Telephone manufacturers abandon the gorilla glass, but what gives?

Corning Gorilla Glass is the gold stallion of protective glass solutions in smartphones space for years, dating from the original iPhone. In fact, Gorilla Glass has become a kind of brand name in space, with manufacturers using it as quality seal.

However, I noticed that something very interesting has happened in recent years. While the best Android phones from Google and Samsung still use Corning protection, Rivaux flagship products from Honor, Huawei and Xiaomi have moved away from Gorilla Glass in favor of internal solutions. So what gives, and how much does it count?

My first thought by noting this trend is that smartphones brands want to save a few dollars without making huge compromise of sustainability. After all, Corning is the best dog in the protective glass space, and it commands a bonus for its recent solutions. In fact, many budgetary phones use older and cheaper gorilla glass variants or other third -party solutions such as Asahi Dragontrail glass.

However, the honor said Android authority that its own internal protection came due to the need:

In 2021, the industry had no appropriate glass-ceramic solution for curved screen smartphones, forcing the honor to invest in search for rage-cereamic technology. First generation technology was applied to The Honor Magic 3 Pro more in 2021, and in 2024, The Honor Magic 6 presented the new generation of honor, Honor Nanocristal Shield technology.

In other words, the honor was open to the use of Gorilla Glass, but the solution he wanted simply did not exist. In fact, the company told me that it did not give up Gorilla Glass or other third -party solutions:

For the honor number and the X series, he continues to use Corning Gorilla Glass or other third -party solutions. Due to the significantly higher cost of ceramic glass compared to traditional reinforced glass like Gorilla Glass, Honor only adopts its own brand solutions in its series of flagship magic to improve the sustainability of the screen and meet the light and thin requirements of the series of foldable phones.

I think it is interesting that Honor says that glass-ceramic solutions like his own nanocrystal shield have a “much higher cost” compared to conventional solutions (that is to say older), contradicting my expensive cost of cost. However, the company did not specify whether its own solution is cheaper than the more recent inventions in Corning ceramic like Gorilla Armor 2.

Meanwhile, Xiaomi uses its SHIELD GLASS and SHIELD GLASS 2.0 solutions on recent flagship phones like the Xiaomi 15 Ultra. The company told me that it had adopted an internal protective glass because it wanted to provide “the best possible user experience by carefully selecting the materials that optimize both sustainability and performance”.

Xiaomi also clarified that he did not drop the gorilla glass. The company still uses corning glass on its more affordable phones like the Redmi Note 14 Pro Plus. He also recognized that the Xiaomi 15 Ultra uses Gorilla Glass 7i for the camera goal.

Anyway, I think the initial investment cost in personalized protective glass is very high for OEMs. I have not seen non -Samsung devices with gorilla armor or armor 2 either, suggesting that it is exclusive to galaxy phones. Thus, telephone brands that want protection against ceramic or microcrystal glass could have no choice but to create it themselves.

What is the corning of this trend doing? The company did not have many notes to say when I asked them:

We continue to innovate and provide difficult cover material solutions to meet the global needs of consumers. As a practice, we do not start the product plans of our customers or the offers of our competitors. Questions related to the choice of equipment and product plans must be shared directly with OEMs.

This is really the question at a million dollars, right? A trend that I have noticed is that smartphones manufacturers often compare their internal glass to the tempered glass rather than the gorilla glass. This is not just a comparison because the tempered glass is only really used on low -end phones today. It’s like comparing a Ferrari to a Ford Model T.

Fortunately, Honor gave me an additional overview of the sustainability of his glass of nanocristal shield:

Unlike the ceramic glass technology, the Gorla Corning glass force, including Corning Gorilla Glass Vict 2, and the DragonTrail glass comes from chemical caliber, which both belong to a traditional chemically designed glass. The ceramic glass, however, has the capacity to hinder the spread of cracks through nanocrystals, resulting in resistance to the upper drop.

Honor also cited an internal fall test of 1.5 meters on a surface resembling an damaged road. He said that the failure rate of the “conventional wet glass” without ceramic crystals was ten times that of the nanocristal shield glass. This still does not give us a specific comparison with recent Gorilla glass variants. Nevertheless, the company thinks that its solution is better in the resistance to fall than the previous efforts of Corning without ceramic like Gorilla Glass Vict 2.

The resistance to fall is only a factor, but what about scratches? Well, Honor says that his nanocristal shield and all the conventional tempered glass (including Gorilla Glass Vict 2) have a Mohs hardness rating between five and six. This means that there is “no significant difference in scratch resistance” between these solutions.

The company did not mention how its glass behaves against Gorilla Armor. For what it’s worth, youtuber Jerryrigevery noted that gorilla armor on the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra had small stripes at level seven on the Mohs hardness scale, with deeper grooves at the level of eight. This suggests that gorilla armor has improved scratches on the honor solution and previous corning products, which are scratching at level six and presented deeper grooves at level seven. The youtuber repeated this test With the Galaxy S25 Ultra and its Gorilla 2 armor, but it saw small stripes at level six and deeper cuts at level seven. This suggests that the original gorilla armor has better stripes than OEM and Gorilla Armor 2 solutions, but it is not conclusive.

Xiaomi is another brand that says that its protection glass has “increased resistance to scratches and drops” on standard tempered glass:

Although we have compared it against standard tempered glass to highlight its improvements, we continuously assess different materials to ensure optimal performance. Our approach is to select the most appropriate solutions based on real world performance, balance of strength, clarity and user experience.

I have the impression that the company managed to say a lot without saying a lot. Nevertheless, a YouTube video has shown someone using the Xiaomi 14 Pro – which presents the brand’s first generation shield glass – like a nail hammer and nuts. The device seems to have emerged unscathed. Xiaomi also noted that the first generation shield glass of Xiaomi 14 Ultra had a 10x drop resistance of 10x that the Xiaomi 13 Ultra. This last device used Gorilla Glass Vict.

Meanwhile, Xiaomi said The Xiaomi 15 Ultra’s Shield Glass 2.0 offers 25% better resistance to a decrease on rough roads than the glass of Xiaomi 14 Ultra. The real question is how the resistance to the fall of Shield Glass 2.0 compared to Corning Gorilla Armor and Armor 2, but the company did not approach this.

For what it is worth, Xiaomi told me that its glass of shield and its glass of shield 2.0 were “a type of microcrystalline glass, rather than traditional ceramic glass”. He added that a key advantage of this material is that it is more resistant to scratches than ordinary glass. However, the company has made no comparison with Gorilla Glass in this regard.

I asked Huawei representatives several times for details on its Kunlun glass technology, but they I didn’t come back to me. In any event, the company claims that the Kunlun glass in armor crystal seen on the PURA 70 Ultra from last year offers 300% better stripe resistance and 100% better resistance to fall than first generation Kunlun glass. Unfortunately, that does not give us a comparison with Gorilla Glass at all. However, glass would use microcrystals for better durability.

Apple, Google and Samsung still use corning solutions, but should you consider a device with a personalized protective glass? Well, the emphasis on sustainability seems to be a constant through these internal solutions, at least compared to the oldest variants of gorilla glass. So, even if we cannot compare with the latest Gorilla Glass solutions, they should always offer good protection against drops and scratches. In addition, the apparent lack of non-Samsung phones with gorilla armor also suggests that other OEMs do not have access to the latest Corning technology anyway.

Honor’s assertion that protection against ceramic glass is more expensive than conventional protection glass shows that it is clearly not a cost reduction measure – another good sign. As such, I expect these OEMs will continue to use older gorilla glass variants on their cheaper phones to reduce costs. Google and Samsung use an older gorilla glass in their affordable phones, putting them on an equal footing with honor and Xiaomi in terms of sustainability.

Nevertheless, Corning has quickly evolved to differentiate its products in recent years, Gorilla Armor and Armor 2 offering anti-Glare coatings on Samsung Ultra phones. This feature is missing on OEM solutions. Even if internal glass solutions are comparable to the latest corning products in terms of protection, you must expect a more pleasant experience visually on phones with gorilla armor.