Anti-reflection displays promise a paper-like look with minimal glare, but they don’t come without trade-offs. Testing on the Huawei MatePad 11.5 (2025) and its predecessor shows that the etched PaperMatte surface noticeably affects image quality compared to a glossy panel.
Because of the textured coating, colors lose some of their punch and overall images appear softer. Sharpness doesn’t reach the clarity you’d expect from a glossy display, and the elevated black level further dims visual impact. In side-by-side measurements against high-quality, non-matte IPS screens, PaperMatte panels deliver a weaker balance between peak brightness and deep blacks. The MatePad 11.5 (2025) achieved a contrast ratio of 629:1, which is modest for a modern tablet. Grayscale performance also shows a slight color cast, nudging color accuracy away from ideal.
Where the PaperMatte finish shines is outdoors. By significantly cutting reflections, it keeps the screen readable in bright environments where glossy displays quickly become mirrors. For anyone who frequently works on a patio, commutes in daylight, or reads under bright indoor lighting, reduced glare can be a game-changer in everyday use.
Who will appreciate a PaperMatte display
– Readers and note-takers who value low glare and a more paper-like feel
– Users who spend a lot of time outdoors or under strong lighting
– Anyone sensitive to reflections and eye strain caused by glossy screens
Who might prefer a glossy display instead
– Creators and media enthusiasts who prioritize vibrant colors and pin-sharp detail
– Users who demand higher contrast and more accurate grayscale performance
– Anyone working with color-critical content such as photo or video editing
Bottom line: PaperMatte delivers excellent anti-reflection performance and comfortable outdoor visibility, but it compromises on color vibrancy, sharpness, contrast, and color accuracy. If glare-free readability is your top priority, it’s a strong choice. If you want the richest colors and crispest detail, a glossy display remains the better fit.
