Sharp's 1080p 5-inch smartphone display demonstrated (pictures)

Sharp's 1080p 5-inch smartphone display demonstrated (pictures)
Just yesterday we saw Sharp kick off mass production of its 5-inch 1080 x 1920-pixel screen, with a whopping pixel density of 443ppi, and now we get to see how that amazing display looks in real life and the stunning amount of detail you get to see on it. Sharp is demonstrating its screen at CEATEC 2012 and it explains it is using continuous grain (CG) silicon TFT and not its own home-grown IGZO transistor process.

And early IGZO prototypes are even more impressive. The technology enables the production of 6.1-inch displays with a pixel density of 498ppi, that will make reading on a mobile device extremely close to the experience you get reading on a book.

Interestingly, Sharp explained that it picked CG (the older technology) because it still has some advantages over the newer IGZO. It has a lot to do with response time which is higher on CG and with how much quicker the company can kick off mass production of the well known CG displays.

Finally, Sharp seems to definitely have one of the most impressive displays out there, along with an upcoming 1080p screen by LG. Check out the images below to see for yourself.

source: TheVerge

All images courtesy of TheVerge.

FEATURED VIDEO

40 Comments

1. bobfreking55

Posts: 866; Member since: Jul 15, 2011

GALAXY NOTE III NEXT YEAR AND GOOGLE NEXUS 5 NEXT MONTH.

10. kartik4u98

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

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

Posts: 866; Member since: Jul 15, 2011

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. -my opinion

19. the_s2

Posts: 239; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

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

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

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

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

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

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

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

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

Yes you are right 1080p displays will have very less usability but many drawbacks..

28. AppleConspiracy

Posts: 637; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

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

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

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

Posts: 637; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

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

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

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

Posts: 637; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

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

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

Yes maybe galaxy s5 would have 1080p display..

40. kartik4u98

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

And what about the Gpu?? 1080p display would require a powerful Gpu..

35. kartik4u98

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

Yup! remixfa is absolutely correct.. 1080p display is only better for tablets..

29. kartik4u98

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

And why have I got so many thumbs down?? I haven't asked a silly or useless question>>??

34. Mittal

Posts: 494; Member since: Dec 14, 2011

lolz.. chill dude Not every1 is totally unbiased here Lets count how many red ones i get here :D

37. kartik4u98

Posts: 511; Member since: May 19, 2012

I hate when I get red thumbs without any reason..

2. shadez10

Posts: 427; Member since: Jan 15, 2012

THIS IS INNOVATION APPLE!!! LEARN FROM IT...

4. g2a5b0e unregistered

Why even involve Apple in this conversation? They don't even make displays. Fanboy-ism just keeps reaching new lows.

6. Jphones

Posts: 252; Member since: Feb 10, 2012

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

Posts: 1869; Member since: May 03, 2012

i know right these fanboys and anti-apple are annoying! even apple isnt included they will include them!

14. eflop

Posts: 2; Member since: Sep 19, 2012

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

Posts: 427; Member since: Jan 15, 2012

I JUST HATE APPLE... thats all =D im expecting RED THUMBS here...

8. AppleConspiracy

Posts: 637; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

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

Posts: 241; Member since: Mar 25, 2012

Higher PPI values bigger than that existed 10 years ago? example(s) please samystic

15. AppleConspiracy

Posts: 637; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

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

Posts: 241; Member since: Mar 25, 2012

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. samystic

25. AppleConspiracy

Posts: 637; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

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.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.