Friday, April 13th 2012

Intel to Push for Higher Resolution PC Displays, Arrive in 2013

Come 2013, and PC consumers could finally break the shackles of regressive PC resolution "standards" such as 1366x768 and 1920x1080, if Intel has its way. At a presentation at IDF Beijing, Intel expressed its desire to see much higher resolution displays for all computing devices, not just PCs, which could in true terms be "retina-matched" display resolutions. At an optimal (comfortable) viewing distance, the resolution of a computing device's screen should match that of your eyes.

If Intel has its way, a 21" all-in-one desktop PC, and a 15" notebook PC screen will have a resolution of 3840x2160 pixels; a 13" Ultrabook PC could have a resolution of 2800x1800 pixels, a 11" Ultrabook and 10" tablet with 2560x1440, and 5" handheld/smartphone with 1280x800. Compare these to the $500+ 27" 1920x1080 monitors that are still sold in the market! A very bold proposal, but one only a company with the industry prominence of Intel can pull off.

Source: Liliputing
Add your own comment

88 Comments on Intel to Push for Higher Resolution PC Displays, Arrive in 2013

#1
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Many Thanks to NHKS for the tip.
Posted on Reply
#2
hhumas
good news ........
Posted on Reply
#4
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
This opens floodgates of pee on EIZO's $35,000 4K monitor media event at NAB'12. Let's hope by 2013, Intel has an IGP that's capable of smooth 4K (four TMDS links) video playback.
Posted on Reply
#5
Damn_Smooth
Shouldn't they figure out a VGA solution that could accommodate that themselves first?
Posted on Reply
#6
BarbaricSoul
by: Damn_Smooth
Shouldn't they figure out a VGA solution that could accommodate that themselves first?
why? don't know about the lesser hardware's cpabilities, but intel's 1155 socket and up are hdmi equipped
Posted on Reply
#7
Damn_Smooth
by: BarbaricSoul
why? don't know about the lesser hardware's cpabilities, but intel's 1155 socket and up are hdmi equipped
And you can play ? game with that resolution? At low settings with their current IGP?
Posted on Reply
#8
Dj-ElectriC
Ill be happy with "just" 2160P on my 24-26" monitor.
Posted on Reply
#9
Millenia
Finally! Been stuck on 1920x1200 on my 24" for far too long.

I just hope they bring high res monitors with 16:10 since it's far superior to 16:9 imo.
Posted on Reply
#11
ensabrenoir
by: Damn_Smooth
Shouldn't they figure out a VGA solution that could accommodate that themselves first?
My thoughts exactly.......as always with intel this is only part of of a larger move so gonna have to wait and see on this one........ Who knows they might have found a fix for old Larrabee.
Posted on Reply
#12
AlienIsGOD
by: Damn_Smooth
And you can play ? game with that resolution? At low settings with their current IGP?
Umm Intel isnt trying to usher this in for gaming, they want it for general use obviously.
Posted on Reply
#13
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
by: hardcore_gamer
Bring in 4K displays !!!!!:rockout:
A lot of hardware already supports 4k video playback, we just need the hardware. :eek:
Posted on Reply
#14
alienstorexxx
first of all.. we need a graphic card on the >200usd range that can run smoothly all games on 1080p.. then we will be avaible to talk about a higher resolution, like 2560. it's gonna be a long way to the 4k.
Posted on Reply
#15
NHKS
by: Damn_Smooth
And you can play ? game with that resolution? At low settings with their current IGP?
for PC gaming yes.. Intel's IGP(even some GPUs) falls short with higher res...
but for professional/workstation & studio design & media editing, the IGP seems to be on track and higher res 'might' not be a problem..
Posted on Reply
#16
BarbaricSoul
by: alienstorexxx
first of all.. we need a graphic card on the >200usd range that can run smoothly all games on 1080p.. then we will be avaible to talk about a higher resolution, like 2560. it's gonna be a long way to the 4k.
this is not about gaming people, computers are used for more than just games(heh, go figure.:slap:)
Posted on Reply
#17
NC37
by: BarbaricSoul
this is not about gaming people, computers are used for more than just games(heh, go figure.:slap:)
You mean glorified internet porno viewers and eroge players? :laugh:

Seriously, the only ones who would really care about high resolutions are gamers and professionals. Regular users don't know the difference between 720 and 1080 other than that one is a higher number than the other.

I don't mind an effort by the industry to boost resolutions, but coming from Intel it means nothing unless they can supply an IGP that can at least compete in the midrange segment.
Posted on Reply
#18
Damn_Smooth
by: AlienIsGOD
Umm Intel isnt trying to usher this in for gaming, they want it for general use obviously.
None of my interest. Sorry.

by: NHKS
for PC gaming yes.. Intel's IGP(even some GPUs) falls short with higher res...
but for professional/workstation & studio design & media editing, the IGP seems to be on track and higher res 'might' not be a problem..
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/news/2011-08/intel_graphics_roadmap.png
Thanks for showing me that, but if it doesn't concern gaming, I don't care.

I'm not trying to be an ass but I have my priorities. I'll just chalk this up to a loss for my concerns.
Posted on Reply
#19
craigo
The new virtu software is doing amazing things for high resolutions.
Posted on Reply
#20
xenocide
About damn time. Considering stupid iPads are up to 2048x1536, you'd think dedicated monitors would be up to at least 2560x1440 as a standard, with upwards of 4K being offered for additional costs...
Posted on Reply
#21
ZoneDymo
YES YES YES
thank you intel :)
Posted on Reply
#22
Benetanegia
You could always play at 1080p in a 3840x2160 display no problem. Hell even many non-native resolutions in the middle would work on such a high resolution display, unlike in a 1080p or 1200p display where anything but native looks awful.

Also game developers and/or AMD/Nvidia could work out a feature similar to MLAA or FXAA where the input is 1080p and the output is 2160p, performing anti-aliasing a lot better than they do now while keeping all the details that are now lost with those algorithms. Or color/textures could be sampled at 2160p, while lighting/shaders are calculated at lower res (many game engines already do this anyway) or many other techniques that would allow for 2160p on current gen cards no problem.
Posted on Reply
#23
nINJAkECIL
I wouldn't mind at all,because I'd never bought it.
I'm comfortable enjoying my dvd and bluray movie on both 720p and 1080p display.
Playing a dvd or 720p movie on 3k res=eye cancer.
but if this gigantic res could push the standard HD video to match the res,I'd be glad to jump ship.
Posted on Reply
#24
Kreij
Senior Monkey Moderator
Why does anyone need more than 800x600? :p :roll:

This is good news. I'll stay on the bleeding edge of res if the monitors are affordable.
Posted on Reply
#25
sanadanosa
oh God, my graphics card become rubbish soon.:banghead:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment