Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

pika2000

Suspended
Jun 22, 2007
5,587
4,902
PPI is the new "megapixel," where OEMs are simply packing pixels just so they can get a number to boast on their marketing material.

In reality, even a 1080p display for an arm's length device is more than sufficient. Nobody was complaining that they can see the pixels on their laptops, which most of them are around 1080p resolution. Heck, not too long ago, many Windows laptops were sporting only 768p panels, even the huge 15" ones.

Increase in resolution has more negative impact.
1. to drive those pixels, you need an even more powerful GPU. Showcase: the iPad3, where the A5X was not fast enough to drive the retina screen, to the point that Apple replaced it with the iPad4 fairly quickly. The A9X might seem powerful on paper, but the iPad Pro is a new beast. I rather have a balanced performance on a great screen than a choppy experience on a 4K display.
2. More pixels = more power requirement. The iPad Pro has to drive a larger screen to begin with, and it needs to maintain good battery life.

People forgot the old days of PC gaming, where having a playable framerate at XGA/HD resolution was a balancing act. People used to understand that resolution is not everything when performance can be impacted. I guess that concept has been lost in the age of mainstream gaming on fixed-resolution mobile devices.
 

Kal-037

macrumors 68020
If the picture is clear and solid I'm good. I love my 1080p tv and have no need or plan for getting a 4k TV, laptop, or whatever anytime soon. Though I might get the iMac 5k in a few years but it would be because of the power and the picture is clear enough to show all the details of my photos, but not for the sake of the PPI count... That's marketing junk.


Kal.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.