Here’s a Look Inside Both Samsung & JDI’s High Pixel Density VR Panels

15

SID Display Week played host to a number of big names in display technology showing off their respective high pixel density VR panels. UploadVR’s Ian Hamilton was on the scene, and managed to get a pretty good capture of both Samsung’s and JDI’s panels with his iPhone 8 camera.

Samsung showed off their 2.43-inch, 3,840 × 2,160 resolution (120Hz) panel through the lenses of a VR headset, although it appears from UploadVR‘s video that only static imagery was shown to SID Display Week attendees. The panel on display features 1,200 pixels per inch (PPI), and although not explicitly mentioned, is probably a derivation of their OLED VR panel first shown at Mobile World Congress last year.

Japan Display Inc. (JDI), a display conglomerate created by Sony, Toshiba, and Hitachi, debuted their high pixel density display at Display Week, showing off the 3.25-inch, 2,160 × 2,432 resolution TFT-LCD (120Hz). JDI’s panel features 1,001 PPI. As opposed to Samsung’s display, attendees were treated to a moving scene.

According to a recent tweet by Hamilton, the screen door effect (SDE) was is still apparent on Samsung’s display, while JDI’s display had a marked reduction of SDE to the point where he couldn’t see it at all.

These displays likely take a good amount of graphical rendering power to run at such high resolutions and fresh rates, so it makes sense why they were displayed in cases rather than a wearable VR headsets.

Foveated rendering is touted as a solution to the current ‘brute force’ method of displaying the full resolution of a scene across the majority of the display, and utilizes eye-tracking and a dedicated rendering pipeline in order to show the highest resolution image in the center of the photoreceptor-dense part of the eye, the fovea, making these sorts of panels viable even for mobile VR headsets.

SEE ALSO
Microsoft Discounts Windows VR Headsets for Black Friday Sale, Up to $100 Off

As an added bit of info: both panels were shown using standard refractive lenses, like those found in Gear VR, and not the more common Fresnel lenses found in current generation mobile VR headsets such as Google Daydream, Oculus Go, and HTC Vive Focus—something likely done to not muddy the view with visual artifacts associated with Fresnel lenses such as ‘god rays’, or faint streaks or glares of light that are most noticeable when looking at bright objects against a dark background.

Our friends over at UploadVR also have an interesting piece on Google And LG’s new 1,443 PPI VR display, also debuted at SID earlier this week.

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. See here for more information.


  • Darshan

    What a wonderful site.. 1000PPI JDI display made me more excited as video shows almost in imperceivable screen door also running 1000 PPI is less taxing on gpu when compared to 1200 PPI. Can’t wait to see HMD powered by JDI Displays..

    • Guygasm

      Remember that PPI has nothing to do with required rendering. The actual panel resolution is what matters. The JDI and Samsung screens are different physical sizes. Although the Samsung is touted as a 1200 PPI screen, it’s only 2.43″ and 1920 (W) x 2160 (H). JDI’s is 3.25″ and 2160 (W) x 2432 (H). This explains why the Samsung still had visible SDE, as it is the lower resolution panel.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        uhh.. the size of the display itself doesn’t matter, 1200 PPI is 1200 Pixels Per Inch and 1001PPI is still 1001 Pixels Per Inch, so a lot less pixels per inch, and the Samsung isn’t 1920×2160 it’s 3840×2160 as stated in the article. So it doesn’t explain why the samsung had visible SDE..

        • Guygasm

          The Samsung is misquoted as 3840×2160. If you read the card below it in the video, that is the stated resolution for two displays. This is confirmed by the fact that 1920×2160 is the only way it works out to 1200PPI for a 2.43″ diag display (actually 1189).

      • cataflic

        I presume that, from the point of view of the eye, the entire area of the screen is rendered and so the relative acuity PPD must be the same as PPI. Wider screen, but same fov.

  • nasprin

    Just wow.
    I imagine my GTX 1080 will melt itself through the floor trying to render this at normal FPS, but hey, i’m glad these displays already exist.

    • Raphael

      Only if game developers refuse to make their games efficient with DX12 or Vulkan and also ignore big performance boosters like VRworks.

    • FireAndTheVoid

      By the time we see these displays in a headset, 1180 Ti’s and possibly even 1280 Ti’s will be on the market. I’m not worried. Also, I care more about eliminating the screen door effect than increasing resolution. So, I’m willing to render at lower resolution and upscale, if need be.

      • You could applay some filter to diffuse these displays, at expense of little of clarity. Afler all, engienieering is just the art of compromise, and I think with this kind of resolution it may be worth it. ;)

    • Torben Bojer Christensen

      Also remember that we already supersample immensely with high end cards today. A few applications with dynamic render resolutions (i.e. Robot repair as good as it looks on the Vive Pro with a GTX 1080 Ti) might just already be up there on a high-end card as of today? Some applications only do 1,3 supersample, others 2.0 or even 3.0. You might not get Fallout 4 to run taking advantage of the resolution, but with others you already might be able to. And as FireAndTheVoid points out, there will be even faster GPU’s when we see these in a HMD.

    • Ghosty

      Eye tracking and foveated rendering!

  • Lucidfeuer

    How does it fare in terms FOV?

  • Dave Graham

    STFU, get them in headset and take ALL my money !!

  • FT

    …don’t mind the snot on the lenses. This is also the sneezing station. SERIOUSLY?

  • Amazing!