Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone 8/Plus True pixel density of Plus (401) > Max (373) > XR (326): Are these calculations correct?

EugW said:
If you had said "The numbers beyond 400 ppi mean nothing", I might have agreed with you. But for 300 ppi, that is not enough.
Click to expand...
163 ppi to 326 ppi (+100%)
four times the pixels per square inch

326 ppi to 458 ppi (+40%)
twice the pixels per square inch

Even if you have perfect vision and you can see every single pixel on an iPhone X, the jump is half as big as the one with the iPhone 4. However what is noticeable to everyone is that the Xr has a bigger screen and shows more content than the X.
 
Gudi said:
Because it was a big deal. At a typical viewing distance the difference between Non-Retina and Retina is very noticeable, whereas the difference between Super-Retina and Retina is hardly visible. Steve Jobs explained it on stage, there’s a limit to what the human eye can see and we’ve surpassed it. The numbers beyond 300ppi mean nothing anymore.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. That's essentially what I was getting at with my post at that time.
 
EugW said:
That is not correct. Someone with near perfect human vision can discern up to about 475 ppi (in LCD terms) at normal viewing distances. That is rare though. OTOH, it's pretty common for people to be able discern more detail beyond 326 ppi.

326 ppi is good enough for most, but there is still a significant minority of the population that can appreciate pixel densities higher than that. This includes those with 20 year-old eyes, and others with properly corrected vision - eyeglass wearers, myself included.

If you had said "The numbers beyond 400 ppi mean nothing", I might have agreed with you. But for 300 ppi, that is not enough.
Click to expand...

For normal vision (20/20) and normal viewing distances (10 - 12") or more, 326 ppi is more than enough and such people cannot discern a difference. This can also be proven mathematically. However, to your point, with near perfect vision (20/10) you are correct in that the math does change and it's possible for those people to discern slightly higher resolution. Your claim that this is "pretty common" would certainly be challenged though. Just the opposite, that's pretty uncommon.
 
techconc said:
For normal vision (20/20) and normal viewing distances (10 - 12") or more, 326 ppi is more than enough and such people cannot discern a difference. This can also be proven mathematically. However, to your point, with near perfect vision (20/10) you are correct in that the math does change and it's possible for those people to discern slightly higher resolution. Your claim that this is "pretty common" would certainly be challenged though. Just the opposite, that's pretty uncommon.
Click to expand...
While 20/10 vision is uncommon, 20/15 vision is not uncommon in 20 year olds or in people who wear glasses.

BTW, because of the way the antialiasing is done, some small black fonts on a 7 Plus will show up as grey on a 6s.
 
Last edited:
Also keep in mind that I believe anything vector (such as fonts) the plus phones apply a downsampling factor of 1.15 to reach 1080p.

Edit: on topic, I agree with an earlier poster, pixel density is pixel density, no matter how much you like or dislike it.

Pentile matrix has less sub-pixel (dot) density than the equivalent RGB LCD display.

Pentile matrix also introduces non-square pixels due to the diamond layout.

All of these things are different and are a factor of how the end image or text is displayed.
 
One point I think worth mentioning in regard to the pentile pixel layout is the layout of the rods and cones in our eye. Specifically, that there are a lot more rods (that don’t perceive color) than cones and that the rods themselves are much more sensitive. Thus, most of our visual acuity isn’t influenced by what color light is being perceived, just the intensity/contrast.

I would guess based on the Apple developer info describing 1125x2536 pixels rendered that the screen driver is able to selectively either include or exclude “borrowed” red or blue subpixels based on relative location to the logical pixel. This would allow a full physical pixel to be divided in a way not possible on an LCD and, at least in the case of rendering black/white/gray appear just as sharp to the rods in our eye as a screen truly 458 ppi. In the case of photos, the resolution of color gradients would be at a lower ppi as you have calculated since it would have to average red/blue components between 2 pixels, but that probably is not perceivable by the less sensitive cones in our eyes.

In other words, I suspect the screen drivers for the pentile OLED’s are able to selectively turn on/off red/blue sub-pixels to deliver the full 458 ppi of light contrast that our eyes are most sensitive to, without much practical loss of resolution of color since our eyes are naturally less sharp at interpreting color.
 
EugW said:
While 20/10 vision is uncommon, 20/15 vision is not uncommon in 20 year olds or in people who wear glasses.

BTW, because of the way the antialiasing is done, some small black fonts on a 7 Plus will show up as grey on a 6s.
Click to expand...
+1 for me having 20/15. I’ve met others as well
 
ultravegeta1981 said:
LCD looks sharper than OLED for me. The pentile displays do look less sharp. That's why I love iPhone LCDs ,best in the game.
Click to expand...
I agree. Yes, contrast on the OLED is great but the text on my 8+ and now XR looks very crisp. I’m in the dark right now and my text is about as small as you can get it. Even if I zoom I am not seeing blurry edges. Text looks very crisp.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ultravegeta1981
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back