backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 52 comment(s) - last by lemonadesoda.. on Nov 28 at 6:26 PM
Toshiba's new LCD makes 30-inch LCDs and wallets weep

Typically, the highest resolution seen for LCD computer monitors comes from the 30-inch variety sporting 2560 x 1600 like the recently announced Gateway XHD3000.

Toshiba decided that 2560 x 1600 just isn’t high enough and announced a 22.2-inch TFT color LCD boasting a headache inducing QUXGA-W screen resolution of 3840 x 2400 resolution.

Unfortunately, the other specifications for the display aren’t nearly as interesting as the resolution. The brightness is only 235 cd/m2; most high-end displays feature brightness in excess of 300 nits. The contrast ratio is 300:1 and the display can produce 16.7 million colors. Viewing angles are simply abysmal at 120 degrees horizontal and 100 degrees vertical.

Toshiba advertises that it will sell the display for 2,079,000 yen, or approximately $18,000 USD. Toshiba also lists a required video card at a price of 312,000 yen or about $2,700 USD, though most high-end video cards today should have no problem supporting ultra-dense resolution -- but don't expect a casual game of Crysis at that resolution.

Toshiba's insane price tag likely has to do with the fact that there are no production lines capable of producing LCD substrates with such high resolutions.  Such high resolutions only come from experimental facilities from NEC and Toshiba for medical imaging displays.

The ship date for the display is Q2 2008. With a small 22.2-inch screen size and a mega resolution of 3840 x 2400 it would seem reading text on the display would be very difficult. Many users complain 2560 x 1600 on a 30-inch display makes text too small.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Text Size
By PrimarchLion on 11/2/2007 6:56:08 PM , Rating: 6
__________
|xxxxxxxxxx|
|xxxxxxxxxx| <----Text size on 24" 1920x1200
|xxxxxxxxxx|
|xxxxxxxxxx|
|xxxxxxxxxx|
|xxxx xxxxx|
|xxxx|xxxxx|
|xxxx|xxxxx|
|xxxx|xxxxx|
|xxxx|xxxxx|
^
|
Text size on 22.2" 3840x2400




RE: Text Size
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 11/3/2007 10:46:54 AM , Rating: 2
Extra points for creativity :)


RE: Text Size
By GeorgeOrwell on 11/3/2007 3:40:27 PM , Rating: 5
The drawing is wrong. What was not mentioned by the author of this article is that the monitor is likely a placeholder to get Toshiba a stake in the upcoming high density display (HiD) market.

Text on a HiD display is not drawn using a fixed number of display pixels, but rather " visible units", so that a small font will actually contain many more pixels, making it easier to see than the equivalent font on a lower resolution monitor. The additional pixels give each letter, each font, greater visual density, making reading the screen more like reading paper. It is easier on the eyes.

Hence we would have (22" HiD on left, 24" 19x12 on right):

|xxxxxxxxxx| |x x x x x |
|xxxxxxxxxx| | x x x x x|
|xxxxxxxxxx| |x x x x x |
|xxxxxxxxxx| | x x x x x|
|xxxxxxxxxx| |x x x x x |
|xxxxxxxxxx| | x x x x x|
|xxxxxxxxxx| |x x x x x |
|xxxxxxxxxx| | x x x x x|
|xxxxxxxxxx| |x x x x x |
|xxxxxxxxxx| | x x x x x|

(physical width of each column is roughly equivalent, but not drawn properly here due to lack of a fixed width font and text processing done by the messaging system)

One can see that the number of pixels available to draw clearly, in the same space, is much higher on the HiD monitor vs. the lower density displays available today.

To help understand how this works, one partial analogy is sub-pixel rendering, i.e. ClearType and others. With ClearType, the individual color sub-pixels that make each LCD pixel are rendered in a manner that makes anti-aliasing work better. Now consider that you can not only keep doing this, but that you have twice as many pixels available.

Another analogy is 600 dpi laser printer vs. 300 dpi laser. Text is not drawn on the laser using physical pixels, but outlines. These outlines are much smoother and easier to see on a 600 dpi printer vs. a 300 dpi model.

Anyone who has used an older HiD (Viewsonic, IBM) knows just how amazingly clear a PDF is on this sort of HiD display. The first time seeing images that look like print, but on the screen, is quite sublime.

In the next few years, we will see HiD expanding into the market. Eventually, over a longer time period, HiD will be commonplace for "knowledge workers". The monitors we have today are not really suited for anything beyond games and television. Manufacturers will continue to market low resolution displays to the vast numbers of people who mainly play games and watch videos and occasionally use their computers for something beyond entertainment.


RE: Text Size
By omnicronx on 11/3/2007 4:02:01 PM , Rating: 2
Good post, very informative


RE: Text Size
By GaryJohnson on 11/3/2007 11:07:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Text on a HiD display is not drawn using a fixed number of display pixels, but rather " visible units", so that a small font will actually contain many more pixels, making it easier to see than the equivalent font on a lower resolution monitor.


That's entirely dependent on the application the text is in, not the monitor, is it not?


RE: Text Size
By caqde on 11/5/2007 2:00:39 PM , Rating: 2
... Well yes and no... In windows text is a fixed size. In a video or movie it is scaled. So unless the monitor is upscaling to the Resolution from another the text is going to be the size that he stated it would be.

If you want to understand what I am saying change your computers resolution and notice the text going up and down in size along with everything else.

But since this is a 1600x1200 resolution displayed using 4pixels like below where each pixel from the computer is represented using 4pixels instead of one.

|X X | |XXXX|
| | |XXXX|
|X X | |XXXX|
| | |XXXX|

In the case of this monitor a resolution given to it of 1024x768 would come out as 2048x1536


RE: Text Size
By lemonadesoda on 11/28/2007 6:26:42 PM , Rating: 2
Nope. Try going into display settings and setting your fonts to "120dpi" instead of "96dpi". When you up the resolution, you can up the dpi, so that MORE PIXELS are used to render the font. And it looks much better.


RE: Text Size
By kmmatney on 11/4/2007 8:55:47 AM , Rating: 2
Pixel size ~0.12 mm...


RE: Text Size
By inperfectdarkness on 11/6/2007 4:19:49 PM , Rating: 1
i ran 1920x1440 on an NEC 22" for 5 years. text is no problem, you just have to adjust the font sizes.

i can't wait to get my hands on something like this. 22" is sufficient for my personal computing needs...i'm just a resolution junky.

it's shit like this which makes me laugh at the fanboi's who think the ps3 & 360 are so great because of "hi-def". 1080p is like 8 bit graphics compared to this stuff.

i'm jumping with both feet on the first mainstream SLI graphics solution that can run this resolution in gaming at 60+ fps w/ AA & AS.


RE: Text Size
By Quiescent on 11/6/2007 9:00:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but it's excellent for when you need to work with programs that require all that space such as Photoshop, 3d modelers, and programs such as Fruity Loops Studio. ;)

I'd get the monitor, but that's way too expensive for me. I'll stick with the old CRTs that support that high resolution I need.


Good to see a higher resolution desktop screen
By Johnmcl7 on 11/3/2007 8:04:10 AM , Rating: 3
I find it irritating that desktop screens are comparatively low resolution compared to notebook screens, whereas I can have a 15.4 and 17 inch 1920x1200 screen you have to go up to 23 inches to get that same resolution on a desktop screen.

Of course I realise this is not realistically a production panel and something I'll never be able to buy sadly.

John




By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 11/3/2007 10:47:58 AM , Rating: 3
Oddly enough the panel manufacturers cite lack of demand as the largest reason for not introducing those panels.


RE: Good to see a higher resolution desktop screen
By johnsonx on 11/3/2007 12:51:13 PM , Rating: 3
precisely; very few consumers want such displays. They used to sell 19" 1600x1200 displays, and maybe 17" too (I don't recall for sure), and end-user reaction was almost universally horrible. No doubt panel manufacturers would like to make laptop and desktop displays from similarly spec'ed panels, but if no one will buy them (or worse, buy them, then complain, return them, etc.) then they have nothing to gain by making them.

Ironically, now that such high-res displays are gone, we have Windows Vista that could make good use of the higher resolution. Tuning XP for larger fonts, etc. was always a crap-shoot, but Vista appears to deal with it much better. Alas, the displays are gone, so it's a moot point.


RE: Good to see a higher resolution desktop screen
By jak3676 on 11/3/2007 9:16:27 PM , Rating: 3
I think this is largly because of how close to the laptop screen people sit, relative to how close they sit to a desktop monitor. I'm perfectly happy with my 13.3" 1280x800 laptop screen, but I haven't had a 13" screen on my desktop since 1993. Once you get past about 20", you actually have to start pushing the monitor further away on your desktop or else you end up looking like you're watching tennis match when you're just reading a document.


By BZDTemp on 11/4/2007 11:08:48 AM , Rating: 2
It may be you feel like at a tennis match with a big screen but try using it differently - like say having a document you edit on the left at a browser on the right used for research. One can do the same with two screens but one big is better.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that monitors will someday came close to what we take for granted when printing but I know it will be a long wait.


By hannibal the mechanical bull on 11/6/2007 9:49:19 AM , Rating: 2
LOL - very true (pans to the left)


By Flunk on 11/9/2007 12:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
You have a point there. After I have been using my notebook for a few minutes I really don't notice the difference in size between it's 14.1" screen and my 19" monitor on my desktop machine. I don't know why anyone would really need a >20" monitor.


By miahallen on 11/4/2007 6:01:05 AM , Rating: 4
Viewsonic made a display with these specs a few years ago, the VP2290b:
http://www.viewsonic.com/support/desktopdisplays/l... You can still find them here and there on ebay for $1000-1500.

Trusted reviews checked it out back in June 2004
http://www.trustedreviews.com/displays/review/2004...

quote:
As far as I am concerned the ViewSonic VP2290b out performs every LCD I’ve come across to date specifically when image quality is paramount. It’s simply awesome for static image manipulation and when married up to the 256MB Matrox Parhelia HR256 graphics board, there’s little to touch it. And to all the gamers and movie viewers out there you should look elsewhere – it’s simply not intended for you with its 50ms response time . The only issue is cost. At £4,641.25 for the VP2290b and £1761.33 for the Parhelia HR256, this setup is clearly the preserve of the well funded research institute or the individual with more than a passing interest in detailed imagery.


It uses the same panel, so results should be similar.


By Macungah on 11/7/2007 3:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone goes "OMG I want!"
Then everyone realizes the obscene price.
With $18,000, you could buy a lot of 20-something inch monitors with 1680x1050 resolution, which is probably a lot more useful than one monitor with a gratuitous amount of pixels.


What for?
By timmiser on 11/2/07, Rating: 0
RE: What for?
By daftrok on 11/2/2007 6:40:48 PM , Rating: 5
Medical examinations of X-rays and whatnot.