LG Display announces 'highest resolution' smartphone screen

LG Display announces 'highest resolution' smartphone screen

Summary: The new 2,560 x 1,440, 538ppi display packs four times the pixels of a 1,280 x 720 display into a package measuring only 5.5-inches.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Hardware, Mobility
19

Did you think that Apple's retina-display screens were the last you'd hear about screen pixel density? Boy, were you wrong!

LG Display has announced today that it has developed the world’s first Quad HD AH-IPS LCD panel for smartphones. The 5.5-inch Quad HD panel has a resolution of 2,560 x 1,440 has four times the pixels of a 1,280 x 720 display, and manages to cram an eye-watering 538 pixels into every square inch.

(Source: LG Display)

Compare this to the iPhone 5, which can only manage 328 pixels per inch. However, it is interesting to note that iPhone 5 screens are manufactured jointly by Sharp, Japan Display and LG Display, so higher resolution displays could be on their way to the iPhone too. 

This race to increase pixel density high than retina level – the point at which the human can no longer make out individual pixels – might seem pointless, but it does have the advantage that it allows small HD screens to be produced.

On top of a high pixel density, the screen boasts being the world's thinnest and narrowest panel, being only 1.21mm thick and having a bezel measuring only 1.2mm.

"LG Display, which pioneered the high resolution mobile market with introduction of the world’s first Full HD smartphone panel in 2012, again opens new possibilities with the successful application of QHD technology," said Dr. Byeong-koo Kim, Vice President and Head of LG Display’s IT and Mobile Development Group.

"With this breakthrough, LG Display will continue to raise new standards for mobile resolution and lead the mobile display market."

Topics: Hardware, Mobility

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

19 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Is there a point?

    Even on 55 inch TV screen that resolution wouldn't make a difference over 1080p. Somehow on a 5.5 inch screen it does?
    BCF1968
    • Yup

      Agree. I have a Galaxy S4. I suspect if the display was replaced by something higher [without me knowing] I wouldn't notice the difference.
      Gisabun
  • Tired

    Of reading about Apple and the Retina display. It is jsut a screen most if not all high end smartphones have higher pixel display than the iPhone. Get over the iPhone.
    schultzycom
    • No kidding. My HTC One has a higher density display.

      Why is the iPhone being used as the reference?
      ye
  • There is a point!

    I have a 27" monitor with 2560x1440 and I CAN tell the difference over a 1920x1080 screen. The color is fantastic. And there is more (pixel) real estate for applications running simultaneously. The images should be incredibly sharp on the 5.5" screen.
    Lscharpen
  • Re: an eye-watering 538 pixels into every square inch

    Not per square inch. The number of pixels per square inch would be 538 * 538 or 289444.
    danbi
  • And then every mobile SoC cries

    because none of them can run a screen with that high of a resolution on a smartphone.

    Then the batteries join them, because they start draining in 2 or so hours.
    Michael Alan Goff
  • mines better

    My screen has 539 ppi and we will be releasing the 1037 ppi screen next month. Its a pixing contest.
    greywolf7
    • OK, that was terrible

      I guess that was the reward for reading to the end of your comment.

      Well played.
      Robert Crocker
  • Absolutely pointless

    It's getting ridiculous. Let's face it: 800x480 is plenty for a 5" screen, and gives you enough pixel density to do and veiw anything you'd want to do and view on such a small screen. At 1280x720 you're pushing ppi ratios that surpass the limits of human ocular discrimination. Beyond that it's just a raw numbers p*ssing match.
    dsf3g
    • 800x480 on anything bigger than 3.5" is a waste of the pocket space

      I don't want to carry a bigger phone just because it's bigger. I want a bigger phone because I can see more information on its screen. so it might be a pissing contest for you, for me 1280x720 on a 4.7" phone is the only reason I bought a phone that barely fits in the pocket and is less convenient to operate with one hand.
      vpupkin
      • I doubt it...

        I doubt you're really seeing more information though. Typically mobile operating systems leverage high pixel densities to show you text that's more "crisp" with cleaner edges and less jaggies. Showing you "more information" means actually shrinking the text and at that point you're squinting to try and make out tiny letters --though admittedly, beautifully formed ones. Now, I've got a font size that I'm more or less comfortable reading. When I find the right sized screen I'm going to blow my text up to that size and read whatever it is I want to read. Whether the screen boasts an 800x480 screen resolution or a 1,280×720 screen resolution, I'm going to pinch the text more or less to the same size. The text will be cleaner on one device, but it will still be the same amount of text, and thus, the same amount of information.
        dsf3g
        • it is easy to see it for youself, just go to any mobile store

          try a few different web sites. especially the ones that are not optimized for mobile. or try maps
          vpupkin
    • And then imagine

      JD inc. with its 651ppi's display and SONY's OLED with its 2098ppi, this article is only for extremely uninformed people, very disappointing coming from a, supposedly, reliable source of information
      GuilleKnows
  • Bandwidth

    And then they'll be bitching that their wireless plan is charging extra for bandwidth, or throttling or using other such tactics to avoid this insanity!
    Rick_R
  • Japan Display INC., 651ppi (2.3 inches)

    I don't get this, this is only a news from LG, JDI and SONY are already moving displays with higher density, 651ppi on 2.3 inches and more advanced technolory and SONY, one of its partner (JDI's), even OLED with 2098ppi (the last is already being used on the head mounted 3D glasses)

    Sad seeing ZDnet giving free marketing to companies, while we all expect an impartial service
    GuilleKnows
  • The head mounted 3D industry, whatever its fate may be...

    ...is clamoring for these small but *cheap* high resolution displays for products such as the Oculus Rift, which currently ship with relatively low resolution screens for the proximity to the human eye, which breaks the 3D effect and can cause motion sickness issues for some people. With hardware capable of driving these displays at their full resolution for each eye the possibilities for affordable head-mounted 3D, which is nothing more than an amusement right now at best, could be interesting to watch.
    Playdrv4me
    • Motion sickness

      I doubt the motion sickness is caused by low resolution screens. More likely it is caused by the disconnect that arises between what your eyes see happening before them, and what the biological balance mechanisms in your inner ear expect to happen as a result.
      dsf3g
      • "I doubt the motion sickness is caused by low resolution screens"

        It might be true, but low resolution in the oculus could still cause eye strains in long term usage.
        decoydot