Samsung Unveils New 10" Retina Display 155
adeelarshad82 writes "Samsung has unveiled a brand new 10.1-inch display that supports a maximum of 2560×1600 pixel resolution that could be ripe for next generation tablets. Samsung's new display is more of a tech demo than anything else at this stage. While it looks impressive, it's not quite ready for broad production. It does, however, prove that high pixel density and high-resolution tablet displays are possible without unreasonable power requirements coming along in the process."
Power Requirements? (Score:4, Interesting)
It does, however, prove that high pixel density and high-resolution tablet displays are possible without unreasonable power requirements coming along in the process.
I'm not sure the power requirements are the biggest issue with this type of display. I think cost is going to be the biggest hurdle it has to clear before it finds its way into a tablet.
Technology really isn't there yet (Score:3, Interesting)
It is getting there, but as of yet there are still hurdles to be dealt with.
The biggest is just cost. Pixels cost money, every sub pixel needs a transistor (or two if you want a nice high quality IPS panel) and so more pixels equals more cost. You might think you want a display like that, but are you willing to bear the cost? Such a monitor could easily cost $3000-4000. Still interested?
Another big one is UI scaling. Programs and OSes are only now getting on board with the whole resolution independence thing. Windows Vista and 7 are fully on board and scale beautifully but many, many apps for them do not. That means you get some things that don't scale at all, or some where only parts (like text) scale but others (like the box that contains the text) don't. Can be a real issue in the case of extreme scaling. Now Windows can deal with that, it can present the programs with a lower resolution virtual display they render to and then stretch it up, but of course that really eliminates the usefulness of a high rez display.
OS-X kinda supports it, but it is incomplete at this point (the next version should have it completely implemented) and because of that app support is not good. Linux? Don't make me laugh, it is a hodge podge disaster there.
Another issue that isn't critical, but could be problematic, is interconnects. It takes more data than you might think to do really high resolutions. So let's say you want to double a 1920x1200 display's pixel density, which would give you 186ppi. No higher colour depth or refresh rate, just more pixels. Ok that is 3840x2400. Not counting any overhead, that takes 12.4gbits/sec to drive. You can do that, Displayport 1.2 can handle it (17.3gbits/sec max) but that's all. HDMI 1.4 isn't enough, DP 1.1 isn't enough. So doable, but barely and only then with the newest technology, which not a lot of videocards support.
Video processing power and RAM are other issues too. 4x the total number of pixels means you need much more processing power to handle all that. For a composited desktop cards today could handle it no problem, but one of the little integrated units probably wouldn't do it, need a dedicated accelerator. For 3D? That will be a real problem. Even a very high end accelerator will have trouble, probably need more than one.
Ultra high rez displays are just some time off. You can pull high pixel density on small devices because it doesn't take many pixels. The "Over 300ppi" and "Retina display" of the iPhone sounds all impressive until you realize it is just 960x640, only about 1/4th of full HD. No problem, that is still low rez. However if you want around 300ppi on a 24" display you are talking around 5760x3600 (that's actually only 279ppi) which would require massive amounts of interconnect bandwidth, not to mention the cost and so on.
It'll happen, but the tech isn't there yet for it to be real feasible.