is properly proportioned, whereas on most phones, images are slightly widened in portrait and lengthened in landscape.
Hello everyone, nokia lumia 920 has the best screen of the new iPhone5?
I am interested in the details of the display.
SuperXDADev said:
Hello everyone, nokia lumia 920 has the best screen of the new iPhone5?
I am interested in the details of the display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iPhone screen is no longer the best anymore. There are a lot of phones at this point has higher PPI than iPhone. In this case, Lumia 920 has more advanced technologies than iPhone. Fast refresh rate (the only 1 that has 60Mhz refresh rate screen), high PPI, ClearBlack for easy reading outside, IPS panel, and also super sensitivity.
spincel said:
iPhone screen is no longer the best anymore. There are a lot of phones at this point has higher PPI than iPhone. In this case, Lumia 920 has more advanced technologies than iPhone. Fast refresh rate (the only 1 that has 60Mhz refresh rate screen), high PPI, ClearBlack for easy reading outside, IPS panel, and also super sensitivity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Display of Lumia 920 is better of iphone5 in the details?
yes, i'm not sure what other details you want, but in every technical way, the l920's screen is better than the iphone 5. most newer android phones are better in many ways as well.
here's the ways its better:
higher pixel density (text is sharper, images are crisper)
higher refresh rate (images move smoother)
clearblack display (easier to read in sunlight)
supersensitive touch (can use with gloves, fingernails, or anything else that isn't your finger, as well as your finger)
spincel said:
iPhone screen is no longer the best anymore. There are a lot of phones at this point has higher PPI than iPhone. In this case, Lumia 920 has more advanced technologies than iPhone. Fast refresh rate (the only 1 that has 60Mhz refresh rate screen), high PPI, ClearBlack for easy reading outside, IPS panel, and also super sensitivity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a 60Hz display and pretty much every modern smartphone has a 60Hz screen. It's just marketing! As for Clearblack that was for the OLED screen in the 900, this one is IPS and is called PureMotion HD +
As for the screen quality itself I've found the colours are pretty damn good. Waiting for Display Mate to do their analysis though.
PyroCF said:
It's a 60Hz display and pretty much every modern smartphone has a 60Hz screen. It's just marketing! As for Clearblack that was for the OLED screen in the 900, this one is IPS and is called PureMotion HD +
As for the screen quality itself I've found the colours are pretty damn good. Waiting for Display Mate to do their analysis though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had read somewhere that they had gotten it to 23Hz? I may be wrong though.
They polarized (a layer? of) the screen so that it's easier to read in sunlight.
Also, although it's called PureMotion HD+ and they've dropped the ClearBlack name, they still reference to that type of display technology for darker blacks in comparison to other SLCD2 technologies (ex. HTC 8x/One X)
@OP, just recapping, but....
Better than iPhone because:
Bigger screen (more opinion than anything)
Higher pixel density (332 ppi vs iPhone 5's 326)
Ability to use screen with gloves (i.e. skin contact not required to operate screen)
The screen is essentially better in every way in comparison to the iPhone 5 other than the lamination that the iPhone has (i.e. the screen appears much closer to the surface of the glass itself when compared to the Lumia 920's). If you're REALLY looking into great screens, you should just go to Verizon and pick up their Droid DNA.
oceansaber said:
I had read somewhere that they had gotten it to 23Hz? I may be wrong though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry but do you even understand screen refresh rates? 23Hz would be appalling by anyone's standards.
The higher, the better for future reference!
PyroCF said:
I'm sorry but do you even understand screen refresh rates? 23Hz would be appalling by anyone's standards.
The higher, the better for future reference!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry thinking ms. My bad. I remember something about the PureMotion HD+ referring to having the smallest delay between touch and response. I don't know where, but there's a couple articles and stuff referencing it haha. It supposedly has the fastest response times of any screen for a smartphone on the market.
actually the lumia 920 is the first smartphone with a 60hz refresh rate and its response time is in the single digits
just check out some of the more detailed/reputable reviews and it will give you a compare of other brands, i can't recall which ones exactly as i read them in passing
and clearblack is nokias name for their polarization filter on screens
PyroCF said:
It's a 60Hz display and pretty much every modern smartphone has a 60Hz screen. It's just marketing! As for Clearblack that was for the OLED screen in the 900, this one is IPS and is called PureMotion HD +
As for the screen quality itself I've found the colours are pretty damn good. Waiting for Display Mate to do their analysis though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, I don't think every smartphone has 60Hz screen. As for the name, Nokia combine those techs into one and called it PureMotion HD+, which consists of:
1. WXGA resolution
2. IPS LCD with 60Hz refresh
3. ClearBlack technology for viewing outdoor
4. High PPI
5. Super sensitivity touch
So if you take all of them and combine them all, it is PureMotion HD+.
Every smartphone other than the Lumia 920 has a 30Hz screen. The 920 is the first phone with a 60Hz screen.
Clearblack is a combination of a polarizing layer to reduce glare and improve visibility in sunlight and also (iirc) they are also using an optically bonded stack, fuzing the digitizer to the cover glass.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express
Also iphone5 have a 30hz panel display?
Inviato dal mio Galaxy Nexus con Tapatalk 2
Misleading title !
adiliyo said:
Every smartphone other than the Lumia 920 has a 30Hz screen. The 920 is the first phone with a 60Hz screen.
Clearblack is a combination of a polarizing layer to reduce glare and improve visibility in sunlight and also (iirc) they are also using an optically bonded stack, fuzing the digitizer to the cover glass.
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you cite this please? This would mean every other phone would look like it's running at 30fps which you would notice. Also clear black was marketing for nokias oled screens.
PyroCF said:
Also clear black was marketing for nokias oled screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and that's the phrase they marketed because that was all they had that was unique to them in the screen department. Now, they use Puremotion HD+, which includes ClearBlack along with a number of other technologies/features, as noted above. Nokia's own developer 920 spec page lists "ClearBlack" in both the description and the list of display technologies.
The screen is simply amazing. It puts any other smartphone screen I have seen to shame in actual real world usage.
This is the first phone I have owned that I can read the screen in the sun, with my sunglasses on. Amazing.
The viewing angles are incredible, the colors are bright and vibrant but not as saturated as AMOLED, and not as dull and lifeless as HTC Screens.
crawlgsx said:
The screen is simply amazing. It puts any other smartphone screen I have seen to shame in actual real world usage.
This is the first phone I have owned that I can read the screen in the sun, with my sunglasses on. Amazing.
The viewing angles are incredible, the colors are bright and vibrant but not as saturated as AMOLED, and not as dull and lifeless as HTC Screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny you mention this because coming from a Dell Venue Pro with an amoled screen that I've used for a year and half, I immediately noticed the terribly dull colors of my 920 screen. Now that I've used my 920 for a few days, I booted up my DVP for giggles and I couldn't help but notice how really overly saturated the colors were! I am truly enjoying my 920's screen as I think it is a good blend between SLCD and Amoled and outdoor viewing really kicks butt on this screen.
The source is from here http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/11/16/how-nokia-gave-the-lumia-920-the-worlds-fastest-screen/ which cites Nokia's Senior Technology Manager. The main take away from this is that the L920 LCD screen has a 9ms pixel response time while others on average is about 23ms. There is no mention of iPhone so we don't know what response time of iPhone screen is.
This is not about 60Hz vs 30Hz. It is about pure pixel response time which is critical in display moving objects in video of games. For comparison, your typical PC desktop LCD monitor need to have < 5ms response time to be comfortable for playing games. 23ms response time is only good for reading emails.
To recap, Nokia's screen has better pixel density than iPhone's retina display. Higher resolution than iPhone5. Maybe faster pixel response time and higher contrast than iPhone (we don't know until someone benchmarked it). Tradditionally, iPhone screens have very high color accuracy. We don't know what Nokia screen has.
I see so much hate for the iPhone here, actually iPhone screen is pretty good they both have 60hz, Lumia has a little higher PPI(but not noticeable) and can be used with gloves, iPhone in its own side has the in cell technology that take away the touch panel and implement it directly in, igzo technology that reduce battery usage.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
batna.antab said:
I see so much hate for the iPhone here, actually iPhone screen is pretty good they both have 60hz, Lumia has a little higher PPI(but not noticeable) and can be used with gloves, iPhone in its own side has the in cell technology that take away the touch panel and implement it directly in, igzo technology that reduce battery usage.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is nothing but fan boys citing from their side of marketing BS. I mean both sides. For example, you made it like iPhone5 invented in panel touch implementation. I'm not so sure. Samsung did it with its Super AMOLED Plus screen about two years ago to reduce the screen thickness and sun reflection. Apple probably just re-invented (like many of its claims) for LCD panels.
I just sold my transformer prime infinity...and coming from that, im disappointed with the screen. How could a lower resolution screen on the prime look sharper than the one on the nexus?
Well I was just looking around here and I don't have a Nexus 10. I got a Galaxy Note 10.1 and from my experience the picture matters a lot.
I mean there are a lot of wallpaper sites with ultra HD and optimized wallpapers for retina display, but the same resolution is not always the same sharpness. some are crappy cropped or zoomed.
Use quickpic to set your background picture. The stock gallery app sometimes crops the pictures false.
And pictures with a resolution below the maximum resolution will always look a bit crappy. that means that when you are using a fullHD picture, which was nice for transformer prime, it can look less sharp on a display with higher resolution like nexus 10
I too come from Prime and there is no contest, this screen is sharper than Prime by miles.
How stuff looks will depend on what you are seeing.
If you have set regular wallpaper, it will look all blurry thanks to resolution. Even so called HD wallpapers will look blurry on this. You need to go search for wallpapers for MacBook Pro retina and use those on this tablet using quickpic. None of the apps from Android market have good wallpapers that are having native resolution of this tablet.
Text is sharp and crisp on this.
Most arcade games are not optimised for this screen and look terrible or blurry. That is not screen's fault.
Desktop web pages look nice full and crisp. So only real issue of lack of sharpness comes into picture when the content is not ready for screen. That includes apps, images and games.
I also come from Prime.
I wouldn't say the Prime screen looks sharper than the Nexus 10. Reading text on the N10, for example, the resolution is really amazing, very nice on the Nexus 10.
The colors and brightness and blacks is a different story. The Prime had those 3 much nicer than the Nexus 10. I loved playing Marble Blast on the Prime, the graphics looked amazingly vivid. On the Nexus 10 they appear as meh.
Its the prime infinity. Drastic difference. What a shame. Gonna put the nex up 4sale.
suzook said:
I just sold my transformer prime...and coming from that, im disappointed with the screen. How could a lower resolution screen on the prime look sharper than the one on the nexus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's mainly because a lot of apps and mobile sites and such aren't made for the resolution. It's made for a smaller resolution, so to make up for that, the apps, mobile sites, and whatever else are all upscaled to fit the 2560x1600 resolution. While upscaling allows you to view things bigger, it will also make everything else a slightly blurry. There are upscaling algorithms to make it look better, but basically it's impossible to make upscaled images look as good as a native 2560x1600 image.
A 720p 10" screen (Note 10.1) will show a 720p video the cleanest because the video outputs a ratio of exactly 1:1 pixels.
A 1080p 10" screen (TF prime) will show a 720p video a bit blurrier because the video outputs a ratio of 2.25:1 pixels.
A 1440p 10" screen (N10) will show a 720p video the blurriest because the video outputs a ratio of 4:1 pixels. (I know the N10 has a 1600p screen, it's just to make calculations slightly easier)
Now when using a 1080p video, a 720p screen will show no improvement because the screen can't output those extra pixels.
When using a 1080p screen, the screen will look sharper than that 720p screen because you have more information. Consider watching TV of a 10x10 resolution vs 1920x1080 resolution. The 1920x1080p resolution will look far better
Once again, the 1440p will look slightly blurry.
Now when you use a 1440p video, you can probably guess which screen will output that video the cleanest.
So basically, this high resolution thing is good mainly for texts as of right now since nothing is really optimized for a screen beyond 1080p.
Anyone who thinks its possible for a much lower resolution screen to be sharper is a fool. This screen is absolutely dazzling. Though content displayed is obviously going to have an affect.
And just to shove some numbers in your face:
N10 - 300.24 PPI (2560x1600 @ 10.055") 4,096,000 pixels (78% MORE)
Prime Infinity - 226.42 PPI (1920x1200 @ 10") 2,304,000 pixels
That's a huge difference.
404 ERROR said:
It's mainly because a lot of apps and mobile sites and such aren't made for the resolution. It's made for a smaller resolution, so to make up for that, the apps, mobile sites, and whatever else are all upscaled to fit the 2560x1600 resolution. While upscaling allows you to view things bigger, it will also make everything else a slightly blurry. There are upscaling algorithms to make it look better, but basically it's impossible to make upscaled images look as good as a native 2560x1600 image.
A 720p 10" screen (Note 10.1) will show a 720p video the cleanest because the video outputs a ratio of exactly 1:1 pixels.
A 1080p 10" screen (TF prime) will show a 720p video a bit blurrier because the video outputs a ratio of 2.25:1 pixels.
A 1440p 10" screen (N10) will show a 720p video the blurriest because the video outputs a ratio of 4:1 pixels. (I know the N10 has a 1600p screen, it's just to make calculations slightly easier)
Now when using a 1080p video, a 720p screen will show no improvement because the screen can't output those extra pixels.
When using a 1080p screen, the screen will look sharper than that 720p screen because you have more information. Consider watching TV of a 10x10 resolution vs 1920x1080 resolution. The 1920x1080p resolution will look far better
Once again, the 1440p will look slightly blurry.
Now when you use a 1440p video, you can probably guess which screen will output that video the cleanest.
So basically, this high resolution thing is good mainly for texts as of right now since nothing is really optimized for a screen beyond 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually have to disagree with you a little bit here. 720p video should look just as good on the Nexus 10 as it does on the Note 10.1. 1280x800 times 2 is 2560x1600. Because of that each pixel of a 720p video will take up exactly 4 pixels on the Nexus 10; however those 4 pixels on the N10 are the same area that would be a single pixel on the Note 10.1. This is a clean ratio. On the TF700 you got to 1920x1200 which is 1.5 times 1280x800. This is not a whole ratio and means that pixels of a 720p video will take up between 1 and 4 pixels on the TF700 display (determined by a fancy algorithm for scaling images).
The Nexus 10 playing 1080p video should have about the same blurriness as the TF700 playing 720p video.
Nitemare3219 said:
Anyone who thinks its possible for a much lower resolution screen to be sharper is a fool. This screen is absolutely dazzling. Though content displayed is obviously going to have an affect.
And just to shove some numbers in your face:
N10 - 300.24 PPI (2560x1600 @ 10.055") 4,096,000 pixels (78% MORE)
Prime Infinity - 226.42 PPI (1920x1200 @ 10") 2,304,000 pixels
That's a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol as a former owner of both (returned Prime C1 for 700 a C6 then returned that, and I started the thread in Prime forums for users who Asus lost our first mailed GPS dongles)- your fooling yourself or you got a N10 with a bad screen
Sent from my SCH-I535 using XDA
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can most likely blame that on googles new font rendering in 4.2. They turned down the font hinting a lot. It would be nice if it was configureable like in Linux. It the same way on the galaxy nexus and nexus 7 in 4.2.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
The problem with this screen is calibration and black levels.
Colors are extremely washed, red is a poor red, same with blue. This totally kills the screen. If you compare this with ipad screen, you will cry. Not because of viewing angles, not because of brightness, because of colours. Google was really smart when they decided not to calibrate their screens, same with nexus 4, while other OEMs take care of this thing deeply.
And black, despite numbers of the reviews, its quite poor, mostly because every single unit has light bleed (some with a hard mess, others this problem is smaller)
As a result, a top screen with such a poor implementation. This could be best screen in an tablet ever, and now it is a mediocre one, with many pixels, but nothing else. And it's a ****ing software issue, thats so sad.
Straf said:
And it's a ****ing software issue, thats so sad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
light bleed is not a software issue
Techie2012 said:
light bleed is not a software issue
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, meant the calibration thing, it's about software. Black thing is because a bad manufacturing process, probably because of low price tag., or crappy manufacturers.
blackhand1001 said:
You can most likely blame that on googles new font rendering in 4.2. They turned down the font hinting a lot. It would be nice if it was configureable like in Linux. It the same way on the galaxy nexus and nexus 7 in 4.2.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow...that blows. Maybe we need a 4.1 ROM??
I saw light bleed as soon as I turned my N10, but that's not the reason I just called to return it -- it was the uneven brightness. The top 1/2 inch of the screen is noticeably darker than the rest of it -- not visible when watching a movie or playing games, but very distracting when surfing and reading books, especially in portrait mode.
Since I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue, I'm hopeful the replacement will be better.
Yep, I completely agree with one of the previous posters, this is definetly a black level issue. I put the iPad with a Retina Display right against a Nexus 10 both playing the same 1080i MKV. The iPad clearly won.
I still like the Nexus 10 a lot and I find it very comfortable to use because of how thin it is and how light it is, but to improve the product I think Google missed it some here. They could lowered the resolution considerably (1920 x 1080 is more than fine), improved on black level, and used the same processor. The lower resolution would have allowed that processor to scream since it wouldn't have been as taxed to interpolate so many pixels.
I don't know if it is a software issue or not, but if it is I really hope Google releases a fix. If there was a way to adjust Gamma or Contrast it might help considerably.
suzook said:
Did you have a prime to compare it to? Sorry, but text IS crisper on the prime. I see it with my 20/20 eyes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's no way on earth text (or other computer generated content like the UI and icons) will look better on a 147PPI display (Prime) vs. 224PPI (TF700) or 300PPI (N10). The reason is as 404 Error did a great job of explaining is that text is a 1:1 match pixel wise; the more pixels the sharper the image. Photos and videos display even the clearest content over multiple pixels so the advantage of a higher PPI becomes less pronounced. And the human eye (even yours) can't resolve sharpness over 229PPI beyond 15". So, your 20/20 eyes are decieving you. The N10 has less contrast and isn't as bright as older displays so that might be what you're reacting to.
Straf said:
This could be best screen in an tablet ever, and now it is a mediocre one,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well lets hope this guy will change that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ9H-TtObBY
tacitust said:
I saw light bleed as soon as I turned my N10, but that's not the reason I just called to return it -- it was the uneven brightness. The top 1/2 inch of the screen is noticeably darker than the rest of it -- not visible when watching a movie or playing games, but very distracting when surfing and reading books, especially in portrait mode.
Since I haven't seen anyone else complain about this issue, I'm hopeful the replacement will be better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine has this problem and so do at least a few others. See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2007676
I'm still debating if it annoys me enough to justify an exchange.
Hey guys this is a detailed list, the Xperia Z was just announced so going of GSMarena specs, if there are any errors plz correct the list, thanks!
Nexus 10
Higher resolution
Higher PPI
Wi-Fi Direct?
Direct updates
Stock Android
More Ergonomic? (rubber rounded back)
Xperia z tab
LTE/4G
Lighter
Thinner
Premium Design
Dust proof
Water proof
S-Force surround sound
microSD
Wi-Fi hotpot
Infrared port
Blutooth 4.0
8mp camera
LED flash
2.2 front camera
cyprusx said:
Hey guys this is a detailed list, the Xperia Z was just announced so going of GSMarena specs, if there are any errors plz correct the list, thanks!
Nexus 10
Higher resolution
Higher PPI
Wi-Fi Direct?
Direct updates
Stock Android
More Ergonomic? (rubber rounded back)
Xperia z tab
LTE/4G
Lighter
Thinner
Premium Design
Dust proof
Water proof
S-Force surround sound
microSD
Wi-Fi hotpot
Infrared port
Blutooth 4.0
8mp camera
LED flash
2.2 front camera
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Xperia Z for me please!
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Will have better colors on the Z tablet
I don't think the price will be the same :fingers-crossed: and it's not gonna get updated that fast
cyprusx said:
Hey guys this is a detailed list, the Xperia Z was just announced so going of GSMarena specs, if there are any errors plz correct the list, thanks!
Nexus 10
Higher resolution
Higher PPI
Wi-Fi Direct?
Direct updates
Stock Android
More Ergonomic? (rubber rounded back)
Xperia z tab
LTE/4G
Lighter
Thinner
Premium Design
Dust proof
Water proof
S-Force surround sound
microSD
Wi-Fi hotpot
Infrared port
Blutooth 4.0
8mp camera
LED flash
2.2 front camera
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
N10 has LED flash as well, and 4.0 bluetooth.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
The resolution on the XZ is better than the N10 because it's more practical. At 10+ inches away you won't see the difference in PPI between the two displays. And the lower resolution (but still FHD) display will use less CPU/GPU power and battery. Speaking of battery, 6,000 mAh is pretty small for a 10.1" tablet with a S4 Pro CPU and FHD display. That could be the XZ's Achilles Heal. The rest of the specs are indeed impressive.
Stock Android and stock Nexus are so good and at such a low price that they will keep me happy whilst I receive the timely Android updates
Naturally, a newer tablet will be better than an older tablet at least hardware wise or else it wouldn't sell.
That said, the Xperia Tablet Z will probably do better than the Nexus 10 in probably almost all aspects except development, text clarity, and possibly line-out (headphone) sound quality. Image clarity and such is much better suited for a 1080p screen unless there is a sudden surge and revolution of 1440p+ displays in this coming year.
ady_seray said:
N10 has LED flash as well, and 4.0 bluetooth.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to numerous sources and GSMarena the nexus 10 has 3.0
If I need 4G/LTE, I'll just tether it to my Verizon phone I already have.
Otherwise, I see nothing in that list which would cause me to jump ship or even give a second thought about.
More than happy with the design and engineering on the N10.
404 ERROR said:
Naturally, a newer tablet will be better than an older tablet at least hardware wise or else it wouldn't sell.
That said, the Xperia Tablet Z will probably do better than the Nexus 10 in probably almost all aspects except development, text clarity, and possibly line-out (headphone) sound quality. Image clarity and such is much better suited for a 1080p screen unless there is a sudden surge and revolution of 1440p+ displays in this coming year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a similar debate about the value of PPI going on in the DNA forums. It matters less than you think. This is from that discussion...
BarryH_GEG said:
The biggest discussion point for newer devices like the N10 and now the DNA/Butterfly are their awesome displays. The thing people lose sight of (no pun intended) is that the human eye is only capable of processing and resolving images at a certain level. Any detail beyond that level is literally wasted. The 20/20 human eye has a maximum visual acuity of 1 arcminute. That is, two points must subtend an angle greater than 1 arcminute in order for a 20/20 eye to resolve the two points. What this means for displays is that pixels must have an angular subtense of 1 arcminute or greater in order for your eye to resolve the detail in the content. Detail below 1 arcminute isn't perceived by the human eye any differently whether a display has 267 PPI or 441 PPI. This is the reason Apple landed on the resolution they did hence the name "retina display." For example, the N2 has an arcminute subtense of 1.073 arcminutes which is nearly perfect and it has a PPI of 267. The DNA has an acrminute subtense of .66 and PPI of 441 which is a waste because anything below "1" can't be resolved by the human eye.
So super high definition displays are more a marketing gimmick, draw more CPU power, and drain the battery faster with the end result being your eyes won't notice any difference. I don't know what the exact numbers are for the Note and N10 but at 147 PPI the Note's above 1 arcminute and at 299 PPI the N10's below it. So you'll notice a difference on text and CGI (but not images and video) but it's not as pronounced as some people here have said unless they have super-human vision. And with the new fixation on resolution things like brightness, contrast, and color accuracy get swept under the rug because all people are focusing on is a PPI count rather than the actual quality of the display. In those areas the Note’s display outperforms the N10’s. And the 1080P display on the DNA isn’t as good in those areas as the 720P display on the One X it's supposedly better than. Remember that when you're salivating over a 441 PPI 1080P smartphone that’s going to be hyped to death this year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
orangechoochoo said:
I bet if the Note2 had a 1080 screen owners would brag about it instead of saying that you can't tell the difference. If we cannot discern the difference between 720 and 1080 way is the S4 and other phones coming out with 1080 since it makes no difference?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BarryH_GEG said:
You realize that with the human eye being the lowest common denominator the selection of PPI is being done ass backwards? Deciding on the optimum PPI for any given device should be an arithmatec equation; not manufacturers arbitrarily pulling numbers our of thier butts to out-feature each other. The above posts that talk about what the human eye can process are irrefutable fact. With an arcminute of "1" ideal for the human eye to process detail, the manufacturers should pick the lowest PPI that acheives "1" arcminute at 10-12" away which is the typical distance a smartphone is viewed. Why the lowest? Because the higher the PPI the bigger the drain on the battery, GPU, and CPU. And why reduce the performance of a device when the end result is the human eye can't process the additional detail being provided anyway? In addition, to achieve higher PPI, displays are suffering in brightness, contrast, and color reproduction. But nobody cares because they get to tell their friends "look, I've got a 1080P display!" Based on the numbers, outside of PPI, the One X has a better display than the DNA. It wouldn't surprise me if the same thing happened between the SGS3's 720P display and the SGS4's 1080P display (unless SAMOLED scales differently). In the end none of this matters because whether it makes sense or not we're all going to end up with 1080P displays one way or the other because that's where manufacturer's marketing is taking us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And this is a good article explaining why pics and videos won't seem any sharper on a 720P, 1080P, or the N10's unique resolution display. And everything gets upscaled on the N10 which doesn't help with detail and image quality.
For most people, though, it won't matter. Photos are inherently fuzzy, so it won’t matter whether they’re viewed on a 1920×1080 or 1280×720 smartphone display; you’ll still see their imperfections. "Even the tiniest image detail in a photograph is always spread over more than one pixel," Dr. Soneira explained in a follow-up e-mail. "The image detail is never perfectly aligned with the pixel structure of the display." Videos are even worse: not only are they fuzzy like photographs, but the pictures are constantly moving. Even if the images were sharp, the human brain couldn’t zero in on content that’s appearing for only a fraction of a second on such a small display. "For ordinary viewing of videos, 1920×1080 is really not going to make a visual difference," adds Dr. Soneira.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/1080p-on-a-smartphone-screencan-it-possibly-matter/
I skimmed through your post and I apologize beforehand if I'm missing some nuances in your post, but I think you misread my post completely. The only thing that can really make use of a 1440p screen at this moment is text which is why I mentioned "text clarity." It is also why I said, if there is a sudden surge of 1440p displays, the N10's high resolution will be better than 1080p. This is simply because 1080p displays will be considered old tech and designers and such will move on to support 1440p displays. The chances of 1440p being adopted to be the standard this year is probably 0%.
I never said it mattered. In fact I always thought PPI is a gimmick and will always be a gimmick beyond 220ish.
Also, just to put it out there, I maintain a theme to up-res the icons on the N10 so those icons don't get upscaled; I'm pretty sure I know what drawbacks there are with having such a high resolution screen.
Another thing - you talk about image quality, but you quote someone talking about photos. Things that are drawn on a computer will be clearer than a photo by a long shot. Those types of images can take advantage of such a high resolution screen. Photography on the other hand really doesn't matter what resolution you view it on for the reason you quoted.
404 ERROR said:
The only thing that can really make use of a 1440p screen at this moment is text.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just threw that info out there because I thought people would find it interesting; it wasn't directed at you per se. And at 10" away text won't look any better on the N10 than it would on the XZ. And that has nothing to do with the display's themselves, it's all about why the human eye can discern. As an example, at that distance, text looks no worse on the N2's 720P display than it does on the DNA's 1080P display based solely on the N2's ability to achieve a subtense of 1 arcmiture at 267PPI. Only if the N10's display is closer to 1 arcminute (below it doesn't matter) than the NZ's would you notice a difference. Now if you hold it 5" away or look at it under a microscope you'll see a difference.
BarryH_GEG said:
I just threw that info out there because I thought people would find it interesting; it wasn't directed at you per se. And at 10" away text won't look any better on the N10 than it would on the XZ. And that has nothing to do with the display's themselves, it's all about why the human eye can discern. As an example, at that distance, text looks no worse on the N2's 720P display than it does on the DNA's 1080P display based solely on the N2's ability to achieve a subtense of 1 arcmiture at 267PPI. Only if the N10's display is closer to 1 arcminute (below it doesn't matter) than the NZ's would you notice a difference. Now if you hold it 5" away or look at it under a microscope you'll see a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right in that if you hold it 10" away you won't see a difference. Unfortunately not all people do and there will always be people who can discern that difference.
I am also considering the Xperia Z tablet against the Nexus 10, here's a better comparison (taken from GSMArena).
Nexus 10
General 2G Network N/A
SIM No
Body Dimensions 263.9 x 177.6 x 8.9 mm (10.39 x 6.99 x 0.35 in)
Weight 603 g (1.33 lb)
Display Type Super PLS TFT capacitive touchscreen, 16M colors
Size 2560 x 1600 pixels, 10.1 inches (~299 ppi pixel density)
Multitouch Yes
Protection Corning Gorilla Glass 2
Sound Alert types N/A
Loudspeaker Yes, with stereo speakers
3.5mm jack Yes
Memory Card slot No
Internal 16/32 GB, 2 GB RAM
Data GPRS No
EDGE No
WLAN Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA
Bluetooth Yes, v3.0 with A2DP
NFC Yes, dual side
USB Yes, microUSB v2.0
Camera Primary 5 MP, 2592х1936 pixels, autofocus, LED flash, check quality
Features Geo-tagging, touch focus, face detection
Video Yes, [email protected], check quality
Secondary Yes, 1.9 MP
Features OS Android OS, v4.2 (Jelly Bean), upgradable to v4.2.1 (Jelly Bean)
Chipset Exynos 5250
CPU Dual-core 1.7 GHz Cortex-A15
GPU Mali-T604
Sensors Accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer
Messaging Email, Push Email, IM, RSS
Browser HTML5
Radio No
GPS Yes, with GLONASS
Java No
Colors Black
- SNS integration
- HDMI port
- MP4/H.264/DivX/WMV player
- MP3/WAV/eAAC+/WMA/Flac player
- Organizer
- Image/video editor
- Document viewer
- Google Search, Maps, Gmail,
YouTube, Calendar, Google Talk, Picasa
- Voice memo
- Predictive text input (Swype)
Battery Non-removable Li-Po 9000 mAh battery
Stand-by Up to 500 h
Talk time Up to 9 h (multimedia)
Misc SAR US 1.38 W/kg (body)
SAR EU 0.21 W/kg (body)
Price group [About 310 EUR]
Tests Display Contrast ratio: 878 (nominal)
Loudspeaker Voice 68dB / Noise 66dB / Ring 67dB
Audio quality Noise -82.3dB / Crosstalk -81.4dB
Camera Photo / Video
Xperia Z Tablet
General 2G Network
3G Network HSDPA 850 / 2100 / 800
4G Network LTE 1800 / 1500 / 2100
SIM Micro-SIM
Announced 2013, January
Status Coming soon. Exp. release 2013, Q1
Body Dimensions 266 x 172 x 6.9 mm (10.47 x 6.77 x 0.27 in)
Weight 495 g (1.09 lb)
- IP57 certified - dust and water proof
Display Type LED-backlit LCD, capacitive touchscreen, 16M colors
Size 1200 x 1920 pixels, 10.1 inches (~224 ppi pixel density)
Multitouch Yes
- Sony Mobile BRAVIA Engine 2
Sound Alert types N\A
Loudspeaker Yes, with stereo speakers
3.5mm jack Yes
- 3D surround sound enhancement
Memory Card slot microSD, up to 64 GB
Internal 32 GB storage, 2 GB RAM
Data GPRS No
EDGE No
Speed HSDPA, 14.4 Mbps; HSUPA, 5.76 Mbps; LTE, Cat3, 37.5 Mbps UL, 100 Mbps DL
WLAN Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n, dual-band, DLNA, Wi-Fi hotspot
Bluetooth Yes, v4.0 with A2DP
NFC Yes
USB Yes, v2.0
Camera Primary 8 MP, 3264x2448 pixels, autofocus
Features Geo-tagging, touch focus, face detection
Video Yes, [email protected]
Secondary Yes, 2.2 MP, [email protected]
Features OS Android OS, v4.1.2 (Jelly Bean), planned upgrade to v4.2 (Jelly Bean)
Chipset Qualcomm Snapdragon APQ8064
CPU Quad-core 1.5 GHz Krait
GPU Adreno 320
Sensors Accelerometer, gyro, compass
Messaging Email, Push Mail, IM, RSS
Browser HTML
Radio No
GPS Yes
Java Yes, via Java MIDP emulator
Colors Black, White
- SNS integration
- MP4/H.264/H.263 player
- MP3/WAV/eAAC+ player
- Organizer
- Document viewer
- Photo viewer/editor
- Voice memo
- Predictive text input
Battery Non-removable Li-Po 6000 mAh battery
If it was $399.99 and battery didn't suck I would probably get it. It also depends on whether or not I sell my Nexus 4 for a Xperia Z. My tablet will match my phone. Lol
Also depends on which is available in Canada first. More nexus 10 shipments or the the Xperia Z tablet in Canada
I also wish that they stuck with the 9.4 inch screen of their older models.
Tablet Z will be at least 100$ more so yeah.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium
299ppi>224ppi. I can see a big difference between 299 and 224 ppi. I prefer the nexus 10. I want 4k on 10".
lKBZl said:
and it's not gonna get updated that fast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sony is one of the most AOSP friendly manufactures out there so I doubt it. I am a Nexus guy for life but Sony builds some quality stuff and are good with updates. As fast as Nexus no, but they won't Samsung it and sit on an update for a year and update it at the same time Google releases that versions replacement.
rookiegenius said:
Tablet Z will be at least 100$ more so yeah.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The upper-bound threshold's been set by the Note 10.1 (32GB $549), N10 (32GB $499), and TF700 (32GB $499). So with 32GB of storage the Xperia Z won't be more than $499 (the Note gets away with more because of S Pen). If Sony's smart they'll price it at $449 to gain some traction in the market. Asus only sold 250K 10.1" tablets a month in Q3 and the TF300 had a MSRP of $349. High-end Android tablets just don't sell well. The Note 10.1 was selling a million a month in Q3 so that makes it an exception. We'll see if that run rate continued in to Q4 when analysts disect Samsung's earnings. Also keep in mind that the specs shown are for the Japanese market Xperia Z. The global and U.S versions could be different. And until something's confirmed at MWC next month we don't even know for sure if there will be global and U.S. versions.