Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MadDog00312 t1_ja26c0q wrote

Holy crap, compatible with LCD production, silicon based, and crazy PPI with up to 1000Hz capability was amazing by itself (when it comes to new materials science).

The fact it’s also silicon based, power efficient, and could realistically be 5 years away is so cool!

There’s actually a chance my next tv could have this!

39

tiktaktok_65 t1_ja2dxdu wrote

what about bandwidth requirements, texture resolutions and the size requirements to power/leverage all that? AAA development times are already between 6-10 years for fundamental new projects that move the technical verge and aren't iterating on established franchises and tech (simply because quality standards are so top of the line) the kind of hyper-realism that is enabled with that display tech if it ever hits will probably take generations to be fully exhausted/leveraged.

19

PmMeYourBestComment t1_ja2gwsw wrote

You don’t need 1000hz content to leverage 1000hz. It’s much easier on the eyes.

Even if the content is only 60fps, it will be so much smoother.

13

MadDog00312 t1_ja3wxqv wrote

You are right of course, if they start with everything at once, which they might for the super rich. We will likely see lower resolutions and/or display scaling for a while, as without content and quite frankly processing power to deal with potentially 100 million pixels is going to be huge.

The whole point of the article and my comment was this is not just some research paper. It uses similar tools and industrial processes that already exist.

This is materials science engineering at its finest. They have already proven it works and how to do it. Now they just need money to push it across the finish line.

Professor of materials science and engineer for whatever it’s worth.

3

MadDog00312 t1_ja5kat8 wrote

I just want bright and accurate color, and pitch blacks. I don’t need some insane resolution gaming monitor, mainly due to GPU prices for true 4K gaming, I want an amazing 100 inch tv that isn’t $60,000. This technology has the potential to make that a reality.

1

ElementNumber6 t1_ja5n3dx wrote

Micro LED displays have been commercially possible for 5 years, and they scale extremely well, meaning a 100" TV panel could be produced without (compared to other such technologies) much more work than a 1.5" watch display, and they are better in just about every possible way.

And yet, they remain future tech for the most part, likely due to the fact existing technologies still have roadmaps to be milked for many years to come.

1

MadDog00312 t1_ja5v5c8 wrote

A micro led will likely never be as cheap to manufacture as these will (simply due to complexity) nor will they be as long lasting. It’s impossible due to both physics and thermodynamics.

I will gladly bore you with the actual science if you want (I teach materials science engineering), but I’m not going to type a long long response if you’re not interested 😀.

I’ll add one caveat, because I can’t access the actual research yet (yay peer review!) if the research team did what they claim to have done, this is a multibillion dollar patent in the works!

3

escobarshideout t1_ja77vvl wrote

My TV does 120Hz but almost nothing supports it apart from certain games with certain expensive hardware.

1

MadDog00312 t1_ja7ppq7 wrote

Unfortunately that’s not likely to change nearly as quickly as the picture quality. However if the research is legit, you could have a tv with better than OLED picture quality, without the OLED pricing. The 1000 Hz refresh rate is more indicative of how fast the pixels can change, not that at this point there is a need for it.

1