LG develops 5.5-inch “Quad HD” 2560X1440 display



LG has made another significant breakthrough in mobile display technology. The company has announced the development of a 5.5-inch display capable of displaying resolutions up to 2560 x 1,440. This is much more refined than anything we have in the market at this size, making for a smooth 538ppi pixel density. LG is calling the display “Quad HD,” named for its ability to deliver four times more pixels than the minimal HD resolution of 1280 x 720.

So the obvious first question is obvious: when are we going to see this in the next LG phone? Well, we can’t quite say just yet. LG is just starting to get their feet wet with full HD 1080p, and we imagine that ride won’t be slowing down anytime this year or early next year.

LG says the display is based on a Low Temperature Poly-Silicon (LTPS) substrate, something that’ll help it achieve high levels of brightness (around 430nit) while keeping it slim and cool. LG says the display is even thinner than the one found inside the upcoming LG G2, with this new “Quad HD” panel coming in at 12% less thickness.

LG wasn’t quite ready to disclose details regarding time-to-market or sampling from third-party OEMs, but I think it’s safe to say that we still have at least a year to go before we start seeing the display shoved into any chassis it can fit in.

Quentyn Kennemer
The "Google Phone" sounded too awesome to pass up, so I bought a G1. The rest is history. And yes, I know my name isn't Wilson.

HTC Zara press render leaks, specs are unsurprisingly lame

Previous article

Sliding Explorer brings a simple file browser with Holo UI

Next article

You may also like


  1. Freakin amazing. Nexus 5 anyone?

    1. Fingers crossed

    2. Haha, wishful thinking

  2. seriously though… whats the point…… i mean more of anything is usually cool but this is just pointless, no one will ever tell the difference between this and 1080p asside from insane battery loss.

    lets work on holographic displays instead of beating the dead horse of pixel count please :)

    1. speak for yourself. people like you get on my nerves. always complaining about progress while you sit on your ass and contribute nothing to the mobile industry.

      1. He’s right. On a small screen this is rather pointless. Anything greater than 315ppi is really pointless because of the limitations of humans.

        Battery life is definitely more important.

        1. whose to say the new screens supports better batter life.

      2. It’s not a complaint about progress, it’s a question of priorities and necessity. Let’s do a poll and see if anyone lists higher pixel counts as their top priority?

        1. I like to have my life made simpler. I hate having to zoom out when looking at large pictures. =.P

          So higher pixels will be on my top priority. And yes. The only reason I’ll benefit from that is being able to see a full picture without having to take the time to zoom out.

          Anything to make me more lazy would be lovely. That way I can spend more time not being lazy. I know, I’m contradicting myself, but it’s how my conscious works. LoL!!

      3. Unless this is a projection display, which it isn’t, then the DPI isn’t progress because it’s way beyond the limits of the human eye. If they added an ultraviolet pixel would you call that progress? It would be new capability but humans can’t perceive UV. How about a speaker that can handle 100KHz? If you had a pet bat it might appreciate that but you couldn’t because the best young human ears can only hear to 20KHz (in older people it’s considerably less). Anything above 200 DPI is diminishing returns, you can tell the difference between a 200 DPI display and a 300 DPI display if you put them side by side and look real closely but if you move them apart so that you can’t see both at once you will be very hard pressed to tell the difference. Above 300 DPI there is no difference at all, that’s why we all set our printers to 300 DPI, anything higher is a waste of ink.

        1. High dpi matters when you got a 1 inch screen half an inch in front of your eyes. Thats one of google glass’s weaknesses. Having a floating 1080p or 4k screen in the air would be a hugely beneficial. You could have 1 of those screens for each eye for a 1080p 3d experience. Imagine the level of augmented reality you could have with something like that. I can see use for that with CAD. You could walk into an empty room with an IKEA catalog with QR codes for each piece of furniture printed next to the item. From there, your glass can scan the code and then give you a 3D model to shift around in your room. Interior design could be part of a home buying experience. Every aspect of it can be customized.

          1. Higher resolution matters yes. But not on a screen that small at that res. 720p is more than enough for a 1 inch screen. It doesnt matter how close it is to your eye its about pixel density and there is absolutely no point going past 400ppi…. ever….. because we physically cant tell the difference hignher densities.

            Dont get me wrong though im all for higher resolution , it just needs to be paired with larger screens. I want a tv that is 60 inches large and still has a pixel density of 400ppi not a cell phone with a 700ppi 5.5 inch screen… there is no point.

          2. I think you’re confusing PPI with our perception of resolution. A 200 PPI screen viewed from 6 inches away looks awful while no difference can be seen between that and a 400 PPI screen at 3 feet away. You mentioned that 720p on a 1 inch screen should be enough. It happens that Sony has created a 0.7 inch 720p OLED display. Can you guess what the PPI on that is? 2098 PPI and that’s not a typo. For the virtual sized screen that it projects, it is perceptibly pixelated. This technology is destined for medical uses at first, but will become more and more mainstream. This is why PPI is nowhere near what we need it to be, considering the direction of where wearable tech is headed.

        2. Well I so happen to have a pet bat and I’ve been putting off getting the count a phone because none are to his liking .

      4. While I contribute nothing lmao. Im an engineer and help progress this world every single day I go to work… what the hell do you do for a living that makes you so high and mighty that I cant have an opinion on tech development huh?

      5. He doesn’t have to contribute anything. He’s the consumer. He demands, companies supply lol

  3. Progress is great and all that… But do we really NEED higher than 1080p on a smartphone? Maybe developments should be made in the quality of the displays in regards to sunlight legibility or power efficiency?

    1. Personally I think 1080p for 4.7″+ and 720p for 4-4.7″ is perfect . Let’s work on brighter and more energy efficient displays.

      1. iPhone 5 has the most energy efficient displays, but then again iPhone always has the best smartphone display on the market.

    2. Because making phone calls and texting without a 1080p 538 ppi quad HD display is unacceptable.


    3. Did we really need anything higher than 720p? I don’t notice the difference between my Nexus 7 1st Gen (720p) and my HTC One (1080p).

      I do, however see the grainyness on my TV. My HTC One outputs at 720p. So I can see that.

      But I think the noticeable limit on phones was 720p. Afterwards, it’s just for viewing extra large pictures on your phone. LoL!!

      1. As much as I love the insane sharpness of 1080p on my HTC One, 1280×800 is perfectly acceptable on my old Nexus 7.

  4. This is all well and good, but how about we put this level of research into batteries.

    1. Exactly what i had in mind! Bloody posers should invest time in more helpful things.

      1. So someone who works in the screen making department should help out with the battery department?

        And also, does LG make batteries? Like are they a battery company? Or are they a company that produces TV’s, and other consumer electronics? If it’s the later, then I think they’re investing their time correctly.

    2. Exacly. I feel like i need stop visiting android websites for a while when i see depressing news like this.

  5. And here I was thinking that mobile display pixel density would be one area where there is finite, diminishing returns, a physical limit to what’s practical, despite the march forward of technology…

    And then this comes along.

    I’d rather have the battery life and performance vs. 500+ ppi.

    1. Reminds me of people who put 550 HP engines in a Honda Civic, its not really practical or needed, but still very cool.

      1. The first half of your sentence was correct…

        1. @Dan Are you implying that 500+ PPI is practical and needed?

          1. No. Implying that a 500hp Civic is in fact *not* cool. It’s just a hooptied up civic.

          2. Well you get my point, people do the same thing with cars, computers, space program….pushing the limits

          3. I would be interested to hear your analogy between a 500hp civic and something from the space program…

            In any case, “pushing the limits” and wasting time and effort for the sake of specmanship is two different things. You can’t focus your eyes near sighted enough to hold a phone close enough to your face to make out anywhere close to 500ppi. Waste of time.

  6. Obligatory “Dat bezel doe…”

    1. Queue SIR-MIX-A-LOT………………………….

      1. I like ’em round, and big…

    2. So…you work for “Phandroid”?

  7. +1 for better battery life over pixels, check your battery usage the screen is always a juice sucker. Does anyone here really have a phone where you can leave the brightness turned up and not destroy your battery life? what good is 430+nits, when i am constantly turning them down to 100nits and barely visible so my battery makes through the day? we have to just realize battery technology is going to take years to catch up, until then screens/processors/video cards need to work on saving juice as a top priority.

    1. you sound like you haven’t heard of oculus rift.

    2. dont just check the screen on time… dig a little deeper… screen will use 50% battery and but might be on for 5 hours… CPU will use 30% and will be only active for 30 minutes.

      1. Not to mention 4G LTE antennae

  8. I remember that from 500 dpi we already have enough dpi, because our retina supports around 550dpi, so that dpi resolution (e.g. 538dpi) might be enough…

    1. as fry from futurama said “It has better resolution than the real world.”

    2. Literally nothing you said makes sense… It’s all about perspective. My 1080p TV is much less than 500dpi, but I could never say that I can see the individual pixels while on my couch. And have you ever looked at a 720p 4.5~5inch screen? With a dpi around 300, you still wont be able to see individual pixels unless you’re squinting a few inches away from the screen.
      Now for my opinion, this is rediculous. Unless the screen is 5in or larger, 1080p is almost overkill. This is just insane.

  9. She’s got HUGE hands, very disproportional to her body!

    1. focal length and perspective. I’m sorry you instagram and don’t understand photography.

      1. Or common sense,which dictates that objects in the foreground appear larger than those in the background. Apparently mcgp has never viewed the world in three dimensions.

        1. Seriously guys? I thought that was slightly amusing… Apparently, you’ve never viewed the world with a sense of humor!

          1. LoL!! I like how everyone is picking on you. =.3

            Sarcasm is hard to see on the internet without bluntly pointing it out.

            The picture does make it seem like she has huge hands, though. =.P

        2. science*

    2. I hope that ‘ol saying about big hands doesn’t apply here………….

    3. Nah.
      In optics, it is that the object is closer to the associated viewing device (“Charged-coupled device” (CCD) chip on a camera, Human eye, etc..) rather than physical size in 3-dimensional space.
      The “Human eye” perceives 3-dimensional images using “parallax”
      You need some “science”…

      Edit: So…were YOU being sarcastic?

  10. I think focus elsewhere would be better. like brighter screen or 240 hz would be nice.

    1. luckily you’re not in any position to make that call.

  11. For all you anti-huge-DPI people out there, here’s an explanation in a broader sense why even 1000 DPI isn’t enough. We all know technology shrinks as it develops. Now with wearable tech coming out, it’s bound to need to get smaller and smaller to not be in our way. We see tiny screens strapped to our faces already (google glass) with tiny screens. When this technology shrinks, we’ll be able to have a full HD screen in the package of such a device. 1080p in a 1 inch screen half an inch in front of our eyes is where we’re headed.

    1. heres someone using their brains… unlike 99% of the comments here…

      1. *stares blankly, mouth gaping, with dribble running down side of mouth* duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh!

        1. ROFL

      2. xD

    2. WTF!? That realization, though. Watching a full 1080p movie right in your face. Oh my gosh, dude!!

      1. LOL

    3. Whoa! 1920×1080 on a 1 inch display? O_o

  12. More useless technology….. Spec Dweebs will love it (Imagine the bragging Rights!); but, seriously, this is something that would be GREAT on an HDTV in your living room. On a smartphone, not so much…..

    1. I think there’s a flip-phone from 2003 somewhere that’s calling your name, bro.

      1. Have owned the HTC Incredible, Droid X2 & Droid Maxx. Also used “cell phones” back when they were actually “bag phones” – Literally phones & a battery pack carried around in a leather bag.

    2. Technology is filled with useless things to make your life easier. Or did you really need that blind spot warning in your car because you didn’t check your blind spot like you normally do?

    3. No one wants a religious fundamentalist bashing technology unlike you (“IronManCC”), but then again,
      I wonder why you still have a computer?
      Oh wait…
      To troll?

      1. The reason I posted was because I had just previously had a discussion with someone regarding 720p vs 1080p on a phone – We’re talking screens of 5″ or less and people making a big deal about it. Seriously? The VAST majority of humans cannot tell the difference between 720p & 1080p on a screen less than 30″ at normal viewing distances. Some folks will convince themselves they see differences; but I’d imagine if I had 2 “unknown” screens of the same size & design, one at 720p & the other at 1080p, and held them normal viewing distance from your eyes, let’s say 18″, some of you would obviously be shocked at the results. I don’t troll, I just say what’s on my mind, just like you. ;-)

        1. Ok then.
          I misunderstood you.

  13. Here’s my question…. Why the hell is everyone complaining the post said not ask details have been disclosed, what is there to complain about an awesome mobile advancement. Personally I never noticed pixels or such on a 720p display until I paired it to my 1080p display, and I guess you’ll didn’t pay attention to it saying was slim and stayed cool which means bigger battery less strain.

    1. Exactly what Im saying. it’s not like they’re halting battery technology advancement for this. That is also going on elswhere in another dept with people who specializes in battery. give us more pixels. more pixels more realism to a point where the real thing is not so far off from the screen. use z brain..

  14. I bet it bleeds light ;)

  15. :o

    1. (‘o’)/

  16. qualcomm showed this high density ppi display a few months ago beginning of the year

  17. I remember having this picture of Bowser on my iPod Touch 2G. The picture was about 3000 x 3000. It was higher, actually, but I don’t remember the exact number.

    Well, the picture wouldn’t show on my iPod because it was too big. So I’ve been waiting for the day I can view this full picture on a device. It looks like that day is starting to come.

    That’s just my way of watching technology advance. This was what? About 4 years ago? Man, it’s amazing.

  18. I don’t get this, this is only a news from LG, JDI and SONY are already moving displays with higher density, 651ppi on 2.3 inches and more advanced technology and SONY, one of its partner (JDI’s), even OLED with 2098ppi (the last is already being used on the head mounted 3D glasses)

    Sad seeing this article giving free marketing to companies, while we all expect an impartial service

  19. This screen will end up on the Nexus 6 in 2014.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in Misc