iPhone 13 Pro finally adopts 120Hz; here are the Android phones that beat Apple to the punch

backstreetboy

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
28,802

High refresh rate screens are not a new trend, but after a couple of years of inexplicably avoiding the feature on its iPhone lineup, Apple has finally adopted the feature in the iPhone 13 Pro series. However, they’ve been preceded by dozens of phones in the Android camp, so let’s take a look at every Android device that had a 120Hz refresh rate before Apple’s iPhone.

What Android phones have a 120Hz refresh rate?

The refresh rate of your screen refers to how many frames it can display each second. The standard for years was 60Hz, capable of displaying 60 frames per second. In recent years, though, many Android manufacturers have moved to higher options, with some even going up to 144Hz and beyond.

The trend of using a higher refresh rate was kicked off in 2017, ironically in Apple’s own iPad Pro. However, it was Android that first brought the trend to phones just a few months later with the Razer Phone. That ill-fated gaming device had a 120Hz LCD display. From there, the next major release was the OnePlus 7 Pro, which had a 90Hz OLED display in mid-2019. Google followed up a few months later with a 90Hz panel on the Pixel 4 series.

In 2020, 120Hz OLED displays became mainstream on flagship devices, with the Oppo Find X2 and Galaxy S20 lineups both fully adopting the feature. In Samsung’s case, too, the feature was widely praised with very few reports of problems outside of an occasional defect.

Below, we’ve compiled a list of just about every important Android phone that has a 120Hz OLED display, and there are many more devices in the budget sector or international market that aren’t listed but also employ the faster refresh rate.
 

SauRoNZA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
40,769
The mistake they make is thinking that any Android device is considered “important” to an iPhone user.

They may as well not exist, important they certainly aren’t.
 

backstreetboy

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
28,802
The mistake they make is thinking that any Android device is considered “important” to an iPhone user.

They may as well not exist, important they certainly aren’t.
It should be. Many great things Apple copied from Android devices over the years. Who knows where we'd be if the iPhone was the only device available.
 

neoprema

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
6,032

UrBaN963

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Messages
16,420
I have the iPhone 11 Pro (60hz). My girlfriend has the S21 Plus (120Hz).

Can't say I've noticed any real difference or benefit. Probably if you did a side-by-side comparison you could tell, but it's not a feature that holds any sway for me particularly.
 

SauRoNZA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
40,769
I have the iPhone 11 Pro (60hz). My girlfriend has the S21 Plus (120Hz).

Can't say I've noticed any real difference or benefit. Probably if you did a side-by-side comparison you could tell, but it's not a feature that holds any sway for me particularly.

Have to second this somewhat, it seems a little inconsequential on the small screen.

On the iPad Pro it is instantly perceivable and different and a selling feature for sure.

What would be more interesting is the reverse of variable refresh rate lowering to much lower refresh rates when not required which could save battery dramatically.

Like you don’t really need more than 15fps for Twitter or most messaging apps for instance.
 

UrBaN963

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 27, 2016
Messages
16,420
Have to second this somewhat, it seems a little inconsequential on the small screen.

On the iPad Pro it is instantly perceivable and different and a selling feature for sure.

What would be more interesting is the reverse of variable refresh rate lowering to much lower refresh rates when not required which could save battery dramatically.

Like you don’t really need more than 15fps for Twitter or most messaging apps for instance.
Basically like the iPhone 13's approach, 10-120Hz. Seems like a good solution in terms of efficiency.
 

SauRoNZA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
40,769
Basically like the iPhone 13's approach, 10-120Hz. Seems like a good solution in terms of efficiency.

Exactly.

That is far more interesting to me than the peak 120hz always on stuff the rest are running.
 

DA-LION-619

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
13,239
Have to second this somewhat, it seems a little inconsequential on the small screen.

On the iPad Pro it is instantly perceivable and different and a selling feature for sure.

What would be more interesting is the reverse of variable refresh rate lowering to much lower refresh rates when not required which could save battery dramatically.

Like you don’t really need more than 15fps for Twitter or most messaging apps for instance.
All separate aspects.
You can have a screen, you still need hardware capable of rendering, also your app performance needs to be there.

One of the reasons behind Flutter.
 

SauRoNZA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
40,769
All separate aspects.
You can have a screen, you still need hardware capable of rendering, also your app performance needs to be there.

One of the reasons behind Flutter.

Well the hardware is the same between these new devices and the iPad Pro so I’m not quite understanding the point.
 

DA-LION-619

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
13,239
Well the hardware is the same between these new devices and the iPad Pro so I’m not quite understanding the point.
That I don’t think there would be a dramatic saving in battery usage.
Pro-motion adjusts the the frame rate based on the content, which is very applicable to the iPad because it doesn’t down clock.
 
Top