Alcatel Idol 4S With Android vs. W10M

[Indistinguishable]

This is the first time we've seen the device running Windows 10 Mobile. But it's been out with Android for a few months. How do you think it'll compare? This is a great opportunity to see how Windows 10 Mobile stacks up against Android in terms of performance.

Here's the unboxing and first impressions from Android Central: Alcatel Idol 4S unboxing and first impressions | Android Central

 

[Guytronic]

Shouldn't this run way faster than the Android type?

 

[cnashx]

It's different hardware than the android version. For a direct Android to WM10 comparison you must look at the new Blackberry DTEK60 which is a rebranded Alcatel Idol 4S with the same specs as the WM10 version.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

It's different hardware than the android version. For a direct Android to WM10 comparison you must look at the new Blackberry DTEK60 which is a rebranded Alcatel Idol 4S with the same specs as the WM10 version.

Still differences. The Blackberry has a 4K screen. I'm glad the WM10 version is FHD for the better battery life and lower processor demands.

 

[Indistinguishable]

Shouldn't this run way faster than the Android type?

Good call, I didn't catch that.

 

[Marcin Dabrowsky]

Still differences. The Blackberry has a 4K screen. I'm glad the WM10 version is FHD for the better battery life and lower processor demands.

I fully agree. I think the 1080p mated to a 3000mah battery makes way more sense than a 4k screen.

Having said that, it would have been nice to compare battery life between android and windows on identical hardware. If I remember correctly the last phone to do that was the HTC one m8. In that case Windows was way ahead in terms of battery life, and I think that was a 2600 or 2800mah battery. However that was win 8.1 and I think 10 is optimized much worse than 8.1 was.

 

[eddieDOTexe]

Originally posted by Marcin Dabrowsky

Originally Posted by HoosierDaddy
Still differences. The Blackberry has a 4K screen. I'm glad the WM10 version is FHD for the better battery life and lower processor demands.

However that was win 8.1 and I think 10 is optimized much worse than 8.1 was.

Tell me about it, its like I'm using a knockoff Android sometimes.

 

[Krystianpants]

Still differences. The Blackberry has a 4K screen. I'm glad the WM10 version is FHD for the better battery life and lower processor demands.

Honestly for something that is pushing VR the higher res would be way better. Windows mobile should just allow setting of resolutions. This way games and other things can use up less battery power by rendering at lower resolutions. Gaming would make the biggest difference for battery saving otherwise it would be minimal.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Honestly for something that is pushing VR the higher res would be way better. Windows mobile should just allow setting of resolutions. This way games and other things can use up less battery power by rendering at lower resolutions. Gaming would make the biggest difference for battery saving otherwise it would be minimal.

I can "see" where higher resolution could be better for VR. I guess I'm lucky to have no interest in it at all. But you can't really have variable resolutions hardware wise because there are exactly as many pixels as the panel is rated as. You could have apps work in lower res but the output would have to be upscaled to the panel resolution. And that has a fairly high cost in picture quality. If you have a Windows PC and a flat screen, you can see the effect by forcing a lower resolution. You won't like it!

 

[Krystianpants]

I can "see" where higher resolution could be better for VR. I guess I'm lucky to have no interest in it at all. But you can't really have variable resolutions hardware wise because there are exactly as many pixels as the panel is rated as. You could have apps work in lower res but the output would have to be upscaled to the panel resolution. And that has a fairly high cost in picture quality. If you have a Windows PC and a flat screen, you can see the effect by forcing a lower resolution. You won't like it!

No the cost would be negligible. There is a point in which the resolution difference becomes harder to spot unless you are directly comparing. The comparison may make one look better than the other but barely. This is typically in the 1080p+ area. So the difference between 2k and 1080p is just not going to be that big.

Again, this would mostly benefit games. Not enough to notice a huge quality change. There are many games out there that don't support QHD and they display on your phone. However, games like asphalt 8 don't support changing resolution so you are stuck with the highest due to it doing auto-detect. Now asphalt Extreme actually lets you change it. And when I changed it to FHD it actually looks great and doesn't eat as much battery. Does the full res one look better? Sure, but in a fast paced game like this it doesn't matter to me as long as I can save battery. I think that using it at an OS level, I like to have the full quality and especially with my nice start screen. But for games I prefer saving battery. I do a lot of gaming. I would prefer it to be configurable in the games themselves no doubt. It would be even cooler if the xbox app can provide hooks for game developers and you can select each games quality as you please. Almost like the Nvidia control panel that lets you fine tune your games on PC.

Samsung is actually working to have this resolution feature on their phones.

 

[ttsoldier]

VR is a niche market. I think they did the right thing by going with 1080

 

[Chris Stevens1]

I'm not into gaming, but as I understand it there are two processing issues related to display resolution and battery use.
1: In the case of a high density display set to high density native resolution, the game needs to:
A: Compute the color of each pixel at native resolution.
B: Pass that information to the display driver that will them process that information and light each native resolution pixel properly.
2: In the case of a higher density display set to lower density resolution, the game needs to :
A: Compute the color of each lower density pixel. (Not each native
Since there are lower number of pixels being computed, so less power is used for these computation than for native high resolution.
B: Pass that information to the display driver that will upscale them process (pixel, doubling. interpolation, antialiasing, etc.
This an extra step requiring processing power.
C: Display driver then passes appropriate information to each actual pixel. I assume that this is the same amount of power as case 1. B.
D: The game may work better, but does this save energy? I do not know.
3. In the case of a standard density display, the game needs to:
A: Compute the color of each pixel. Less pixels than a high density display = less energy than a higher density display.
B: Pass that information to the display driver that will them process that information and light each pixel properly.
Less pixels than a high density display = less energy than a higher density display.

Maybe someone how understands this better can give a definitive answer.

I don't know how VR will look. I will go by a T-Mobile store and check it out in a few days.

 

[Daniel Rubino]

Still differences. The Blackberry has a 4K screen. I'm glad the WM10 version is FHD for the better battery life and lower processor demands.

QHD (2560 x 1440) is not 4K (3840 x 2160). The DTEK60 is literally a 2K screen. Same resolution as Lumia 950/XL.

Does FHD on Windows 10 Mobile for a 5.5" display matter? I prefer the better battery life and no, it looks the same because of the way W10M scales/hard lines. Having said that, QHD is better for VR, but I personally don't care about phone VR in the least.

 

[Sedp23]

The Windows is the better specced phone better cameras and processor. Better os comes down to preference

Sent from mTalk

 

[naijab0y]

The Windows is the better specced phone better cameras and processor. Better os comes down to preference

Sent from mTalk

Not better specced than the DTEK60 tho.