For years, I’ve been telling people here, and in other places, that OLED screens are not more efficient than LCD screens, but I’m generally ignored in that. Time and again, writers write of the higher efficiency, and I continually correct them.
i’m happy to see that finally, some sense, and understanding has reached the public on this issue. On the other hand, MicroLED is more efficient. The problem is that OLED is very inefficient when compared to LED. The organic nature limits efficiency and total brightness. One major reason is that unlike LED, OLED is very temperature sensitive. The higher the voltage (and current) the higher the temp gets. The hotter an LED, or OLED gets, the shorter the lifetime. OLED lifetimes shrink rapidly at temperatures that are very modest. Ironically, LCD uses LED backlighting that’s vastly brighter than an OLED can be. As LED gets more efficient, and brighter, something we’re all aware of with LED lighting advances, LED backlights need less power for the same output.
while OLED has been getting more efficient too, and brighter, it still needs more power, overall, across the contrast range. While we read so much about OLED not using power when a Pixel is black (it does use a tiny amount), we read less about the large amount needed when a Pixel is white. It’s why most OLED UIs are mostly black. The average can easily exceed the power needed by the same size and Rez LCD.
this is why Apple has invested so much in MicroLED R&D. Others have followed. I’m hoping we see those screens sooner than later.
Not so, it's the CPU that's killing the battery. To Apple's credit, the iPhone CPU is blazing fast, much faster than Android, but it comes at a price.
It is the display then the RAM. The RAM must be continuously powered. The bigger the RAM the less battery life you have. CPU can be throttled, you cannot throttle the display or the RAM.
Initially the battery life of my Max seemed dramatically worse than the old X (which was fantastic), but after ~ a couple weeks, the Max seemed to be doing as well as the X. (This is all very scientific, mind you.) I was wondering if, for example, the Bionic side of things runs in the background, until it learns about you or your photos or your ____, and then things settle down to a more copasetic rate of battery consumption. Basically, every tester could be right, including Consumer Reports, just depending on when they tested.
That is the exact same behaviour I saw as well. My XS Max seemed to drain faster than my X. Now, about 1.5 months later, the XS Max is doing really well.
I also think that the bug, where it wouldn't charge till it was unlocked on occasions, may have played a part as well. I was caught off-guard a couple of times by that.
Could it not also be to do with Apple refining the software? I bet your phone shipped with iOS12 and since then you have upgraded to 12.01 and then again to 12.1?
this is a perfect example of theory not living up to reality. Another source of power drain is the fact that often the OLED displays are higher resolution, so at least some of the potential power savings are eaten up by higher resolution. I compared the screen of the Xs with that of the Xr and I couldn't see an appreciable difference, so I'm perfectly happy to take a high quality LCD screen over the OLED.
I have never been able to run iPhones for 1.5-2 days on a single full charge in the past since iPhone 4. Now with iPhone X, I am able to. That says a lot...
And my iPhone X which isn’t even a year old yet won’t manage a single day any more!
Its showing the 20% low battery warning by 6pm these days and I’m guessing it’s all downhill from here...
Both the iPhone X and the XS use OLED displays, so the introduction of OLED is not a logical reason to explain a worse battery performance on the XS compared to the X. Other factors must be at play.
Seperately, it’s interesting that the use of an OLED display on the iPhone X was touted by many news outlets and blogs in 2017 (though notably not by Apple) as likely leading to improved battery life, due to OLED pixels not drawing power when in their off state and not requiring power-hungry LED backlighting.
A number of those same outlets and blogs are now touting the iPhone XR’s apparent better battery life as down to the use of an LED display being less power-hungry than OLED.
Both the iPhone X and the XS use OLED displays, so the introduction of OLED is not a logical reason to explain a worse battery performance on the XS compared to the X. Other factors must be at play.
Seperately, it’s interesting that the use of an OLED display on the iPhone X was touted by many news outlets and blogs in 2017 (though notably not by Apple) as likely leading to improved battery life, due to OLED pixels not drawing power when in their off state and not requiring power-hungry LED backlighting.
A number of those same outlets and blogs are now touting the iPhone XR’s apparent better battery life as down to the use of an LED display being less power-hungry than OLED.
There’s a lot of misinformation out there due to the screen manufacturers of OLED displays pushing the popular idea of higher efficiency. It’s never been true. The brighter an OLED gets, the more power it sucks. Apple and Samsung have, for OLEDs, very bright screens. At about 250 bits, the best OLEDs and the best LCDs are about the same in efficiency. Go lower and OLEDs easily win. But at 350 LCDs are slightly ahead, and at 500, they’re well ahead. At the top 650, or so, there’s no contest.
its interesting to note that in testing the new Pixel 3, not the XL with the Samsung screen, but the LG screen, Anandtech found that it just goes to 400 bits. Black levels clipped again too, but not as badly. I mention this because of the talk of Apple giving $2.7 billion to LG in some way to help them improve their screens for use in Apple’s new phones, as a secondary manufacturer. I hope that if Apple does use them, the screens are better than the one in the new Pixel 3.
Comments
i’m happy to see that finally, some sense, and understanding has reached the public on this issue. On the other hand, MicroLED is more efficient. The problem is that OLED is very inefficient when compared to LED. The organic nature limits efficiency and total brightness. One major reason is that unlike LED, OLED is very temperature sensitive. The higher the voltage (and current) the higher the temp gets. The hotter an LED, or OLED gets, the shorter the lifetime. OLED lifetimes shrink rapidly at temperatures that are very modest. Ironically, LCD uses LED backlighting that’s vastly brighter than an OLED can be. As LED gets more efficient, and brighter, something we’re all aware of with LED lighting advances, LED backlights need less power for the same output.
while OLED has been getting more efficient too, and brighter, it still needs more power, overall, across the contrast range. While we read so much about OLED not using power when a Pixel is black (it does use a tiny amount), we read less about the large amount needed when a Pixel is white. It’s why most OLED UIs are mostly black. The average can easily exceed the power needed by the same size and Rez LCD.
this is why Apple has invested so much in MicroLED R&D. Others have followed. I’m hoping we see those screens sooner than later.
Not likely. Batteries rely on chemical movement of ions between the cathode and anode. No movement, no power.
Ditto for my XS Max vs. my iPhone 8 Plus.
Its showing the 20% low battery warning by 6pm these days and I’m guessing it’s all downhill from here...
Still that’s much better than my iPhone 6S...:)
Seperately, it’s interesting that the use of an OLED display on the iPhone X was touted by many news outlets and blogs in 2017 (though notably not by Apple) as likely leading to improved battery life, due to OLED pixels not drawing power when in their off state and not requiring power-hungry LED backlighting.
A number of those same outlets and blogs are now touting the iPhone XR’s apparent better battery life as down to the use of an LED display being less power-hungry than OLED.
its interesting to note that in testing the new Pixel 3, not the XL with the Samsung screen, but the LG screen, Anandtech found that it just goes to 400 bits. Black levels clipped again too, but not as badly. I mention this because of the talk of Apple giving $2.7 billion to LG in some way to help them improve their screens for use in Apple’s new phones, as a secondary manufacturer. I hope that if Apple does use them, the screens are better than the one in the new Pixel 3.