Originally Posted by Bearly
Thanks for the reply. I read AT daily (daily!) and have seen that Preview. However, I disagree with them on a few things and that's namely their screen tests:
They list the Droid X and Droid 2 as having higher brightness than the Fascinate, which I can honestly say (I own a Fascinate and friend's own X and the D2) is just plain wrong. The contrast is also better on the Fascinate. I have no clue how they're measuring their data but it's simply wrong; the Fascinate is substantially brighter than either of those two and is even better in sunlight.
Again, I hope the Bionic is a nice phone, despite having an encrypted bootloader. I don't think I'll get an LTE phone until I see a 4" qHD screen and at LEAST 1 GB RAM to be honest. My Fascinate has what, 384 MB RAM free? I can't play a game or and come back to Home without screen redraws which can take a while. Really annoying.
You might be right about the Fascinate being brighter, and on the actual total contrast ratio I believe the Galaxy S phones are absent, perhaps because a true brightness of zero yields an otherworldly higher true contrast ratio. And photos and video certainly look more vibrant (hehehe) on SuperAMOLED. My point was simply comparing the above to the Atrix screen left me MOST disappointed with the Atrix, other than one single factor - sharpness. And when the Bionic takes that screen and makes it bigger, they are taking some of the ONLY advantage that screen had over the others to begin with. Bad move.
Originally Posted by jinwons
The smaller RAM on Galaxy S is due to allocating some part of it to PowerVR 540 GPU in Hummingbird processor. So it's full size is still 512Mb. Doesn't Tegra2 based phone allocate some part of RAM to its GeForce GPU too?
Whether it does or not, this is one case where we DO want more gee bee's, regardless!