New 5 inch mobile phone – FullHD or maybe just HD?

Hello.

I have now bought myself a Elephone P6000 Pro Android mobile phone, which has a 5 inch display with a HD resolution (1280 x 720)
Now I ask myself the question whether a full HD display with 5 inches would not be better, sharper?
What do you all mean? Would you tend in my place befitting a FullHD display, or I do not remember much of?

And so consumes a FullHD display much more energy compared with only HD?


Let's just say it would be better but hd enough in this size from actually


Full HD brings nothing on such a small display.

Best regards

Carsten


Carsten M.

Full HD brings nothing on such a small display.

Best regards

Carsten

But Carsten! It brings a higher battery consumption. Otherwise, I agree with the previous speakers. The units pack are currently waiting with some "features" on which harm the equipment than good. QHD displays or 2K video are there only two examples ...


I have the Moto G 2014 and an Xperia Z are at home. Although, you realize that the Z Full HD is sharper, but not much. For that HD uses less battery and is still sufficiently sharp at 5 inches


I think resolution is not everything. Otherwise, yes, all five inch HD display would all look equally good. Topic viewing angles, brightness, color rendering, lighting, etc.
That's why I think a good HD display can at 5" look better than a bad Full HD display with the same screen size.


Ne, ie Full HD I stop at the size of nonsense. Even phones with 5.5 or even 6 inch the not per se need. Take, for example, the Nokia Lumia 1320 that has even a HD display and low ppi. Have used it for a long time and have to say that is displayed on, everything really very sharp and contrasty. Because I miss not Full HD or QHD. Had it always means use as the display otherwise is much too bright.

And as has been said here is it just too much at the expense of the battery and the general performance. What bingt me such a high resolution if doing other things fall by the wayside? Must of course decide for themselves.


The newer phones have sophisticated power management that allows no problems, represent economical FullHD.
And of course you can see the difference with HD.
Had a S3 with HD and now have an S4 with FullHD, the S4 has clearly the sharper image.
Whoever says otherwise is either bad eyes or lying.
FullHD has long been standard, now already lower standard.
Looks best you look at the difference for yourself and then decide for themselves whether HD is enough or not.
But to battery power you need not to worry.


It's more than logical that HD and Full HD are different in direct comparison, otherwise you would not need FullHD yes. But honestly, who has please every day it just to annoy about the different resolution two mobile phones? Nobody. And apart from that it brings on such a small screen in the long term not really worth more because our eyes are not designed to accurately detect any changes over 300 ppi. Clearly the difference is there, but unless you're holding the phone directly to his face you will have few problems in everyday life. Since HD is enough thick.

That is not quite right with the battery consumption as well. You have to take only devices like the Galaxy S6 or iPhone 6, which indeed have catastrophic battery life. It may be smart phones with good energy management, but that is less of something as manufacturers now obstruct ever smaller batteries.


Although today's smartphones cope better with the Akkurecourcen, an HD display clearly consumes less power than a full HD display. Clearly you can see the differences. But not nearly to the extent as you imagine. The display difference between S3 and S4 is mainly due to the further development of AMOLED technology and less on the resolution. Displays up to 5" better than to let dissolve in HD I think it is nonsense. to 7" Full HD is enough loose. As good brightness values ​​or black levels are much more important ...


With a 5-inch device that does not matter because a good HD display ranges from completely, these pixels delusion is just a sales pitch.
The a FullHD display more battery pulls is a fact.


Frank A.

The newer phones have sophisticated power management that allows no problems, represent economical FullHD.

With identical power management, the HD display is still fuel efficient. Fewer pixels means less demand for electricity.

Frank A.

And of course you can see the difference with HD.

Maybe, if you look closely and has good eyes. In practice, however, the benefit perspective.

Your TV 40 or 50 inches has even Full HD. Your monitor with 24 or 27 inches as well.
Are their images blurred in the distance?
Is the final sharpness for normal use relevant?
Not even the pressure of the newspaper that one uses a similar distance to the hosiery such as a smart phone or tablet is such sharp.

Frank A.

Had a S3 with HD and now have an S4 with FullHD, the S4 has clearly the sharper image.

How old was the S3 and how old the S4?
You can also see the degradation of the display and rausrechnen?

Frank A.

Whoever says otherwise is either bad eyes or lying.

If you still have such good eyes, be glad!
You can also assume, however, you would be lying. Missing arguments yes. In any case, a person can best separated on 0.5 minutes of arc two points. And then only at high concentration. In normal reading is an academic value. And for moving images entirely without significance.

Frank A.

FullHD has long been standard, now already lower standard.

Technical standard! But not everything that is technically possible is also sensible.

Frank A.

Looks best you look at the difference for yourself and then decide for themselves whether HD is enough or not.

This is the only sentence from your post, I'll sign that.


Aries

Your TV 40 or 50 inches has even Full HD. Your monitor with 24 or 27 inches as well.

I had, until recently, a 42 inch TV with HD resolution and has been enough, only now at 50 inches I am with FullHD, optically hardly any difference. Will hot, at 5 inches it does not matter.


@Aries:
disassembled beautiful!: D
Most devices "just" HD resolution have a worse life than most recent Full HD - Phones. So at least I have pursued it in the reading tests can, like correct me. Clear is the most processor and Energiemagement, HD consumed less power than full HD. Meanwhile, however, can be neglected fortunately one that the art around it is thanks. The OS has also often significantly more impact on the battery life of a Phones, for example, I had with lollipop because bad experiences when compared to KitKat.

Technically you're absolutely right, just do not understand why you think it necessary to lecture me since ... since I do not say to the contrary. I just wanted to clarify that the TE must not be afraid of an oh-so battery-eating display. ;)

My S3 was about 1.5 years old when I bought the new S4. I admit that I did not get counted the age of the display ... including, I referred only to the resolution, which has not changed in that time.

Sure, you can assume that I lie, can speak only for myself, but I know other people who see the difference ... would be strange if not.
I find the sharpness relevant, and that does not change through your irrelevant statement regarding TVs. This can be compared, but why? We're in smartphones.
That being said, at least I see the difference between an HD READY and FullHD TV even more, especially in video games.

Quote: "Technical standard! But not everything that is technically possible is also sensible."
What can I say? A generalized statement that ... well, not really which says reasonable. Or are you saying that Full HD is generally no sense? I do not understand. My statement is at least generally valid, it is FACT.

You write, in practice, the benefits of a higher resolution perspective. I can not confirm, on the contrary.
You can not assume that it's users so of course I did not.
Is all subjective, but there are just people who find the display resolution important.


@dragon lord:
The S6 has no catastrophic battery life. Where do you get this statement?
Samsung is on each of the S-series, the runtime has improved, so the longer the S6 as the S5 .... and it was not bad. By the way, despite even higher resolution : D


So on the subject, I would also only contribute once again that I had been worse appliances, as seen from the battery life ago. Clear my Galaxy S6 does not matter to many other battery monsters, such as eg. My old Xperia Z2, poor battery performance is not. Of course, it could always be more, but I think to be able to infect it awesome my unit 10 minutes to the network in order to then be able to use thanks almost charging quickly.

In general, however, remains to say that in battery technology through out is still room for improvement, we hope that in the future because finally something is coming.

Regards


The Z-series is really great, and the devices have such long lead times, not only because of the relatively large battery capacity. The energy management is simply good, and there is not as much preinstalled stuff that tinkers in the background.


Christian W.

Carsten M.

Full HD brings nothing on such a small display.

Best regards

Carsten

But Carsten! It brings a higher battery consumption. Otherwise, I join my previous speakers'. The units pack are currently waiting with some "features" on which harm the equipment than good. QHD displays or 2K video are there only two examples ...

or 4K


Frank A.

My statement is at least generally valid, it is FACT.

What is universal? What is fact?
The fact is that fewer pixels, use less power.
The fact is also that you can compare different old equipment.
If you compare, then only compare the displays at the same technique. Then you get facts and generality.

Frank A.

You write, in practice, the benefits of a higher resolution perspective. I can not confirm, on the contrary.

If you are 20 years old, you might recognize even individual pixels when you zoom close enough to go the smartphone. But only when the image. Only if you concentrate. In everyday life, you read distance 40 cm. Look perhaps moving pictures. It does not matter whether you have a HD or Full HD. And thus the benefits of Full HD nunmal perspective.

You do not need FullHD also the TV, if you choose too small a size at too great a distance.

Frank A.

Is all subjective, but there are just people who find the display resolution important.

It is also subjective, what one persuades himself and how much they can influence the marketing.


The fact is that FullHD is a technical standard, I did write. I also wrote that HD uses less power.
Am a long time not 20 anymore and get out of the age, to let myself be influenced by marketing.
Let but the TV comparison ...
"You do not need FullHD also the TV, if you choose too small a size at too great a distance."
First, bad words, and second, I have already explained in the post before that I see the difference clearly.
Just because your opinion is, you do not generalize. For me, this is so and ready.