Samsung’s latest flagship, the Galaxy S20 series.

One of the new features in this series is the display’s 120Hz refresh rate, and enabling this feature will make the whole operation smoother than the conventional 60Hz refresh rate.

However, from 60Hz to 120Hz, the number of screen updates per second simply doubles, so the power consumption increases accordingly.

You can feel the comfort that is clearly different from 60Hz because the movement is slimy.

Meanwhile, anandtech was comparing the battery of this Galaxy S20 series when using 60Hz and 120Hz.

Comparing web browsing time under WiFi environment

Galaxy S20 Ultra (SD865) 60Hz: 14.05h
Galaxy S20 Ultra (SD865) 120Hz: 11.33h

Galaxy S20 Ultra (E990) 60Hz: 12.28h
Galaxy S20 Ultra (E990) 120Hz: 10.13h

Galaxy S20 + (E990) 60Hz: 11.10h
Galaxy S20 + (E990) 120Hz: 8.85h

On PC Battery’s battery bench score:

Galaxy S20 Ultra (SD865) 60Hz: 13.04h
Galaxy S20 Ultra (SD865) 120Hz: 10.02h

Galaxy S20 Ultra (E990) 60Hz: –
Galaxy S20 Ultra (E990) 120Hz: 7.38h

Galaxy S20 + (E990) 60Hz: 9.06h
Galaxy S20 + (E990) 120Hz: 7.28h

For both models and CPUs, there is a difference between 20% and 30% battery life at 60Hz and 120Hz refresh rates .

It is interesting to note that the batteries of the Galaxy S20 Ultra with SD865 and Exynos 990 have a difference of about 10% in the usable time at both 60Hz and 120Hz.

The Galaxy S20 series with Exynos is known to have a benchmark score that is about 20% lower than the SD865, but it is not good that the battery consumption is high.

The signing activity for the unification of SD865 has begun.

I think this is a level that makes a big difference even in actual use.

This comparison is only for Galaxy S20 Ultra and S20 +, there is no comparison of Galaxy S20 released from .

However, it is speculated that the “ratio” of the difference in battery life between GHz and GHz at the S20 may be similar.