Sharp working on 1080p 443 ppi 5-inch smartphone display

Sharp has begun production on 1080p displays for smartphones. The company has announced that the LCD panel type 5 will be 5-inch full HD (1920 x 1080) displays with a rather large 443 PPI. The screen will go into full production this month and will be shown in Japan at CETEC this week. It is not yet known what smartphones will make use of the display.

It has been observed that a human eye can generally not differentiate detail past 300 PPI, however it does depend on the distance. Being that these displays are for smartphones, it's really not likely users will be able to see a whole lot of difference with such a large pixel density.

Sharp has been unprofitable lately, seeing losses across the board. Sharp presented its banks with a revival plan that included cutting more than 10,000 jobs, and selling overseas factories, as well as Recurrent Energy, which they are rumored to be selling for 25 billion yen. So who knows if this push in display technology can help Sharp return to profitability.

Source: Sharp

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Nokia Maps to become default location provider for Oracle

Next Story

XCOM FPS may have switched to third person game

39 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

All I can say is, Android needs to get some great games to support the screen. Someone ordered it to be made, Sharp isn't just makign the screen for nothing.

Iind the hypocrisy here to be amazing. How about this spin - the iPad 3 has a reslution of 2048-by-1536, whic puts it at about 1M more pixels vs an HDTV at 1920 x 1080.

A 9.7" screen is not capable of providing proper ration for such a high resolution. A 17" screen is as small as I would go for such a high resolution. But it is perfectly ok for Appel to have such a wasteful resolution on a tablet device that offers no major benefit whatsoever of then bragging rights? So it wrong for anyoen else to do it?
1920x1080 on a 5" device will look very cool. The PPI doesn't even matter. It does mean the video playback will be support natively, which means content avail in the same format will look exactly the same. If you look at BluRay quality movies on the iPad 3, it looks like crap. Its fuzzy, it shadowed and it looks cheap.
Also, any OS can be made to support the resolution easily. When a dev makes an app, they simply need to include the bitmap for that size. Apps not designed to fit on Android, will simply scale to an even resolution to make the app fit the screen properly. Likely 1280 x 720. Windows Phone 8 would do the same. iOS? nah, that POS can't even scale evenly to a screen 1/2" bigger than the previosu model.

Also for those criticizing size? Have you even picked up a 5" device? I picked up the Galaxy Note 5.3" and unless you have stubby fingers, its not that big. My fingers are fairly long and I am using a 4.8" Galaxy S III and the Note doesn't feel that much bigger.

I wonder if those creating this actually use their smart phones for you know making calls. Its not just Sharp, but all the manufacturers out there. They seem so concerned with having a big screen for movie watching, and internet browsing, but have they actually held a 5" screen to your face for talking? Its quite uncomfortable. A smart phones main purpose in design should be the calling aspect, browsing second. We have tablets nows for a reason

I barely use my One X to make calls. You can't just define a smartphone so simply. I sure as hell don't want to carry around a tablet with me to do the stuff I do on my phone.

Kirkburn said,
I barely use my One X to make calls. You can't just define a smartphone so simply. I sure as hell don't want to carry around a tablet with me to do the stuff I do on my phone.

Im not trying to define a smart phone. I just think there has to be a fine line between being able to make calls and using it for browsing. 5" is just too much for a lot of people to hold and use with one thumb. Back in school we were asked to design a smartphone and I did rough mock ups of phones with 4 to 5" screens and then sample a range of people.

Well ... if people buy 5" smartphones, that's their prerogative. If people didn't want 5" phones, they wouldn't buy them.

Beyond the, "suck this Apple," for bragging rights, I don't see that there is a need when people are having trouble with the current 200-300ppi phones.

This is beyond a good laser printer in the 80s/early 90s, and is full color, increasing the effective resolution with antialiasing and even inter-frame smoothing if implemented.

This is just burning more power, especially in rendering time. And if these are Android based, holy cow will that thing get hot with all the CPU bound rendering. (Yes even the latest release of Android still has a LOT of CPU bound rendering.)

Considering the 1080p is where desktop GPUs and CPUs start to choke on rendering games, there is no way to expect native resolution gaming on a screen like this with any quality beyond basic puzzle and simplistic simple texture scenes.

Unreal 3 (non mobile) and Havok running on the WP8 at 720p is impressive to pull off; however, 1080p seems more like a lot of upscaling to get Xbox 360 quality graphics. (Heck even a PS3 or Xbox 360 has trouble with gaming at 1080p.)

thenetavenger said,
Beyond the, "suck this Apple," for bragging rights, I don't see that there is a need when people are having trouble with the current 200-300ppi phones.

This is beyond a good laser printer in the 80s/early 90s, and is full color, increasing the effective resolution with antialiasing and even inter-frame smoothing if implemented.

This is just burning more power, especially in rendering time. And if these are Android based, holy cow will that thing get hot with all the CPU bound rendering. (Yes even the latest release of Android still has a LOT of CPU bound rendering.)

Considering the 1080p is where desktop GPUs and CPUs start to choke on rendering games, there is no way to expect native resolution gaming on a screen like this with any quality beyond basic puzzle and simplistic simple texture scenes.

Unreal 3 (non mobile) and Havok running on the WP8 at 720p is impressive to pull off; however, 1080p seems more like a lot of upscaling to get Xbox 360 quality graphics. (Heck even a PS3 or Xbox 360 has trouble with gaming at 1080p.)

alse, desktop PC's don't choke on games made with a 1080P resolution. Mac's do, but not Windows PC's.

I use a 22" monitor with my Wndows 7 PC. I play a lot ofSimCity 4, Need for Speed and SIMS3. I set the resolution on all of them to the native resolution and I have everythign maxxed out. If you sue some cheap onboard GPU including Sandy ridge graphics, then yes you wont have a good experience. I use ATI andI use one card and it words just fine.

thenetavenger said,
Considering the 1080p is where desktop GPUs and CPUs start to choke on rendering games, there is no way to expect native resolution gaming on a screen like this with any quality beyond basic puzzle and simplistic simple texture scenes.

That's strange because I game at 1600p with the latest games (Borderlands 2, The Witcher 2, Batman: Arkham City, Skyrim, Max Payne 3) and they all run at 60fps and certainly aren't "basic puzzle and simplistic simple texture scenes."

As for the X360 and PS3 struggling with 1080p, that's because they're seven years old and are massively outdated. That's like saying your toaster has trouble has trouble melting copper... it simply wasn't designed for that.

mrmomoman said,
The technology will be used. It's just plain "silly" to think that advancing screen technology is wasteful.

It is wasteful if it adds nothing to the user experience yet jacks up the cost.

xstex said,

It is wasteful if it adds nothing to the user experience yet jacks up the cost.

Not to mention battery drain.

Beyond Godlike said,
Hope to see one on Android!!!!

Of course it will be on Android. Their moto is the bigger the number, the better. They already have huge screens they think people want. And they try to convince people that having 4 cores is magically better. Having a useless PPI will fit in perfectly.

Edited by Astra.Xtreme, Oct 1 2012, 4:43pm :

Beyond Godlike said,
Hope to see one on Android!!!!

Sure, it will be part of the Samsung Galaxy S4 and its 7-inch screen.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Of course it will be on Android. Their moto is the bigger the number, the better. They already have huge screens they think people want. And they try to convince people that having 4 cores is magically better. Having a useless PPI will fit in perfectly.

They don't think ppl want bigger screens, they actually know they do.

If you look at Android sales, you will see the Galaxy Note 5.3" and the Nexus 7" all sold in numbers higher than the Galaxy Tab 10.1. What they tells you is peopel dont want a huge 10" screen. The only reason the iPad sold so many is because it was the best option at this size and it was the only option at this size with Aple. IF Apple ever makes a 7" iPad, the 10" sales will drop in 1/2 in thefirst month the 7" goes on sale. Apple knows this. It si stalling the 7" model so 10" sales will stay high or they will be stuck with a crap load of unused 10" iPad's

Samsung sold 5M of the original Note in just a few weeks, they expect to triple the sales with the Galaxy S Note II. 5" and 7" is the magic number no matter what Apple leads you all to believe.

5" is great because it a gid size for a phone, it offers the benefits of a tablet that still fits in a reasonable pocket for eacy storage. Tho holding it to your face is not gonna happen as I will use BT. 7" is great for those who want to go a bit bigger without going all the way to 10". 10" is to big for so mnay reason Iwont list here. I actually hate the iapd is so big. I may as well carry a laptop as it offers more benefit at similar cost and no limiatation. a 2lb laptop isnt to big compared to carry a 1.5lb iPad.

The problem is, you're mad because Aple is too stupid to adopt what peopel actually want. Thsoe willign to make the move ae making the mone in that size space. That si why Appel changed its tune and intermal emails reveiled shows Apple is considering a 7" tablet.

TechieXP said,
snip.

Okay, first of all, I never mentioned Apple, so you can stop your troll attempt right there... I'm clearly not mad, and frankly I don't give a damn what Apple thinks is best for the user. The user buys the product, so the user knows what's best. Period. Use your head before saying something brainless, please.

Now, back to the point. The reason why the Note 10.1 sold like crap is because the app offering for tablets on Android is simply awful. The fragmentation really kills it. And for the same price, you can buy the well established iPad. If it was instead $300, it would have probably sold very very well. And I think you are confusing yourself here. You would rather carry a ultrabook (which is what I'm assuming you meant by 2lb) pc than a tablet? And at over twice the cost? Between size and costs, the tablet easily wins. 10" is the sweet spot for a tablet because it's still big enough to allow you to be productive and extremely portable. A 7" screen is a massive downgrade. I had a Nexus 7, and it was simply too small to do anything on. For small, I have my phone. For big, I have my tablet. Having the middle gap was pointless. If Apple makes a 7", I'm sure it will sell well at first, but then people will realize it's pretty stupid and very limiting, and trade it in for a normal iPad.

Regarding the Note II, if it sells well, it will be really interesting, but I have my doubts. I played with the Note when it first came out and it was very laggy and simply silly due to it's size. Granted I'm sure JB made it smoother, but it was too big to be a serious phone. If you didn't have loose pants on, it was incredibly uncomfortable to carry. I still believe it's just a novelty because it's the "biggest" phone.

It's no wonder they're unprofitable lately if they're wasting money on unnecessary developments like this.

They aren't just making these for the hell of it. They are making them because they have clients that want them.

Andrew Lyle said,
Is 1080p really necessary on smartphones?

Nope. And 443 DPI will create issues as there isn't any OS out there ready for that kind of display density. The closest would be Android on XHDPI, which expects a baseline density of 320 DPI. On a 443 DPI display that would make buttons and text quite small. I also doubt Google adding another density target, four sets of resources is enough and there is no advantage to display densities over 320 anyway.

Ambroos said,

Nope. And 443 DPI will create issues as there isn't any OS out there ready for that kind of display density. The closest would be Android on XHDPI, which expects a baseline density of 320 DPI. On a 443 DPI display that would make buttons and text quite small. I also doubt Google adding another density target, four sets of resources is enough and there is no advantage to display densities over 320 anyway.

Not true, you might not be able to pick out an individual pixel at densities of 320 or above, but you can see effects introduced by pixelation, such as slight jaggyness of diagonal lines (especially when they are moving). I don't see any point in going beyond 440ppi though, i doubt you'll even be able to see the effects of pixelation at that density.

Andrew Lyle said,
Is 1080p really necessary on smartphones?

Was retina really necessary? No but it did make things nicer. As for "it will create issues since no OS supports it yet, that's like saying when retina was rumoured that "oh that's just silly iOS doesn't support it" well duh! This high density screen hasn't been released no of course there aren't OS's to support it.

As soon as it IS released and implemented i'm sure the K or L maybe even M release of droid will support it as will WP9 maybe even 8

HD screens improve performance too as you don't need to anti alias. Draw a one px line on that screen and it will be fine as hell, that amount of control is awesome. As a designer I know you can do SO much with that! better control of colours and smoother gradients for one! Also turn that line on it's side and it should be really damn smooth too, even at 320ppi it's pretty jagged.

Even if it's not conceivably useful now who knows that the future holds? Projector LCD's could use it, or perhaps devices like glass. Anyway I think this is awesome tech and I reckon the future holds amazing things for us!!

Andrew Lyle said,
Is 1080p really necessary on smartphones?

Is it necessary for a TV? It's all relative. People at the time claimed that 720p was plenty. And for many years PCs had 320x240 monitors. Technology moves on and if they can offer a better experience then great. When it ceases to be a selling point it will stop increasing, much like mobile phones did with camera resolutions - once you're at 8MP there isn't much point going higher without a better lens or post-processing.

.Neo said,
Handy for those who use microscopes when looking at their smartphones.
The key is to make everything bigger (and smoother), not leaving them the way they are now (because then things will be unreadable)

.Neo said,
Except your eyes won't be able to tell the difference between 340 ppi and 440 ppi.

I want 1080 ppi so I can high def while I high def.

Rudy said,
The key is to make everything bigger (and smoother), not leaving them the way they are now (because then things will be unreadable)

I dunno, people say you cant see the difference, but when there's a straight edge that lines up with the pixels. If you turn it diagonally you can easily see jaggies along the edge even on the iphone 4s.

As soon as it truly is impossible to see the difference in any normal situation, they should stop increasing pixel density. I imagine a pixel density of 440 ppi is about right.