Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [engadget] Samsung to exhibit 13.3-inch notebook display with 3,200 x 1,800 resolution
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[engadget] Samsung to exhibit 13.3-inch notebook display with 3,200 x 1,800 resolution - Page 9

post #81 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtolios View Post

CONTENT ON THE MONITOR IS SCALLED FROM 1600x900 -> DOUBLE THE SIZE EACH DIRECTION = 4x THE PIXELS (AREA doh)
IT IS NOT A 1800p MONITOR, IT IS A 900p MONITOR WITH FSAA ON HARDWARE LEVEL, JUST LIKE THE rMBP IS A 900p. (only the rMBP scales a 16:10 900p interface, thus different res than the 16:9 Sammy).

Oh, and "plastics" and composite materials are superior to metals in countless ways.
Ofc people in aerospace, high tech military, R/C modelling and super-car manufacturing are idiots pushing plastics - it is all about cutting costs, while "aluminum" is a premium material.
Get a grip - metal looks fancy and different, but aluminum has crappy mechanical properties and highly unwanted thermal properties for a device that runs hot and interfaces directly with your skin.
Plus lots and lots of MBPs warp under mechanical and thermal stresses...
Magnesium and Titanium are "premium" metals, true, but aluminum is perhaps the crappiest metal of em all...it is chosen cause it is lightweight and it doesn't rust easily + it is cheap to buy and work with. Not cause it is mechanically superior to ANY other metal.

Cheap, crack-able plastic < Aluminum < Magnesium alloys or others such as high quality plastic < Carbon fiber (not just a thin sheet over a plastic shell)
post #82 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtolios View Post

CONTENT ON THE MONITOR IS SCALLED FROM 1600x900 -> DOUBLE THE SIZE EACH DIRECTION = 4x THE PIXELS (AREA doh)
IT IS NOT A 1800p MONITOR, IT IS A 900p MONITOR WITH FSAA ON HARDWARE LEVEL, JUST LIKE THE rMBP IS A 900p. (only the rMBP scales a 16:10 900p interface, thus different res than the 16:9 Sammy).

Oh, and "plastics" and composite materials are superior to metals in countless ways.
Ofc people in aerospace, high tech military, R/C modelling and super-car manufacturing are idiots pushing plastics - it is all about cutting costs, while "aluminum" is a premium material.
Get a grip - metal looks fancy and different, but aluminum has crappy mechanical properties and highly unwanted thermal properties for a device that runs hot and interfaces directly with your skin.
Plus lots and lots of MBPs warp under mechanical and thermal stresses...
Magnesium and Titanium are "premium" metals, true, but aluminum is perhaps the crappiest metal of em all...it is chosen cause it is lightweight and it doesn't rust easily + it is cheap to buy and work with. Not cause it is mechanically superior to ANY other metal.

Since it's scaling you can set it to a range of resolutions, not just 900p luckily. Mines at 1920x1200.

And plastics fine, just what Samsung uses feels like garbage. Thin, bendy, glossy plastics don't feel good. I'd hands down take something like aluminum over it. On the other hand Nokia does it right with the unibody polycarbonite body for the 920.

And I've never experienced warping but that's just me.
Rig
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820K MSI X99A SLI PLUS EVGA GTX 1070 FTW 4x8GB G.Skill Ripjaws  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Pro Samsung 850 Evo Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2515H Happy Hacking Keyboard 2  EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Corsair 600Q 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G403 Steelseries QcK Mass M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 930 @ 3.7 HT Gigabyte X58A-UD3R VisionTek 4870x2 3x4GB's G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB AAKS, 2x 640GB AAKS, 2x 1TB Samsung SH-S203B Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung 245BW 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Happy Hacking Keyboard 2 Silverstone OP850 Antec 1200 [Three Nanoxia FX12] [Two San Ace 1011] Logitech G500 
Mouse Pad
Razer eXactMat 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7 3615QM GT 650M 16GB DDR3 256GB SSD 
OS
OS X Mountain Lion 
  hide details  
Reply
Rig
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820K MSI X99A SLI PLUS EVGA GTX 1070 FTW 4x8GB G.Skill Ripjaws  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 Pro Samsung 850 Evo Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2515H Happy Hacking Keyboard 2  EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Corsair 600Q 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G403 Steelseries QcK Mass M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 930 @ 3.7 HT Gigabyte X58A-UD3R VisionTek 4870x2 3x4GB's G.Skill Ripjaws 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB AAKS, 2x 640GB AAKS, 2x 1TB Samsung SH-S203B Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung 245BW 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Happy Hacking Keyboard 2 Silverstone OP850 Antec 1200 [Three Nanoxia FX12] [Two San Ace 1011] Logitech G500 
Mouse Pad
Razer eXactMat 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7 3615QM GT 650M 16GB DDR3 256GB SSD 
OS
OS X Mountain Lion 
  hide details  
Reply
post #83 of 93
Sure, warping in MBPs is very very rare, but it happens. Friend had a brand new 2012 one shipped warped or it warped within the 1st day. You would place it on a flat surface and you would feel it wobble as the under surface was warped. A straight edge placed against it would prove it even visually. She was pissed ofc, but they would not exchange it.

Crackable plastics are not fun, true, but so is bended aluminum - pretty easy to happen with the impressively thin profiles used in MBPs or other slick aluminum devices.
All materials have weaknesses.
FooBox
(20 items)
 
 
Camera Gear
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon E5-1650 V3 3.5GHz Dell C610 Quadro K4200 4GB 32GB PC-2133 DDR4 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M550 256GB Dell Windows 7 Professional Dell U2412M 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2412M Dell KB-212-B Dell 850W 80+ Gold T5810 
Mouse
Logitech G700 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsGraphics
Canon EOS 6D  EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM  EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM 
GraphicsOptical DriveOptical DriveOptical Drive
EF 35mm f/2 IS USM Manfrotto 190XPROB Tripod Manfrotto 685B NeoTec Monopod Manfrotto 410 Junior Geared Head 
Optical DriveCase
Manfrotto 496 Ball Head Lowepro Mini Trekker AW 
  hide details  
Reply
FooBox
(20 items)
 
 
Camera Gear
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon E5-1650 V3 3.5GHz Dell C610 Quadro K4200 4GB 32GB PC-2133 DDR4 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M550 256GB Dell Windows 7 Professional Dell U2412M 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell U2412M Dell KB-212-B Dell 850W 80+ Gold T5810 
Mouse
Logitech G700 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsGraphics
Canon EOS 6D  EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM  EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM 
GraphicsOptical DriveOptical DriveOptical Drive
EF 35mm f/2 IS USM Manfrotto 190XPROB Tripod Manfrotto 685B NeoTec Monopod Manfrotto 410 Junior Geared Head 
Optical DriveCase
Manfrotto 496 Ball Head Lowepro Mini Trekker AW 
  hide details  
Reply
post #84 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfinion View Post

Can we do away with WQXGA+ and all the others? 99% of people probably have no idea what they even mean. XXXX x YYYY is nice and simple...
That is the fault of the game, not the screen. Instead of using a fixed set of resolutions, games should poll the hardware/OS to figure out which resolutions are available, and adapt to them. Nvidia has an amazing PDF on resolution independence and arbitrary aspect ratios in games, but I'd have to dig hard to find it.

2 seconds later: http://developer.download.nvidia.com/whitepapers/2010/SurroundBestPracticesGuide.pdf

Google, you fiend you. rolleyes.gif

Feeling dirty from your hard dig? lachen.gif


Back on topic, yeah, i don't really care for these small ultra res displays, not bashing samsung here.... But the general display market needs to get off it's butt and get something higher then 1920x1080 easily affordable, this is ridiculous.
Ryzen 2017
(17 items)
 
Home Server
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD R7 1700 @ 3.95GHz - 1.425V Asus Prime X370 Pro Nvidia Geforce GTX 1080Ti FE 2000/6000 @ 1.025v 16GB (2x8GB) G.Skill DDR4 2933MHz CL16-16-16-35 1T 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
BPX 120GB NVMe SSD *boot* Intel 730 Series 240GB SSD Crucial BX100 1TB SSD Asus DVDRW 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Pro x64 Acer XG270HU 1440P 144Hz Freesync Cougar 600k Mechanical 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic x1050w Antec 1100 V2 Razer Deathadder Elite Steelseries QCK Heavy 
Audio
Plantronics Rig 500e 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Opteron 4226 6 core Valencia 2.7GHz Opteron 4226 6 core Valencia 2.7GHz Asus KCMA-D8 Nvidia GT 520 1GB DDR3 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
32GB (4GBx8) Kingston 1066 ECC DDR3 (4x) Hitachi 500GB 7200RPM HDD's out of an old NAS Lightscribe CD/DVDRW Xubuntu 16.04 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 17" 4:3 Trash Dell Membrane OCZ 750w Generic Mid Tower 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Lenovo Laser Tabletop None 
  hide details  
Reply
Ryzen 2017
(17 items)
 
Home Server
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD R7 1700 @ 3.95GHz - 1.425V Asus Prime X370 Pro Nvidia Geforce GTX 1080Ti FE 2000/6000 @ 1.025v 16GB (2x8GB) G.Skill DDR4 2933MHz CL16-16-16-35 1T 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
BPX 120GB NVMe SSD *boot* Intel 730 Series 240GB SSD Crucial BX100 1TB SSD Asus DVDRW 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Pro x64 Acer XG270HU 1440P 144Hz Freesync Cougar 600k Mechanical 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic x1050w Antec 1100 V2 Razer Deathadder Elite Steelseries QCK Heavy 
Audio
Plantronics Rig 500e 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Opteron 4226 6 core Valencia 2.7GHz Opteron 4226 6 core Valencia 2.7GHz Asus KCMA-D8 Nvidia GT 520 1GB DDR3 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
32GB (4GBx8) Kingston 1066 ECC DDR3 (4x) Hitachi 500GB 7200RPM HDD's out of an old NAS Lightscribe CD/DVDRW Xubuntu 16.04 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 17" 4:3 Trash Dell Membrane OCZ 750w Generic Mid Tower 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Lenovo Laser Tabletop None 
  hide details  
Reply
post #85 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Bad Day View Post

Cheap, crack-able plastic < Aluminum < Magnesium alloys or others such as high quality plastic < Carbon fiber (not just a thin sheet over a plastic shell)

I have seen a flame war here, metal vs plastic - Sorted, lets use wood biggrin.gif
post #86 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBEG View Post

By your own admission you acknowledge aesthetics as separate from component quality, which is exactly the same point I was making. Yes, from a marketing perspective aluminum and magnesium are both great. They look great and they feel great, which is a big deal for the average consumer.

Which is what point exactly? That we should be completely utilitarian? That notion is as barbarous as archaic times. Yet pseudo-intellectuals still insist on that idiotic idea.
Quote:
I'm opining the "fit and finish" crowd altogether; aesthetics be damned,

A few hundred million people don't agree with you.
Quote:
I'm spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on a machine and I want good craftsmanship all the way around, not just on the guts.

Aesthetics are part of that. A big part actually.
Quote:
Spoken like someone with absolutely no knowledge of plastics (I'll use that word since polymer seems to upset you) and the areas/industries they're used in.

You don't need to be a physicist to determine a mechanical failure. You don't need to be an electrician to diagnose a power outage. You don't need to be a musician to criticize music. Just like I don't need an Engineering degree in an extremely selective field to criticize the use of plastic in Samsung's products. I love this measuring though, it feeds my ego greatly.
Quote:
Good blends are far more impact resistant than aluminum of the same weight (though they will be thicker).

Once again we ignore the fact that many "metal" materials used in premium products are made out of 100% Aluminum. There are hundreds of different types of composites and alloys that are superior to plastics in many ways. Plus, they feel nicer. Weight is not as much of an issue as people make it out to be, and lightweight alloys will only weigh maybe 35-65% more than plastics. An insignificant number when you consider how small a smartphone is. When we consider how thin and light an utlraportable is, we see how ridiculous the notion of "too heavy" really is.
Quote:
They'll also technically absorb more vibration, but I don't know of any studies specifically addressing what wavelengths a denser blend will soak in vs aluminum. Aluminum is no more scratch resistant than modern plastics and both show equally well.

Plastics will not stand up to certain types of corrosion better than metals. Many alloys are superior to plastics in resistance, anti-vibration, and stand up to blunt trauma much better. Putting plastics on premium products is ridiculous if we even ignore aesthetics. There are hundreds of materials that are superior to plastics. Why do we even use plastics? It's cheap and durable enough for most daily tasks. The only argument in favor of plastics is why bother with superior materials when you are unlikely to ever need the qualities those materials can offer? Which is a good point, and one I would've conceded because I don't have an answer besides "plastic feels cheap."
Quote:
The stuff a Galaxy phone is made of is not good plastic. The stuff used in the defense and construction industries, on the other hand, is pretty cool stuff. A lot of modern truck bed liners are pretty damn thin and resist damage better than the metal skin over the truck body itself.

You know what else is cool? The alloy used on Globemaster III that can withstand 12.7mm fire while being extremely lightweight for such a heavy duty composite.
Quote:
And no, I don't work in the industry or for a producer; my experience with polymers plastics is their role in keeping things in place on a rifle, in magazines, and on a gun belt. But hey, I'm always down for being educated. Would you mind showing me/us the mechanical properties that lead you to your conclusions?

As I already explained, I should not be shelling out 600-900$ for a device that takes less than 200$ to make, with less than 30$ of that going towards it's protective casing. Nor should anyone else for that matter. When I shell out 1.2k$ for an utlraportable, it better well be made out of something superior to plastic.
Edited by HanSomPa - 5/22/13 at 12:08am
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4790k Asus z87AR R9 290 4GB Sapphire Tri-X Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
WD Black Corsair 240GB SSD Asus crappy drive Windows 8 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 1080p 24" IPS Panel Ducky Shining Red Cherry MX [Blue LED] 700 Watt Cooler Master PSU Cooler Master Storm Scout 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech 502 Proteus Core Steelseries 4HD Asus Xonar Essence STX Sound card 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4790k Asus z87AR R9 290 4GB Sapphire Tri-X Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
WD Black Corsair 240GB SSD Asus crappy drive Windows 8 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 1080p 24" IPS Panel Ducky Shining Red Cherry MX [Blue LED] 700 Watt Cooler Master PSU Cooler Master Storm Scout 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech 502 Proteus Core Steelseries 4HD Asus Xonar Essence STX Sound card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #87 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous View Post

That's not true. My iPhone 5 is 326 PPI and I can easily spot pixelation from 6" or so away and I dare say many others can too. PPI doesn't mean anything and means even less in relation to distance. The further away an object is, the lower its PPI can be for pixelation to not be visible. PPI wouldn't make a difference for zooming, assuming it was high enough in the first place. It's not like zooming has any correlation to your screens resolution unless you're zooming in on your own screenshots...

Either way, pixels have to take up less than a very small percentage of your visionary field, it's nothing to do with absolute numbers.
I have no idea what this even means? It has an entire operating system!

Yes, was my mistake to talk about zooming in relation with PPI. For zooming we can talk about resolution.
Maybe you haven't understood yet what PPI means: PIXELS PER INCH: and the screen is divided with pixels. And, yes, doesn't mean anything with the distance, but my example was for understanding that; at 300 PPI you cannot see any pixel at all at any distance you want, it doesn't matter how big is the screen. Of course, under 300 PPI you cannot see the pixels if you go away from the screen, but going further away from the screen, you begin to lose the microdetails. Anyway , increasing the resolution on a given size, will increase the PPI.. Again, you cannot distinguish any pixel on the screen at 300 pixels per inch. For better understanding at what PPI means you can take this in consideration: http://thirdculture.com/joel/shumi/computer/hardware/ppicalc.html Play with it.
So, at 300 PPI pixels density per inch you can achieve the best microdetails from an image which the human eye could perceive.

Otherwise, if you got a screen with bigger resolution, but you haven't any content to display at that resolution is a waste of pixels. When you zoom in, the image of the media content expands and it you begin to see the pixels of it. The perfect match is, the content media resolution in pair with the resolution of the screen.
Edited by sorance2000 - 5/22/13 at 5:02am
post #88 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by sorance2000 View Post

Yes, was my mistake to talk about zooming in relation with PPI. For zooming we can talk about resolution.
Maybe you haven't understood yet what PPI means: PIXELS PER INCH: and the screen is divided with pixels. And, yes, doesn't mean anything with the distance, but my example was for understanding that; at 300 PPI you cannot see any pixel at all at any distance you want, it doesn't matter how big is the screen. Of course, under 300 PPI you cannot see the pixels if you go away from the screen, but going further away from the screen, you begin to lose the microdetails. Anyway , increasing the resolution on a given size, will increase the PPI.. Again, you cannot distinguish any pixel on the screen at 300 pixels per inch. For better understanding at what PPI means you can take this in consideration: http://thirdculture.com/joel/shumi/computer/hardware/ppicalc.html Play with it.
So, at 300 PPI pixels density per inch you can achieve the best microdetails from an image which the human eye could perceive.

Otherwise, if you got a screen with bigger resolution, but you haven't any content to display at that resolution is a waste of pixels. When you zoom in, the image of the media content expands and it you begin to see the pixels of it. The perfect match is, the content media resolution in pair with the resolution of the screen.

You can see higher than 300 PPI. That is fact. Grab an iPhone 5 in the Apple store, it's 326 PPI and you can see pixelation from almost a foot away if your eyesight is decent, you can see it at 6-8" even if it's not.

If you couldn't distinguish more than 300 PPI, then think about this. If you take a high end smartphone, iPhone 5 for example. Get an entirely white image with one randomly placed black pixel and one randomly placed group of two black pixels. If you can tell which is the one and which is the two, then you can tell the difference. And I assure you that you can. I know exactly what PPI means, you don't seem to understand that we can see more than 300. They may be subtle differences but they are detectable.

Sure it's a waste of pixels on a content based media like a movie, but that's not the point of these screens. They're designed to sharpen up the operating system and make things look much more fluid, which they achieve rather well. Windows 8 on these high resolution screens looks really good, it's incredibly sharp. If we didn't advance the screens, we wouldn't advance anything. People would say "Why record above 1080P when we don't have the screens?" and the rest would say "Why make screens above 1080P when there's no content?". Someone has to go first in order for the others to follow. And thankfully Apple brought PPI and the "retina" concept into view of most 'techies' and now it's a major factor for new products.
Mendeleev
(16 items)
 
Bohr
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K Asrock Z87 Extreme4M Asus Direct-CUII HD7970 Patriot Viper Black Mamba 16GB (4x4) 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 840 PRO 512GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F1 2TB Toshiba 7K3000.D 3TB The cheapest one 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H100i Windows 8 Pro Dell U2312HM Razer Black Widow Ultimate 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX Black Edition 750W Modular Corsair 350D Razer Naga Razer Goliathus 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7 4702MQ Nvidia GTX 760M 8GB (2x4GB) 1600MHz 128GB Sandisk SSD 
Hard DriveOSMonitorAudio
750GB Samsung HDD Windows 8 Pro 64-Bit 14" 1600x900 panel Crap 
  hide details  
Reply
Mendeleev
(16 items)
 
Bohr
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K Asrock Z87 Extreme4M Asus Direct-CUII HD7970 Patriot Viper Black Mamba 16GB (4x4) 2133MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 840 PRO 512GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F1 2TB Toshiba 7K3000.D 3TB The cheapest one 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Corsair H100i Windows 8 Pro Dell U2312HM Razer Black Widow Ultimate 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX Black Edition 750W Modular Corsair 350D Razer Naga Razer Goliathus 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7 4702MQ Nvidia GTX 760M 8GB (2x4GB) 1600MHz 128GB Sandisk SSD 
Hard DriveOSMonitorAudio
750GB Samsung HDD Windows 8 Pro 64-Bit 14" 1600x900 panel Crap 
  hide details  
Reply
post #89 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstrous View Post

You can see higher than 300 PPI. That is fact. Grab an iPhone 5 in the Apple store, it's 326 PPI and you can see pixelation from almost a foot away if your eyesight is decent, you can see it at 6-8" even if it's not.

If you couldn't distinguish more than 300 PPI, then think about this. If you take a high end smartphone, iPhone 5 for example. Get an entirely white image with one randomly placed black pixel and one randomly placed group of two black pixels. If you can tell which is the one and which is the two, then you can tell the difference. And I assure you that you can. I know exactly what PPI means, you don't seem to understand that we can see more than 300. They may be subtle differences but they are detectable.

Sure it's a waste of pixels on a content based media like a movie, but that's not the point of these screens. They're designed to sharpen up the operating system and make things look much more fluid, which they achieve rather well. Windows 8 on these high resolution screens looks really good, it's incredibly sharp. If we didn't advance the screens, we wouldn't advance anything. People would say "Why record above 1080P when we don't have the screens?" and the rest would say "Why make screens above 1080P when there's no content?". Someone has to go first in order for the others to follow. And thankfully Apple brought PPI and the "retina" concept into view of most 'techies' and now it's a major factor for new products.


Read again what I typed. you didnt`t understand anything from it. Let`s take a an example: a 23 inch monitor; it has almost 96 pixels per inch.
Look at that monitor and try to distinguish the pixels - it`s about phisical size of the pixel screen not of the media content - on it, from whatever distance you want; then imagine those pixels at more 4 times lesser sized, looked at any distance from the screen you'd like to stay. You can approach to the screen closest posible. If you can distinguish some pixels there , you'd posses the best eyes in the world. All I typed here is not related to my own opinion, it's about science.
From wikipedia : "Some observations have indicated that the unaided human eye can generally not differentiate detail beyond 300 PPI;[4] however, this figure depends both on the distance between viewer and image, and the viewer’s visual acuity. The human eye also responds differently to bright, evenly lit and interactive display, than prints on paper"

Can you perceive from screen a detail lesser than 1/10 of a mm?. smile.gif As an exercise try with a very sharp pen to draw 10 dots inside a 1mm square, one by one. biggrin.gif
At 302 PPI you get a dot pitch -it could be in general assumption called pixel pitch- with the size of 0.083 mm. wink.gif
Edited by sorance2000 - 5/23/13 at 5:59am
post #90 of 93
BURN IT! before it starts giving commands!

hope they are readable without being 2" from the screen
rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2700k @ 4.5GHz ASRock z75 Pro3 MSI 980 Ti Gaming and Gigabyte R9 290 OC windforce 8GB 2133 CL9 Gskill Snipper 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2x 128GB M4 sata3 3TB Seagate + 640GB WD black M550 512GB sata3 2x140mm SilverArrow 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win7 64bit QNIX 27" 1440p @96Hz 850W EVGA SuperNova +80Gold HAF 932 
MouseAudioAudio
Razor Abyssus SoundBlaster Z  Logitech X-540 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
rig
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2700k @ 4.5GHz ASRock z75 Pro3 MSI 980 Ti Gaming and Gigabyte R9 290 OC windforce 8GB 2133 CL9 Gskill Snipper 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2x 128GB M4 sata3 3TB Seagate + 640GB WD black M550 512GB sata3 2x140mm SilverArrow 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win7 64bit QNIX 27" 1440p @96Hz 850W EVGA SuperNova +80Gold HAF 932 
MouseAudioAudio
Razor Abyssus SoundBlaster Z  Logitech X-540 5.1 
  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 exhibit 13.3-inch notebook display with 3,200 x 1,800 resolution