Slashdot Mirror
Japan Display Squeezes 8K Resolution Into 17-inch LCD, Cracks 510 PPI At 120Hz
MojoKid writes: By any metric, 8K is an incredibly high resolution. In fact, given that most HD content is still published in 1080p, the same could be said about 4K. 4K packs in four times the pixels of 1080p, while 8K takes that and multiplies it by four once again; we're talking 33,177,600 pixels. We've become accustomed to our smartphones having super-high ppi (pixels-per-inch); 5.5-inch 1080p phones are 401 ppi, which is well past the point that humans are able to differentiate individual pixels. Understanding that highlights just how impressive Japan Display's (JDI) monitor is, as it clocks in at 510 ppi in a 17-inch panel. Other specs include a 2000:1 contrast ratio, a brightness of 500cd/m2, and a 176 degree viewing angle. While the fact that the company achieved 8K resolution in such a small form-factor is impressive in itself, also impressive is the fact that it has a refresh rate of 120Hz.
Applications like "viewing with your eyeball actually pressed to the cover glass." You know, real critical ones.
Nothing at all to do with getting the biggest feel-good number on the spec sheet, No sir, not at all.
Any monitor would crack at 510 pounds per square inch regardless of the Hz.
PlanetVulkan.com
Before anyone goes around calling this pointless, the Japanese (as well as many other Asian countries) character system benefits from a higher resolution more than the writing systems used by most all Western countries. The symbols are far more dense, which makes the additional resolution more useful.
Here's a good image that shows off that difference that additional resolution can achieve.
to the company's press release.
You're wrong. For looking at a website, sure this may be overkill. But for medical applications -- reading digital x-rays and MRI scans, for instance -- it's most definitely not overkill; very, very small and low-contrast features on medical images often are of crucial importance.
4k already needs DisplayPort 1.2 to be able to push data at 60Hz. What interface can conveniently push 8k at 120Hz ??
It's not so great. I've seen an image of the new display on the Internet and it has the same pixel density as my monitor.
Graphics cards in computers draw most of their power doing lighting calculations for games, many calculations for each pixel. Phones just pass along pixel information from the source material, with nothing more complicated than scaling going on.
Even a high end computer video card uses a lot less than maximum power when it's doing as little work as a phone does.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Remember to use gold plated connectors to get the best visual fidelity.
120Hz is good, 8K native resolution is also good, even if I would not use the monitor at that resolution. One of my problems with LCDs is that they distort the image if the resolutions do not match. CRTs do not have this problem. An 8K 17" LCD also won't have this problem. Whether I would set it to 1920x1200, 1280x800 or 1152x864 (4:3 with pillarbox), the image would look just as nice as on a CRT.
120Hz means faster image update rate at any resolution (unlike my CRT which can do 160Hz at some low resolution but only 85Hz at 1920x1200, a LCD that does only 60Hz at its max resolution does not get any faster at lower resolutions).
I am only concerned now with the input lag and black levels, but it seems that one day I will be able to replace my CRT monitor with a similar size LCD (24") that will have higher resolution and none of the annoyances of current LCDs.
No, he means 16:10. You may think you're awesome remembering grade school math, but comparing 16:10 to 16:9 is more intuitive, even for geniuses like you.
Panasonic sells 4k monitors of this size in volume to the medical industry, and for engineering work (CAD). It's likely that they will upgrade to 8k soon and use that to spur development of the technology. Those industries will pay 5x as much for a GPU because it is guaranteed to produce correct output (gamers won't notice a single pixel being slightly the wrong shade of green now and then), so it's clear that there is demand from them. They basically want to eliminate any visible aliasing issues entirely, which is also why they pay for very high end printers.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
In other words, virtual reality. The problem with the current VR headsets like the DK2, is you have effectively a 1080p display that fills most of your field of vision, in other words, yes - you can see the pixels and they are pretty big. The screen door effect is also pretty bad. Text is very difficult to read using the Rift DK2 unless the text is very large.
Developing very high PPI displays will be a real benefit for VR headsets. Tne next crop (the Vive/SteamVR and Oculus CV1) have better resolution (IIRC it's something like 1200 pixels vertical) and probably will have much less of a screen door effect, but the resolution really needs doubling at least for a VR headset to truly feel HD.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows