are tft lcd screens the future free sample

Several strategic and tactical negotiation levers are explained in the report to help buyers achieve the best prices for the TFT - LCD Display Sourcing market. The report also aids buyers with relevant TFT - LCD Display Sourcing pricing levels, pros, and cons of prevalent pricing models such as volume-based pricing, spot pricing, and cost-plus pricing and category management strategies and best practices to fulfil their category objectives.

Price forecasts are beneficial in purchase planning, especially when supplemented by the constant monitoring of price influencing factors. During the forecast period, the market expects a change of 2.00%-4.00%.Identify favorable opportunities in TFT - LCD Display Sourcing TCO (total cost of ownership).

This TFT - LCD Display Sourcing procurement intelligence report has enlisted the top suppliers and their cost structures, SLA terms, best selection criteria, and negotiation strategies.Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd

A thin-film-transistor liquid-crystal display (TFT LCD) is a variant of a liquid-crystal display that uses thin-film-transistor technologyactive matrix LCD, in contrast to passive matrix LCDs or simple, direct-driven (i.e. with segments directly connected to electronics outside the LCD) LCDs with a few segments.

In February 1957, John Wallmark of RCA filed a patent for a thin film MOSFET. Paul K. Weimer, also of RCA implemented Wallmark"s ideas and developed the thin-film transistor (TFT) in 1962, a type of MOSFET distinct from the standard bulk MOSFET. It was made with thin films of cadmium selenide and cadmium sulfide. The idea of a TFT-based liquid-crystal display (LCD) was conceived by Bernard Lechner of RCA Laboratories in 1968. In 1971, Lechner, F. J. Marlowe, E. O. Nester and J. Tults demonstrated a 2-by-18 matrix display driven by a hybrid circuit using the dynamic scattering mode of LCDs.T. Peter Brody, J. A. Asars and G. D. Dixon at Westinghouse Research Laboratories developed a CdSe (cadmium selenide) TFT, which they used to demonstrate the first CdSe thin-film-transistor liquid-crystal display (TFT LCD).active-matrix liquid-crystal display (AM LCD) using CdSe TFTs in 1974, and then Brody coined the term "active matrix" in 1975.high-resolution and high-quality electronic visual display devices use TFT-based active matrix displays.

The liquid crystal displays used in calculators and other devices with similarly simple displays have direct-driven image elements, and therefore a voltage can be easily applied across just one segment of these types of displays without interfering with the other segments. This would be impractical for a large display, because it would have a large number of (color) picture elements (pixels), and thus it would require millions of connections, both top and bottom for each one of the three colors (red, green and blue) of every pixel. To avoid this issue, the pixels are addressed in rows and columns, reducing the connection count from millions down to thousands. The column and row wires attach to transistor switches, one for each pixel. The one-way current passing characteristic of the transistor prevents the charge that is being applied to each pixel from being drained between refreshes to a display"s image. Each pixel is a small capacitor with a layer of insulating liquid crystal sandwiched between transparent conductive ITO layers.

The circuit layout process of a TFT-LCD is very similar to that of semiconductor products. However, rather than fabricating the transistors from silicon, that is formed into a crystalline silicon wafer, they are made from a thin film of amorphous silicon that is deposited on a glass panel. The silicon layer for TFT-LCDs is typically deposited using the PECVD process.

Polycrystalline silicon is sometimes used in displays requiring higher TFT performance. Examples include small high-resolution displays such as those found in projectors or viewfinders. Amorphous silicon-based TFTs are by far the most common, due to their lower production cost, whereas polycrystalline silicon TFTs are more costly and much more difficult to produce.

The twisted nematic display is one of the oldest and frequently cheapest kind of LCD display technologies available. TN displays benefit from fast pixel response times and less smearing than other LCD display technology, but suffer from poor color reproduction and limited viewing angles, especially in the vertical direction. Colors will shift, potentially to the point of completely inverting, when viewed at an angle that is not perpendicular to the display. Modern, high end consumer products have developed methods to overcome the technology"s shortcomings, such as RTC (Response Time Compensation / Overdrive) technologies. Modern TN displays can look significantly better than older TN displays from decades earlier, but overall TN has inferior viewing angles and poor color in comparison to other technology.

Most TN panels can represent colors using only six bits per RGB channel, or 18 bit in total, and are unable to display the 16.7 million color shades (24-bit truecolor) that are available using 24-bit color. Instead, these panels display interpolated 24-bit color using a dithering method that combines adjacent pixels to simulate the desired shade. They can also use a form of temporal dithering called Frame Rate Control (FRC), which cycles between different shades with each new frame to simulate an intermediate shade. Such 18 bit panels with dithering are sometimes advertised as having "16.2 million colors". These color simulation methods are noticeable to many people and highly bothersome to some.gamut (often referred to as a percentage of the NTSC 1953 color gamut) are also due to backlighting technology. It is not uncommon for older displays to range from 10% to 26% of the NTSC color gamut, whereas other kind of displays, utilizing more complicated CCFL or LED phosphor formulations or RGB LED backlights, may extend past 100% of the NTSC color gamut, a difference quite perceivable by the human eye.

The transmittance of a pixel of an LCD panel typically does not change linearly with the applied voltage,sRGB standard for computer monitors requires a specific nonlinear dependence of the amount of emitted light as a function of the RGB value.

In-plane switching was developed by Hitachi Ltd. in 1996 to improve on the poor viewing angle and the poor color reproduction of TN panels at that time.

Initial iterations of IPS technology were characterised by slow response time and a low contrast ratio but later revisions have made marked improvements to these shortcomings. Because of its wide viewing angle and accurate color reproduction (with almost no off-angle color shift), IPS is widely employed in high-end monitors aimed at professional graphic artists, although with the recent fall in price it has been seen in the mainstream market as well. IPS technology was sold to Panasonic by Hitachi.

Most panels also support true 8-bit per channel color. These improvements came at the cost of a higher response time, initially about 50 ms. IPS panels were also extremely expensive.

IPS has since been superseded by S-IPS (Super-IPS, Hitachi Ltd. in 1998), which has all the benefits of IPS technology with the addition of improved pixel refresh timing.

In 2004, Hydis Technologies Co., Ltd licensed its AFFS patent to Japan"s Hitachi Displays. Hitachi is using AFFS to manufacture high end panels in their product line. In 2006, Hydis also licensed its AFFS to Sanyo Epson Imaging Devices Corporation.

It achieved pixel response which was fast for its time, wide viewing angles, and high contrast at the cost of brightness and color reproduction.Response Time Compensation) technologies.

Less expensive PVA panels often use dithering and FRC, whereas super-PVA (S-PVA) panels all use at least 8 bits per color component and do not use color simulation methods.BRAVIA LCD TVs offer 10-bit and xvYCC color support, for example, the Bravia X4500 series. S-PVA also offers fast response times using modern RTC technologies.

When the field is on, the liquid crystal molecules start to tilt towards the center of the sub-pixels because of the electric field; as a result, a continuous pinwheel alignment (CPA) is formed; the azimuthal angle rotates 360 degrees continuously resulting in an excellent viewing angle. The ASV mode is also called CPA mode.

A technology developed by Samsung is Super PLS, which bears similarities to IPS panels, has wider viewing angles, better image quality, increased brightness, and lower production costs. PLS technology debuted in the PC display market with the release of the Samsung S27A850 and S24A850 monitors in September 2011.

TFT dual-transistor pixel or cell technology is a reflective-display technology for use in very-low-power-consumption applications such as electronic shelf labels (ESL), digital watches, or metering. DTP involves adding a secondary transistor gate in the single TFT cell to maintain the display of a pixel during a period of 1s without loss of image or without degrading the TFT transistors over time. By slowing the refresh rate of the standard frequency from 60 Hz to 1 Hz, DTP claims to increase the power efficiency by multiple orders of magnitude.

Due to the very high cost of building TFT factories, there are few major OEM panel vendors for large display panels. The glass panel suppliers are as follows:

External consumer display devices like a TFT LCD feature one or more analog VGA, DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort interface, with many featuring a selection of these interfaces. Inside external display devices there is a controller board that will convert the video signal using color mapping and image scaling usually employing the discrete cosine transform (DCT) in order to convert any video source like CVBS, VGA, DVI, HDMI, etc. into digital RGB at the native resolution of the display panel. In a laptop the graphics chip will directly produce a signal suitable for connection to the built-in TFT display. A control mechanism for the backlight is usually included on the same controller board.

The low level interface of STN, DSTN, or TFT display panels use either single ended TTL 5 V signal for older displays or TTL 3.3 V for slightly newer displays that transmits the pixel clock, horizontal sync, vertical sync, digital red, digital green, digital blue in parallel. Some models (for example the AT070TN92) also feature input/display enable, horizontal scan direction and vertical scan direction signals.

New and large (>15") TFT displays often use LVDS signaling that transmits the same contents as the parallel interface (Hsync, Vsync, RGB) but will put control and RGB bits into a number of serial transmission lines synchronized to a clock whose rate is equal to the pixel rate. LVDS transmits seven bits per clock per data line, with six bits being data and one bit used to signal if the other six bits need to be inverted in order to maintain DC balance. Low-cost TFT displays often have three data lines and therefore only directly support 18 bits per pixel. Upscale displays have four or five data lines to support 24 bits per pixel (truecolor) or 30 bits per pixel respectively. Panel manufacturers are slowly replacing LVDS with Internal DisplayPort and Embedded DisplayPort, which allow sixfold reduction of the number of differential pairs.

Backlight intensity is usually controlled by varying a few volts DC, or generating a PWM signal, or adjusting a potentiometer or simply fixed. This in turn controls a high-voltage (1.3 kV) DC-AC inverter or a matrix of LEDs. The method to control the intensity of LED is to pulse them with PWM which can be source of harmonic flicker.

The bare display panel will only accept a digital video signal at the resolution determined by the panel pixel matrix designed at manufacture. Some screen panels will ignore the LSB bits of the color information to present a consistent interface (8 bit -> 6 bit/color x3).

With analogue signals like VGA, the display controller also needs to perform a high speed analog to digital conversion. With digital input signals like DVI or HDMI some simple reordering of the bits is needed before feeding it to the rescaler if the input resolution doesn"t match the display panel resolution.

The statements are applicable to Merck KGaA as well as its competitors JNC Corporation (formerly Chisso Corporation) and DIC (formerly Dainippon Ink & Chemicals). All three manufacturers have agreed not to introduce any acutely toxic or mutagenic liquid crystals to the market. They cover more than 90 percent of the global liquid crystal market. The remaining market share of liquid crystals, produced primarily in China, consists of older, patent-free substances from the three leading world producers and have already been tested for toxicity by them. As a result, they can also be considered non-toxic.

Kawamoto, H. (2012). "The Inventors of TFT Active-Matrix LCD Receive the 2011 IEEE Nishizawa Medal". Journal of Display Technology. 8 (1): 3–4. Bibcode:2012JDisT...8....3K. doi:10.1109/JDT.2011.2177740. ISSN 1551-319X.

Richard Ahrons (2012). "Industrial Research in Microcircuitry at RCA: The Early Years, 1953–1963". 12 (1). IEEE Annals of the History of Computing: 60–73. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)

K. H. Lee; H. Y. Kim; K. H. Park; S. J. Jang; I. C. Park & J. Y. Lee (June 2006). "A Novel Outdoor Readability of Portable TFT-LCD with AFFS Technology". SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers. AIP. 37 (1): 1079–82. doi:10.1889/1.2433159. S2CID 129569963.

2020 Update: NVIDIA and ASUS now has a long-term road map to 1000 Hz displays by the 2030s! Contacts at NVIDIA and vendors has confirmed this article is scientifically accurate.

For those new to Blur Busters, I am the co-author of a peer reviewed conference paper (along with researchers from NOKIA, NIST.gov and Keltek) on successfully photographing display motion blur which several websites have now adopted, including RTINGS, TFTCentral, SWEclockers, HDTVtest, etc.  The most prominent site of these, RTING.com, credits me (here, here, and in the Credit Screen of the below YouTube) for my invention in inexpensively photographing display motion blur.

Also, we were the world’s first consumer website to test a genuine true-480 Hz display (no fake Hz). We had to invent new motion tests to test 480 Hz.

Here is a popular TestUFO Animation demo of motion blur from persistence (MPRT). Click on the animation for a bigger animation. The background looks different depending on which UFO you look at!

For this optical effect, view this on LCD instead of CRT or plasma. If using motion blur reduction (e.g. ULMB, BFI, or interpolation), turn that feature off temporarily for this animation demo. Another great TestUFO animation is TestUFO Persistence-of-Vision.

Warning for flicker-sensitive people: There are other animations further down on this page that utilize flicker to demonstrate scientific principles of display motion blur behaviour.

These are two very different pixel response measurements, as seen in the GtG versus MPRT FAQ. There are many 60Hz displays with <1ms GtG (e.g. OLED) but has 16.7ms MPRT (lots of motion blur).

Persistence (in milliseconds) is also known scientifically as “MPRT” in research papers (Google Scholar search). Quoted as a number, MPRT100% and persistence often mean the same thing by modern virtual reality scientists and newer display engineers. For example, Chief Scientist at Oculus, Michael Abrash, wrote a famous blog article that use the “persistence” terminology.

This is because fast GtG doesn’t always mean fast MPRT. Back in 2013, I wrote “Why Does OLED Have Motion Blur?” when people were surprised by OLED motion blur despite OLED’s fast pixel response. This is due to the “sample-and-hold” effect, otherwise known as display persistence.

Over the years, we did many tests (beginning with 60Hz vs 120Hz vs LightBoost in 2013, and most recently, becoming the world’s first website to test 480Hz in 2017).

Motion blur on modern digital displays are reduced via strobing or black frame insertion (BFI) to lower persistence. Many LCD gaming monitors use strobe backlights (such as ULMB) that flicker at the same frequency of the refresh rate, in order to reduce motion blur.

Also, OLED screens used for virtual reality also do this type of rolling scan. This includes the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive, as well as Samsung GearVR compatible smartphones. When a GearVR smartphone is inserted into a GearVR compatible headset, they run in a special low-persistence strobed mode.

Many newer displays, especially OLED displays and modern TN gaming monitors, have the majority of their GtG pixel transitions complete in a tiny fraction of a refresh cycle. This makes GtG an insignificant percentage of MPRT. Such displays exhibit behaviour that closely follows Blur Buster’s Law.

It is guaranteed that there can’t be less motion blur than this number, no matter how good your vision is. This is the motion blur you get when GtG pixel response is instant (0ms). In the real world, motion blur can be worse than this, due to finite pixel response. This is before any additional blur is added, such as GtG limitations (additional smearing/ghosting) or display source limitations (camera blur or slow camera shutter) or human vision limitations (natural motion blurring).

It is an immutable constant (like the speed of light) where you can’t get less display motion blur than this number. Blur Busters Law assumes perfect squarewave persistence, where GtG is 0ms at both leading and trailing edge. So any display with GtG above 0 is always worse than Blur Busters Law.

This is the Blur Busters simplification of the MPRT formula found in this scientific paper. We use MPRT100% instead of MPRT90% (in the scientific paper). A120Hz ideal sample-and-hold display with 0ms GtG has identical motion blur (MPRT100%= 8.333ms) as a 1/120sec photo shutterfor the same physical panning velocity of full frame rate material.

We preferMPRT100%at Blur Bustersfor math simplicity and to match human-perceived motion blur on modern ultrafast sample-and-hold displays. Whereupon 240fps at 240Hz perceives exactly the same motion blur as a 1/240sec camera shutter photograph.And it is also easier for blogs to calculate from TestUFO motion tests.

However, software is limited in precision (erratic flicker) and can only BFI increments of full refresh cycle lengths. Hardware is required to achieve sub-refresh-cycle BFI (e.g. strobe backlights such as ULMB).

Assumptions: The exact Blur Busters Law minimum is achieved only if pixel transitions are fully square-wave (0ms GtG) on fully-sharp sources (e.g. VR, computer graphics). Actual MPRT numbers can be higher.Slow GtG pixel response will increase numbers above the Blur Busters Law guaranteed minimum motion blur. Source limitations (e.g. slow camera shutter, video blur, unfocussed camera) also adds extra motion blur above-and-beyond the display.

Assumptions: The exact Blur Busters Law minimum is achieved only at one square-wave flash per frame, during imperceptible strobe crosstalk. Frame rate matching refresh rate matching strobe rate. Any curves in the flash curve away from its peak level (e.g. CRT phosphor fade, plasma/DLP multi-pulsing, etc) will muddy the math (e.g. phosphor ghosting, rainbow blurs, etc). Very bad strobe crosstalk (GtG taking much longer that it overlaps two pulses) can also affect motion quality.

These are additional blur-like artifacts above-and-beyond the guaranteed minimum motion blur mandated by Blur Busters Law. See LCD Motion Artifacts and LCD Overdrive Artifacts for examples.

Blur Busters Law simply specifies the guaranteed minimum display motion blur you will see. It does not prevent additional motion blur (or other artifacts) above-and-beyond motion blur from persistence.

Just like a guitar string that is plucked, high-Hz strings are blurry while low-Hz strings noticeably vibrate. The same is true for display blur versus stutter — Blur Busters Law is simply a function of frequency.

For low Hz where the Hz is so low, the normally high-frequency stutter no longer blends seamlessly into display motion blur. If you stare at www.testufo.com on a common 60 Hz LCD screen, you will see higher framerates tend to show motion blur while lower framerates tend to stutter (vibrate).

Low frame rates such as 15fps (whether be 15Hz, 30Hz, 60Hz or 120Hz sample-and-hold) will noticeably stutter. Instead of “50 pixels of motion blur” it reads as “50 pixels of stutter amplitude” (the vibrate-back-and-fourth span).

However, once the stutter is high-frequency (e.g. 60fps or 120fps) the 60 or 120 stutters per second vibrates so fast, it just blends into motion blur. The “stutters-blends-to-motion-blur” effect is more easily understood in this variable refresh rate simulation, if viewed on a common LCD (non-strobed):

This is a TestUFO Animation that simulates variable refresh rate (G-SYNC, FreeSync, HDMI 2.1 Game VRR, or VESA Adaptive-Sync) via interpolation. Assuming you’re using a modern GPU-accelerated web browser (e.g. chrome://gpu fully green) the above browser animation above will show that low-framerate stutter blending seamlessly into motion blur as the frame rate (refresh rate) smoothly ramps up and down.

A huge purpose of variable refresh rate gaming displays (G-SYNC and FreeSync gaming displays) is to eliminate stutters induced from frame rate fluctuations. However, it cannot fully eliminate stutter of ultra-low frame rates (e.g. 15fps or 30fps). Whatever leftover stutter remains, exactly follows Blur Busters Law except that the calculated minimum motion blur (in pixels) is instead the stutter amplitude (in pixels).

The threshold blending between stutter and blur will vary from human to human based on their individual flicker fusion threshold on the stutter vibration. Blur Busters Law for high frame rates (240fps) will tend to be motion blur due to ultra-fast 240Hz “stutter” blending into motion blur. While Blur Busters Law on low frame rates (15fps) will tend to be stutter amplitude instead of motion blur.

Another great animation demonstrating the continuum between stutter and motion blur, can be demonstrated in TestUFO Eye Tracking Variable Speed Animation.

In the old days, playing 30 fps games on a 60 Hz CRT created a double image effect. This is still a problem today when playing on strobed displays running any frame rates below strobe rate.

There are always 2 duplicate images during [email protected] strobed, and [email protected] strobed. This is still visible even at [email protected] strobed.

In addition, multi-image artifacts are also made visible via backlights utilizing PWM-dimming, such as doing 360 Hz PWM at 60 Hz. This produces the same effect.

Even 1000 Hz PWM still unfortunately produces visible artifacts. We cannot see high-frequency flicker directly, but PWM side effects (stroboscopic effect) up to 10,000Hz are still visible (research paper):

This happens when you do fixed-gaze situations. This is also called the Phantom Array Effect. Stare at the middle of the below animation, the TestUFO Mouse Arrow Demo.

Unfortunately, there are many situations where we don’t want motion blur forced upon us by the display above-and-beyond natural human vision blurring. This includes virtual reality headsets. Oculus and other manufacturers found that low-persistence reduces nausea in virtual reality. They cannot add additional motion blur without increasing nausea. So stroboscopic effects are currently the lesser of evil for most people.

At lower refresh rates such as 60 Hz or 75 Hz, amplified flicker can occur because of the flicker curve and flicker duty cycle. On CRTs and plasmas, phosphor gives a gentler fade than square-wave strobe backlight flashes. In addition, global flash strobing (e.g. ULMB) also varies average picture brightness more than a scanning flash (e.g. CRT).

This is why the equivalent refresh rate (e.g. 75 Hz) flickers a lot more on strobed LCD displays than on CRT/plasma displays, because you’re comparing square-waved strobing (e.g. ULMB) versus curved strobing (e.g. CRT).

Today, we sit closer to screens that are bigger and brighter than yesterday’s CRT tubes. This amplifies visibility of flicker. Due to this, most blur-reduction modes (ULMB) run only at higher refresh rates such as 120 Hz instead of 60 Hz to avoid bad flicker.

We simply use use overkill BFI/strobe rate to compensate for the lack of flicker curve-softening (phosphor fade). Thankfully, 120 Hz square wave strobing (ULMB or LightBoost) still flickers a lot less than an old 50 Hz or 60 Hz CRT.

Real life has no frame rate. Frame rates and refresh rate are an artificial digital image-stepping invention of humankind (since the first zoetropes and first movie projectors) that can never perfectly match analog-motion reality.

However, ultra-high frame rates at ultra-high refresh rates (>1000fps at >1000Hz) manages to come very close. This is currently the best way to achieve blurless sample-and-hold with no flicker, no motion blur, and no stroboscopic effects.

Also, real life has no flicker, no strobing and no BFI. Today’s strobe backlight technologies (e.g. ULMB) are a good interim workaround for display motion blur. However, the ultimate displays of the distant future will fully eliminate motion blur without strobing. The only way to do that is ultra-high frame rates & refresh rates.

The limiting factor is human-eye tracking speed on full-FOV retina-resolution displays. As a result, with massive screen 4K TVs, 8K TVs, and virtual reality headsets, higher refresh rates are needed to compensate for degradation of motion resolution via persistence.

the sweet spot for 1080p at 90 degrees FOV is probably somewhere between 300 and 1000 Hz, although higher frame rates would be required to hit the sweet spot at higher resolutions.

Higher frame rates are definitely better for visual quality. They also are power hungry, so it will take a while to solve that for standalone HMDs. I think 240 Hz/eye is a good short term target and agree with 1kHz+ for the long run.

The Blur Busters Law (1ms of persistence = 1 pixel of motion blurring per 1000 pixels/sec) becomes a vicious cycle when it comes to increasing resolutions and increasing FOV. Persistence limitations and stroboscopic artifacts are more easily noticed with the following:

Higher resolution displays:The same physical motion speed travels more pixels per second. This creates more pixels of motion blur for the same persistence (MPRT).

Wider field of vision (FOV) displays:The same angular display motion speed (eye tracking speed) stays onscreen longer. This extra time makes display motion blur more easily seen.

You need lower persistence to compensate: Increasingly bigger & higher resolution screens as time progresses, requires lower persistence (MPRT) numbers to keep motion blur under control.

In the most extreme future case (theoretical 180+ degree retina-resolution virtual reality headsets), display refresh rates far beyond 1000 Hz may someday be required (e.g. 10,000 Hz display refresh rate, defined by the 10,000 Hz stroboscopic-artifacts detection threshold), and also explained in The Stroboscopic Effect of Finite Frame Rates. This is in order to pass a theoretical extreme-motion “Holodeck Turing Test” (becoming unable to tell apart real life from virtual reality) for the vast majority of the human population.

However, for general CRT-quality sports television watching, 1000fps at 1000Hz would sufficiently approximately match 1ms CRT phosphor persistence, for a flicker-free sample-and-hold display. Technologically, this is achievable through interpolation or other frame rate amplification technologies on an ultra-high refresh rate display.

The Vicious Cycle Effect also applies to stutters that are no longer hidden by other defects such as display motion blur. For example a 1ms stutter is an 8 pixel stutter-jump at 8000 pixels/second, which is a slow one screenwidth per second on an 8K display. Smaller stutters becoming human-visible again with extreme display and graphics quality improvements.

This will eventually be necessary for virtual reality, but also useful for huge wall-sized retina displays needing blur-free motion. It will take time, but fortunately, it is closer this century than many think. Experimental 1000 Hz displays now exist.  For example, ViewPixx has a 1440 Hz DLP projector for display research, and there are several other vendors.

Beyond niche/indie manufacturers already selling ultra-high-Hz today, we currently expect mainstream-manufacturer 480 Hz gaming monitors to hit the market by year 2020, and mainstream-manufacturer 1000 Hz gaming monitors to hit the markets by year 2025.

It will be challenging for graphics processors to generate the ultra high frame rates necessary for future 1000+ Hz gaming displays of the 2020s and 2030s.

Solutions are being accelerated out of necessity by virtual reality research. For example, Oculus’ asynchronous time-warping and spacewarp technologies converts 45 frames per second to 90 frames per second at low GPU processing cost via clever 3D interpolation tricks.

Dr. Morgan McGuire (NVIDIA scientist who agreed on 1000+Hz) wrote an article for RoadToVR about foveated rendering algorithms as well as real-time ray-tracing or beam-tracing with real time de-noising. This can be another potential alternative to ultra-high frame rates.

In addition, future lagless 3D interpolation technologies with geometry-awareness and parallax-reveal capabilities, may potentially convert 100fps to 1000fps with no visible artifacts for 1000Hz.

Another theoretical route to successful high-detail 1000fps+ could be a co-GPU embedded in the display (Imagine a G-SYNC 4 or FreeSync 4 with strobeless ULMB!), working in conjunction with a main computer’s GPU, in order to get around display cable bandwidth limitations. The future of “Frame Rate Amplification Technologies” (FRAT) is full of exciting research!

According to IMARC Group’s latest report, titled “TFT LCD Panel Market: Global Industry Trends, Share, Size, Growth, Opportunity and Forecast 2022-2027”, the global TFT LCD panel market size reached US$ 157 Billion in 2021. Looking forward, IMARC Group expects the market to reach US$ 207.6 Billion by 2027, exhibiting a growth rate (CAGR) of 4.7% during 2022-2027.

A thin-film-transistor liquid-crystal display (TFT LCD) panel is a liquid crystal display that is generally attached to a thin film transistor. It is an energy-efficient product variant that offers a superior quality viewing experience without straining the eye. Additionally, it is lightweight, less prone to reflection and provides a wider viewing angle and sharp images. Consequently, it is generally utilized in the manufacturing of numerous electronic and handheld devices. Some of the commonly available TFT LCD panels in the market include twisted nematic, in-plane switching, advanced fringe field switching, patterned vertical alignment and an advanced super view.

We are regularly tracking the direct effect of COVID-19 on the market, along with the indirect influence of associated industries. These observations will be integrated into the report.

The global market is primarily driven by continual technological advancements in the display technology. This is supported by the introduction of plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) technology to manufacture TFT panels that offers uniform thickness and cracking resistance to the product. Along with this, the widespread adoption of the TFT LCD panels in the production of automobiles dashboards that provide high resolution and reliability to the driver is gaining prominence across the globe. Furthermore, the increasing demand for compact-sized display panels and 4K television variants are contributing to the market growth. Moreover, the rising penetration of electronic devices, such as smartphones, tablets and laptops among the masses, is creating a positive outlook for the market. Other factors, including inflating disposable incomes of the masses, changing lifestyle patterns, and increasing investments in research and development (R&D) activities, are further projected to drive the market growth.

The competitive landscape of the TFT LCD panel market has been studied in the report with the detailed profiles of the key players operating in the market.

IMARC Group is a leading market research company that offers management strategy and market research worldwide. We partner with clients in all sectors and regions to identify their highest-value opportunities, address their most critical challenges, and transform their businesses.

IMARC’s information products include major market, scientific, economic and technological developments for business leaders in pharmaceutical, industrial, and high technology organizations. Market forecasts and industry analysis for biotechnology, advanced materials, pharmaceuticals, food and beverage, travel and tourism, nanotechnology and novel processing methods are at the top of the company’s expertise.

Our offerings include comprehensive market intelligence in the form of research reports, production cost reports, feasibility studies, and consulting services. Our team, which includes experienced researchers and analysts from various industries, is dedicated to providing high-quality data and insights to our clientele, ranging from small and medium businesses to Fortune 1000 corporations.

The global TFT-LCD display panel market attained a value of USD 181.67 billion in 2022. It is expected to grow further in the forecast period of 2023-2028 with a CAGR of 5.2% and is projected to reach a value of USD 246.25 billion by 2028.

The current global TFT-LCD display panel market is driven by the increasing demand for flat panel TVs, good quality smartphones, tablets, and vehicle monitoring systems along with the growing gaming industry. The global display market is dominated by the flat panel display with TFT-LCD display panel being the most popular flat panel type and is being driven by strong demand from emerging economies, especially those in Asia Pacific like India, China, Korea, and Taiwan, among others. The rising demand for consumer electronics like LCD TVs, PCs, laptops, SLR cameras, navigation equipment and others have been aiding the growth of the industry.

TFT-LCD display panel is a type of liquid crystal display where each pixel is attached to a thin film transistor. Since the early 2000s, all LCD computer screens are TFT as they have a better response time and improved colour quality. With favourable properties like being light weight, slim, high in resolution and low in power consumption, they are in high demand in almost all sectors where displays are needed. Even with their larger dimensions, TFT-LCD display panel are more feasible as they can be viewed from a wider angle, are not susceptible to reflection and are lighter weight than traditional CRT TVs.

The global TFT-LCD display panel market is being driven by the growing household demand for average and large-sized flat panel TVs as well as a growing demand for slim, high-resolution smart phones with large screens. The rising demand for portable and small-sized tablets in the educational and commercial sectors has also been aiding the TFT-LCD display panel market growth. Increasing demand for automotive displays, a growing gaming industry and the emerging popularity of 3D cinema, are all major drivers for the market. Despite the concerns about an over-supply in the market, the shipments of large TFT-LCD display panel again rose in 2020.

North America is the largest market for TFT-LCD display panel, with over one-third of the global share. It is followed closely by the Asia-Pacific region, where countries like India, China, Korea, and Taiwan are significant emerging market for TFT-LCD display panels. China and India are among the fastest growing markets in the region. The growth of the demand in these regions have been assisted by the growth in their economy, a rise in disposable incomes and an increasing demand for consumer electronics.

The report gives a detailed analysis of the following key players in the global TFT-LCD display panel Market, covering their competitive landscape, capacity, and latest developments like mergers, acquisitions, and investments, expansions of capacity, and plant turnarounds:

*At Expert Market Research, we strive to always give you current and accurate information. The numbers depicted in the description are indicative and may differ from the actual numbers in the final EMR report.

Global Thin Film Transistor (TFT) Display Market, By Technology (Plasma Display (PDP), Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED), Other), Type (Twisted Nematic, In-Plane Switching, Advanced Fringe Field Switching, Multi-Domain Vertical Alignment, Advanced Super View, Cell Technology), Panel Type (A_MVA, ASV, MVA, S_PVA, P-IPS), End Use (Domestic Use, Industrial Use) – Industry Trends and Forecast to 2029

Liquid crystal are considered highly light valves or electo-optic transducers. These thin film transistors are known to be simple electronic control devices widely fabricated on a large transparent substrates. They enable fabrication of electronic display.

Global Thin Film Transistor (TFT) Display Market was valued at USD 270.26 million in 2021 and is expected to reach USD 968.64 million by 2029, registering a CAGR of 17.30% during the forecast period of 2022-2029. Twisted Nematic accounts for the largest type segment in the respective market owing to its low cost. The market report curated by the Data Bridge Market Research team includes in-depth expert analysis, import/export analysis, pricing analysis, production consumption analysis, and pestle analysis.

A thin-film-transistor display refers to a form of LCD that uses TFT technology for enhancing image quality including addressability and contrast. These displays are commonly utilized in mobile phones, handheld video game systems, projectors, computer monitors, television screens, navigation systems and personal digital assistants.

Technology (Plasma Display (PDP), Organic Light Emitting Diode (OLED), Other), Type (Twisted Nematic, In-Plane Switching, Advanced Fringe Field Switching, Multi-Domain Vertical Alignment, Advanced Super View, Cell Technology), Panel Type (A_MVA, ASV, MVA, S_PVA, P-IPS), End Use (Domestic Use, Industrial Use)

U.S., Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Rest of South America, Germany, Italy, U.K., France, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Rest of Europe, Japan, China, India, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Rest of Asia-Pacific, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E, South Africa, Egypt, Israel, Rest of Middle East and Africa (MEA).

Panasonic Corporation (Japan), LG Display Co., Ltd (South Korea), HannStar Display Corporation (Taiwan), AU Optronics Corp. (Taiwan), Chi Mei Corporation. (Taiwan), SAMSUNG (South Korea), SHARP CORPORATION (Japan), Schneider Electric (France), Siemens (Germany), Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (Japan), SONY INDIA. (India), FUJITSU (Japan), Chunghwa Picture Tubes, LTD. (Taiwan), Barco.(Belgium), BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. (China), Innolux Corporation (Taiwan), Advantech Co., Ltd (Taiwan), among others.

This section deals with understanding the market drivers, advantages, opportunities, restraints and challenges. All of this is discussed in detail as below:

The increase in the smartphone and tablet proliferation acts as one of the major factors driving the growth of thin film transistor (TFT) display market. Technological advancements are leading a radical shift from traditional slow, bulky and imprecise resistive mono touch to highly sensitive multi-touch capacitive screen have a positive impact on the industry.

The rise in number of electronic readers and growing demand for on-the-move information accelerate the market growth. The development of easy-to-use display devices drives the growth of the market.

The increase in application areas of large e thin film transistor (TFT) display due to the advantages offered by these paper displays in terms of user experience, manufacturing cost, readability, and energy consumption further influence the market.

Additionally, rapid urbanization, change in lifestyle, surge in investments and increased consumer spending positively impact the thin film transistor (TFT) display market.

Furthermore, development of smart cities extend profitable opportunities to the market players in the forecast period of 2022 to 2029. Also, availability of customized continuous development and ongoing research will further expand the market.

On the other hand, high cost associated with the manufacturing is expected to obstruct market growth. Also, lack of awareness and low refresh rate are projected to challenge the thin film transistor (TFT) display market in the forecast period of 2022-2029.

This thin film transistor (TFT) display market report provides details of new recent developments, trade regulations, import-export analysis, production analysis, value chain optimization, market share, impact of domestic and localized market players, analyses opportunities in terms of emerging revenue pockets, changes in market regulations, strategic market growth analysis, market size, category market growths, application niches and dominance, product approvals, product launches, geographic expansions, technological innovations in the market. To gain more info on thin film transistor (TFT) display market contact Data Bridge Market Research for an Analyst Brief, our team will help you take an informed market decision to achieve market growth.

The COVID-19 has impacted thin film transistor (TFT) display market. The limited investment costs and lack of employees hampered sales and production of electronic paper (e-paper) display technology. However, government and market key players adopted new safety measures for developing the practices. The advancements in the technology escalated the sales rate of the thin film transistor (TFT) display as it targeted the right audience. The increase in sales of devices such as smart phones and tablets across the globe is expected to further drive the market growth in the post-pandemic scenario.

The thin film transistor (TFT) display market is segmented on the basis of technology, type, panel type and end-use. The growth amongst these segments will help you analyze meager growth segments in the industries and provide the users with a valuable market overview and market insights to help them make strategic decisions for identifying core market applications.

The thin film transistor (TFT) display market is analysed and market size insights and trends are provided by country, technology, type, panel type and end-use as referenced above.

The countries covered in the thin film transistor (TFT) display market report are U.S., Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Rest of South America, Germany, Italy, U.K., France, Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Rest of Europe, Japan, China, India, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Rest of Asia-Pacific, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E, South Africa, Egypt, Israel, Rest of Middle East and Africa (MEA).

North America dominates the thin film transistor (TFT) display market because of the introduction of advanced technology along with rising disposable income of the people within the region.

Asia-Pacific is expected to witness significant growth during the forecast period of 2022 to 2029 because of the rise in demand for consumer electronics, and semiconductor manufacturing industry in the region.

The country section of the report also provides individual market impacting factors and changes in regulation in the market domestically that impacts the current and future trends of the market. Data points like down-stream and upstream value chain analysis, technical trends and porter"s five forces analysis, case studies are some of the pointers used to forecast the market scenario for individual countries. Also, the presence and availability of global brands and their challenges faced due to large or scarce competition from local and domestic brands, impact of domestic tariffs and trade routes are considered while providing forecast analysis of the country data.

The thin film transistor (TFT) display market competitive landscape provides details by competitor. Details included are company overview, company financials, revenue generated, market potential, investment in research and development, new market initiatives, global presence, production sites and facilities, production capacities, company strengths and weaknesses, product launch, product width and breadth, application dominance. The above data points provided are only related to the companies" focus related to thin film transistor (TFT) display market.

In recent years, China and other countries have invested heavily in the research and manufacturing capacity of display technology. Meanwhile, different display technology scenarios, ranging from traditional LCD (liquid crystal display) to rapidly expanding OLED (organic light-emitting diode) and emerging QLED (quantum-dot light-emitting diode), are competing for market dominance. Amidst the trivium strife, OLED, backed by technology leader Apple"s decision to use OLED for its iPhone X, seems to have a better position, yet QLED, despite still having technological obstacles to overcome, has displayed potential advantage in color quality, lower production costs and longer life.

Which technology will win the heated competition? How have Chinese manufacturers and research institutes been prepared for display technology development? What policies should be enacted to encourage China"s innovation and promote its international competitiveness? At an online forum organized by National Science Review, its associate editor-in-chief, Dongyuan Zhao, asked four leading experts and scientists in China.

Zhao: We all know display technologies are very important. Currently, there are OLED, QLED and traditional LCD technologies competing with each other. What are their differences and specific advantages? Shall we start from OLED?

Huang: OLED has developed very quickly in recent years. It is better to compare it with traditional LCD if we want to have a clear understanding of its characteristics. In terms of structure, LCD largely consists of three parts: backlight, TFT backplane and cell, or liquid section for display. Different from LCD, OLED lights directly with electricity. Thus, it does not need backlight, but it still needs the TFT backplane to control where to light. Because it is free from backlight, OLED has a thinner body, higher response time, higher color contrast and lower power consumption. Potentially, it may even have a cost advantage over LCD. The biggest breakthrough is its flexible display, which seems very hard to achieve for LCD.

Liao: Actually, there were/are many different types of display technologies, such as CRT (cathode ray tube), PDP (plasma display panel), LCD, LCOS (liquid crystals on silicon), laser display, LED (light-emitting diodes), SED (surface-conduction electron-emitter display), FED (filed emission display), OLED, QLED and Micro LED. From display technology lifespan point of view, Micro LED and QLED may be considered as in the introduction phase, OLED is in the growth phase, LCD for both computer and TV is in the maturity phase, but LCD for cellphone is in the decline phase, PDP and CRT are in the elimination phase. Now, LCD products are still dominating the display market while OLED is penetrating the market. As just mentioned by Dr Huang, OLED indeed has some advantages over LCD.

Huang: Despite the apparent technological advantages of OLED over LCD, it is not straightforward for OLED to replace LCD. For example, although both OLED and LCD use the TFT backplane, the OLED’s TFT is much more difficult to be made than that of the voltage-driven LCD because OLED is current-driven. Generally speaking, problems for mass production of display technology can be divided into three categories, namely scientific problems, engineering problems and production problems. The ways and cycles to solve these three kinds of problems are different.

At present, LCD has been relatively mature, while OLED is still in the early stage of industrial explosion. For OLED, there are still many urgent problems to be solved, especially production problems that need to be solved step by step in the process of mass production line. In addition, the capital threshold for both LCD and OLED are very high. Compared with the early development of LCD many years ago, the advancing pace of OLED has been quicker.While in the short term, OLED can hardly compete with LCD in large size screen, how about that people may change their use habit to give up large screen?

Liao: I want to supplement some data. According to the consulting firm HIS Markit, in 2018, the global market value for OLED products will be US$38.5 billion. But in 2020, it will reach US$67 billion, with an average compound annual growth rate of 46%. Another prediction estimates that OLED accounts for 33% of the display market sales, with the remaining 67% by LCD in 2018. But OLED’s market share could reach to 54% in 2020.

Huang: While different sources may have different prediction, the advantage of OLED over LCD in small and medium-sized display screen is clear. In small-sized screen, such as smart watch and smart phone, the penetration rate of OLED is roughly 20% to 30%, which represents certain competitiveness. For large size screen, such as TV, the advancement of OLED [against LCD] may need more time.

Xu: LCD was first proposed in 1968. During its development process, the technology has gradually overcome its own shortcomings and defeated other technologies. What are its remaining flaws? It is widely recognized that LCD is very hard to be made flexible. In addition, LCD does not emit light, so a back light is needed. The trend for display technologies is of course towards lighter and thinner (screen).

But currently, LCD is very mature and economic. It far surpasses OLED, and its picture quality and display contrast do not lag behind. Currently, LCD technology"s main target is head-mounted display (HMD), which means we must work on display resolution. In addition, OLED currently is only appropriate for medium and small-sized screens, but large screen has to rely on LCD. This is why the industry remains investing in the 10.5th generation production line (of LCD).

Xu: While deeply impacted by OLED’s super thin and flexible display, we also need to analyse the insufficiency of OLED. With lighting material being organic, its display life might be shorter. LCD can easily be used for 100 000 hours. The other defense effort by LCD is to develop flexible screen to counterattack the flexible display of OLED. But it is true that big worries exist in LCD industry.

LCD industry can also try other (counterattacking) strategies. We are advantageous in large-sized screen, but how about six or seven years later? While in the short term, OLED can hardly compete with LCD in large size screen, how about that people may change their use habit to give up large screen? People may not watch TV and only takes portable screens.

Some experts working at a market survey institute CCID (China Center for Information Industry Development) predicted that in five to six years, OLED will be very influential in small and medium-sized screen. Similarly, a top executive of BOE Technology said that after five to six years, OLED will counterweigh or even surpass LCD in smaller sizes, but to catch up with LCD, it may need 10 to 15 years.

Xu: Besides LCD, Micro LED (Micro Light-Emitting Diode Display) has evolved for many years, though people"s real attention to the display option was not aroused until May 2014 when Apple acquired US-based Micro LED developer LuxVue Technology. It is expected that Micro LED will be used on wearable digital devices to improve battery"s life and screen brightness.

Micro LED, also called mLED or μLED, is a new display technology. Using a so-called mass transfer technology, Micro LED displays consist of arrays of microscopic LEDs forming the individual pixel elements. It can offer better contrast, response times, very high resolution and energy efficiency. Compared with OLED, it has higher lightening efficiency and longer life span, but its flexible display is inferior to OLED. Compared with LCD, Micro LED has better contrast, response times and energy efficiency. It is widely considered appropriate for wearables, AR/VR, auto display and mini-projector.

However, Micro LED still has some technological bottlenecks in epitaxy, mass transfer, driving circuit, full colorization, and monitoring and repairing. It also has a very high manufacturing cost. In short term, it cannot compete traditional LCD. But as a new generation of display technology after LCD and OLED, Micro LED has received wide attentions and it should enjoy fast commercialization in the coming three to five years.

Peng: It comes to quantum dot. First, QLED TV on market today is a misleading concept. Quantum dots are a class of semiconductor nanocrystals, whose emission wavelength can be continuously tuned because of the so-called quantum confinement effect. Because they are inorganic crystals, quantum dots in display devices are very stable. Also, due to their single crystalline nature, emission color of quantum dots can be extremely pure, which dictates the color quality of display devices.

Interestingly, quantum dots as light-emitting materials are related to both OLED and LCD. The so-called QLED TVs on market are actually quantum-dot enhanced LCD TVs, which use quantum dots to replace the green and red phosphors in LCD’s backlight unit. By doing so, LCD displays greatly improve their color purity, picture quality and potentially energy consumption. The working mechanisms of quantum dots in these enhanced LCD displays is their photoluminescence.

For its relationship with OLED, quantum-dot light-emitting diode (QLED) can in certain sense be considered as electroluminescence devices by replacing the organic light-emitting materials in OLED. Though QLED and OLED have nearly identical structure, they also have noticeable differences. Similar to LCD with quantum-dot backlighting unit, color gamut of QLED is much wider than that of OLED and it is more stable than OLED.

Another big difference between OLED and QLED is their production technology. OLED relies on a high-precision technique called vacuum evaporation with high-resolution mask. QLED cannot be produced in this way because quantum dots as inorganic nanocrystals are very difficult to be vaporized. If QLED is commercially produced, it has to be printed and processed with solution-based technology. You can consider this as a weakness, since the printing electronics at present is far less precision than the vacuum-based technology. However, solution-based processing can also be considered as an advantage, because if the production problem is overcome, it costs much less than the vacuum-based technology applied for OLED. Without considering TFT, investment into an OLED production line often costs tens of billions of yuan but investment for QLED could be just 90–95% less.

Given the relatively low resolution of printing technology, QLED shall be difficult to reach a resolution greater than 300 PPI (pixels per inch) within a few years. Thus, QLED might not be applied for small-sized displays at present and its potential will be medium to large-sized displays.

Zhao: Quantum dots are inorganic nanocrystal, which means that they must be passivated with organic ligands for stability and function. How to solve this problem? Second, can commercial production of quantum dots reach an industrial scale?

Peng: Good questions. Ligand chemistry of quantum dots has developed quickly in the past two to three years. Colloidal stability of inorganic nanocrystals should be said of being solved. We reported in 2016 that one gram of quantum dots can be stably dispersed in one milliliter of organic solution, which is certainly sufficient for printing technology. For the second question, several companies have been able to mass produce quantum dots. At present, all these production volume is built for fabrication of the backlighting units for LCD. It is believed that all high-end TVs from Samsung in 2017 are all LCD TVs with quantum-dot backlighting units. In addition, Nanosys in the United States is also producing quantum dots for LCD TVs. NajingTech at Hangzhou, China demonstrate production capacity to support the Chinese TV makers. To my knowledge, NajingTech is establishing a production line for 10 million sets of color TVs with quantum-dot backlighting units annually.China"s current demands cannot be fully satisfied from the foreign companies. It is also necessary to fulfill the demands of domestic market. That is why China must develop its OLED production capability.

Huang: Based on my understanding of Samsung, the leading Korean player in OLED market, we cannot say it had foresight in the very beginning. Samsung began to invest in AMOLED (active-matrix organic light-emitting diode, a major type of OLED used in the display industry) in about 2003, and did not realize mass production until 2007. Its OLED production reached profitability in 2010. Since then, Samsung gradually secured a market monopoly status.

So, originally, OLED was only one of Samsung"s several alternative technology pathways. But step by step, it achieved an advantageous status in the market and so tended to maintain it by expanding its production capacity.

Another reason is customers’ demands. Apple has refrained itself from using OLED for some years due to various reasons, including the patent disputes with Samsung. But after Apple began to use OLED for its iPhone X, it exerted a big influence in the whole industry. So now Samsung began to harvest its accumulated investments in the field and began to expand the capacity more.

Also, Samsung has spent considerable time and efforts on the development of the product chain. Twenty or thirty years ago, Japan owned the most complete product chain for display products. But since Samsung entered the field in that time, it has spent huge energies to cultivate upstream and downstream Korean firms. Now the Republic of Korea (ROK) manufacturers began to occupy a large share in the market.

Liao: South Korean manufacturers including Samsung and LG Electronics have controlled 90% of global supplies of medium and small-sized OLED panels. Since Apple began to buy OLED panels from Samsung for its cellphone products, there were no more enough panels shipping to China. Therefore, China"s current demands cannot be fully satisfied from the foreign companies. On the other hand, because China has a huge market for cellphones, it would be necessary to fulfill the demands through domestic efforts. That is why China must develop its OLED production capability.

Huang: The importance of China"s LCD manufacturing is now globally high. Compared with the early stage of LCD development, China"s status in OLED has been dramatically improved. When developing LCD, China has adopted the pattern of introduction-absorption-renovation. Now for OLED, we have a much higher percentage of independent innovation.

Then it is the scale of human resources. One big factory will create several thousand jobs, and it will mobilize a whole production chain, involving thousands of workers. The requirement of supplying these engineers and skilled workers can be fulfilled in China.

The third advantage is the national supports. The government has input huge supports and manufacturers’ technological capacity is improving. I think Chinese manufacturers will have a great breakthrough in OLED.

Although we cannot say that our advantages triumph over ROK, where Samsung and LG have been dominating the field for many years, we have achieved many significant progresses in developing the material and parts of OLED. We also have high level of innovation in process technology and designs. We already have several major manufacturers, such as Visionox, BOE, EDO and Tianma, which have owned significant technological reserves.

Peng: As mentioned above, there are two ways to apply quantum dots for display, namely photoluminescence in backlightingFor QLED, the three stages of technological development [from science issue to engineering and finally to mass production] have been mingled together at the same time. If one wants to win the competition, it is necessary to invest on all three dimensions.

units for LCD and electroluminescence in QLED. For the photoluminescence applications, the key is quantum-dot materials. China has noticeable advantages in quantum-dot materials.

After I returned to China, NajingTech (co-founded by Peng) purchased all key patents invented by me in the United States under the permission of US government. These patents cover the basic synthesis and processing technologies of quantum dots. NajingTech has already established capability for large-scale production of quantum dots. Comparatively, Korea—represented by Samsung—is the current leading company in all aspects of display industry, which offers great advantages in commercialization of quantum-dot displays. In late 2016, Samsung acquired QD Vision (a leading quantum-dot technology developer based in the United States). In addition, Samsung has invested heavily in purchasing quantum-dot-related patents and in developing the technology.

China is internationally leading in electroluminescence at present. In fact, it was the 2014 Nature publication by a group of scientists from Zhejiang University that proved QLED can reach the stringent requirements for display applications. However, who will become the final winner of the international competition on electroluminescence remains unclear. China"s investment in quantum-dot technology lags far behind US and ROK. Basically, the quantum-dot research has been centered in US for most of its history, and South Korean players have invested heavily along this direction as well.

Peng: If electroluminescence can be successfully achieved with printing, it will be much cheaper, with only about 1/10th cost of OLED. Manufacturers like NajingTech and BOE in China have demonstrated printing displays with quantum dots. At present, QLED does not compete with OLED directly, given its market in small-sized screen. A while ago, Dr. Huang mentioned three stages of technological development, from science issue to engineering and finally to mass production. For QLED, the three stages have been mingled together at the same time. If one wants to win the competition, it is necessary to invest on all three dimensions.

Huang: When OLED was compared with LCD in the past, lots of advantages of OLED were highlighted, such as high color gamut, high contrast and high r