400 ppi and above.. Does it matter?

[kyrax12]

I feel like 400ppi is really all it is needed. Anything above is not noticeable by the human eye.


So I am guessing the PPI war has ended right?

 

[Ravynmagi]

400 ppi would be about most 1920x1080 phones. So the PPI war isn't over, we now have 2560x1440 phones with 587 ppi.

Though I couldn't tell you yet if 400 is enough and 500+ is overkill, because I really haven't used a 1440p phone yet.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

I feel like 400ppi is really all it is needed. Anything above is not noticeable by the human eye.


So I am guessing the PPI war has ended right?

What makes you think that?

What makes you think this "war" has anything to do with science or reality?

It's marketing....no reason or logic needed. Just marketing spin to get people to buy their company's product.

 

[Mopetar]

500 is actually nice for Asian markets as it allows for many of the different characters to be more clearly and accurately depicted.

It's not strictly necessary for other markets, but it will make text a lot sharper.

 

[theeedude]

1080p is all you need on a phone.
Plus you get native resolution on HD movies.

 

[Ravynmagi]

I kinda suspect that while at first glance 1440p (aka 500+ PPI) phones might not look noticeably better, but when you use a 1440p phone for a while, then look back at a 1080p phone, you might really see the difference. That is how I was when going from 720p to 1080p.

 

[Rdmkr]

Usually when I browse websites on my 1920x1080 5.2" LG G2 I see the pixellation in text fairly easily. I tend to hold it quite close to my face when browsing, but it's a very natural movement to me. The whole idea that there is a rigid threshold at which extra detail stops mattering has always seemed silly to me on account of how viewing distance is not a fixed constant; it varies not only between users but also between use cases. The provision of extra detail also gives the user a reason to hold a device closer.

The pixellation is rarely acutely jarring to me, but that there is room for improvement in the context of my personal usage habits is undeniable.

 

[paperwastage]

OP, maybe a better question is: "400 ppi and above, should we be focusing on other specs?"

there's always a tradeoff in everything...

beefier CPU = need better heatsink = more physical weight

better camera = space used instead of something else

what's the tradeoff for more PPI? less battery... (or you put more battery in and have more physical weight/size)

I feel like the tradeoff for more PPI isn't worth it

 

[zerogear]

You know, that's what I said about the 720p to 1080p jump, but it was insanely awesome going to 1080p. So I'll take the wait and see approach for this one, assuming that they can get their battery life on par.

 

[Red Storm]

I couldn't really say if going above 1080P is better because the only phone I've used that had it was the G3 but it had too much over-sharpening.

Waiting to see the Note 4's screen to determine for myself.

 

[jacktesterson]

I honestly think 1080p is all that is needed on any phone under 6 inches.

I have had a chance to look at a 1440p screen and based on resolution/detail only, I honestly don't see the point. It just requires more GPU for barely any noticable difference in detail, if any.

Hell - even 720p on phones under 4.5 inches is good enough really.

 

[zCypher]

640K ought to be enough for anybody!

There's no such thing as "good enough".

 

[Brian Stirling]

We will have 4K phones before you know it. Will it be a noticeable improvement over 1080P, probably not much, but two things are likely to drive it. Marketing and being native 4K.

A tablet or phone with a 4K camera is a given and an increasing number of people are getting 4K TV's so having a portable device to source 4K is desirable. No, you don't need a 4K screen to source 4K video but having 4K baked in should help it handle 4K better.

Brian

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

4K TVs is one of those things that doesn't make sense either. Unless you sit 3 feet away from your TV you won't notice the resolution bump. Its nice to have but not a must.

500 is actually nice for Asian markets as it allows for many of the different characters to be more clearly and accurately depicted.

It's not strictly necessary for other markets, but it will make text a lot sharper.

I've heard this said a few times, but I'm not sure if the average user will notice. I think in the end it depends on whether the average eye can discern detail at that level at a normal viewing distance.

 

[Mopetar]

I've heard this said a few times, but I'm not sure if the average user will notice. I think in the end it depends on whether the average eye can discern detail at that level at a normal viewing distance.

Here's an image that better illustrates the effect.

It would be better if there were more intermediate steps, but you can see why the extra resolution offers better detail.

 

[Rdmkr]

This is the left bar of anandtech's main forum page as it appears on my 1080p screen when I first load it in a browser. It's legible, but pixellated. I can see the imperfections from a pretty regular viewing distance, but what's worse is that the small text instinctively makes me draw the screen closer, thus bringing the pixels more clearly in view.

I actually think something is applying a softening effect to the picture as it appears on the forum, so the effect is a little worse on the smartphone screen.

 

[BrightCandle]

Based on the various tests done on the human eyes perception the current theory is that at 24" we will need roughly 12000p before the eye can't distinguish the pixels from reality. At a 2.5 foot viewing distance that is about 550 PPD (pixels per degree). It would have a PPI of about 570.

But a phone of 400 ppi is 1080 over 2.7". A phone is typically viewed no less than about 10". That translates to about 80 PPD. The theoretical PPI necessary on a phone at that viewing distance would have to be 2744 PPI, or about 7411 pixels.

So we are still a very very long way away from the limits of the human eye. The research isn't 100% clear yet, because we can't make displays that high resolution yet. But its at least 8000p and could be much higher, 24,000p or even higher. 12000p however is what looks like it might be the limit for a monitor of 24".

 

[theeedude]

This is the left bar of anandtech's main forum page as it appears on my 1080p screen when I first load it in a browser. It's legible, but pixellated. I can see the imperfections from a pretty regular viewing distance, but what's worse is that the small text instinctively makes me draw the screen closer, thus bringing the pixels more clearly in view.

I actually think something is applying a softening effect to the picture as it appears on the forum, so the effect is a little worse on the smartphone screen.

This looks like scaler artifacts, not resolution limitations.
It could be made to look sharper with same resolution if it was vector based text as opposed to whole page being rendered and then scaled. What's really needed is ability to render vector text and graphics smoothly during things like pinch and zoom.

 

[BrightCandle]

This looks like scaler artifacts, not resolution limitations.
It could be made to look sharper with same resolution if it was vector based text as opposed to whole page being rendered and then scaled. What's really needed is ability to render vector text and graphics smoothly during things like pinch and zoom.

Nice in theory, in practice it doesn't work. The issue is that we can do dramatically better by hand than an automated algorithm does with vector graphics. This is why all mobile apps come with images at lots of different densities and why fonts come in all the different point sizes. Its because a hand crafted fonts and such look a lot better.

We basically don't use vector based drawing for anything these days because it doesn't really work out very well when things are quite small, like 8-20pt or so text. Even images we do by hand often, because at smaller resolutions we want to remove some details completely when it gets small enough. The same is true of fonts, we remove particular subtle parts of the font at small sizes to maintain the overall impression of the font. Its not because computer programmers are stupid, its because it works better.

The way web browsers do this is they change the font point, so actually there is a good chance it looks like that. I can see the pixels on my screen, most people can. Without sub pixel smoothing there is a lot of aliasing evident on the screen.