Corning Gorilla Glass 5 more scratch prone than GG4

[thexzenon]

 

One of the (minor) selling points of the new Samsung Galaxy Note 7 was its new screen made of Corning Gorilla Glass 5, which is touted as being more shatter-resistant. This, however, may come at the cost of reduced scratch resistance as seen in the following video.

 

Galaxy Note 7 scratch test:

Spoiler

Testing starts at about 0:45.

 

As observed in the video, the screen gets scratched at a level 3 on the Mohs scale, whereas the previous version of the Gorilla Glass started showing signs at level 6 (see LG G5 test below).

Spoiler

 

 

According to Android Authority, two representatives from Corning have actually come out and claimed that the test is not accurate enough as it wasn't conducted in a controlled environment. They also claim that the marks on the screen might not even be scratches, but some leftover material from the picks used to test the screen.

 

Jaymin Amin, Corning's VP of Technology:

Spoiler

The hardness pick that was used in the video was a 3, that’s considerably softer than the glass material. Oftentimes when you have a softer material like that, and depending on what kind of loads you have used, you tend to see material transfer on the test substrate.

Material transfer on the test substrate is not necessarily a scratch but it can appear to the untrained eye as a pretty visible scratch. We don’t know whether or not that is what is being seen in the video. Certainly in the testing we’ve done internally, we don’t see that issue at all with similar picks on the Mohs hardness scale.

 

Jon Pasansky, Corning's Business Technical Director for Gorilla Glass added:

Spoiler

It’s a function of the difference in the hardness of the materials, but in particular the load is very important. So you could have a lower hardness pick with a much higher load and still achieve a condition that would look like a slightly higher hardness pick with a lighter load. It’s a combination of pressure and material hardness differences that exist between the pick and the material that’s being contacted.

 

My take on all this:

 

This discussion is only related to the scratch resistance of the new Gorilla Glass, which is indeed advertised as being more shatter-resistant. However, this doesn't mean that being more prone to scratches is fine. Many people use cases and screen protectors to keep their screens from shattering (and scratching) so they won't care about this. Many people (myself included), however, don't cover the phone as it ruins the aesthetics, so for those who are careful enough not to drop their phones the only problem remaining is scratching, which apparently is a bigger issue with GG5, compared to the previous model.

 

The representatives also mentioned that those marks might not be scratches, but remaining bits of material onto the screen. To me this sounds like some PR bullshit (never mind, proven wrong by you guys), because people won't care if their screen has leftover materials or actual scratches on them. A visible, irremovable mark is still a scratch in my book and I'm sure most users that complain about a mark will not say "I have some soft material debris on my screen" instead of "My screen is scratched".

 

I know this stuff isn't the biggest news ever, especially now that the tech news section is flooded by Zen rumors and news, but I still found this interesting and thought some you might want to know about. It is, after all, information that concerns the new Note 7.

 

 

Sources:

Article from Android Authority - http://www.androidauthority.com/corning-responds-samsung-galaxy-note-7-scratch-test-video-711210/

Videos linked in the spoilers above.

[Curufinwe_wins]

First things first, the mohs scale is not linear or particularly useful in a technical sense...

 

Secondly it just isn't possible for gc5 to be softer than mohs scale 3. Literally impossible. 

 

That said, trading scratch resistance for shatter resistance is actually a thing, and I wouldn't be surprised to see gc5 to be slightly softer than gc4 (which is much harder than gc3 and prior).

[Sir Asvald]

#ripharambe

[ThinkWithPortals]

6 minutes ago, Abdul201588 said:

#ripharambe

I was about to report you for shitposting and then the image loaded for me...

[Sir Asvald]

2 minutes ago, ThinkWithPortals said:

I was about to report you for shitposting and then the image loaded for me...

 didn't you read the title of the thread.  

[ThinkWithPortals]

2 minutes ago, Abdul201588 said:

 didn't you read the title of the thread.  

*goes back and carefully rereads the title three times*

 

[Doobeedoo]

Hmm interesting. Though shame if it's true cause phone is more prone to scratch at least what I'd say. We'll how it will go after. 

[thefinalemblem]

2 hours ago, crisro996 said:

"To me this sounds like some PR bullshit"

It's certainly not PR bullshit, it's actually more scratch resistant. This coming from a family that works at Corning.

[Sakkura]

Generally, being scratch resistant and shatter resistant are two different goals that would tend to require the opposite material properties. To avoid scratches, you want a material that's very hard. But harder materials are usually also more brittle, making them more prone to shatter.

 

Of course they can work on getting better materials with a better combination of properties, but there's always going to be some tradeoff between scratch resistance and shatter resistance.

[thexzenon]

4 minutes ago, thefinalemblem said:

It's certainly not PR bullshit, it's actually more scratch resistant. This coming from a family that works at Corning.

It still scratched way easier than the thin sheet of Gorilla Glass 4 on the G5.

[Badly Browned]

3 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

First things first, the mohs scale is not linear or particularly useful in a technical sense...

 

Secondly it just isn't possible for gc5 to be softer than mohs scale 3. Literally impossible. 

 

That said, trading scratch resistance for shatter resistance is actually a thing, and I wouldn't be surprised to see gc5 to be slightly softer than gc4 (which is much harder than gc3 and prior).

 

Yeah, regular glass has a hardness of ~5.5. So unless this thing isn't glass, there is no way a copper pick should be scratching it. At 2-2.5 we're talking about fingernails being able to scratch something, which for a screen designed for touch and pen controls is obviously not ideal. 

 

My guess is what looks like scratches are actually bits of his tools themselves getting rubbed into the screen. I've done this myself while testing hard minerals. I'll think I have scratched a mineral with a nail or something but it's actually the other way around and the nail is the one getting scratched.

 

So maybe they are not technically scratches, but the end result of a non-pristine screen is still the same. 

 

 

 

 

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 hour ago, Badly Browned said:

 

Yeah, regular glass has a hardness of ~5.5. So unless this thing isn't glass, there is no way a copper pick should be scratching it. At 2-2.5 we're talking about fingernails being able to scratch something, which for a screen designed for touch and pen controls is obviously not ideal. 

 

My guess is what looks like scratches are actually bits of his tools themselves getting rubbed into the screen. I've done this myself while testing hard minerals. I'll think I have scratched a mineral with a nail or something but it's actually the other way around and the nail is the one getting scratched.

 

So maybe they are not technically scratches, but the end result of a non-pristine screen is still the same. 

 

 

 

 

Except of course that you can wash off the "tool leftovers"

[Badly Browned]

12 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Except of course that you can wash off the "tool leftovers"

Usually, but sometimes it takes some elbow grease to take it out.

 

Just saying it makes more sense than a screen that apparently can be scratched by a fingernail, which is what a sub-3 Mohs would entail. 

[Curufinwe_wins]

39 minutes ago, Badly Browned said:

Usually, but sometimes it takes some elbow grease to take it out.

 

Just saying it makes more sense than a screen that apparently can be scratched by a fingernail, which is what a sub-3 Mohs would entail. 

Oh yea, ofc. I just was lashing out against the OP's statement that it is the same thing as a scratched screen.