Sharp's 1080p 5-inch smartphone display demonstrated (pictures)
0. phoneArena posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:11
Just yesterday we saw Sharp kick off mass production of its 5-inch 1080 x 1920-pixel screen, with a whopping pixel density of over 440ppi…
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. bobfreking55 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:17 8
GALAXY NOTE III NEXT YEAR AND GOOGLE NEXUS 5 NEXT MONTH.
10. kartik4u98 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:57 3
can someone smarter than me tell what is the practical advantage of such useless display? such resolution must be handled by very powerful processors and 3x bigger battery, Our eyes will never can make difference from 330 ppi anyway.??
16. bobfreking55 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 03:43 2
hmm.. not necessarily 1080p though. The Phablets that go above 5" (which we are reaching already btw,) are getting ppis of 290 and below. maybe a 900p screen is enough, just to put it in retina territory.
and if technology evolves further, mirroring the device's screen would be better with higher resolutions.
19. the_s2 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 05:46 2
Well, I could almost distinguish individual pixels on the Xperia S 342 ppi display. We need more ppi. Well, just because Steve Jobs said, it doesnt mean we cant see the micropixels. Higher the ppi, better the reading experience. as for the battery, techonlogy is evolving day by day, so no worries! also, the focus should be given more on optimizing software to minimize battery needs.
26. kartik4u98 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 14:19 1
I am not able to distinguish a single pixel on my nexus..
I don't think that the super thin phones of today's generation can have a battery of more that 4000mAh..
And one question-Does your Xperia S charge up fully in less than one??(one of my friend that his XS charges in just 45minutes)
21. PapaSmurf posted on 02 Oct 2012, 07:38 2
Actually, your eyes can't distinguish pixels over 300 if your eyes are 12 inches away from your phone. If you're closer than that, you may see them. The higher the pixel count, the sharper the display and text.
22. remixfa posted on 02 Oct 2012, 07:49 3
Most people cant see pixels when they are 6 inches away from a 300+ PPI screen. Your eye blends them together unless you are trying your damndest to look for pixels.
I think this is currently useless. Your eye wont tell the difference at a regular usable distance. It may be slightly sharper, brighter, or whatever... but 1080p for a pocket device is overkill right now.
It is going to take a ton of extra processing power to push all those pixels in that higher resolution and its going to take a ton of battery. The move from 720p to 1080p when talking about processing power needs is a lot more substantial than people think.
The current set of chips will struggle to do anything of merrit on such a dense high def display. Maybe when TRUE A15's are out like the Exynos5 and Omap5, will they have enough power to push it smoothly (and they really should be able to), but right now the A9's, kraits, ect will show signs of slow down in anything processor intensive with that much screen.
And then you got to think how much battery its going to take to keep all those pixels lit. All of a sudden the massive batteries of the Note 2 and Razr max become "minimum" for a full days use and everything else just sucks.
It has zero real benefits and tons of draw backs. It's not worth it. For tablets/netbooks and other large devices with room for a fat battery, absolutely. For phones.. no thanks.
27. kartik4u98 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 14:22 0
Yes you are right
1080p displays will have very less usability but many drawbacks..
28. AppleConspiracy posted on 02 Oct 2012, 14:23 0
You're right, but you're also forgeting that with miniaturization of pixels goes the miniaturization of tranzistors and therefore increasing power efficiency. I think mobile tech in terms of processing power is now mature enough to drive FullHD displays. We've seen that on iPad 3 and now we can see it on Asus Transformer Infinity etc.
30. remixfa posted on 02 Oct 2012, 15:23 1
yeeea.the ipad is 264 ppi
The transformer infinity is 229 ppi
This screen is 440 ppi.
Thats literally just about DOUBLE the amount of pixels to move around. That's a lot of extra horsepower needed and a lot of extra battery life. Even if each pixel got a 30% battery savings compared to current technology (doubtful), it would still draw more power because of the density.
And again.. its unneeded for small screens. Your also comparing it to tablets. It may be OK for tablets, but its complete over kill for phones... even the Note2 and other monsters dont need it.
32. AppleConspiracy posted on 02 Oct 2012, 15:52 0
It's not double the amount of pixels, it's the same amount. Only density is different.
Density has nothing to do with power efficiency (except some eventual inherent characteristics of particular technology used for producing such small pixels), but with their quantity and surface needed to produce light behind them.
If it's 1080x1920 pixel panel on next 5" mobile screen, it's the same amount of pixels as in Asus Transformer Infinity that needs to be handled, and even lower demand for power since the surface behind them is substantially smaller and those (sub)pixels need less power to drive.
36. kartik4u98 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:51 0
But you can't fit a large 7000mAh battery in a 5 inch smartphone.
I DON'T KNOW that the surface behind the screen matters in the power consumption??.
38. AppleConspiracy posted on 03 Oct 2012, 17:11 0
As I've mentioned, the smaller pixels are, the smaller tranzistors are, and therefore smaller power consumption. Besides that, smaller surface that needs to be lighted up (LED backlight I presume) makes smaller demand for power.
The problem is the reason why we should have something we cannot actually see. Power drain is not so much of a problem.
39. kartik4u98 posted on 04 Oct 2012, 05:14 0
Yes maybe galaxy s5 would have 1080p display..
40. kartik4u98 posted on 04 Oct 2012, 05:16 0
And what about the Gpu??
1080p display would require a powerful Gpu..
35. kartik4u98 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:46 0
Yup! remixfa is absolutely correct..
1080p display is only better for tablets..
29. kartik4u98 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 14:24 0
And why have I got so many thumbs down??
I haven't asked a silly or useless question>>??
34. Mittal posted on 03 Oct 2012, 07:23 1
lolz.. chill dude
Not every1 is totally unbiased here
Lets count how many red ones i get here :D
37. kartik4u98 posted on 03 Oct 2012, 08:52 0
I hate when I get red thumbs without any reason..
4. g2a5b0e posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:25 14
Why even involve Apple in this conversation? They don't even make displays. Fanboy-ism just keeps reaching new lows.
6. Jphones posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:32 5
apple's in every convo it's a phone technology site genius. An apple enters these tech conversations because they lack innovation and are lack luster in their customer appreciation and aren't consumer friendly in prices. An we know they don't make screens but they pay other companies to do it. They don't have to make it they design it thats his point
11. pikapowerize (banned) posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:58 1
i know right these fanboys and anti-apple are annoying! even apple isnt included they will include them!
14. eflop posted on 02 Oct 2012, 03:19 0
Agreed! People can be devoted fans to something.. Hell it's even okay to be a fanboy. But I think it becomes disastrous when someone with an IQ below 100 becomes a fanboy..
I.E, can't spell, doesn't say anything true or insightful... AND WRITES IN CAPSLOCK TO SOUND LOUD AND SMART.
Seriously people. Grow the hell up.
18. shadez10 posted on 02 Oct 2012, 04:56 4
I JUST HATE APPLE... thats all =D
im expecting RED THUMBS here...
8. AppleConspiracy posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:39 4
How is this innovation? Higher PPI values bigger than that existed 10 years ago. Now they are just using it to numerically outgrow standards set by Apple. Nothing new, just MORE.
On the other hand, nobody cared for high PPI before Apple. Then Apple introduced this "unnecessary" Retina display and everyone changed their views. Apple was innovating, and Sharp is not. Technology itself is irrelevant. It's only a technology, not the ideas of using it.
13. samystic posted on 02 Oct 2012, 03:09 1
Higher PPI values bigger than that existed 10 years ago? example(s) please
15. AppleConspiracy posted on 02 Oct 2012, 03:24 0
Technology of high-density LCDs was already achievable in that time, although it was not announced as a product or technology applicable to products (in 2002, products with over 200 PPI existed). Over 300-PPI displays were already in mobile devices in 2007. In 2008, some company introduced over-2000 PPI display.
17. samystic posted on 02 Oct 2012, 04:40 1
examples with names please... when you say "Higher PPI values bigger than that existed 10 years ago", you are comparing a 498ppi figure, not 'in 2002, products with over 200 PPI existed). Over 300-PPI displays were already in mobile devices in 2007' ...
you are only right in last part but please put it this way - Apple starts advertising a technology available and others follow suit... PPI concept, touchscreen becoming a fashion statement, etc.
25. AppleConspiracy posted on 02 Oct 2012, 13:48 0
I recall information about reaching over 500 PPI about 10 years ago in experimental phase but since I cannot find the source I cannot prove to you that it has been reached then, so please forget what I said about 10 years and let's make it six years (sanyo-Epson 2006), well before Retina display was introduced. Besides, the second paragraph you wrote is the point I was trying to say.
31. remixfa posted on 02 Oct 2012, 15:25 0
yea, you need to find sources. Im pretty freaking connected to what's going on in the tech world and I've not heard anything of the sort. The fact is that displays generally dont have super high PPIs because again.. its unneeded. When your sitting 2 feet or so from a monitor or 10 ft from your TV, your eyes cant tell the difference between 150ppi and 500 ppi.
The new macbook "retina" display that everyone is in love with is only like 220 ppi or so and its more dense than pretty much everything out there.
33. AppleConspiracy posted on 02 Oct 2012, 16:21 0
I agree. There is a limit to what human eye can discern from certain distance. 330+ PPI is the absolute limit - even if we stick our noses to the screen we couldn't see even the pixelization effect (jaggedness on hard edges), not to mention pixels themselves.
So it's obvious this is only a marketing move, just to say they are "innovative", and to hold the record. It's only a matter of prestige and marketing.
On the other hand, as I have mentioned earlier, I wouldn't be suprised to see "new" kind of accessories for smartphones with FullHD displays that turn them into a big LCD TV by mounting them on magnifying glasses. (if you remember the magnifying plastic viewbox for 35 mm slides on analogue camera)
3. wendygarett posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:22 1
pic #3 and #4 looks brilliant!!
but why am I still think the retina display of iphone is better?? Pic #1 :/
9. Mittal posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:42 3
the USP of this screen so far is the pixel density, dont look for other qualities just yet
5. Jphones posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:28 0
phone tech is gonna be crazy next year, flexible screens, 1080p screens, crazy new features. thank you innovation
7. cepcamba posted on 02 Oct 2012, 02:33 1
Almost like a magazine wow. I just hope it doesn't eat up battery too fast.
12. pikapowerize (banned) posted on 02 Oct 2012, 03:00 0
hope sharp to have a great year! i saw their renevue is so low so i hope that they will be back on top of the game!
20. samdsox posted on 02 Oct 2012, 05:53 0
In other news, the average battery life of a new smart phone using this screen is one hour.
24. CamaroSS posted on 02 Oct 2012, 11:34 0
This is awesome. I couldn't afford Sharp's elite tv, but this one would be within my reach :P Sharp's been putting out the best displays for a long time - Great work.