By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Samsung Galaxy S3 specs - this is just ... WOW!

You are all thinking about the 1080p in the wrong way. Its not straight resolution size that's the point here. Just like how my Galaxy Nexus 720p isn't really best for my 4.5" screen. Its about the density and thus clarity of a picture this allows. All those extra small pixels allow for a highly dense and highly clear output that is a FAR better visual experience for the end user on a MEDIA based device. Additionally, you'll see great clarity in textual reading on web and other text based things you do on your phone.

Density and clarity.... not resolution.



Around the Network
superchunk said:
You are all thinking about the 1080p in the wrong way. Its not straight resolution size that's the point here. Just like how my Galaxy Nexus 720p isn't really best for my 4.5" screen. Its about the density and thus clarity of a picture this allows. All those extra small pixels allow for a highly dense and highly clear output that is a FAR better visual experience for the end user on a MEDIA based device. Additionally, you'll see great clarity in textual reading on web and other text based things you do on your phone.

Density and clarity.... not resolution.

In that case though, 1080p will probably be sacrificing on brightness, screen glare and viewing angle compared to 720p, and those factors are more important than density for it being a usable screen.



superchunk said:
You are all thinking about the 1080p in the wrong way. Its not straight resolution size that's the point here. Just like how my Galaxy Nexus 720p isn't really best for my 4.5" screen. Its about the density and thus clarity of a picture this allows. All those extra small pixels allow for a highly dense and highly clear output that is a FAR better visual experience for the end user on a MEDIA based device. Additionally, you'll see great clarity in textual reading on web and other text based things you do on your phone.

Density and clarity.... not resolution.


At 326 pixels per inch (iPhone 4) you need to hold a phone 10.5 inches from your face to see a pixel, assuming your vision is 20/20. In other words, at 12 inches or farther from your face, these displays are perfectly clear.

At 460 pixels per inch (rumoured Samsung Galaxy S 3 display), you need to hold that phone 7.5 inches from your face to see a pixel. How much reading do you do at such a distance? I think your optometrist would strongly recommend against reading something less than a foot from your face.

Now consider that a 1080p display will require around twice the computing power to render as the Galaxy Nexus' 720p display. Do you want your GPU to be working twice as hard at all times (and getting half the framerate for games and animations) for greater clarity in those moments when you hold your phone so close to your face that you go crosseyed?



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

famousringo said:
superchunk said:
You are all thinking about the 1080p in the wrong way. Its not straight resolution size that's the point here. Just like how my Galaxy Nexus 720p isn't really best for my 4.5" screen. Its about the density and thus clarity of a picture this allows. All those extra small pixels allow for a highly dense and highly clear output that is a FAR better visual experience for the end user on a MEDIA based device. Additionally, you'll see great clarity in textual reading on web and other text based things you do on your phone.

Density and clarity.... not resolution.


At 326 pixels per inch (iPhone 4) you need to hold a phone 10.5 inches from your face to see a pixel, assuming your vision is 20/20. In other words, at 12 inches or farther from your face, these displays are perfectly clear.

At 460 pixels per inch (rumoured Samsung Galaxy S 3 display), you need to hold that phone 7.5 inches from your face to see a pixel. How much reading do you do at such a distance? I think your optometrist would strongly recommend against reading something less than a foot from your face.

Now consider that a 1080p display will require around twice the computing power to render as the Galaxy Nexus' 720p display. Do you want your GPU to be working twice as hard at all times (and getting half the framerate for games and animations) for greater clarity in those moments when you hold your phone so close to your face that you go crosseyed?

Same arguement is why do TVs need more than 1080p since you can't visually tell a difference any more? Its that all that is important?

You can't stop improving just because its good enough.

Improvements in that clarity and density provide more in depth and visual appeal for movies and video in motion etc. CPU and GPU will continue to double regardless if the screen advances or not. As it all pushes forward it also breaks out of its prime market to advance other markets.

Games pushing computers to advance so quickly have lead to what we have now in home PCs. Phones pushing limits now will assist the battery industry into improving technologies which in turn help electric cars and other products. Likewise, improving the OLED screens in these samsung screens improve the tech overall wich will result in larger OLED TVs coming out quicker at reduced costs.



These Spec wars are such nonsense it reminds me of the clock speeds wars of the 90s. It would be nice if they concentrated on the experience rather than trying to overcome some of the shortcomings through beefing up the specs.



W.L.B.B. Member, Portsmouth Branch.

(Welsh(Folk) Living Beyond Borders)

Winner of the 2010 VGC Holiday sales prediction thread with an Average 1.6% accuracy rating. I am indeed awesome.

Kinect as seen by PS3 owners ...if you can pick at it   ...post it ... Did I mention the 360 was black and Shinny? Keeping Sigs obscure since 2007, Passed by the Sig police 5July10.
Around the Network
welshbloke said:
These Spec wars are such nonsense it reminds me of the clock speeds wars of the 90s. It would be nice if they concentrated on the experience rather than trying to overcome some of the shortcomings through beefing up the specs.

Beefing up the specs allows experience innovation as there are less barriers.



superchunk said:
famousringo said:

At 326 pixels per inch (iPhone 4) you need to hold a phone 10.5 inches from your face to see a pixel, assuming your vision is 20/20. In other words, at 12 inches or farther from your face, these displays are perfectly clear.

At 460 pixels per inch (rumoured Samsung Galaxy S 3 display), you need to hold that phone 7.5 inches from your face to see a pixel. How much reading do you do at such a distance? I think your optometrist would strongly recommend against reading something less than a foot from your face.

Now consider that a 1080p display will require around twice the computing power to render as the Galaxy Nexus' 720p display. Do you want your GPU to be working twice as hard at all times (and getting half the framerate for games and animations) for greater clarity in those moments when you hold your phone so close to your face that you go crosseyed?

Same arguement is why do TVs need more than 1080p since you can't visually tell a difference any more? Its that all that is important?

You can't stop improving just because its good enough.

Improvements in that clarity and density provide more in depth and visual appeal for movies and video in motion etc. CPU and GPU will continue to double regardless if the screen advances or not. As it all pushes forward it also breaks out of its prime market to advance other markets.

Games pushing computers to advance so quickly have lead to what we have now in home PCs. Phones pushing limits now will assist the battery industry into improving technologies which in turn help electric cars and other products. Likewise, improving the OLED screens in these samsung screens improve the tech overall wich will result in larger OLED TVs coming out quicker at reduced costs.

The difference is that you don't need to charge TV's. Phones consume a lot of power already and there is no advancement in battery technology. What you are saying is that they will sacrifice all that computing power for something that you won't be able to see and you will get a much less battery life. It is nonsense. Of course they can do it, companies make stupid decisions all the time.

Samsung doesn't produce experimental devices to improve other areas of technology. They are producing functional devices. 



superchunk said:

Same arguement is why do TVs need more than 1080p since you can't visually tell a difference any more? Its that all that is important?

You can't stop improving just because its good enough.

Improvements in that clarity and density provide more in depth and visual appeal for movies and video in motion etc. CPU and GPU will continue to double regardless if the screen advances or not. As it all pushes forward it also breaks out of its prime market to advance other markets.

Games pushing computers to advance so quickly have lead to what we have now in home PCs. Phones pushing limits now will assist the battery industry into improving technologies which in turn help electric cars and other products. Likewise, improving the OLED screens in these samsung screens improve the tech overall wich will result in larger OLED TVs coming out quicker at reduced costs.


We're not talking about good enough, we're talking about worse. A device with a 1080p screen that size is worse than a device with a 720p screen.

I can't believe how hard it is to explain this to you, but there's no such thing as a free lunch. You don't see any improvement, but you still pay real costs to get them. There are other things which can be done with that improved processor besides render more pixels. It can put more detailed textures on higher-polygon 3D objects on that 720p screen, or it can animate things at twice the framerate, or it can save your battery and use less power to render the same image.

And what the hell bearing does a 4.8" OLED screen have on a 48" TV screen? You're talking about completely different use cases and design parameters. Unless you're arguing that TVs need to have 450 pixels per inch (in which case, I give up on you), this screen will have absolutely no relevance for Samsung's TV business.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

famousringo said:
superchunk said:

Same arguement is why do TVs need more than 1080p since you can't visually tell a difference any more? Its that all that is important?

You can't stop improving just because its good enough.

Improvements in that clarity and density provide more in depth and visual appeal for movies and video in motion etc. CPU and GPU will continue to double regardless if the screen advances or not. As it all pushes forward it also breaks out of its prime market to advance other markets.

Games pushing computers to advance so quickly have lead to what we have now in home PCs. Phones pushing limits now will assist the battery industry into improving technologies which in turn help electric cars and other products. Likewise, improving the OLED screens in these samsung screens improve the tech overall wich will result in larger OLED TVs coming out quicker at reduced costs.


We're not talking about good enough, we're talking about worse. A device with a 1080p screen that size is worse than a device with a 720p screen.

I can't believe how hard it is to explain this to you, but there's no such thing as a free lunch. You don't see any improvement, but you still pay real costs to get them. There are other things which can be done with that improved processor besides render more pixels. It can put more detailed textures on higher-polygon 3D objects on that 720p screen, or it can animate things at twice the framerate, or it can save your battery and use less power to render the same image.

And what the hell bearing does a 4.8" OLED screen have on a 48" TV screen? You're talking about completely different use cases and design parameters. Unless you're arguing that TVs need to have 450 pixels per inch (in which case, I give up on you), this screen will have absolutely no relevance for Samsung's TV business.

When it comes out, I'll put it next to my 720p Galaxy Nexus and I know I'll see a difference in overall picture quality.

Also, are you saying Sony, Sammy, and others have no interest in putting out OLED TVs?



superchunk said:

Also, are you saying Sony, Sammy, and others have no interest in putting out OLED TVs?


No, I'm saying the development of a 1080p 4.8" smartphone display has nothing to do with the development of a ~50" 1080p TV display. You're talking about a display whose breakthrough feature is making cost-effective OLEDs smaller to achieve greater pixel density within performance parameters (maintaining brightness, color fidelity, etc.). What TV needs is a breakthough that makes OLEDs bigger while remaining cost-effective and within appropriate performance parameters.

So unless you're talking about a 10800p TV with no disernable pixels until your face is six inches from the screen, the rumoured SGS 3 has absolutely no impact on the development of OLED TVs.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.