what about motorola moto e6?

If you do want to measure flicker it is as you see many products who looks good in full brightness or near full brightness. But as soon as you lower the brightness the pulse slows down and flicker can accure.
Why lower the brightness? Well, if you have a monitor which have e.g. 350 cd/m2 as higest brightness I am 100% sure that you will lower the brightness, especially when daylight drops.

could you post a pwm review for oppo a37 please?

what about Xiaomi Mi A2?

i hope that tyou post review for: realme 6s and realme c11

i hope that you post iphone 6 and iphone 6s test

Quote from: Zohaib on February 05, 2022, 03:34:10Any user who has personally used any laptop and smartphone that has low flicker and pwm.
Any device that is easy on eyes.

Dell XPS 13 9310 2-in-1, best laptop screen ever, even nicer than the new MacBook Air M2.
Razer Phone 2, wide 1440px WQHD screen with 120Hz refresh, without PWM - but not OLED and not great in broad daylight. Both aren't great for broad daylight, but hipsters work at night, right?

iPhone SE should be called iPhone Health Edition.

Could you please add a PWM review of OnePlus Nord N30 5G which is the only IPS display phone available in the USA right now.

I can't wait to get a review on the basic model pwm figure of iPhone 15 compared to iPhone 13. Not only me, but quite a few people are curious about the reviews of the general model.

Can't wait for the iPhone 15 series results and how it compares with the 610 Response Time PWM Frequency from the iPhone 13! Hope all is well and Have a great day!

Is there a way to get a notification when a particular device review is posted? I always check on here to see the PWM for new devices. But I never know when they are published. Maybe there could be a link within articles leading up to the Notebookcheck review. On your end it could help grow email signup and remind users to come back to the site later. Just a thought! Thanks for all the data in these reviews. It's saving my eyeballs and device returns.

A useful article, despite the negative comments from some. At least you made the effort to write the article & make a list, rather than us all being completely in the bloody dark! Even now, 2023, still the PWM information is not listed in Laptop specs. As you have said (& it explains the unhelpful response from a retailer when I asked about display specs), as long as makers use different displays for exactly the same model, we have no idea what PWM, if any, we will get. It makes any list somewhat unreliable as you also may only have tested one of possibly several different displays in any model. Let alone the possible effects of different graphics cards or drivers as has been suggested.
Many people have eye problems & with the massive increase in hours-long screen staring over the past couple of decades, many more will develop them & come to regret it. It can only be made worse by PWM & the complete lack of transparency over its use in such displays... 

Could you test the 2019 27-inch imac screen? Thank you very much.

The data is full with invalid results.

All 50Hz and 100Hz are the results of your ambient lights with 50Hz or 100Hz AC electricity.

All results less than the devices' refresh rates are also invalid. You can't have PWM frequency less than refresh rates. If so, there will always be a couple of frames that are never lit by backlight. (Assuming the pulse width is very short at low brightness)

On OLED device, the PWM frequency must be the multiple of refresh rate, that's how OLED works. So results like 250Hz on 60Hz device are all invalid. 240Hz should be the actual result.

there are some results that are clearly just measuring noise.

Last but not least, there are some results that are simply typos. For example
Nokia-T20-Tablet-review-Pad-with-LTE-lasts-forever

Aside from invalid results, the numbers shown here didn't take the modulation depth into consideration. For example, a 50Hz PWM with 100% modulation depth is easily noticeable, but a 10Hz PWM with 1% modulation depth is barely perceivable. If you check the waveform, some of the wave pattern is very far from the time axis, indicating the modulation depth is very small.