I’ve been looking through the numbers on the new 3ds xl. It is stated that the screen is 90% larger than the original 3ds. No matter how I mess around with the numbers, I can only get to 38% percent larger. How I made the math: The new 3d screen is 4,88” whereas the old was 3,53” The new touch screen is 4,18”, and the original was 3,02” Total screen size on the new 3ds is 4,18” + 4,88” = 9,06” Total screen size for old 3ds is 3,53” + 3,02” = 6,55” Now: ((9,06-6,55)/6,55)*100 = 38,3 % And the control: 6,55 * 1,383 = 9,06”. Can someone tell what I am doing wrong?

Screens are measured diagonally... Growth of actual screen size changes exponentially in regards to the inch measurements changes. Triangles! Pythagorus! A2 + B2 = C2!!!!!

A 90% growth in diagonal inches would mean that it's almost 4x bigger haha. You should measure the surface area like Veho said, length x width.

It's the area. The 3DS top screen is 76.8 mm x 46.08 mm, giving an area of 3538.944 mm2. The 3DS XL top screen is 106.2 mm x 63.74 mm, giving an area of 6767.064 mm2. 1.9 * 3538.944 = 6723.99, and 6723.99 ≈ 6767.064. Presumably the same is true for the bottom screen. I also see that there has been a new post while I typed this, so someone else probably beat me to explaining this. EDIT: Yeah, they did But I have calculations, so mine's better

[(3DS.X + 3DS.Y + 3DS.Z) * 190]/100 + WiiU.Fugly - 3DS.Comfort = 90% Larger It's easy when you think about it.

Here's an example (excuse my paint skills): In this example the original screen (in black) is 200 x 200. This equates to a total area of 40000 To increase this area by 100% (to keep it simple, the 3DS as you said is 90%) we have to double to total area of 40000 to 80000. This means the screen now has to be ### x ### = 80000 sqrt of 80000 = 282.84.... Thus the new width and height of the screen is 282 x 282 (shown in red) which, as you can see, is not the same as simply doubling both lengths (400 x 400).

You forgot to include the square root of pi divided by zero in your calculations sir. You're all wrong!

so embarresing. FFS its not square inches. Its just in inches. My bad. remove/erase thread. makes me sick seeing me asking this. Anyway. Thank you for putting time into stating the obvious. *embarressed*

To be fair, it wasn't until you posted this thread that I took the time to figure out why they say it's 90% bigger. I hadn't really thought about it before, but I'd read it somewhere and briefly thought "that can't be right..." but never bothered to figure it out. Now I have. So it wasn't completely useless

Same here. The 90% always seemed odd to me but I was too lazy/didn't mind that much to check this myself. So this thread is useful actually.