This is getting old. 2k was virtually standard in 2014. The s6 had a 2k display. I know many will argue 4k not pratical for phones but at least there should be a 4k special edition version geared towards Virtual Reality gamers. It doesn't look good for the future of mobile VR gaming. Google play is already releasing 4k mobile content yet there are no plans for any 4k phone not even a pricier special edition version? I would not be surprised if the s9, s10 and s11 also had 2k only displays. In a few years 8k tv sets will be released with 8k content, yet 2k phones are it. Well the futuristic concept of virtual reality mobile gaming technology was nice but so was flying cars, robot servants and holograms...
lola, 08 Nov 2016buy oculus rift then plug it to your pc. it's cheaper than samsung flagships.What if I have 4 years old laptop which does not support Rift? Still I must spend a lot of cash to be inVr.
Obiges dint need to be up to 4k gaming standards. They only use q portion of the screens area in 2 circled areas.
No 4k will be a big disappointment or me if I'm honest.
So for the first time this phone will not have a physical button in the front bottom middle but AI button on the side so I assume there will be three on screen buttons instead. This would be welcoming news because I hate physical butons.
Dorsefrith, 08 Nov 2016No 4k screen? Ok so I will stay with my s6edge+. This was main reason why I wanted to buy Gala... morebuy oculus rift then plug it to your pc.
it's cheaper than samsung flagships.
No 4k screen? Ok so I will stay with my s6edge+. This was main reason why I wanted to buy Galaxy S8(ofc only for Gear Vr porpouse)
For the majority of people, QHD on a phone is a waste of money and just eats up batter life:
I've written several comments about this before so I won't repeat, but here is a nice reference that basically tells you why:
4K would not be useless, even if the user does not use it for VR.
Since displays uses sub-pixels, there is color noise on screens. The smaller the pixels are, the less visible, this would be (however, it's still not invisible on the Sony Z5 Premium).
There is also the space between pixels, but this could be improved upon even while keeping the resolution.
And judging by the images of the Sony Z5 Premium display, the gap between the pixels, was not reduced by the same amount that the pixel-count went up, so there is no definite relation between those two, but in general, higher resolution displays have lesser spacing between pixels (at least for those with the same number of sub-pixels).
4K is also a standard, QHD, isn't really. There is very little material i QHD, today, even mobiles with a QHD resolution tend not to offer video recording or photography at that resolution, so even though more devices uses it, the amount of material in that resolution doesn't really increase.
4K also works better for scaling.
QHD is 2x2 times the pixels of 720p. But the relation to 1080p is really odd, so scaling 1080p videos, doesn't really work. And switching off pixels, would reuslt in even bigger space between pixels.
1080p has an odd realtion to 720p, so upscaling 720p to 1080p doesn't really work either.
4K is 3x3 the pixels of 720p, and 2x2 pixels of 1080p, so scaling can be done much easier with either just multiplication of the pixels, or by fading pixels to be a mix of the actual pixels of the source material.
"Samsung is likely to stick to the QHD resolution of the current Galaxy S7 because it makes much more sense for both performance and battery life"
I dont agree with the performance part.
Samsung could build in a basic chip for multiplying the pixels, and allow the user to set the resolution they want the GPU to work with.
With a 4K screen, you get compatibility with both 720p and 1080p (3x3 pixels or 2x2 pixels). Doing the same on a QHD would only make it compatible with 720p (2x2 pixels). And on a 5.2" screen, 720p isn't really enough for text or static object, but could work really well for actionpacked games. By multipplying pixels, you end up with a combined pixel, using the same area as the number of pixels it's made up from. So 720p rendered by a 4K screen would be just as choppy as it would have been on a 720p screen at the same size, when using multiplying. Using a upscaling chip, to try to upscale resolution, would have an impact on performance, in that it would delay the output from the GPU, and that would never work in games. And would make scrolling choppy. And the more complex processing would use more battery. At the end of the day, upscaling might neither provide more batterylife nor better performance compared to letting the GPU do the full 4K resolution, so that is why the simpler multiplyer makes sense.
Also there could be an automatic activation of the multiplyer, so that watching 720p or 1080p videos on youtube, automatically activates the multiplying at the correct resolution, instead of the GPU doing some unecessary up-scaling that probably wont look any better.
For VR, QHD isn't enough, the pixels are too visible, for it to be comfortable.
I would like to see how 4K would look in a Gear VR, but I suspect we need even higher resolution, before the resolution feels comfortable, and then there is other issues as well, to be sorted out. But 4k would at least be a move in the right direction.
But perhaps Samsung is confident that few or no other maker will introduce 4K this spring, thus leaving them the option of holding that off for the Note8 (or S8 Pro/S8 Pen, or whatever they will end up calling it).
I'm hoping that VR solutions will bring back 3D cameras, as there is now a way to see the content on a mobile, that does not rely on a 3D displays with bad performance.
3D cameras can give a wider captured field of view with less complex lenses, meaning generally better center resolution and thinner lens desingns. Combining two cameras means that the total amount of captured resolution, can be higher, than each camera module, and that could potentially mean that modules with bigger pixels with better light gathering capabilities are used.
Using two simultaneously captured images, also allows for better noise reduction processes (just with you eyes, the two cameras would be off-set, but that would be known forhand, so processing can compensate for that, with googles HDR+, the images has to be analyzed, to make sure nothing has moved).
But also, having two cameras, would allow for them to be used a "eyes" when using the device with a VR headset. That way we could have cooler augumented reality, or a simple way to quickly by-pass VR, for example to locate something in the room.
At least I would prefer to capture 3D over 360. Because I'm not really interested in what whas behind my back, or far to my side, when I captured something. If there was something there of interest, I would film or take photos of that separately. I see the use for some action videos, but not for a device that I hold up in front of me, so that is really for a different kind of product. And in such a product I would like it even better if it gave me 3D 360, perhaps by having two lenses on the front, two on the back, and two on each side or one on each side (with some clever processing, that combines the image of the front and back cameras plus the single side cameras for 3D even for the sideview). (And to take it further, two cameras on the side that is either up or down, depending on how the camera is mounted).
I hope samsung launches a 6 inch s8 too .. like a plus version or something .. and i hope it is explosion proof .. and has a 4000 mah plus battery ..
Ai? another useless gimmick
2k display? battery hunger
no dual stereo speaker for $300 phone selling $800 crap
im glad i returned note 7 but stuck with laggy s7 a flagship that lags
techlover1, 07 Nov 2016Well, I'm definitely fingers crossed. Not only for myself and all the consumers, but for Samsu... moreSo, you want the S8 to be what the S5 was? By that, I mean extremely innovative and an actual and clearly noticeable improvement. Well, that's what Samsung needs if they want eto arise from the Note 7 failure.
mir, 08 Nov 2016Merely increasing the screen resolution is not an innovation in itself.What do you call it then? Give me a specific term for it.
mir, 08 Nov 2016AI: I will no longer explode, so I can train you in your grammar.Grammar police, ladies and gentlemen!
AnonD-422874, 08 Nov 2016Person: Hello AI. Will you going to explode? AI: I don't know for sure. We wait.Yes Explode like an iphone 7
Stondec100, 07 Nov 2016You deserve a phone with 230P display, you enemy of innovation. Merely increasing the screen resolution is not an innovation in itself.