HTC M9 Specs Leak (No QHD)

[smooth4lyfe]

Personally wish it had a QHD screen...what do yall think?
__________________
The HTC One (M9) will supposedly have a 64-bit quad-core Snapdragon 810 chipset indeed, clocked at 2.0 GHz, and aided by 3 GB of the best RAM there is - DDR4. When it comes to the display, however a 5" panel with "only" a 1080p resolution is listed, so things won't change much from the current edition in that respect.

What's changing, however, is arguably the HTC flagships' weakest spot - the camera resolution - as the new One M9 is said to arrive with a 20.7 MP rear camera with dual LED flash, and a 4 MP UltraPixel shooter in the front. A 2840 mAh battery is said to power all that jazz, and we can't say we are disappointed by the screen resolution, given the battery capacity, as we will probably get plenty of screen-on time with a juicer that is larger than the one on the M8. The One M9 will allegedly come in 32 GB and 64 GB internal storage versions, and run Android 5.0.2 Lollipop, with a new Sense 7.0 sprinkled on top.

Complete list of HTC One M9 specs and accessories leaks: 5" display, larger battery

 

[John-Smith]

I think it's smart to stick with 1080p for a couple more years. Not only is it cheaper, but it just makes everything on the phone run better all around, from battery to performance.

 

[Habiib]

With the lack of native 2K content and the given screen size, I'm glad they aren't wasting resources on something I wouldn't notice nor be able to distinguish from FHD.

I'm more curious about the Toshiba camera sensor though.

Posted via the Android Central App

 

[I Can Be Your Hero]

I'd rather a 1080p screen due to it being less stressful on the processor, which would lead to better battery life and having owned an LG G3, I didn't feel there was a perceivable advantage in having a 1440p screen over a 1080p screen.

5" screen on 1080p is way more than adequate. The M8 was praised for having a great screen last year, I don't see how that will make it a bad screen this year.

Plus as Habiib has said, there is a lack of 2k content. Most content is made for 1080p. Sure more stuff will roll out eventually and apps will update to 1440p but again, to me the difference going to a 2k screen was negligible.

I like that HTC will be going with a 1080p screen. Add that with 5" size and 2840mah batter, it should mean a device with some pretty great battery life. Then of course there's HTC's best-in-the-business design and build materials/quality, dual front facing boomsound speakers and the M8's biggest criticism, the camera, getting boosted to a 20mp shooter, I think that's a combination for a pretty spectacular device.

I think HTC are on track to having the best smartphone of 2015. With the camera being addressed, it's as if the phone will now have no real weaknesses.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[Crimsonforce]

I think they had to do 1080P instead of QHD to keep the 810 from overheating. Samsung GS6 is going to be QHD but they aren't using the 810 because of overheating problems. Probably a smart move by HTC since they don't make any chips in house like Samsung (exynos).

 

[James E1]

I think they had to do 1080P instead of QHD to keep the 810 from overheating. Samsung GS6 is going to be QHD but they aren't using the 810 because of overheating problems. Probably a smart move by HTC since they don't make any chips in house like Samsung (exynos).

Don't think that had anything to do with. They know that 1080p is all you need on a screen under 7".

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Crimsonforce]

Don't think that had anything to do with. They know that 1080p is all you need on a screen under 7".

Posted via Android Central App

I don't know for sure that it did but logical thinking would say so. Almost all flagships phone are coming with QHD now. I prefer 1080P for better battery life and performance. Just sharing my thoughts..

 

[James E1]

No problem we all have opinions. But using your logic would mean that the M9 ultra would also have a 1080p screen. The M9 ultra is rumored to have the Snapdragon 810 chip and have a QHD screen. So IMO that has nothing to do with it.

 

[Senden]

Can you really tell the difference on a 5inch screen anyway? Any word on memory expansion? Didn't the M8 come with a micro sd slot? Hope that returns for the M9.

 

[spiff_p239]

I personally don't see the need for such a high resolution screen and appreciate the fact that it will be cheaper to purchase off-contract as a result.

 

[smooth4lyfe]

With the lack of native 2K content and the given screen size, I'm glad they aren't wasting resources on something I wouldn't notice nor be able to distinguish from FHD.

I'm more curious about the Toshiba camera sensor though.

Posted via the Android Central App

While this is true, I would have preferred the QHD screen because as more 2K videos start rolling out, you can experience it as they do, rather than having to change to a new phone later to finally experience it...I like the fact that companies are starting to incorporate QHD this early because it gives them and consumers a head start to try it out. And I can assure u a 2K video will be noticeable different than a 1080p one on a cell phone. I'v compared my Z3 to the Note 4 playing a 2K video and the difference is quite noticeable

 

[Habiib]

While this is true, I would have preferred the QHD screen because as more 2K videos start rolling out, you can experience it as they do, rather than having to change to a new phone later to finally experience it...I like the fact that companies are starting to incorporate QHD this early because it gives them and consumers a head start to try it out. And I can assure u a 2K video will be noticeable different than a 1080p one on a cell phone. I'v compared my Z3 to the Note 4 playing a 2K video and the difference is quite noticeable

What!?!?! How is there a noticeable difference between 1080p and 1440p on ~5" display. Do you realize how close your viewing distance will have to be from the display to even remotely notice a big difference on a screen that size? The only exception would be if you zoom in on native 2K or higher video (via scaling). Also, I'm not seeing any widespread rollout of native 2K content. The only 2K content that I've noticed to be somewhat widely available is YouTube videos (that have the option to begin with). Why on earth would a company even devote resources to making 2K content when 4K media is the most adopted successor to 1080p and is what most mid to high-end consumer TVs are supporting? On a 2K display, 4K content would have to be down scaled, and yes that includes mobile devices that can record 4K video. Even if you want to include gaming, what percentage of available or planned games for mobile devices, have been modified or developed for 2K resolution. The question is quite simple, what major benefit does a 1440p display offer over a 1080p display on a mobile phone? If someone says more detailed images, then how many scenarios are there where the said difference can be clearly identified?

Posted via the Android Central App

 

[msavic6]

There are multiple aspects that combine to create a great display. Resolution is only a small part of the whole equation. The iPhone 6 has a great looking display and it isn't even 720p while other devices like the G3 have a QHD screen yet look like "crap" in comparison.

Color Accuracy, white balance, brightness, contrast, and viewing angles are all ultimately more important than the resolution. You don't need QHD resolution to make a great display but you do need the above aspects to make a great display.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[smooth4lyfe]

What!?!?! How is there a noticeable difference between 1080p and 1440p on ~5" display. Do you realize how close your viewing distance will have to be from the display to even remotely notice a big difference on a screen that size? The only exception would be if you zoom in on native 2K or higher video (via scaling). Also, I'm not seeing any widespread rollout of native 2K content. The only 2K content that I've noticed to be somewhat widely available is YouTube videos (that have the option to begin with). Why on earth would a company even devote resources to making 2K content when 4K media is the most adopted successor to 1080p and is what most mid to high-end consumer TVs are supporting? On a 2K display, 4K content would have to be down scaled, and yes that includes mobile devices that can record 4K video. Even if you want to include gaming, what percentage of available or planned games for mobile devices, have been modified or developed for 2K resolution. The question is quite simple, what major benefit does a 1440p display offer over a 1080p display on a mobile phone? If someone says more detailed images, then how many scenarios are there where the said difference can be clearly identified?

Posted via the Android Central App

Well yeah I do not dispute that the difference may not be a huge one, but its definitely noticeable. It may also have something to do with the type of screen technology that each company uses. Samsung used AMOLED and Sony uses its own IPS I believe. All I can say is that the difference was clearly noticeable on the phones screen when I compared. And my point is not saying that phones companies should make 2K, but merely phones developers should start making phones in preparation for the latest video resolution (be it 2K, or 4K) that are starting to be prevalent and soon the norm, so long as it doesnt affect the phone performance. It is not disputable that 2K and 4K videos will start being the norm in a few years. Why wait till then to develop them when companied can make them now, without severely affecting phone performance? I think Samsung has done a good job with that on the Note 4. It was able to use a QHD screen and keep battery performance at an optimal level. I personally think more phone companies should learn to do the same. I have no problem with HTC sticking with 1080p. I just wont be getting that phone personally.

 

[smooth4lyfe]

There are multiple aspects that combine to create a great display. Resolution is only a small part of the whole equation. The iPhone 6 has a great looking display and it isn't even 720p while other devices like the G3 have a QHD screen yet look like "crap" in comparison.

Color Accuracy, white balance, brightness, contrast, and viewing angles are all ultimately more important than the resolution. You don't need QHD resolution to make a great display but you do need the above aspects to make a great display.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

This is agree with for sure. I am sure that if 2 different companies had QHD resolution screens, they would certainly not look the same. I know Samsung is usually bright and over saturated, which does add to the look and affect of how a video or picture looks. LG is less saturated and looks much different

 

[warpdrive]

Well yeah I do not dispute that the difference may not be a huge one, but its definitely noticeable. It may also have something to do with the type of screen technology that each company uses. Samsung used AMOLED and Sony uses its own IPS I believe. All I can say is that the difference was clearly noticeable on the phones screen when I compared. And my point is not saying that phones companies should make 2K, but merely phones developers should start making phones in preparation for the latest video resolution (be it 2K, or 4K) that are starting to be prevalent and soon the norm, so long as it doesnt affect the phone performance. It is not disputable that 2K and 4K videos will start being the norm in a few years. Why wait till then to develop them when companied can make them now, without severely affecting phone performance? I think Samsung has done a good job with that on the Note 4. It was able to use a QHD screen and keep battery performance at an optimal level. I personally think more phone companies should learn to do the same. I have no problem with HTC sticking with 1080p. I just wont be getting that phone personally.

Why wait? Then why did you not skip the S5 and jump on the G3? With all the flaws, it wasn't a bad screen and 2K no less.

I understand that you're a huge Samsung fan and I get that you may want to stay with them at this time. But the N6 and the G3 already had great screens besides the note 4 and well you didn't jump ship.

Now you're saying that if only the m9 had a QHD display you would have left Samsung? I'm sorry, but I just don't belive it based on your past. The Samsung S6 could have had a 720p screen and you would have gotten it and sadly, us regular full time readers of this site know this.

With much respect,
Warpdrive

Posted via Android Central App using the all new HTC One (m8)

 

[smooth4lyfe]

Why wait? Then why did you not skip the S5 and jump on the G3? With all the flaws, it wasn't a bad screen and 2K no less.

I understand that you're a huge Samsung fan and I get that you may want to stay with them at this time. But the N6 and the G3 already had great screens besides the note 4 and well you didn't jump ship.

Now you're saying that if only the m9 had a QHD display you would have left Samsung? I'm sorry, but I just don't belive it based on your past. The Samsung S6 could have had a 720p screen and you would have gotten it and sadly, us regular full time readers of this site know this.

With much respect,
Warpdrive

Posted via Android Central App using the all new HTC One (m8)

I'm not even saying this as a Samsung fan, I am just saying what I think
I currently have the Z3 and I LOVE this phone. Its way better than the S5. I switched mainly because the camera and the battery life. The low light on the Z3 is eons better than the S5

I'm not sure why you got so offended by my post. I can tell you a lot of things I dislike about the S6 (such as the bezels, and I am hoping they fix the camera), but the fact that you judge me by something I've posted shows the immaturity of some of the people on this forum.

 

[Habiib]

Well yeah I do not dispute that the difference may not be a huge one, but its definitely noticeable. It may also have something to do with the type of screen technology that each company uses. Samsung used AMOLED and Sony uses its own IPS I believe. All I can say is that the difference was clearly noticeable on the phones screen when I compared. And my point is not saying that phones companies should make 2K, but merely phones developers should start making phones in preparation for the latest video resolution (be it 2K, or 4K) that are starting to be prevalent and soon the norm, so long as it doesnt affect the phone performance. It is not disputable that 2K and 4K videos will start being the norm in a few years. Why wait till then to develop them when companied can make them now, without severely affecting phone performance? I think Samsung has done a good job with that on the Note 4. It was able to use a QHD screen and keep battery performance at an optimal level. I personally think more phone companies should learn to do the same. I have no problem with HTC sticking with 1080p. I just wont be getting that phone personally.

Ahhh there's one caveat I missed. With AMOLED display technology, THERE IS a huge difference between the FHD and QHD panels. The pixel arrangement itself is why the difference is so noticeable, as evident when comparing say the Note 3 and Note 4 displays. The icons, images, etc are noticeably sharper on QHD AMOLED panels vs FHD. If the HTC One series were using AMOLED tech, then maybe would sign off on the notion that it would be of great benefit to incorporate QHD resolution, but for LCD panels, not much.

Posted via the Android Central App

 

[warpdrive]

I'm not even saying this as a Samsung fan, I am just saying what I think
I currently have the Z3 and I LOVE this phone. Its way better than the S5. I switched mainly because the camera and the battery life. The low light on the Z3 is eons better than the S5

I'm not sure why you got so offended by my post. I can tell you a lot of things I dislike about the S6 (such as the bezels, and I am hoping they fix the camera), but the fact that you judge me by something I've posted shows the immaturity of some of the people on this forum.

So if I shouldn't judge you based on what you posted both in the past and currently, then what should I judge you by? Hmmm, see what I mean.

As for owning the z3, I had no idea. I'm glad that you are willing to try other things, unlike what I thought before. I stand corrected.

But above all I want to point out that I'm not trying to be hostile with you at all. If anything, I respect the contribution you provide in both the Samsung forums as well as the rest of this website. If my last reply seemed otherwise, I'm sorry for the confusion.

Yet, you still didn't answer my question.
Since the G3,N6,and the N4 all have a 2K screens (2 of them Amoled), why did you not get one since you feel it is so important at this time? It's a legitimate question especially since you went with a phone that doesn't have such a screen to replace your S5. Or maybe a better way of asking my question is, why is it important now yet wasn't important to you say in the past 6 months?

Posted via Android Central App using the all new HTC One (m8)

 

[smooth4lyfe]

Yet, you still didn't answer my question.
Since the G3,N6,and the N4 all have a 2K screens (2 of them Amoled), why did you not get one since you feel it is so important at this time? It's a legitimate question especially since you went with a phone that doesn't have such a screen to replace your S5. Or maybe a better way of asking my question is, why is it important now yet wasn't important to you say in the past 6 months?

Posted via Android Central App using the all new HTC One (m8)

The screen type is not dispositive to my choosing of a phone. I look at everything as a whole. On one my biggest requirements in a phone is the camera. The N6 and the N4 just do not do justice in that area. As for the G3, I was never really a fan of LG phones, though I was considering getting the LG Flex.

When it comes to the screen type, its only one of the things I look like, but that alone will not justify my decision to buy a phone.