How did (almost) all the reports miss that it was PenTile?

[DalekSnare]

I don't think PenTile bothers most people (look how popular the GS3 was), but it bugs some of us. Maybe we hold our phones closer to our eyes or have better glasses or are just more finicky, who knows. I even drove to a Verizon store to see what the 928's screen looked like. My brother thought it looked great, but to me it looked like the screen was checkered (same as on the GS3 and Galaxy Nexus devices that I have at work).

As for LCD vs. AMOLED, I'd prefer AMOLED except for the PenTile thing. I love the RGB AMOLED in my Lumia 900 except for the resolution.

 

[algs26]

I think the Samsung Galaxy S 2 was the only ~4-5" Galaxy S phone with RGB stripe. And it wasn't exactly HD (480). Are there any 4-5" phones 720p or higher that are non-pentile AMOLED?

 

[shadyghost]

"Samsung's Philip Berne explained to me that the blue subpixels on AMOLED displays actually degrade the fastest - quicker than the red or green subpixels. With a PenTile layout, the subpixels are arranged RGBG (red, green, blue, green), so they feature more green subpixels and fewer red or blue subpixels than an RGB stripe layout with the same resolution. Because of this, AMOLED displays that have the PenTile layout tend to have a longer lifespan than those with RGB layouts. Since Samsung is selling its phones to users that usually keep them for 18 months or longer, it has to be sure that the display will still offer peak performance at that time. According to the company, PenTile AMOLED displays have proven to be more reliable than those with RGB layouts.


Those that have issues with the PenTile arrangement usually complain that the screen does not look as crisp as an RGB display or that there is odd color fringing along the edges of images, such as app icons. While Berne did agree that the PenTile arrangement's faults are pronounced at lower resolutions, such as qHD[SUP](INFO)[/SUP] or WVGA[SUP](INFO)[/SUP], high-resolution displays hide the problems due to the sheer density of pixels. The Galaxy S III and the Galaxy Note, for example, both feature high-resolution Super AMOLED displays with PenTile subpixel arrangements (the Galaxy S III has a 1280 x 720 pixel screen, while the Note has a 1280 x 800 [COLOR=blue !important][COLOR=blue !important]pixel [COLOR=blue !important]display[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]). Under a microscope, one can see the pixel layout on these displays, but in real-world use, it is not visible to the vast majority of users. To that point, the Galaxy S II, which had a lower-resolution WVGA[SUP](INFO)[/SUP] (800 x 480 pixel) display, featured an RGB layout for its subpixels"


Read more at Samsung: PenTile AMOLED displays last longer, that's why we use them

 

[shadyghost]

I'm actually relieved it's PenTile. Here is a link that explains the tech in depth. Technology ??What Does It Do?

 

[shadyghost]

Also, I can say that screen burn in with my Lumia 900 was apparent after only 6 months of use. I remember walking into ATT stores 6 months after the 920 was released and the screen burn in was so bad on the display phones you couldn't even use the phone anymore.

 

[HeyCori]

Burn-in is faintly noticeable on my 900. Fortunately, I have a LCD 920 now and only keep my 900 around as an emergency backup phone. Can't say that I'm too happy to see that the 1020 is AMOLED. Burn-in will happen, most likely sooner rather than later.

 

[jt09xlt]

I have had my GNex for year and half now which is pentile and AMOLED and have yet to experience any burn in. Granted apples to oranges, just sayin.

 

[algs26]

My GNex is visibly bluer where the notification bar sits. I notice it the most when I use a white browser in landscape mode.

 

[jt09xlt]

My GNex is visibly bluer where the notification bar sits. I notice it the most when I use a white browser in landscape mode.

Really? I haven't had an issue with blur, burn in or anything display related. Maybe I just got lucky.

 

[LastBattle]

Burn-in is faintly noticeable on my 900. Fortunately, I have a LCD 920 now and only keep my 900 around as an emergency backup phone. Can't say that I'm too happy to see that the 1020 is AMOLED. Burn-in will happen, most likely sooner rather than later.

Every time I see someone with a Galaxy S2,3,4, nexus screen that's so blueish/brownish...
I just feel so fortunate to have picked up the 920 with excellent colour reproduction and accurate whites.

Sigh, as much as I hate the overhyped garbage AMOLED from Samdung. I am still buying it because its one of the best phones out there by Nokia.

 

[ammarmalik2011]

Most review sites just linked to their Lumia 925 and 920 reviews. Because that's basically what the 1020 is besides the camera. The 925 has the penTile AMOLED. That's how it got to 8.5mm thinness. LCDs are thicker in general. The Lumia 1020 is already chunky, so any way to slim it down is a necessity. It looks far better than the LCD on the 920 anyway. PenTile is used because it is harder to get higher resolution on smaller displays with AMOLED. Most of Samsung's Galaxy S phones use penTile AMOLED and most people are happy with the display and after over 300ppi, even review sites don't care about it anymore at that high a density because its very hard to see. At lower densities, AMOLED can achieve full RGB. Phones that have full RGB AMOLED are Nokia 808 Pureview, Lumia 900, Samsung Galaxy S2, Note 1, Note 2, and most likely Note 3. These all have lower PPI so they have room for full RGB per pixel. The penTile screen on the Galaxy S4, for example, looks far superior than the RGB screens of the Note 1 and Note 2, as well as the older AMOLED on Nokia phones, so penTile doesn't mean its a worse screen. It can be the complete opposite. Even so, Samsung is refining their AMOLED technology so that higher PPI screens can have full RGB as well. Maybe next year. Nokia's AMOLED screens are probably sourced from Samsung. I mean, who else is making AMOLED for smartphones? Even most components on the iPhone are sourced from Samsung.

The new Droid Ultra and Maxx on Verizon have a 5-inch 720p OLED display which is non-pentile.

 

[strikeIII]

As some others here have stated. Please go see the 1020 first hand before you make any assumptions about the quality of the screen. Different manufactures make screens differently even though it's still AMOLED, some just make it better than others. IMO, The 1020 screen is definitely better than the 920 and I know because I have both. The 1020 gives you the option to adjust the color saturation and temperature so if you think it looks too blue then adjust it. Stop believing everything you read people and find out for yourselves.

 

[gsquared]

The OP mentions that most people never even notice the difference. That leads one to believe that only a very small amount of people even care of such things. This topic seems like a complete non-issue.

 

[Stil_1]

Daniel have you used it on a sunny day? Unless GSMArena has got a faulty device numbers prove otherwise, sorry. 1020 has the same contrast like other "usual" smartphones and I very well know what is the difference between them and 808. There are literally situations where you have to put second hand over those phones to read something while you can use 808 normally, if you still have access to 1020 try to find some 808 and compare for yourself.

GSMArena lists Contrast ratio as infinite for both the 1020 and S4. What I see they lack is brightness, which is what I think you meant. That's the numbers that are lower than the other two phones. Not sure why that is, perhaps a thicker screen to transmit light through? What's also important is the screen reflectivity. If they use a good coating then it still lets a less bright screen to be visible in daylight.

Now, I do have to say, the HTC one is definitely easier to see in daylight than the S4, both which have brighter screens than the 1020. Curious to see that compared.