Extreme OLED Test Finds Apple’s iPhone X Takes 17 Hours to “Burn In”

[Megalith]

Apple has been declared the “winner” of a 21-day-long test to gauge which handset -- the iPhone X, Galaxy Note 8, or Galaxy S7 Edge -- was least susceptible to OLED burn-in. While the iPhone was the first to show signs of image retention, static images did not get as bad as the Samsung devices.

In the end, the Galaxy Note 8 showed the worst signs of burn-in after the marathon test. The Galaxy S7 Edge, despite being a 2016 phone, performed admirably, but was still bested by the 2017 iPhone X. After three weeks of displaying the same image on maximum brightness, all three handsets expectedly had potentially permanent signs of burn-in. But the tests also show that Apple's efforts to reduce the effects of OLED burn-in have paid off.

 

[cyclone3d]

So I shouldn't leave my phone on the same static image for 17+ days... got it.

 

[kandrey89]

My Samsung Note 2 had a burned in image, Samsung kind of sucks in this regard.

 

[mesyn191]

These burn in times are all pretty short. You would think it'd be a mostly solved problem by now. Those old monochrome CRT's took much longer to burn in I believe and it'd still happen over time.

 

[Jim Kim]

Courage?

 

[Ocellaris]

Results: Applen has the best resistance to long term burn in

Article headline by Megalith: More Apple clickbait

 

[MMitch]

Isn't apple's display made by Samsung lol ? I guess they implemented some sort of SW workaround or the max brightness of each phone is different ?
I cross read the main linked url but didn't find this information and the Chinese (?) linked url after that, well I didn't bother.

I doubt each phones has the same max brightness and that alone probably affect the burn-in rate dramatically.

 

[Nolan7689]

all three handsets expectedly had potentially permanent signs of burn-in.

If it’s only potentially permanent isn’t it still classified as image retention and therefore not burn-in?
As some that used Plasma for a decade there is a distinct difference. There were a handful of times I’ve seen a screen retain an image and had it fade completely away a couple days later. And that was only ever after accidentally leaving the screen on a static image.

I get that static overlays happen and whatnot, but who the fuck has the time to be on their phone that amount of time for things to burn in? Even when I’m on mine for a few hours everything is changing as I’m switching apps and such all. The only thing that might be consistent would be the time/battery/signal etc. surely it could be a simple thing to just hide all that bullshit.

 

[SixFootDuo]

The only thing I've ever seen burn-in on was my old Westy W3 .... it was faint depending on if the right conditions were met .. I might see some very faint lines. I literally wore that monitor out and then at the end of its life, some guy wanted to buy it for around $400 dollars. He emailed me a few years after the fact and said the thing died on him but that he was happy to have had it and thanked me again ... this was 2010 so going on 8 years ago.


Who leaves their screen on ... on their phone for days? No one. Silly test just like all the drop tests. Moronic

 

[Khahhblaab]

The only thing I've ever seen burn-in on was my old Westy W3 .... it was faint depending on if the right conditions were met .. I might see some very faint lines. I literally wore that monitor out and then at the end of its life, some guy wanted to buy it for around $400 dollars. He emailed me a few years after the fact and said the thing died on him but that he was happy to have had it and thanked me again ... this was 2010 so going on 8 years ago.


Who leaves their screen on ... on their phone for days? No one. Silly test just like all the drop tests. Moronic

...but unfortunately its the way a lot of information about longevity and effectivness are done. I was always surprised that up until recently deciding the toxicity of a drug was done by feeding mice 400/500/1000 times the amount a human adult would take. They give unreasonable amounts to 'mice, and from that data they extrapolate the effects on a human.

So if a drug could be of serious help in normal amounts, we would never know because they gave mice cancer in extraordinary amounts. Playing a static image at overbrightness for 17 hrs straight lets us know that it wont go bad in 16 hrs. From that we say its ready for production.

At least the screen worked.

 

[extide]

Just don't run your brightness so damn high, lol. I have a ~2 year old S7 Edge myself and zero burn in.

 

[XenIneX]

These burn in times are all pretty short. You would think it'd be a mostly solved problem by now. Those old monochrome CRT's took much longer to burn in I believe and it'd still happen over time.

Organic phosphors just don't have the lifespan of whatever cancer-dust they used in the good old days.

If it’s only potentially permanent isn’t it still classified as image retention and therefore not burn-in?
As some that used Plasma for a decade there is a distinct difference. There were a handful of times I’ve seen a screen retain an image and had it fade completely away a couple days later. And that was only ever after accidentally leaving the screen on a static image.

"Retention/persistence" in phosphor displays doesn't exist. It's just marketing wank for "weak burn-in which will be averaged out once you've burned-in the rest of the display to a similar degree; so don't worry, that Brazzers logo should be gone before your family comes over for thanksgiving".

I get that static overlays happen and whatnot, but who the fuck has the time to be on their phone that amount of time for things to burn in? Even when I’m on mine for a few hours everything is changing as I’m switching apps and such all. The only thing that might be consistent would be the time/battery/signal etc. surely it could be a simple thing to just hide all that bullshit.

There are a lot of people who use their phones for GPS during their daily commute. That hour or more a day can add up quick. Also, people who use them as bedside clocks, and set the screen to stay on while charging.

 

[mesyn191]

Organic phosphors just don't have the lifespan of whatever cancer-dust they used in the good old days.

I believe they mostly used common phosphors for CRT's too. The bigger health issue with them from what I remember was lead waste during disposal and manufacture of CRT's. The radiation issue was mostly overblown.

But yeah OLED's still having mediocre to crappy lifespan in 2018 is just getting silly IMO since I keep remembering industry commentary from years ago that these problems were supposed to be not only solved but solved in a affordable if not cheap fashion by now.

 

[shansoft]

Isn't apple's display made by Samsung lol ? I guess they implemented some sort of SW workaround or the max brightness of each phone is different ?
I cross read the main linked url but didn't find this information and the Chinese (?) linked url after that, well I didn't bother.

I doubt each phones has the same max brightness and that alone probably affect the burn-in rate dramatically.

The display is made by Samsung, but the design spec is done by Apple.

iPhone X have the highest brightness out of all. It would be interesting to test all of them on the same brightness.

 

[N4CR]

So I shouldn't leave my phone on the same static image for 17+ days... got it.

Yup, better not use a key pad or send messages for longer than a few months total time too... All UI elements that are static will burn eventually. Orange/yellow/black themes only prolong it for so long.
All oled phones suffer from it eventually and it's why I'll stick to IPS after using a burned in oled for a year.

Blue goes first, even though it's a bigger pixel for this reason but is many times more susceptible. Until they fix blue I wouldn't touch oled.

 

[N4CR]

Isn't apple's display made by Samsung lol ? I guess they implemented some sort of SW workaround or the max brightness of each phone is different ?
I cross read the main linked url but didn't find this information and the Chinese (?) linked url after that, well I didn't bother.

I doubt each phones has the same max brightness and that alone probably affect the burn-in rate dramatically.

Two main ways. Darker UI with minimal blue usage or pixel shifting or both. Brightness of course is another factor. Considering a few [H]'rs have screen on times around 5-8 hrs per day... It happens faster than you think especially if you thrash the phone.

 

[nutzo]

So I shouldn't leave my phone on the same static image for 17+ days... got it.

Isn't that about how long the average iPhone X screen lasts before the phone is dropped and it breaks?

 

[Deleted member 243478]

Gotta love it... first thread full of Apple bashing, Apple proven right and Samsung wrong now everyone says its not important.

HardOCP hate

Apple could have stayed with LCD and mitigated burn in completely...

 

[Stimpy88]

Gotta love it... first thread full of Apple bashing, Apple proven right and Samsung wrong now everyone says its not important.

HardOCP hate

Apple could have stayed with LCD and mitigated burn in completely...

Got to agree with you here. This forum is completely delirious when it comes to Apple hate. It only ends up showing the total ignorance of many here. But I guess it’s fashionable to hate on Apple, and the safe bet to side with the mob.

 

[Gasaraki_]

Results: Applen has the best resistance to long term burn in

Article headline by Megalith: More Apple clickbait

Considering Apple doesn't even make the screen.

 

[Gasaraki_]

The display is made by Samsung, but the design spec is done by Apple.

iPhone X have the highest brightness out of all. It would be interesting to test all of them on the same brightness.

Yeah just like iPhone cameras are made by Sony but designed by Apple... /s

 

[krotch]

Yeah just like iPhone cameras are made by Sony but designed by Apple... /s

I don't think Apple has anything to do with Sony sensors design. They just take the sensor, then design the rest of the camera around it. You can have the best sensor in the world, but if you have crappy lenses or crappy image sensor processor, you will end up with a crappy picture.

I'm just guessing though. They may or may not help design a sensor, but I don't think they need to do it.

 

[viper1152012]

I'm glad samsung is doing so well with the iPhone,

My phone v30 P-OLED looks as good. Minus the burn in, so thanks LG

 

[viper1152012]

"Designed by" I think you mean encapsulated in plastic and glass by Apple.

They don't create much of their tech let alone manufacture it.

 

[Ocellaris]

"Designed by" I think you mean encapsulated in plastic and glass by Apple.

They don't create much of their tech let alone manufacture it.

I belive they design their own CPU and GPU but I guess that doesn’t count?

 

[Derfman]

Gotta love it... first thread full of Apple bashing, Apple proven right and Samsung wrong now everyone says its not important.

HardOCP hate

Apple could have stayed with LCD and mitigated burn in completely...

Aren't they using a Samsung screen?

 

[viper1152012]

So Apple uses an ARM architecture, TSMC makes it and they modified it to be there's.

If I'm not mistaken I thought imagination made the gpu and Apple again modified it.

I stand by my statement.

 

[Ocellaris]

Aren't they using a Samsung screen?

It’s not a certain assumption to think Samsung would use their best tech in their own devices. Apple specs out the display and Samsung makes it. The specs may be too poor from a cost benefit analysis for Samsung to use in Galaxy devices.

 

[Derangel]

So Apple uses an ARM architecture, TSMC makes it and they modified it to be there's.

If I'm not mistaken I thought imagination made the gpu and Apple again modified it.

I stand by my statement.

The A11 GPU was designed by Apple. They did not license it from PowerVR (Imagination). The chips are based around the ARM instruction set, but it is incredibly dense to say that disqualifies them as being designed by Apple. The chips are made to Apple's specifications and demands. It's as stupid as saying Qualcomm doesn't design their own chips because they're based on ARM. Your bias is clouding your judgement.

 

[Deleted member 243478]

Aren't they using a Samsung screen?

A Samsung screen build to Apples standards, not theirs.

 

[viper1152012]

Hmm sounds reasonable, but you sound quite hurt that I lack knowledge. Thanks for being assuming and reinforcing my conclusion that few people can have a discussion without turning into a shit fest.

Did find this"Apple has long designed and built the core processing chips found in iPhones and iPads, but this year reports began to emerge of the company's hope to expand the amount of internal iOS device components that it creates on its own. In April, Apple informed Imagination Technology that it would stop using its graphics technology over the next two years"
So they DO borrow the gpu from imagination LIKE. I STATED. And they bases the cpu on ARM foundation with a lemon twist.

Good on them.

 

[Khahhblaab]

Apple could have stayed with LCD and mitigated burn in completely...

True, but OLED's have a major advantage when Apple wants to sell the thinnest sleekest "i<want an apple>phone". Because of the lack of a back screen to illuminate it, OLED's are thinner by far. All LCD's are illuminated by some type of light, leds being the fashionable way today that add a bit of thickness. OLED's cant be beat when it comes to designing the thin phones that the public wants. The trade off is that a supremely thinner phone comes with a supremely thinner battery - and less battery time.

If you have seen pictures of 'roll-up oled's', you see how thin they can get.

 

[Derangel]

Hmm sounds reasonable, but you sound quite hurt that I lack knowledge. Thanks for being assuming and reinforcing my conclusion that few people can have a discussion without turning into a shit fest.

Did find this"Apple has long designed and built the core processing chips found in iPhones and iPads, but this year reports began to emerge of the company's hope to expand the amount of internal iOS device components that it creates on its own. In April, Apple informed Imagination Technology that it would stop using its graphics technology over the next two years"
So they DO borrow the gpu from imagination LIKE. I STATED. And they bases the cpu on ARM foundation with a lemon twist.

Good on them.

Sorry, I did make a shitty assumption. Easy to do around here when so many people decide its better to blind themselves to facts.

As for the GPU, yeah its still based on some aspect of PowerVR's tech. Notebookcheck called it PowerVR Rogue. It sounds like something that is heavily modified by Apple and not based on a chip licensed from Imagination. Prior A chips used GPUs licensed from Imagination/PowerVR and customized to Apple's wishes. Much like the screens they use. Apple doesn't build in-house, but they do control the design of a lot of the stuff they put in their iOS devices.

 

[Khahhblaab]

The A11 GPU was designed by Apple. They did not license it from PowerVR (Imagination). The chips are based around the ARM instruction set, but it is incredibly dense to say that disqualifies them as being designed by Apple. The chips are made to Apple's specifications and demands. It's as stupid as saying Qualcomm doesn't design their own chips because they're based on ARM. Your bias is clouding your judgement.

.......its possible that the two of you are focusing on two different things. The A11 chip has some GPU abilities but its mainly a CPU.

Just wondering since both of the points brought are right.....and almost in agreement

 

[Deleted member 243478]

True, but OLED's have a major advantage when Apple wants to sell the thinnest sleekest "i<want an apple>phone". Because of the lack of a back screen to illuminate it, OLED's are thinner by far. All LCD's are illuminated by some type of light, leds being the fashionable way today that add a bit of thickness. OLED's cant be beat when it comes to designing the thin phones that the public wants. The trade off is that a supremely thinner phone comes with a supremely thinner battery - and less battery time.

If you have seen pictures of 'roll-up oled's', you see how thin they can get.

They went to OLED because consumers were demanding it more than anything. Aparently them using LCD means it was an inferior product. The power savings are substantial though.

Apple always planned on going OLED when they were happy with its performance and mitigated drawbacks.

 

[rudy]

It’s not a certain assumption to think Samsung would use their best tech in their own devices. Apple specs out the display and Samsung makes it. The specs may be too poor from a cost benefit analysis for Samsung to use in Galaxy devices.

Yes however OLED technology and burn in is dependent on a lot of factors. Pixel density, size of sub pixels, etc... And the iPhone OLED is not the same density / resolution as what is on a note 8. So even though they are both made by Samsung, Samsung is dealing with different displays.

If it’s only potentially permanent isn’t it still classified as image retention and therefore not burn-in?
As some that used Plasma for a decade there is a distinct difference. There were a handful of times I’ve seen a screen retain an image and had it fade completely away a couple days later. And that was only ever after accidentally leaving the screen on a static image.

I get that static overlays happen and whatnot, but who the fuck has the time to be on their phone that amount of time for things to burn in? Even when I’m on mine for a few hours everything is changing as I’m switching apps and such all. The only thing that might be consistent would be the time/battery/signal etc. surely it could be a simple thing to just hide all that bullshit.

Like most scientific experiments it is set up to get us a window into something that would otherwise be impossible or impossibly expensive and time consuming to test. While you can never be fully sure of something we can consider it highly likely that this burn in test will predict resilience to long term burn in caused by people having the same or a similar image on their screen too much, but not all for days strait. Burn in is a process that happens when pixels wear out over time. It is not an on and off scenario its a gradual process. And just the same reversing burn in is similar. Its not really that the burn in goes away over time its more like the other pixels just eventually burn down in a fashion that you cannot see it. So if a phone lasts longer than another or has less burn in, I think that can be a good thing. It may come with tradeoffs though such as decreased pixel density, it wouldn't be surprising to me if in general lower pixel density displays had bigger subpixels that would not show burn in as fast.

Just looking the test over I can see that the maximum brightness on the displays is not the same, this could also mask some of the burn in. IE if you have a change in pixel brightness due to burn in, it would be harder to see if the white light around it is much brighter because the difference would appear smaller. Also one of the most common ways to reduce OLED burn in is to dim the display more quickly and further when you aren't looking at it. Given the iPhone X is all about facial recognition seems likely they are doing this and it will be interesting to know if or how the testers controlled for this. ​

 

[Khahhblaab]

They went to OLED because consumers were demanding it more than anything. Aparently them using LCD means it was an inferior product. The power savings are substantial though.

Apple always planned on going OLED when they were happy with its performance and mitigated drawbacks.

Exactly! Even though consumers seem invisible to most, they actually drive what the makers make. When consumers want thinner....etc, OLED makes the cut because it affords the best way to go thin because its the thinnest display technology perfected to manufacturing - today.

LCD's isnt an inferior technology. Its just not as thin. Different. Based on a blend of different technologies.

All differences in display technologies gain somewhere else.

LCDs? Thicker, when thinking about a thin smart phone.

OLED's? Thinner, but more costly to go large.

Trade off's is actually what drives these ideas. Iphone doesnt have to cost a grand, thats the trade off we get when a device becomes a cultural need. An iconic must have.

Mitigated drawbacks-------->trade offs.

way things are made.

 

[viper1152012]

Hmmm. Poled claims to be immune to burn in