"Even though the Galaxy SII and the Galaxy Note have AMOLED Plus (whoops!) different AMOLED screens, Samsung explained that the blue subpixels in those matrices degrade faster than their red and green brethren. This doesn’t happen in the Pentile this doesn’t happen as quickly, and Samsung wants to keep your screen bright and vibrant for at least 18 months. You shouldn’t notice much of a difference between a Galaxy Nexus’ screen and the new SIII. Is the longevity of your screen a good trade-off for the quality?"
So supposedly it it suppose to make the blue and red LEDs bigger as it has lower luminous efficiency, smaller greens because green has the highest luminous efficiency per power ratio and that from a biological stand point, humans eyes are more sensitive to green light thus not requiring as much lux to display a evenly bright vivid imagine.
Because blue and reds have lower luminous efficiency rating, making them all the same size as green while providing a evenly vivid imagine would mean more power going to the red and blue LED (blue being the most) and that would shorten the lifespan thus degrading faster (Blue>Red>Green). As a result bigger LED are made so it can create the same amount of light at roughly the same voltage/watt as a smaller green LED but however from my 3 year old Super Amoled screen that is on the Galaxy S, blue seems to show burn ins while red and green are almost non existent.
Samsung claims it is to extend its lifespan but it degrades equally as fast so why can't they just stick with regular RGB stripes instead for example?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2
