# AMOLED vs Transflective display



## Lokifish

AMOLED- Better color saturation, deeper blacks, faster refresh rates, harder to read in direct sunlight, much higher battery usage under well lit conditions, display burn in.


Transflective- Less color saturation, slightly lower resolution, slower refresh rates, backlight only needed in low light conditions to be readable, lower battery usage due to minimal need for backlight.


This poll is for a smartwatch that is to be put into production and not the watches you see in the image. So even if you have no interest in another smartwatch, feedback is key.


Image 1- Reference image
Image 2- "Cheap" Chinese 240x240 Transflective (6% brightness) vs Samsung 320x320 AMOLED (33% brightness) 
Image 3- Transflective (backlight off) in light 1/4 that of your typical office vs AMOLED using about the same amount of power.
Image 4- Direct sunlight Transflective (0% brightness) vs Samsung AMOLED (100% brightness)
Image 5- Prototype transflective (backlight off) in complete darkness. AMOLED simply cannot do this.


----------



## watchvaultnyc

voting TRANSREFLECTIVE since I think battery life is a bigger issue for smartwatches than nice colors


----------



## robert01

I think for the color depth AMOLED screen is better but for the battery life Transflective screen is best.


----------



## rationaltime

Though I don't have one to review, for this application I am inclined
to favor the E-ink display. I expect the product definers are unwilling
to make a trade off that sacrifices color.









Thanks,
rationaltime


----------



## Lokifish

The only issue with E-Ink is it's refresh rate is the slowest of all display types.


----------

