Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AMOLED is now the best (Note 4 is top)
- Thread starter mib1800
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
----------
Just because you don't like it doesn't invalidate what was discovered.
AMOLED is now the best (Note 4 is top)
That's not what Engadget reported:
"Coincidentally, the site also found code within the GS4 that indicates the existence of a program called "BenchmarkBooster," which is responsible for overclocking the processors. when certain apps are running"
http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/30/samsung-benchmarks/
That's not what Engadget reported:
"Coincidentally, the site also found code within the GS4 that indicates the existence of a program called "BenchmarkBooster," which is responsible for overclocking the processors. when certain apps are running"
http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/30/samsung-benchmarks/
Proof that Engadget is wrong, please. Or your post is just as much opinion. Engadget may have used the wrong word, for you, but if a program existed that boosted clock speeds based on programs executing, well shame on samsung.
I pretty much remember that whole thing pand I call shenanigans on Samsung.
Are you trying to show that you don't read the threads?
Read the Anandtech article and stop embarrassing yourself, please.
Yes, please, stop already
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7187/looking-at-cpugpu-benchmark-optimizations-galaxy-s-4
Samsung was caught cheating, but it was not overclocking as the OP said. Read the link, accept the proof and stop your crap about opinions.
Please stop. JUST STOP. You didn't even read my post and you are just embarrassing yourself at this point.
----------
LOL, this maybe the only thing I ever agree with you on.
Well this would confirm what I, a couple other posters (that had both a 6+ and a note4), and review sites have been saying regarding display brightness.
----------
Quite right.
He seems overtly emotional.
Lol, thought I'd find the iPhonebregade here, if you don't agree with what Display Mate said then that's cool, keep it moving. Where the S4 comes in, I'm not even going to bother paging back.
Thoroughly enjoying this phone's display, have compared with colleagues who have iPhone 6, LG G3, Xperia Z1, iPhone 6Plus and GS5, we played a 4K@60FPS video on the Androids, which we had simply sent around via WiFi Direct, then when we threw the iPhones in we had to just view webpages as it was going to be a mission to send the 4K vids to them, all were pretty blown away by the Note 4's display, and everytime I use another phone and comeback it is truly refreshing to see this stunner of a display.
Thoroughly enjoying this phone's display, have compared with colleagues who have iPhone 6, LG G3, Xperia Z1, iPhone 6Plus and GS5, we played a 4K@60FPS video on the Androids, which we had simply sent around via WiFi Direct, then when we threw the iPhones in we had to just view webpages as it was going to be a mission to send the 4K vids to them, all were pretty blown away by the Note 4's display, and everytime I use another phone and comeback it is truly refreshing to see this stunner of a display.
Source? If you are calling Displaymate liars, the top experts in the field, you should have a source. Why would the lie about that, are they Fandroids?
It's kind of funny, I just got back from the playground watching my daughter play. The sun is shining nice and bright today and I made it a point to point my Note 4 directly at it. Amazing display, easily readable in the full wrath of the sun. Subjectively I HIGHLY doubt it was at 450 cdm and I'm more than happy to take the word of the industry experts backing that up.
What does it matter? The iPhonebregade refuse to accept anything that puts a Samsung under positive light, the reviewers incl. AnandTech, GSMArena, Display Mate and many others rate the display highly and you and me as owners are also thoroughly happy with it.
Just sitback and laugh at the haters try desperately to poke holes.
Its like HowardForums all over again here.
Who else in the industry has samsung devices reaching brightness 698 cd/m2 of Measured Peak Brightness with Automatic Brightness On?
That's exactly what they said about the S5 which I own.
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_S5_ShootOut_1.htm
Yet Anandtech stated the following here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7903/samsung-galaxy-s-5-review/6
Here's phonearena comparing the note Edge to the S5: http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/Samsung-Galaxy-Note-Edge-vs-Samsung-Galaxy-S5_id3848
For anyone wondering1 nit = 1 cd/m2.
And the fact that when I owned the iPhone 6, it was blatantly brighter and more usable outdoors than my S5, despite Display mate suggesting the S5 should have nearly 200 more nits of brightness outdoors. Not even close.
So yeah, something is not passing the sniff test.
I don't understand, this thread is about the Note 4 not the S5. Also what makes those reviews more plausible than displaymates? Displaymate is well respected and they are experts of the highest caliber, just look at their awards: http://www.displaymate.com/edit.html. I find it very difficult to believe that displaymate actually lies and exaggerates a finding, especially in light of my own personal findings of the incredible brightness in full sunlight.
To add insult to injury phonearena never specified if testing the Note edge 1) with automatic brightness enabled and 2) outdoors. I'll bet they did neither. Once again bringing us full circle to the Note 4 having a brighter display, just like a dog running in circles biting its own tail. Anandtech did state automatic brightness and outdoors, but they didn't state how much light hit the phone, obviously the brightness would vary with how much light it had to deal with because it still has to balance battery life.
I'm still not seeing anything that would make me believe that a company as well respected and with such a high level of expertise would actually lie and exaggerate about one line of phone.
Last edited:
The point was that Displaymate has had a history since the Note 3 of inflating Samsung display brightness that no one else is able to replicate and validate.
There here should be a plethora of sources showing the Samsung devices having brighter screens and greater outdoor visibility than the iPhone.
Where are they?
Why is there pretty much no one able to validate, or even come to a consensus with these ridiculous numbers Displaymate is putting out?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8613/the-samsung-galaxy-note-4-review/4
Last edited:
So you're saying that 2 reviews, one of them from a blogging site trump displaymates review? This is a company that does nothing else but test displays and have the highest respect and accolades in their field. Heck even anandtech when talking about sunlight brightness said "in practice", which obviously tells me they didn't test in full sunlight at all. I'd say neither of those 2 reviews are accurately portraying the sunlight brightness of the phones, but then again they are also 2 different phones than the subject of THIS thread.
The direction of this is going nowhere fast, based purely on hearsay and not on facts. If you can find a source that says displaymate is fabricating test results we will go from there, otherwise it's just kind of an inane conversation.
Last edited:
Then validating their findings should be easy.
Considering Anandtech has been benchmarking devices since 1997, their measurement standards are credible. I doubt they would simply fabricate numbers, and their findings can be cross referenced for a consensus with other independent sources.
Displaymate's findings...not so much. Not among other people in the field, or on the street with one's own eyes.
Bolded part, hilarious. Here are some choice parts of displaymates resume:
DisplayMate is used by every major manufacturer in their research labs, by hundreds of test labs and service facilities, by thousands of technicians, and by over 100,000 consumers and end users. Via DisplayMate's Consulting Services we assist many of the world's leading manufacturers in developing and producing the best displays and display technologies.
DisplayMate Technologies specializes in proprietary sophisticated scientific display calibration and mathematical display optimization to deliver unsurpassed objective performance, picture quality and accuracy for all types of displays including video and computer monitors, projectors,
He has authored over 35 research articles in scientific journals in physics and computer science, including Scientific American.
he has designed color television broadcast equipment for the CBS Television Network, built a computer mathematical model of a television system for optimizing the camera to receiver performance and accuracy of the optics and electronics for CBS, a leader of a team at Bell Labs Research that built intelligent autonomous mobile robots, designed an all-electronic 360 degree viewing angle imaging laser range finder using the parallax principle, did the mathematical foundation of the fine guidance system for the Hubble Space Telescope, built the accepted standard model of the Milky Way Galaxy (which is named after him), built theoretical high redshift cosmological and stellar models for the Hubble Space Telescope, has done fundamental work on the analysis of clustering and super-clustering of galaxies, plus work in Relativity and nuclear physics.
This versus some dude who started reviewing motherboards on Geocities and now works for Apple. Or more specifically Joshua Ho who authored the review, I couldn't find any info on him at all other than being an editor of a hardware review blog site. I don't mean to denigrate anandtech's site, I trust them but as I've stated they most probably did NOT test it in direct sunlight, and even in using words like "in practice" when referring to sunlight brightness it's obvious they didn't.
I'm sorry, but the overwhelming majority of evidence is against these silly accusations against displaymate simply to prove a point on an internet forum.
A blurb/CV is not a source that can be cross referenced for a consensus and validation.
Being the "go to" source means your findings should always be easy to replicate if they are above refute.