Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Engadget]Samsung to announce 2560 x 1600 10.1 tablet
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Engadget]Samsung to announce 2560 x 1600 10.1 tablet - Page 4

post #31 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seeing Red View Post
This discussion is starting to remind of a pre-view thread for a DAC over at Head-fi. It pretty much came down to the fact that a $200 DAC now can produce sound just as well as a DAC that costs $1200 (level matched of course). Even with all the low less connectors and noise isolation built into the expensive DAC there wasn't really a perceptible difference between the two. If anything the expensive DAC added distortion in a way which appealed to 'audiophiles.'

I think the main point is what humans can precieve is unmeasureable and different for every person. You will have to overshoot that percetible boundry in order to make sure you got everyone.

OT: How many consumers will be able to see the difference between 2560x1600 and 1280x800? Enough to make money out of it? I think the step is definitely over the line of the percetible boundry. The next step in resolution density will most likely go unnoticed to the naked eye so why pursue it. The primary purpose of this technology is to display information and I think marketing can only carry a product so far.

There is always going to be other areas of display technology they will and can constantly improve on such as contrast, black depth and color accuracy. Even those parameters will get to a point beyond human preception.
I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, it's not quite the same sort of situation. I'm sure people can perceive the differences in sound QUALITY from various sources (however slight/subtle those may be). What someone CANNOT do is hear things that the hairs in their ears/eardrums simply do not respond to. Or analagously, see things to a higher resolution than the rods/cones in their eye can detect at a given distance. There is no more fundamental limitation than that, and no one can detect beyond what their body's senses are capable of. You can quantitate what a sense is able to respond to (you can physically count the rods and cones in an eye, extrapolate out resolution capabilities vs. distance), and you can't "beat" the math once you approach that, not even with perception.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #32 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by E_man View Post
You don't happen to have proof of this? I can see that being true for old apps, but apps designed for 960x640 definitely seem to use it. If both the new and the old apps were rendered at the same resolution, you would think someone would have noticed...

Interesting side note. I compared the chromaticity diagram on my pentile galaxy s with a non pentile iPad.Interestingly they both handled the image very much the same, vibrancy aside.
RGBG pentile handles colors decently. It just can't handle edges, which is why text on the Galaxy S looks closer in resolution to my 480x320 iPod than my 800x480 Desire.

Try it with this image: http://static.arstechnica.com/03-21-2010/fig4-ia.png


But don't compare pixels. Pixels are useless when talking about phones.

Compare the physical sizes. The 3GS and iPhone 4 are both 3.5" screens. The physical size of the UI is the same. All of the buttons, text, icons are the exact same size. The iPhone 4 ones are just a little clearer.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4670k ASUS Maximus VI Gene Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB Kingston Hyper-X 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 OCZ Vertex 3 WD6401AALS WD5000AAKS 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Noctua NH-D14 elementary OS Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM LG W2442PA-BF 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Corsair HX750W Corsair Graphite 600T Logitech G700 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DG 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4670k ASUS Maximus VI Gene Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB Kingston Hyper-X 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 OCZ Vertex 3 WD6401AALS WD5000AAKS 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Noctua NH-D14 elementary OS Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM LG W2442PA-BF 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Corsair HX750W Corsair Graphite 600T Logitech G700 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DG 
  hide details  
Reply
post #33 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, it's not quite the same sort of situation. I'm sure people can perceive the differences in sound QUALITY from various sources (however slight/subtle those may be). What someone CANNOT do is hear things that the hairs in their ears/eardrums simply do not respond to. Or analagously, see things to a higher resolution than the rods/cones in their eye can detect at a given distance. There is no more fundamental limitation than that, and no one can detect beyond what their body's senses are capable of. You can quantitate what a sense is able to respond to (you can physically count the rods and cones in an eye, extrapolate out resolution capabilities vs. distance), and you can't "beat" the math once you approach that, not even with perception.
I didn't say they were the same situation, it just reminded me of it. I probably shouldn't of included that part about adding distortion as it seemed to detract from the overall point. Anyways the point of DACs are to accurately reproduce the original sound. We have equipment that can do that at the $200 level. Adding excess amounts of components to provide clean power to the circuitry or gold plating the connectors in order to lower loss doesn't make a difference in how the end result sounds to humans. You can hook up an oscilloscope to the outputs and you might see a slight electrical difference, but who is the say that difference won't be lost in the transducers' imperfect frequency response or your imperfect ears.

Like you stated the range of what we can preceive is smaller than what we are physically capable of sensing. We have the ultimate thresholds for what we can preceive but we are not sure exactly where everyone stands. So do you base technology of what we can preceive or what we can sense. Do a quick case study and we can get what we preceive pretty easily. Being more a subjective way, essentially how our brains interpret the data, it might take a large sample size. A sensory decompisition for every aspect of each sensor organ to get the ultimate boundaries of human perception is going to take a lot longer (not that we aren't doing it).

In the end, I'm sure that companies are not mindlessly investing money into research ventures if customers won't find any value in the tech. If that were the case they would need to heavily rely on their marketing department to pull a profit.
Lil Burninator
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K ASUS Gryphon CF R9 290Xs Samsung 4x4GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 1TB 2x 240s | 360 | MPC35X | Mostly BP W7 Pre x64 XL2720T 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K70 AX1200 CaseLabs S5 + Ped G700/Mamba 
Mouse PadAudio
Vespula WA7 + KRK RP6s + HD650s 
  hide details  
Reply
Lil Burninator
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770K ASUS Gryphon CF R9 290Xs Samsung 4x4GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung EVO 1TB 2x 240s | 360 | MPC35X | Mostly BP W7 Pre x64 XL2720T 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K70 AX1200 CaseLabs S5 + Ped G700/Mamba 
Mouse PadAudio
Vespula WA7 + KRK RP6s + HD650s 
  hide details  
Reply
post #34 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seeing Red View Post
I didn't say they were the same situation, it just reminded me of it. I probably shouldn't of included that part about adding distortion as it seemed to detract from the overall point. Anyways the point of DACs are to accurately reproduce the original sound. We have equipment that can do that at the $200 level. Adding excess amounts of components to provide clean power to the circuitry or gold plating the connectors in order to lower loss doesn't make a difference in how the end result sounds to humans. You can hook up an oscilloscope to the outputs and you might see a slight electrical difference, but who is the say that difference won't be lost in the transducers' imperfect frequency response or your imperfect ears.

Like you stated the range of what we can preceive is smaller than what we are physically capable of sensing. We have the ultimate thresholds for what we can preceive but we are not sure exactly where everyone stands. So do you base technology of what we can preceive or what we can sense. Do a quick case study and we can get what we preceive pretty easily. Being more a subjective way, essentially how our brains interpret the data, it might take a large sample size. A sensory decompisition for every aspect of each sensor organ to get the ultimate boundaries of human perception is going to take a lot longer (not that we aren't doing it).

In the end, I'm sure that companies are not mindlessly investing money into research ventures if customers won't find any value in the tech. If that were the case they would need to heavily rely on their marketing department to pull a profit.
Ah, my bad--I mis-read it at first, and thought you were saying it was the same thing. I understand now, sorry for the mis-understanding.

I would hope companies are not mindlessly investing money into expanding something like pixel density unnecessarily, except people love to have more megapixels! (whether or not they're needed or usable...like 8mp on my phone with crappy camera optics, lol)
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #35 of 44
This is just... too much..
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 2500K @ 3.30GHz ASUS P8P67-M PRO ASUS ENGTX 460 850\1700\1800 Kingston HyperX Blu 2x2GB 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
SAMSUNG SpinPoint F3 500GB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit AOC 916Swa 19" Logitech Ultra-Flat 
PowerCaseMouse Pad
Corsair CX600W v2 CoolerMaster Elite 430 Black A4Tech x7 Gaming 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 2500K @ 3.30GHz ASUS P8P67-M PRO ASUS ENGTX 460 850\1700\1800 Kingston HyperX Blu 2x2GB 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
SAMSUNG SpinPoint F3 500GB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit AOC 916Swa 19" Logitech Ultra-Flat 
PowerCaseMouse Pad
Corsair CX600W v2 CoolerMaster Elite 430 Black A4Tech x7 Gaming 
  hide details  
Reply
post #36 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathris View Post
The internal resolution on the iPhone didn't change at all actually, because iOS apps can't handle dynamic scaling. Their 960x640 screen is really just 480x320 with 4xAA
No, not even close.

The iPhone 4's resolution is 960x640. When an iOS app runs on the iPhone 4 the OS draws it with four times the detail. That way controls are the same physical size, and much clearer.
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #37 of 44
nathris posted cool pictures and went to college, so I'm gonna assume he's right.

btw, not being sarcastic.
Gaming Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 5.2ghz 1.43v Asus P8P67 Deluxe Asus + MSI GTX470 SLI - 885/1770/1800@1.1v 3x2gb Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB + 500GB Seagates, 80gb Intel X25-M SSD LG 22x CD/DVD Reader/Writer Win7 Home Premium x64 24" 1920x1200 Samsung 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 XFX 850w Black Edition Coolermaster HAF932 Logitech G500 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus 
  hide details  
Reply
Gaming Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 5.2ghz 1.43v Asus P8P67 Deluxe Asus + MSI GTX470 SLI - 885/1770/1800@1.1v 3x2gb Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB + 500GB Seagates, 80gb Intel X25-M SSD LG 22x CD/DVD Reader/Writer Win7 Home Premium x64 24" 1920x1200 Samsung 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 XFX 850w Black Edition Coolermaster HAF932 Logitech G500 
Mouse Pad
Razer Goliathus 
  hide details  
Reply
post #38 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy1993 View Post
nathris posted cool pictures and went to college, so I'm gonna assume he's right.

btw, not being sarcastic.
Don't be rude.

It's basic knowledge that the iPhone has a 960x640 resolution. There is no AA involved. The reason the screen looks crisper is because there are four times more pixels being drawn in the same area.

Four pixels on the iPhone 4 take up the same space as one pixel on the iPhone 3GS. I'm pretty shocked that anyone would believe otherwise.

Retina display
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #39 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelbom View Post
No, not even close.

The iPhone 4's resolution is 960x640. When an iOS app runs on the iPhone 4 the OS draws it with four times the detail. That way controls are the same physical size, and much clearer.
That's exactly what I said. If you were to open up iBooks and open an ebook, and use size 12 times new roman font you would get the exact same amount of text on the iPhone 4 as on the 3GS. Its just that the text on the iPhone 4 is smoother.


4 times the resolution should mean 4 times the information, but its not.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4670k ASUS Maximus VI Gene Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB Kingston Hyper-X 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 OCZ Vertex 3 WD6401AALS WD5000AAKS 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Noctua NH-D14 elementary OS Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM LG W2442PA-BF 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Corsair HX750W Corsair Graphite 600T Logitech G700 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DG 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4670k ASUS Maximus VI Gene Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB Kingston Hyper-X 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 OCZ Vertex 3 WD6401AALS WD5000AAKS 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Noctua NH-D14 elementary OS Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM LG W2442PA-BF 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Corsair HX750W Corsair Graphite 600T Logitech G700 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DG 
  hide details  
Reply
post #40 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathris View Post
That's exactly what I said. If you were to open up iBooks and open an ebook, and use size 12 times new roman font you would get the exact same amount of text on the iPhone 4 as on the 3GS. Its just that the text on the iPhone 4 is smoother.


4 times the resolution should mean 4 times the information, but its not.
I knew you said the content is the same physical size, and that the iPhone 4 looks smoother... but what were you talking about 480x320 and AA for
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
Kasuf
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 6600K ASRock Z170 Pro4 ASUS Radeon RX 480 ROG Strix Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000MHz 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 850 EVO Noctua NH-D15 LG 34" Ultrawide (LG34UC98) Corsair HX750i 
Case
Silverstone FT05B-W 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Engadget]Samsung to announce 2560 x 1600 10.1 tablet