Hello everyone,
Just had a quick question. Does the new saturated mode on the Pixel 2 XL consume more battery than the other color display modes? ( Boosted and Natural)
Thanks.
I haven't noticed any difference in battery life. Don't quote me but my understanding is it just changes the color calibration without anything extra running in the background.
Same battery life SOT to me. Ran it on Boosted/Vivid before.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
As others have said, it seems the same...
Hi folks, as in title, is there an option to enhance/raise nits of our beloved Pixel 2 XL?
I really need it to read display under direct sun.
I'm looked for in this forum and Google without success.
I've mine magisked too!
Thank you
last_nooby said:
Hi folks, as in title, is there an option to enhance/raise nits of our beloved Pixel 2 XL?
I really need it to read display under direct sun.
I'm looked for in this forum and Google without success.
I've mine magisked too!
Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, not at this time. It seems the lg panels are not conducive to increased brightness beyond stock settings ?
Typically using Adaptive Brightness on at 100% gets you higher nits than Adaptive Brightness off and at 100%. I don't think I've seen this tested with the Pixel 2 XL but Max Lee has done a bunch of brightness tests and that's how it typically works.
Google has lowered the nits by 50 also for the screen burn in issue.
Sent from my [device_name] using XDA-Developers Legacy app
So like we all know that on Samsung devices the default resolution is set to 1080p to increase battery life, so the question is can we do the same on our device?
Prattham said:
So like we all know that on Samsung devices the default resolution is set to 1080p to increase battery life, so the question is can we do the same on our device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The difference is negligible. Here's one of a few videos demonstrating it:
https://youtu.be/jBPcCETBGgI
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
EeZeEpEe said:
The difference is negligible. Here's one of a few videos demonstrating it:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not accurate though
Sent from my Google Pixel 2 XL using XDA Labs
How so? It wasn't even a static test of just letting a video play. He did games and actually used the phone. Also if it's not, show me a video that shows a significant difference between the two because it's not the only video I've seen that shows barely a difference. Charging 15-30 minutes earlier isn't much. 1-2+ hours, now you're talking.
Prattham said:
That's not accurate though
Sent from my Google Pixel 2 XL using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
@Prattham: Regardless of whether the screen is set to 1440p or 1080p you're still driving the same number of physical pixels on the device. Any power savings you get is not because of the screen but because of a reduction of the GPU's load. While the test may not meet scientific standards it does meet real world standards, which is more important. A savings of 2 to 3% as shown in the video easily fits within the margin of error for such a test, and thus there is no benefit to switching to 1080p.
GSMarena did their test with a S7 and found zero difference in battery life. The myth is dead. The only benefit is better graphics performance. Samsung didn't do it for battery, they did it for UI smoothness.
Sure it has a slower processor, but my question is will it really be intolerable ?
Is there any Android app anywhere that will not run on the device because of the slow processor ?
I like owning a Pixel device, I had a Pixel XL and to get the major updates first and have pure Android experience is sweet.
Sure Oneplus 7, but really ..... I expect it to cost over $1000.00 Canadian
AstroDigital said:
Sure it has a slower processor, but my question is will it really be intolerable ?
Is there any Android app anywhere that will not run on the device because of the slow processor ?
I like owning a Pixel device, I had a Pixel XL and to get the major updates first and have pure Android experience is sweet.
Sure Oneplus 7, but really ..... I expect it to cost over $1000.00 Canadian
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just picked up the 3a XL to run the Q beta and even on beta software (so far) the performance is not bad at all. Sure it has a slower less powerful processor but in reality how often do you really use the Pixel 3's processor to it's full potential? I think for an everyday phone running internet, messaging, phone, and some light game apps it will be just fine.
I mean, the processor is basically on par with the pixel 2, so it will be an upgrade from the og pixel.. I've got the 2 xl now and haven't had any issues with speed
I saw a video last night of someone comparing the 3 to 3a and there was definitely a speed difference in launching apps. However, in day to day usage, I don't think it's very noticeable at all. I just set my 3a XL up on the Q beta and it's running just fine. I don't do much gaming on my phone so I can't speak to that piece.
I don't know from where you guys get your speed reference, but coming from android one; mi a1, nokia 6.1, mi a2 this phone is wiping the floor with them. After the nexi got canceled I didn't go for the pixel line because of principle and ethics. Although I hope google will handle the budget category better than those mentioned above, since they all were ok out of the box and set up, the frustrating slowdowns and more bugs introduced than fixed came each month one after another.
From this youtube video, the guy himself is a power user, he didn't notice any performance issues. He highly recommends the Pixel 3A XL
link - search "Hands-On: Google Pixel 3a XL has been my daily driver for 6 weeks" on YT
2 days with my 3a xl and I ain't seen one hint of lag. I am on 11 percent battery and am just minutes away from hitting 10 hours SOT. I have nothing but good things to say about this phone. Massively recommended
I haven't had an issue running all my app, streaming video apps, and games on my 3a xl. There is an occasional delay on games that ran butter smooth on a 845 processor but it's nothing that would make me want to get rid of the phone. The screen isn't as good as a flagship of course but it's nowhere near what a phone of this price would be. I'm still in shock how well the phone runs for the price and I've owned nothing but flagships in the past.
I haven't regretted getting mine. I use it as my daily and I dont really notice the speed difference. It is like micro seconds slower,,,nothing that you wouldn't notice unless your really looking for it. Having all the other features and that camera makes up for it at this price point. Plus, I put a wireless charging receiver on it for 9 bucks and I have wireless charging back. Its not ultra fast charging but it charges the whole phone in about hour and a half.
hamz22 said:
2 days with my 3a xl and I ain't seen one hint of lag. I am on 11 percent battery and am just minutes away from hitting 10 hours SOT. I have nothing but good things to say about this phone. Massively recommended
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. This right here is why I just bought one yesterday. I wanted a pixel 3 xl, but could not fathom having to charge every few hours or having it die on me when travelling. The Oneplus 7 was my first choice but I'm sure even the regular one will be priced higher than the Pixel. I got a $100 gift card plus $50 cashback, so all things accounted, I paid around $380 for the 3a XL, and that is a bargain, no mater how you look at it. I have a Note 9 that will now be my backup phone. Noting wrong with it. I just want proper and fast updates, a good camera, and dependable battery and it seems Samsung will never catch up on the software side. So far the 3a XL is performing more than adecuately for my needs. I never play games or do cpu intensive tasks on my phone so this will be just fine.
TechOut said:
I just picked up the 3a XL to run the Q beta and even on beta software (so far) the performance is not bad at all. Sure it has a slower less powerful processor but in reality how often do you really use the Pixel 3's processor to it's full potential? I think for an everyday phone running internet, messaging, phone, and some light game apps it will be just fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can run PUBG just fine... Take that however you will
murso74 said:
I mean, the processor is basically on par with the pixel 2, so it will be an upgrade from the og pixel..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the SD670 SoC in the Pixel 3a is closer to the SD821, which was featured in the 1st gen Pixel. Nobody should be put off by that fact at all. The Phone is fast and buttery smooth with some of the best battery life I have ever seen. The 3a XL's battery life could almost trade blows with some of the 5000mah monster phones out there. Like the Huawei Mate 20X for example.
hamz22 said:
I believe the SD670 SoC in the Pixel 3a is closer to the SD821, which was featured in the 1st gen Pixel. Nobody should be put off by that fact at all. The Phone is fast and buttery smooth with some of the best battery life I have ever seen. The 3a XL's battery life could almost trade blows with some of the 5000mah monster phones out there. Like the Huawei Mate 20X for example.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SD 670 is pretty comparable to the SD 835 from the Pixel 2 line. The CPU numbers may be slower but they use the newer silver and gold kryo cores. Plus a newer GPU.
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using XDA Labs
It's on par with the pixel 2
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk
I've just received the pixel 3a xl , and straight away will probably be sending it back ,
I have come from a 2 xl and the 2xl imho is the better phone,
sutty86 said:
I've just received the pixel 3a xl , and straight away will probably be sending it back ,
I have come from a 2 xl and the 2xl imho is the better phone,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
interesting, i'm in the market for a phone. The 2xl 128gb is only £370 GBP compared to the 3a XL which is £469.
What do you prefer about the 2xl?
mwatson said:
interesting, i'm in the market for a phone. The 2xl 128gb is only £370 GBP compared to the 3a XL which is £469.
What do you prefer about the 2xl?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not who you were asking but I came from a 2 XL. The 2 XL does perform better. It's snappier and sometimes the 3a XL stutters. Other than that, I would say the speakers on the 2 XL are better (the 3a isn't bad though) and the metal/glass combo of the 2 XL feels better in the hand. The screen on the 2 XL is also brighter at Max but overall the display is much better in the 3a.
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using XDA Labs
I prefer the width of the 2xl , slightly shorter too.
I also have started using day dream which the 3a xl doesn't support.
I did a test earlier of blasting portraits one after the other and the 2xl takes 5 in quick succession and the 3a xl takes 4 shots.
Again the 2xl processes much faster and I'm take other shots within a few seconds.
A must for family photography.
The 3a xl has amazing battery life,
Gestures on pie using fluid are sluggish on the 3a xl but this might change with Android q.
Cameras are identical in my testing,
Yeah, you notice the weaker processing in the camera app, especially night shots. I wouldn't call it an impediment to getting pictures of fast moving grand kids but that's my own opinion, I think some would consider it an issue in the same way you do. I personally find it interesting that some are saying the performance is largely the same as compared to acurrent flagship, I don't see that. I'm usually not the type that joins in on microstutters and all that sort stuff because current flagships seem to me to be fluid in use all, or nearly all, the time. I don't see that here, I most def see apps hitching up while loading, I see a camera which is slower, even the main menu will stutter when it opens and does so out of the box.
In context though the current introductory pricing is not likely to go away. As we get closer to the Pix 4 the flagship 3's will drop in price which if anything will push these down further. Today I read those have a 200 dollar reduction in price (for the time being) which still makes them twice as expensive. At 370 and 300 I think these things are compelling buys.. You get flagship camera quality, those nice little Pixel software touches, decent screens, the performance isn't what I would describe as bad even if I don't feel it offers a flagship grade of smooth. Life could be a lot worse for those that can't or don't want to muster up flagship ching.
Honestly I would consider a 2xl ,better built than the 3 imo
The notch is hideous,
I believe a the reviewers are being positive as Google actually gave them the pixel and not loaned them like usual.
I'm not knocking the 3a at all just I believe the 2xl if you can refurbed or even new at some places would be the better buy.
I've seen them online for around £180 if you look around
So far the only issue I can find with my 3a XL is that the screen brightness is just way too low and makes visibility in sunlight very difficult.
Anyway to improve?
hpsauce37 said:
So far the only issue I can find with my 3a XL is that the screen brightness is just way too low and makes visibility in sunlight very difficult.
Anyway to improve?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could try Elemental X kernel. It has a high brightness mode. That would require you to unlock your bootloader though.
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using XDA Labs
I was asking same thing here. https://forum.xda-developers.com/pixel-3a-xl/help/brightness-t3930488
MrMeeseeks said:
You could try Elemental X kernel. It has a high brightness mode. That would require you to unlock your bootloader though.
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the right answer. I personally haven't had any trouble using the 3a XL in bright sun light yet (although it definitely needs 100% brightness outside), but the Elemental X Kernel's high brightness mode is definitely brighter than 100% brightness and may be enough to satisfy your needs.