Pixel Qi Promises Better Than iPad (3rd Gen) Displays

By Douglas Perry
published

Pixel Qi, a manufacturer of low-power displays for portable devices, said that it has a technology that would match the screen resolution of the latest iPad at a much lower power draw.

n a blog post, Pixel Qi founder Mary-Lou Jepsen said that she was "shocked" by the massive power consumption of the iPad and the fact that "90 percent" of the entire power need of the tablet goes to the display.

Jepsen stated that Pixel Qi has a technology to match "or exceed" the resolution of the iPad and run it at less than 1 watt, while the iPad screen swallows an estimated 8 watts. Jepsen said that the display has also a low power mode "that runs at a full 100X power reduction from the peak power consumed by the iPad3 screen."

The technology isn't available yet, but Pixel Qi claims that it is "finalizing" its partners to develop a new screen family. There was no information when commercial products will be available with the Pixel Qi screen.

Douglas Perry
23 Comments Comment from the forums
  • mayne92
    Would be nice to shut up the stupid marketing term "Retina Display" as being the best for once on mobile devices...
    Reply
  • tramit
    1 watt is impressive. That would be really nice to have the sharpness/clarity that high ppi screens dish out. It be more impressive if they are able to match the impressive color gamut that the Samsung manufactured screen produces also. We will see if they can back up their own promises.
    Reply
  • MajinCry
    Did anyone else notice something...Off? "Full 100X power reduction..."

    Marketing BS as usual.
    Reply
  • alchemy69
    Talk is cheap.
    Reply
  • DSpider
    MajinCryDid anyone else notice something...Off? "Full 100X power reduction..."Marketing BS as usual.Yeah. If it's something like 80 they'll round it up to 100, because come on, who's gonna measure it? It'd still be pretty noticeable, though.
    Reply
  • raringcoder
    MajinCryDid anyone else notice something...Off? "Full 100X power reduction..."Marketing BS as usual.Possibly not. They state they operate under 1 watt and the low power mode (presumably not the 1 watt mode) consumes 100x less than iPad3 at peak power, which is 8 watts or greater.

    That puts it around 0.08 watts, or 0.1 of a watt, which is only a tenth of what they state is their full power requirement.
    Reply
  • raringcoder
    raringcoderPossibly not. They state they operate under 1 watt and the low power mode (presumably not the 1 watt mode) consumes 100x less than iPad3 at peak power, which is 8 watts or greater.That puts it around 0.08 watts, or 0.1 of a watt, which is only a tenth of what they state is their full power requirement.To put this into perspective, I'm assuming that low power mode is basically a blank screen with a "fast on" feature. My TV consumes 70 ish watts switched on and less than 1 watt on standby, that's 70x less power than itself when on.
    Reply
  • willard
    MajinCryDid anyone else notice something...Off? "Full 100X power reduction..."Marketing BS as usual.It's marketing BS, but there is still truth to be had. They're comparing a low power mode to the iPad's full power mode. Not a very meaningful comparison (a lot like dynamic contrast ratios), but we can make it more meaningful by comparing to the iPad's lowest power mode instead.

    Anybody know off hand what the new iPad's display draws at minimum?
    Reply
  • warezme
    Show us the goods, it is easy to throw around big numbers when it is all theoretical.
    Reply
  • freggo
    MajinCryDid anyone else notice something...Off? "Full 100X power reduction..."Marketing BS as usual.

    As usual, reporters and writers can play with words but missed math class.

    Reply