alt Hacker NewsI used to be a display architect about 15 years back (for Qualcomm mirasol, et al), so my knowledge of the specifics / numbers is outdated. Sharing what I know.
High pixel density displays have disproportionately higher display refresh power (not just proportional to the total number of pixels as the column lines capacitances need to be driven again for writing each row of pixels). This was an important concern as high pixel densities were coming along.
Display needs fast refreshing not just because pixel would lose charge, but because the a refresh can be visible or result in flicker. Some pixels tech require flipping polarity on each refresh but the curves are not exactly symmetric between polarities, and further, this can vary across the panel. A fast enough refresh hides the mismatch.
Replies
What's interesting about these newer 1Hz claims is that they're basically trying to sidestep the exact problems you mention
> the column lines capacitances need to be driven again for writing each row of pixels
Not my field so please forgive a possibly obvious question: That seems true regardless of the pixel count (?), so for that process why wouldn't power also be proportional to the pixel count?
I notice I'm saying 'pixel count' and you are saying 'pixel density'; does it have something to do with their proximity to each other?
Since you are knowledgable about this, do you have any idea what happened to Mirasol technology? I was fascinated by those colour e-paper like displays, and disappointed when plans to manufacture it was shelved. Then I learnt Apple purchased it but it looks more like a patent padding purchase than for tech development as nothing has come out of it form Apple too. Is it in some way still being developed or parts of its research tech being used in display development?