Curious how the resolution of Apple’s new Retina iPad mini compares to your devices of the past and the 4K and even 8K displays that will soon become standard resolutions? DoghouseDiaries put together the graphic below that shows relative screen resolutions, comparing everything from a Retina iPad mini to an Apple II and future 3840 × 2160 4K displays just beginning to hit the market:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel
Sharp IGZO ramping up mass production 4K Displays,IGZO allows to refresh the screen as slow as 1Hz, saving drastic amounts of power on the screen refresh ,IGZO IGZO! http://youtu.be/p-amUEaMfqA
Next gen Apple display may be using Sharps new 4k ! IGZO IGZO
Too bad these graphics have mistakes. The relationship between iPad and 4K is wrong. Amiga and C64 resolutions WRONG. I can only imagine what other mistakes are in the graphics.
ipad mini with retina is not wrong, It’s 2048×1536. A 4K UHD (Ultra High Def) television is 3840×2160.
2160 – 2048 = 112, which is about the space on each end hanging over the ipad added up.
and i just checked on the other two and they both were 320×200
Did you take the images into Photoshop and compare the sizes? I did. The relationships are incorrect, not necessarily any numbers they list.
I had C64 and Amigas, multiple of each. C64 graphics were 160×200. It was possible to do 320×200, but that wasn’t used for graphics – ever. Likewise, the Amiga was 320×200 for its lowest resolution, but that’s the resolution absolutely every game was created for. 640×200 rectangular pixels was the resolution of the desktop in Workbench, and you could do interleaved modes as well as genlock to PAL and NTSC versions of every mode.
Anyway, they’re not the only ones where the proportions are incorrect. It was a sloppy graphic. Let’s leave it at that.
wow, you really are splitting hairs. But yes, your right. the actual ipad pixels(2048) is 90% of the pixels in a 4K(2160) where as the actual pixels in this image of the ipad (309) is 88% of the actual pixels in the 4K(348). But I think there might be some loss in the scaling down.
corrected 94% for actual
Why does it even matter, this is a poor example of resolution anyways. We’re talking about pixels not PPI, it’s like Apple says pixels so small that you can’t see them. Which by the way makes an HDTV a ‘Retina’ display.