Samsung planning 2560×1440 resolution display and iris scanner for Galaxy followup [RUMOR]


Samsung Galaxy S4 Camera

Christmas is closing in fast and while many of you are dreaming about the shiny new toys you’ll be unwrapping this year, others are already looking ahead to what’s coming around the bend. The mobile industry is a fiercely competitive one, and if you were wondering how smartphone makers were ever going to top 2013’s offerings, Samsung might have that answer.

According to sources out of ZDNet Korea, Samsung could be planning to release a quad HD or QHD (not to be confused with quarter HD or “qHD”) smartphone next year. This translates to a device packing a whopping 2560×1440 resolution display, 4 times the resolution of standard 720p devices. Because, you know — regular HD is just no longer cutting it.

But that’s not all. It wasn’t too long ago when Apple made a commotion in the tech space after introducing a fingerprint scanner in their lastest iPhone. Never one to be outdone, Samsung could already be prepping the world’s first smartphone to come equipped with an “iris scanner” for enhanced security. This would allow a user to secure their phone using their own eye for identification, something we don’t imagine would be too easy to forge or counterfeit. Apparently, Samsung has already moved out of the development stage and is now looking towards mass producing the tech.

Samsung’s eye scanning feature is one we’ve heard about before, after a patent turned up back in November, revealing Samsung’s possible plans to include this tech in future devices. We’re not sure how much weight any of these rumors hold, but it looks like Samsung could show off the device at next year’s Mobile World Congress in which we will definitely be in attendance. Should be an interesting 2014.

Chris Chavez
I've been obsessed with consumer technology for about as long as I can remember, be it video games, photography, or mobile devices. If you can plug it in, I have to own it. Preparing for the day when Android finally becomes self-aware and I get to welcome our new robot overlords.

Entry-level Samsung Galaxy Core Advance announced

Previous article

LG Gx announced: 5.5-inch 1080p display, removable 3,140mAh battery

Next article

You may also like


  1. The phone going to be the size of a TV? Gonna need a humongous battery to power all those pixels.

    1. I had read somewhere that it’s going to be 4000mah.

      1. And that it will come with stock KitKat and dispense chicken nuggets.

        1. Well with all the other useless crap Samsung includes with touchwiz. Chicken nuggets would be the next logical step. Let’s just hope the nuggets don’t have rounded corners.

          1. Galaxy Nuggets! Lol

          2. will blow ur taste buds away beyond this galaxy lol

        2. Bock – Bock!

          1. Thanks, Easter Bunny!

        3. you mean their new tizen os.

        4. mmmmm chicken nuggets haha

      2. It should be that or larger.

  2. And this is why I love my Moto X.

  3. 2560×1440 on a phone? Oh dear…

    That is too high, it better have an amazing GPU to help cope with that.

    1. Do you sometimes wonder how other people read and interpret your posts? I imagined some person snapping their fingers on that last part. LoL!!

      “That is too high, *snap* it better have an amazing GPU to help cope with that. *neck-roll*”

      LoL!! I’m sorry.

      1. Have you been drinking?

      2. Aawwwwww laaauudddies!

    2. I get the feeling that next year we will be discussing this again “4K on a phone? Please…”. I guess phone manufactures ran out of ideas of actual functional features that could be implemented so they are just doing the easy way with the good old ppi/mhz/thickness race.

  4. How’s that iris scanner going to work in dark environments? Seems it would have the same drawbacks as Face Unlock.

    1. No point to truly bring this up. I mean think about the shows where the person is walking in a secure base and their eye get’s scanned. Isn’t there adequate lighting?

      It’s just a drawback of technology. But one day, we will have cameras that can pull in as much light as the human eye in dimly lit areas..

      Unless we already do. =.S

      1. The point in bringing it up, is that while it sounds like a high-tech, highly secure method of unlocking your phone, it’s got an obvious fatal flaw (like Face Unlock). So, it’s going to have the same annoying inconvenience that F.U. has a lot of the time. It’s going to look like a slick feature in Sammy’s marketing campaigns, but it’s gonna be another gimmick in the sink. Good fingerprint sensors work 24/7, day or night.

        1. Ah!! The inconvenience? That truly does make the phone. If all the little things about it are actually somehow useful to you.

          A fingerprint scanner would be useful all the time. The only other way to make this better is for them to combine. A retina scanner and fingerprint scanner, along with a PIN override if necessary.

          This is why tech companies should work together. =.=

          I’m sorry, I just completely changed topics, but it’s quiet again today at work.

  5. it’s a rumor and not yet confirmed so stop with the Fred Sanford heart attacks lol

  6. come one samsung… give me an affordable 1440p monitor for my computer FIRST please…..

  7. Is going to still be following the ol gingerbread way of things with a stupid home button and menu key?

    1. I love that physical home button. I double tap to jump to Google now, click to wake the device, and even press and hold it to activate the flashlight while it’s in lock screen! PS, I am running a custom ROM

    2. My Galaxy S3 is my first smartphone and I honestly like the layout. Having a home button and a back button is wicked. The menu button is pretty good too. The fact that an iPhone only has a home button is one reason why I don’t like it.

  8. “word is samsung will also pack in an industry first 5000mah battery to compensate for excess energy to be consumed by the insane resolution.” /s

    1. Which in turn wouldn’t change the battery life. Meaning larger batteries don’t necessarily give better battery life.

      *hopes people learn that*

      1. Data please…me thinks yer wrong

        1. Seriously? Think about it. A larger screen uses more battery, so you make the battery larger. The battery life wouldn’t be any different than a phone with a smaller battery and smaller screen.

          That’s what I mean by that. I’m not saying that a larger battery *doesn’t* give you more battery life. It’s just in theses cases, the devices have always needed larger batteries.

          The only devices I seen with a large battery that didn’t [truly] need it was the Droid Razr Maxx series. Which gave the device a heck of a lot of battery power.

          1. My note2 says yer wrong

          2. …ahm not tying to troll…I think sammys started to get the msg re battery life. The note2 is very good, as is the s4.

          3. I don’t think you’re trolling. What I’m saying is your battery life on the Note 2 is probably no different than the battery life of the S3 or the HTC One X or some other phone that came out during that time.

            The larger battery is to make up for the larger screen. Yes, the battery life is great, but it’s no different.

            So this 5000 mA battery may be because the phone has a godly high resolution. OR… it can be like the Razr Maxx and just have a VERY large battery. LoL!!

          4. but that’s incorrect, the Note 2 does have better battery life than the One x and s3 in many “standardized reviews.”

      2. As long as it’s removable and I can carry a spare or two, I’m good.

        I wish they would have stuck by AMOLED, but these QHD displays are apparently a lot cheaper.

        1. Two 5,000 mA batteries? Calm down.

          My battery charger has a capacity of 5000mA. LoL!!

          I will admit this, though. My 1st battery with my S2 pretty much couldn’t hold a charge anymore, so it was life linking off that battery charger. My gosh did that thing keep my phone on ALL day. I’d use that thing for like 2-3 days straight before charging it.

          5000 mA may be the overkill we need. Hopefully it doesn’t keep things standard. By standard I mean the average battery life we’re seeing now.

          1. I don’t like to be tied down. I swap batteries when it gets low, back to the races.

            If my phone came with a 5k battery, it needs it. A QHD screen will suck the power pretty fast I bet. So having a 2nd would be necessary.

            This is all still conjecture that QHD and 5k batteries will be in the new phone.

          2. Some times you need overkill… hence ZeroLemon batteries

        2. I’d be happier with an RGB 1080p AMOLED display with better calibration.

      3. well that’s only half true… sure a small 300 mah increase in battery doesn’t mean better battery life… but a 1,000 mah difference certainly does. Phone’s now with better processors and 4x the resolution of our older devices also last 4x longer than our older devices.

  9. I wouldn’t jump for the fingerprint scanner, but an iris scanner?! Sign me up! That’s highly tempting, special agent, bad ass tech. People are already in awe when I use my face to unlock my phone, imagine my iris!

    I just hope battery life remains with that huge resolution

    1. I still think an iris scanner would be pretty useless.

  10. Would someone please explain to me how 2560×1440 is equal to “4 times the resolution of current full HD 1080p”?

    1. It’s only 33% larger not 400%. Someone needs to go back to high school and take general math.

      1. Well someone throws around the “quad HD” and you think that it is HD x4

      2. Clearly you don’t understand QHD yourself…

    2. I was like, math error.

    3. It’s 4x720p.

    4. 1280×720 = 921,600 pixels
      2560×1440 = 3,686,400 pixels
      That’s 4x the pixels.

      Subsequently it’s also 4x the stupidity with 1/4 the performance and 1/4 the battery life. Anything over 300-350 ppi is utterly pointless.

      1. Looks like the article is fixed now. Before it said 1080p instead of 720p.

  11. Can you tell the difference in image quality when comparing 1080p to 2k?

    1. I have a problem between 720 and 1080.

      1. Exactly, from a technology point of view the resolution on phone is impressive.

        Beyond that there’s not much point, yes you can fit more on screen but its so small you really will need a magnifying glass make anything out.

    2. 1080p is 1920(2k)x1080 so there is no difference. This will be a slighty higher resolution than current 2k/1080p phones, and considering that the S5 may include 4k video recording like the Note 3, those videos will have more visual details than if seen on a current Note 3 with the 2k/1080p display. Plus the entire UI will be optimized for this 1440p resolution, so even these things will look sharper.

      1. The human eye just isn’t that good, no it won’t look any sharper on 5 inch display.

        1. Yes it can. If you know what to look for. Detail is lost when a video is downconverted from 4k/2160p to 2k/1080p. Only thing this 2.5k/1440p display will do is to show that extra detail that it is lost in the 1080p display. Same way that a 1080p video will look sharper on the HTC One than on the Moto X. The 1080p display of the 4.7 inch screen of the HTC One will show the detail that was removed in the 720p display of the 4.7 inch display of the Moto X. For that reason, the HTC One will look sharper.

          1. 720p to 1080p is a bit different, at 720p you can still see pixels, at 1080p you can’t unless its a larger pentile display.

            Technically your right, if you play 4k video you will lose less detail but that’s not point.

            The point is you won’t be able to tell the difference on a 5″ screen, at that screen size users will be hard pressed to see the difference between 720p and 1080p when watching HD video.

          2. Well, that can depend on the user too. Some people still can’t see the difference between a DVD or Blu-ray or even streaming HD video or Blu-ray, but the difference is there.

            Think about people watching DVD’s on a 1080p tv. Now the tv typically does a great job in “filling in the blanks,” upconveting. So the viewer can’t see the individual pixels of the 480i DVD on a 1080p HDTV for that reason, but the image still looks bad and soft…. that’s part of the example I tried to give between the HTC One and the Moto X. You will not be able to see the individual pixels in either phone, but all those extra pixels added up together on the HTC One will provide a more detailed and sharper image.

            That’s basically what this added resolution is for on this Galaxy S5 for those people that want the higher res. Is not that we can see each individual pixel now, it’s to see as much detail as possible. Extra color depth, maybe it will support 10 bit video over 8 bit video. At the right viewing distance and if you know what to look for, you will be able to see the difference.

          3. Bishop, if we can’t see the individual pixels as you just said then what’s the point in adding more? If you can’t see the pixels then anything beyond that is adding details we can’t see.

          4. Because it goes beyond seeing and not seeing the individual pixels. In the example I gave you with the DVD, you can play it on your 1080p HDTV, the tv will upconvert the video and you won’t be able to see the individual pixels as a true 480i source, it will just look like a low quality video but all the pixels will be utilized. Now if you played a full HD video, the amount of pixels will remain the same, but the source changed and the image will be very sharp and detailed.

            That is the point I was trying to make. These displays aren’t only to increase the amount of pixels, but to offer perceivable difference, when the UI, videos, and other things will now be optimized for the 2.5k/1440p display. Things that are sourced from 2.5k/1440p will offer more visual detail on these displays than if watched on a 2k/1080p phone.

          5. I’m not sure if your being serious or not, up-scaling can provide some good results but it’s clearly not as good as native HD, nobody is going to disagree with that and most users can easily tell the difference on a HDTV.

            Regardless the output is still 1080p for both, one is a conversion from lower resolution while one is native 1080p with much higher bitrate.

            Actually, this isn’t even relevant.

            Remember we are talking about a 5″ screen here, again technically there is more detail but with a screen that size and with such a high ppi can the user see the difference?

            Unless your a son of Krypton the answer should be no.

          6. Well, we’ll be able to test it out ourselves in a few months. Then we can have our own conclusion.

            And yes, I was serious, as I was pointing out that it isn’t only about being able to see the pixels or not. Same way you can’t make out the pixels between the Moto X and the HTC One while playing the same Full HD footage, yet the HTC One will have a sharper and more detailed image, while the Moto X will be softer because it was down converted.

            No way of saying that you cannot see the increased resolution on a possibly 5.3 inch phone while playing 1440p content yet since we don’t currently have these phones, but I’m pretty sure I will be able to notice it.

            I will also argue that the average person will not notice the difference of SD and HD on a large screen because they don’t even know what to look for. And even the more trained people might not notice the compression of streamed HD compared to a Blu-ray version. But others do.

  12. I wanna see how porn is gonna look on this thing.

    1. Glad to know it’s not just me…

      1. Damn right brother, we have to take the important things into consideration.

  13.  If the Quad HD math is throwing you off, that’s four times as many pixels as a 1,280 x 720 display. This isn’t 4K on a portable display

    1. Yup. It’s 4 times the resolution of 720p. Although, since that resolution isn’t used as much on flagship phones, they probably shouldn’t use it as the base model. But I guess it just inflates the numbers lol.

  14. I have a feeling we’ll have 4k phones in 2-3 years…

    1. It seems that Samsung was planning that for 2015. So it wouldn’t be a surprise if the S6 or the Note 5 had a 4k display.

      1. Agree,the Gnote 3 already have 4K recording.

  15. As mentioned above already, please learn the difference between HD (720), Full HD (1080), QHD (1440), and 4k (2160). I hate the media confusing people. This is a tech site which means I hold you to a higher standard than the likes of CNN and others.

  16. Manufacturers probably hate customers like me, who hesitate to buy. On laptops, big screens have resolution too low (1366×768). On phones, small screens have resolution too high (1920 and now 2560). Is there any rational?

    1. Profit I’m sure. Why put an expensive display on a laptop that is only going to retail for $400-500, and that will probably not be replaced for two years, maybe even longer. Phones are up to around $700 and many people replace them every year. Make the phone as cool sounding as possible for those who replace them frequently… make the newest model seem so much better. High end laptops do have the much better screen resolution, along with faster CPU, faster GPU, faster RAM, faster hard drive, more RAM, bigger hard drive… But the people buying those are usually ones who know what they are getting and are willing to spend for it, not the person looking for something cheap. Phones are still expensive toys to many people, and unlike an actual computer they are status symbols for more than just nerds and geeks.

      1. I am probably weird as I have the exact opposite behaviour. On things which are durable (a laptop which I keep for longtime as in your example), I prefer good quality. On things that I renew often, I don’t buy expensive stuffs. All the discarded phones end up in dump site. It’s an environmental crime. Yeah, you can resell them 2nd hand but they will still end up being discarded sooner. All the good stuffs, high quality screen, storage, machined died aluminum body, etc. will be all wasted.

  17. If you can pull the phone out and look at the scanner and it unlock, then yes. If I have to put it to my face like a retąrd, count me out

    1. How to look derpier than ever before – have to have phone on face to unlock. Lololol.

  18. i’d be more interested in a 5000mah battery and 128GB internal storage.

  19. mhmmm my comments arent sticking on here lol

  20. I have loved Samsung devices. I have almost all my extended family and friends either using a s3, s4 or note device. If the iris or fingerprint junk is on the s5 I think it will be time for my exodus to Motorola. I don’t need hackers or NSA to know what my eye looks like or my finger prints are just by hacking my phone. What a cell phone needs is the built in kill switch not really Fort knox or whatever Samsung is calling it. I have remote wiped my device several times testing out security apps. I used to care about external storage but not so much anymore. External storage is just another thing to have to worry about someone stealing. I went back to using the ipod to listen to my music. Has better battery life than sucking down what I have for my phone. I guess I might have finally hit the point where it doesn’t matter how much junk you stick in it. I just need a great call quality, good camera and fast locking gps.

  21. Interesting.. Not sure how popular this will be

  22. Dumbest thing I ever heard on 5″ phone.

    1. welcome to samsung…. Nexus 5 will probably be better still then the S5

  23. I personally think 1440p is waayyy too much for a 5 inch phone. Even 1080p was sort of pushing it…

    1. Said no one ever

      1. Actually, there you are wrong. I’m not the only one doubting the point of ultra-HD or whatever HD you call it displays. To me, 720p is enough, and maybe 1080p. What are manufacturers trying to do, make microscopic pixels or something? I get the point of those ultra-high resolutions on a TV, but on a 5 inch phone? That’s pushing it.

        1. The only people that talk down new technology, are those unwilling or unable to adapt it.

          1. I just think it is way too much, especially for a 5-inch phone. I understand that everyone has different preferences, but still, I find those kind of ultra-high resolutions overkill.

          2. You could make the counter argument that the only people who talk up technology that really isn’t even noticeable or usable are ones making money from it. Will your eyes even be able to notice a difference on a 6 inch screen? There is that point of dimishing returns and then where it starts going backwards.

          3. I think a lot of people, you especially are forgetting that with that extra resolution comes extra work for the phone’s GPU. I want the graphical standard of mobile gaming to improve, not worsen. Most computers can’t run games at 4k, god knows how a phone would do it.

            Two possible ways, reduce the quality of the graphics or reduce the resolution and upscale, both will result in a loss of quality. If that loss of quality is merely because some manufacturer wanted to push a pointless increase because consumers think bigger is better, then count me out.

        2. I can see a change in 720p vs 1080p. However passing 1080p is a bit crazy and is a waste of battery life

          1. Yeah, I was excited about 1080p, and it does look nice. But going beyond that on a phone… why? I still like 720p, but that’s just my personal opinion. I’m fine with both 1080p and 720p resolutions.

Leave a reply

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

More in Handsets