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
Maban
3840x2400 in a 30-36 inch please.
Posted on Reply
#2
techtard
Gimme a projector that displays directly into my eyeballs.
Posted on Reply
#4
ensabrenoir
techtard said:
Gimme a projector that displays directly into my eyeballs.
Google already working on it sorta......
Posted on Reply
#5
Mega-Japan
Is it me or is the whole 3D hype dying? I know most folks here consider it to be gimmick blah blah, but I thought that 3D everything was to become standard at some point, no?
Posted on Reply
#6
Fourstaff
Intel pushing HDD to 5mm they are fucking bastards, Intel pushing for higher res they are geniuses. Regardless, all forms of tech advancement (drive to widespread adoption or something else) should be welcomed.
Posted on Reply
#7
ensabrenoir
Mega-Japan said:
Is it me or is the whole 3D hype dying? I know most folks here consider it to be gimmick blah blah, but I thought that 3D everything was to become standard at some point, no?
If they can do it without the glasses and economically then I believe it will spread
Posted on Reply
#8
Benetanegia
ensabrenoir said:
If they can do it without the glasses and economically then I believe it will spread
I don't think it's ever going to be posible without glasses unless you can live with <30º viewing angles.
Posted on Reply
#9
Mega-Japan
Benetanegia said:
I don't think it's ever going to be posible without glasses unless you can live with <30º viewing angles.
If angles is the concern, then display should be switched to 2D. But I thought eventually displays with 2D/3D option would become mainstream. Those who not like it can simply keep it off.
Posted on Reply
#10
mastrdrver
btarunr said:
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.
:laugh:

Oh wait! Your serious.................................................................:roll:
Posted on Reply
#11
Kaleid
baggpipes said:
So this is awesome... Maybe this will get video card manufacturers to increase the tech without much price increase....
LOL, that's funny.
Posted on Reply
#12
acerace
What? I'm not even out of my 1280x1024 res yet. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#14
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
The current revision of DisplayPort is rated to run at a maximum of 3840 × 2160 × 30 bpp @ 60 Hz.
Posted on Reply
#15
NHKS
Dj-ElectriC said:
:twitch:
If ill have a 24" 4800X2700 monitor, I think ill puke rainbows to death...
quite!..
but it will be in 2015 at earliest & of course in the premium segment.. as for me i will be content if good quality 2560x1440 monitors(like this) come down to mainstream prices next year, as my monitor upgrade is loong overdue!... keeping my fingers(or eyes :p ) crossed until then
Posted on Reply
#16
n-ster
OMG I JUST THOUGHT OF SOMETHING!

imagine these monitors in.... EYEFINITY :eek:
Posted on Reply
#17
NHKS
n-ster said:
OMG I JUST THOUGHT OF SOMETHING!

imagine these monitors in.... EYEFINITY :eek:
& running something like Metro 2033...
Posted on Reply
#18
n-ster
NHKS said:
& running something like Metro 2033...
6 screen eyefinity and 32x SSAA for good measure

Would have to measure by frames per minute or hour
Posted on Reply
#19
ensabrenoir
n-ster said:
OMG I JUST THOUGHT OF SOMETHING!

imagine these monitors in.... EYEFINITY :eek:
Total brain damage from the coolness.....and slippery floors from all the drool
Posted on Reply
#20
semantics
Ill take more pixel density then just more pixels on a larger screen, i don't think i need anything larger then 26" when i'm only sitting a foot or so away from the screen.
Posted on Reply
#21
jmcslob
I really wish we had a resident Optometrist so he could explain why this is pointless...

Fuck 4k as the human eye can't distinguish the difference somewhere between 1080p and before 4k..

Give me Holographic displays or fuck off!
Posted on Reply
#22
n-ster
jmcslob said:
I really wish we had a resident Optometrist so he could explain why this is pointless...

Fuck 4k as the human eye can't distinguish the difference somewhere between 1080p and before 4k..

Give me Holographic displays or fuck off!
Dude, even true 4K (4096x2304) only gives 174 PPI @ 27"

For comparision the 3.2" 320x480 Galaxy Gio is 180 PPI. The Sony X1 has a 3" 800x480 (312 PPI) display. If you can't distinguish between the 2 of those, well, you need glasses man
Posted on Reply
#23
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Soon I can replace my monitors then.
Posted on Reply
#24
hellrazor
jmcslob said:
I really wish we had a resident Optometrist so he could explain why this is pointless...

Fuck 4k as the human eye can't distinguish the difference somewhere between 1080p and before 4k..

Give me Holographic displays or fuck off!
I wish we had a resident optometrist so he can tell you WTF is wrong with your vision, next you're gonna tell me we can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 FPS.
Posted on Reply
#25
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
I hope the market for 7" monitors will get bigger. At least I want monitors of that size running a res equal or bigger than 1280x800.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment