• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Evo 4G vs Epic 4G

Which phone would you choose?

  • Epic 4G

    Votes: 203 21.1%
  • Evo 4G

    Votes: 758 78.9%

  • Total voters
    961
Welcome to the forums!

The Evos have always been mis-specified. The android apps such as the photo gallery are actually limited to 16-bit color (64k, what marketing types call 65k). I understand the newer ones are shipping with Sony displays - if so, that's 20-bit color, or 256k colors.

As each phone is using what they factory adjust, all users can get to is brightness. There's no contrast or gamma so if you hold either up to a calibrated HDTV, you'll see that each is off-color in its own way.

The Evo has a superior cpu, the Epic has a superior gpu. That's the whole "faster processor" difference, seriously.

They're both top notch, make your choice on features and what's right for you.

Most of us enjoy the steady updates, support and immediate Froyo capabilities. Anyone saying it doesn't matter on a "faster" processor is not really getting the point of Froyo - and probably hasn't really tried it.

Anyway - both top notch phones, you won't go wrong with either one with Froyo.
 
Thanks for the replies. My main question is as to whether the consensus is that the Epic's AMOLED screen (being that the Epic is newer than the Evo) is, indeed, BETTER than TFT LCD, or if it's just looks that way to the naive customer (me) because it's so over-saturated. Much like the way LED TVs *pop* to the viewer, and then you realize that's a bad thing, since it makes everything look like a cartoon -- so you buy a plasma.

Really, the only reason I'd get the Epic is for the AMOLED. If it indeed is more life-like, natural, etc. than the Evo's screen.

Also, is there any validity to the idea that 16M colors is better than 65k (or 64k), as far as what the human eye can actually discern? 16M sounds a lot higher...on paper. But if 65k is brilliant enough for the human eye, then what do I care?

Thanks!
 
Again, I'm not making this up - it's at least 256k colors vs. 16M colors when playing video.

Can the eye see the difference in the real world? Oh, you betcha and more.

Can the eye see the difference when downsampling an HD source that really has that color range to an ED screen and can the eye discern that on such a small screen? That will vary by individual - and it will vary A lot - and it has nothing to do with eyesight quality as much as program content.

It's not that the SAMOLED screen is set so much to an HDTV's Vivid (or equivalent) setting - it's that it can go a bit brighter and when demo'd in that mode, it pops. Like a TV on a showroom floor, you won't watch your videos at that high setting. Adjusted for the same brightness, the difference is one of errors - the Evo will be wrong in one direction, the Samsung in the other.

Because they both lack gamma adjustments.

Where the SAMOLED really might make a difference in that pop-ability is for playing games (vivid cartoon colors anyway) and for using as a phone or web reader in a brighter light environment.

The other place the SAMOLED makes a difference - less power consumption when putting out the same amount of light than the Evo.

I'm lucky - I took an Evo and a Samsung and cued up the exact same video (720p) on each and same on my properly adjusted HDTV - holding each phone at a distance so the relative size to the eye was the same as the HDTV at a distance - and each at a subjectively adjusted matching brightness.

Under those conditions, they were both color-wrong compared to the correct HDTV source.

Side by side without the TV source, I thought the SAMOLD looked better. When comparing each to the HDTV, the SAMOLED was exhibiting black-crushing. So it looks more contrasty and less washed out as the Evo in a quick comparison - but there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

It's a tradeoffs of errors where color accuracy is concerned.

If you brain, intuition or your eyes say the Sammy is the way to go, then go with the Sammy - it's _your_ phone.

But the marketing myth that the SAMOLED is more accurate is simply that - a marketing myth.

They're equally in error, so choose the one that pleases you if it's down to screen selection.

If you take the Samsung route, and have lingering doubt of what I say, then your other take away is that compared to the older AMOLED screen, the SAMOLED is much better.

The tests I did said the Evo was a bit red heavy while the Sammy was a bit blue-heavy - while a friend across country doing the same thing said the Evo was blue-heavy while the Sammy was red-heavy.

And that's the outcome of unit-to-unit manufacturing variations when we have no chroma adjustment for either one.

Not as exciting as what fans on either side will argue - but the boring truth, in simple manufacturing and engineering terms.

Both sides have ardent followers ready to defend their favorite because in truth, the Evo doesn't wash out and the Samsung doesn't over-saturate (like the earlier AMOLED did). Simply a case of complimentary errors - the actual color truth is in-between any two units you'll try in the real world.

Hope that helps, and I'll leave you with this advice - when viewing subjectively, trust your gut - you've got to live with your purchase, and it's your gut.

PS - I didn't have the selection when I choose the Evo. Now that I do, I'd still choose the Evo - having nothing to do with the screen, but the devices other feature differences.

Your mileage may vary - or may be the same.

And by the way - my eyesight is quite good when adjusted for astigmatism.
 
As the man did, I would rip a movie you like to 480x800 and put it on a microSD card. Take it into the store and play it on both. Visit a website or two you frequent often. Then decide which looks better to your eye. As he also said, this isn't your HDTV. Can't pop a calibration disc in and tweak it for accuracy. Both technologies have their good and bad and you have to decide for yourself which one you want to look at on a daily basis. That takes all the good, bad and ugly advice from schmucks like us out of the picture. And it's the same advice I gave my customers when they came in to the showroom looking for a new tv. Doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks about which is better. They were the ones watching movies and shows on a regular basis. It's what looks good to your eyes.
I'm lucky - I took an Evo and a Samsung and cued up the exact same video (720p) on each and same on my properly adjusted HDTV - holding each phone at a distance so the relative size to the eye was the same as the HDTV at a distance - and each at a subjectively adjusted matching brightness.
 
OK, I'm an idiot... I need something at 800x480, right? The smallest size I can see on that site is like 854x480... Will that size work?
 
It won't give the full range of pastels common to real movies, but it does give a quick look at the major color points in both dark and light scenes.

I found it ideal for my use.

The other would've been Good Night and Good Luck, for the definitive study in overall contrast and dynamic range - but a digital copy of that has remained out of my reach.
 
OK, I'm an idiot... I need something at 800x480, right? The smallest size I can see on that site is like 854x480... Will that size work?

You're not an idiot - that's an honest question and I apologize for not anticipating it.

Yes the 854x480 will work, and the 720p copy will work well, too. Either you get it down-sampled at the source, or your phone will down-sample it.

The detailing difference in the various downsampling schemes won't matter in my opinion.

This is strictly an overall color test.

You might also download the 720p one to see if you feel there's any difference in downsampling to 800x480 in either phone - to your eyes. I predict no visible difference.

Edit - seeing dbpaddler's post - no argument.
 
Thanks for all your help, guys. Sprint store wouldn't let me put an SD card into the phones, but going back helped me decide. Ordering the Evo tomorrow! Now to find a case.

BTW, the store did confirm that the Evo screens are now made by Sony, but I couldn't get confirmation that it's now 256k colors versus the previous 65k.

Also, does the Evo 4g now handle simultaneous voice/data? I saw reports that it didn't initially -- but that Sprint was working on it. I live in a 4g city, if that makes a difference...
 
BTW, the store did confirm that the Evo screens are now made by Sony, but I couldn't get confirmation that it's now 256k colors versus the previous 65k.

Trust me - it's a 20-bit display, 256k colors. If you look at the HTC specs, it also says the Evo is at Android 2.1 - they don't update these things, that's all.

Also, does the Evo 4g now handle simultaneous voice/data? I saw reports that it didn't initially -- but that Sprint was working on it. I live in a 4g city, if that makes a difference...

Voice on CDMA (3G radio) and data on 4G or WiFi, that's simultaneous - no simulataneous voice and data on CDMA only. CDMA is perfectly capable of handling all data - just not as fast as 4G or wifi - and it only does one or the other at a time.
 
thanks. reviews look good, though it talks about the case being a tad loose on the front. guessing all silicone cases are like that, since you stretch them to put them on?

do you have any experience with the case mate barely there case? I realize I'm prob posting in the wrong forum... will head over to accessories now. :)
 
Voice on CDMA (3G radio) and data on 4G or WiFi, that's simultaneous - no simulataneous voice and data on CDMA only. CDMA is perfectly capable of handling all data - just not as fast as 4G or wifi - and it only does one or the other at a time.

Which is to say that if I'm in a 4G or wifi area, then I'd get voice/data simultaneously, but not otherwise?

Also, thanks for the heads up about the screen. Yet another reason why I know I made the right choice!
 
thanks. reviews look good, though it talks about the case being a tad loose on the front. guessing all silicone cases are like that, since you stretch them to put them on?

do you have any experience with the case mate barely there case? I realize I'm prob posting in the wrong forum... will head over to accessories now. :)


Take a look at tpu cases. They're pretty inexpensive and offer pretty good protection without a lot of bulk. Not as thin as a case mate barely there but offers more protection. A search on ebay will offer quite a lot of choices. At about $5 shipped it can't be beat.
 
Trust me - it's a 20-bit display, 256k colors. If you look at the HTC specs, it also says the Evo is at Android 2.1 - they don't update these things, that's all.



Voice on CDMA (3G radio) and data on 4G or WiFi, that's simultaneous - no simulataneous voice and data on CDMA only. CDMA is perfectly capable of handling all data - just not as fast as 4G or wifi - and it only does one or the other at a time.

Although this may change February 7th!

Something tells me this "industry first" may have to do with SVDO!

SVDO allow simultaneous 1x voice and EVDO data : EVDOinfo.com
 
Which is to say that if I'm in a 4G or wifi area, then I'd get voice/data simultaneously, but not otherwise?

Also, thanks for the heads up about the screen. Yet another reason why I know I made the right choice!

You're welcome, and yes to the first question - unless what IOWA's published above comes to pass.

And what's published above answers the question I've had about iPhone users converting to Verizon and their expectations - they already expect that capability.
 
Again, I'm not making this up - it's at least 256k colors vs. 16M colors when playing video.

Can the eye see the difference in the real world? Oh, you betcha and more.

Can the eye see the difference when downsampling an HD source that really has that color range to an ED screen and can the eye discern that on such a small screen? That will vary by individual - and it will vary A lot - and it has nothing to do with eyesight quality as much as program content.

It's not that the SAMOLED screen is set so much to an HDTV's Vivid (or equivalent) setting - it's that it can go a bit brighter and when demo'd in that mode, it pops. Like a TV on a showroom floor, you won't watch your videos at that high setting. Adjusted for the same brightness, the difference is one of errors - the Evo will be wrong in one direction, the Samsung in the other.

Because they both lack gamma adjustments.

Where the SAMOLED really might make a difference in that pop-ability is for playing games (vivid cartoon colors anyway) and for using as a phone or web reader in a brighter light environment.

The other place the SAMOLED makes a difference - less power consumption when putting out the same amount of light than the Evo.

I'm lucky - I took an Evo and a Samsung and cued up the exact same video (720p) on each and same on my properly adjusted HDTV - holding each phone at a distance so the relative size to the eye was the same as the HDTV at a distance - and each at a subjectively adjusted matching brightness.

Under those conditions, they were both color-wrong compared to the correct HDTV source.

Side by side without the TV source, I thought the SAMOLD looked better. When comparing each to the HDTV, the SAMOLED was exhibiting black-crushing. So it looks more contrasty and less washed out as the Evo in a quick comparison - but there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

It's a tradeoffs of errors where color accuracy is concerned.

If you brain, intuition or your eyes say the Sammy is the way to go, then go with the Sammy - it's _your_ phone.

But the marketing myth that the SAMOLED is more accurate is simply that - a marketing myth.

They're equally in error, so choose the one that pleases you if it's down to screen selection.

If you take the Samsung route, and have lingering doubt of what I say, then your other take away is that compared to the older AMOLED screen, the SAMOLED is much better.

The tests I did said the Evo was a bit red heavy while the Sammy was a bit blue-heavy - while a friend across country doing the same thing said the Evo was blue-heavy while the Sammy was red-heavy.

And that's the outcome of unit-to-unit manufacturing variations when we have no chroma adjustment for either one.

Not as exciting as what fans on either side will argue - but the boring truth, in simple manufacturing and engineering terms.

Both sides have ardent followers ready to defend their favorite because in truth, the Evo doesn't wash out and the Samsung doesn't over-saturate (like the earlier AMOLED did). Simply a case of complimentary errors - the actual color truth is in-between any two units you'll try in the real world.

Hope that helps, and I'll leave you with this advice - when viewing subjectively, trust your gut - you've got to live with your purchase, and it's your gut.

PS - I didn't have the selection when I choose the Evo. Now that I do, I'd still choose the Evo - having nothing to do with the screen, but the devices other feature differences.

Your mileage may vary - or may be the same.

And by the way - my eyesight is quite good when adjusted for astigmatism.
Yeah...what he said...

(sorry Early, couldn't resist that)
 
Will this be a firmware upgrade for the carriers? What about the phones? Is there any need for new hardware for the cartier or customer?

SVDO will require different hardware, so our current handsets will not support SVDO.

I, too, believe that SVDO is the big announcement by Sprint!
 
There's cheaper versions of the barely there cases on ebay. I posted reviews of it along with the tpu cases. I also have the innocase from Seidio. I liked the barely there snap on type, but the coverage was so minimal. The TPU cases that have the raised areas for buttons are nice. Good fit, good grip and about the same thickness as the innocase. I ultimately stuck with the innocase & holster combo until I passed the Evo along to another rep and went to the epic.
do you have any experience with the case mate barely there case? I realize I'm prob posting in the wrong forum... will head over to accessories now. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom