In today's market, many premium smartphones are equipped with a feature that adjusts the display's Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) based on the surrounding lighting conditions. This technology is designed to enhance the viewing experience by aligning the screen's color temperature with that of the environment, which can vary depending on factors like the type of light bulb or the time of day. For instance, lighting conditions can range from warm incandescent bulbs to cooler LED lights, and natural daylight can also affect how colors appear on screen. The primary aim of CCT adaptation is to create a more natural and comfortable viewing experience while reducing cognitive dissonance, the discomfort felt when expectations do not match reality.

Among the brands implementing this technology, Apple stands out with its True Tone feature. This feature automatically adjusts the iPhone's screen to optimize color display according to the ambient lighting conditions, enhancing readability. Honor also offers a similar feature called Natural Tone, which adjusts color temperature based on ambient lighting, aiming for a paper-like viewing experience. Other manufacturers, including Samsung, Xiaomi, Oppo, and Vivo, have developed their versions of this technology, each branded differently—like adaptive color tone and natural tone display.

Dxomark conducted a test in this regard, based on a recent comparative study that investigated the effectiveness of CCT adaptation across several flagship smartphones, including the Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max, Honor Magic 6 Pro, Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra, and others. The evaluation was conducted in various settings, including an office environment with mixed lighting and controlled lab conditions with varying CCT levels.

The findings revealed that there is no consensus among manufacturers regarding CCT values and their adaptation to ambient lighting. Each device responded uniquely, which could affect the user experience, especially for those who frequently switch between devices. Despite all brands claiming to optimize color performance, the results showed significant variation. Moreover, none of the tested smartphones dropped below a CCT of 5000K, which suggests that all manufacturers agree on maintaining this threshold for user comfort.

One particularly noteworthy result came from the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra, which, despite having a feature that alters CCT, failed to adapt to different lighting conditions during tests. This consistent display behavior could indicate a potential issue with the device's hardware or software, as it did not attempt to adjust in scenarios where others did.

Additionally, the devices struggled with adapting to extreme lighting conditions, such as 10,000K, which is not commonly found in nature or artificial lighting. Most smartphones showed a bluish-white display up to approximately 7500K. Interestingly, the Vivo X100 Pro demonstrated superior adaptation, adjusting smoothly up to 9000K, which offered a notably consistent viewing experience. However, such extreme adjustments may go unnoticed by average users.

Despite the impressive marketing claims surrounding these adaptive features, the tests highlight significant room for improvement. The consistency above 5000K, varied performance in different lighting environments, and the notable shortcomings of some devices underscore the necessity for further refinement in CCT adaptation technology.

For consumers seeking the most comfortable viewing experience, these discrepancies in how devices handle color temperature adjustments could be vital to their satisfaction. As manufacturers continue to innovate, a deeper understanding of user preferences and environmental factors will be essential for enhancing the overall smartphone experience.

DXOMARK