News: 0173620814

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

What Comes After OLED? Meet QDEL (arstechnica.com)

(Tuesday April 23, 2024 @11:30PM (BeauHD) from the next-big-thing dept.)


An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:

> Quantum dots are already moving in the premium display category, particularly through QD-OLED TVs and monitors. The next step could be QDEL, short for "quantum dot electroluminescent," also known as NanoLED, screens. Not to be confused with the QLED (quantum light emitting diode) tech already available in TVs, QDEL displays don't have a backlight. Instead, the quantum dots are the light source. The expected result is displays with wider color spaces than today's QD-OLEDs (quantum dot OLEDs) that are also [1]brighter, more affordable, and resistant to burn-in . It seems like QDEL is being eyed as one of the most potentially influential developments for consumer displays over the next two years. If you're into high-end display tech, QDEL should be on your radar.

>

> You may know QDEL as NanoLED because that's what [2]Nanosys , a quantum dot supplier developing the technology, calls it. QDEL has gone by other names, such as QLED -- before Samsung claimed that acronym for LCD-LED TVs that use quantum dots. You may also see QDEL referred to as QD-EL, QD-LED, or EL-QD. As the alphabet soup suggests, there are still some things to finalize with this tech. This article will mostly use the term QDEL, with occasional references to NanoLED. If none of those names sound familiar, it's probably because you can't buy any QDEL products yet. Suppliers suggest that could change in the next few years; Nanosys is targeting 2026 for commercial availability. [...]

>

> Today's OLED screens use OLED material as their light source, with QD-OLED specifically applying quantum dots to convert the light into color. In QLED, the light source is a white backlight; QDEL displays apply electricity directly to quantum dots, which then generate light. QDEL uses a layer of quantum dots sandwiched between an anode and cathode to facilitates the flow of electricity into the quantum dots. QDEL displays have pixels made of a red quantum dot subpixel, green quantum dot subpixel, and -- differing from today's QLED and QD-OLED displays -- blue quantum dot subpixel. QDEL displays use the same quantum dot cores that QD-OLED and QLED products use, [Jeff Yurek, Nanosys' VP of marketing] told me, adding, "The functionalization of the outer layer of the [quantum dots] needs to be changed to make it compatible with each display architecture, but the cores that do the heavy lifting are pretty much the same across all of these."

>

> Because QDEL pixels make their own light and can therefore turn off completely, QDEL displays can deliver the same deep blacks and rich contrast that made OLED popular. But with the use of direct-view quantum dots, stakeholders are claiming the potential for wider color gamuts than we've seen in consumer displays before. With fewer layers and parts, there are also implications for QDEL product pricing, longevity, and even thinness. [...] The fact that quantum dots are already being successfully applied to LCD-LED and OLED screens is encouraging for future QDEL products. QDEL stakeholders claim that the tech could bring efficiencies like lower power consumption and higher brightness than OLED. ( [3]Research using a [4]prototype device has recorded quantum dot light-emitting diodes reaching 614,000 nits. Of course, those aren't the type of results you should expect to see in a real-life consumer product.) There's also hope that QDEL could eventually last longer than OLED, especially since QDEL doesn't rely on organic materials that can cause burn-in.



[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/meet-qdel-the-backlight-less-display-tech-that-could-replace-oled-in-premium-tvs/

[2] https://nanosys.com/roadmap

[3] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41566-019-0364-z?utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=CONR_PF018_ECOM_GL_PHSS_ALWYS_DEEPLINK&utm_content=textlink&utm_term=PID100017430&CJEVENT=6dafd19f01ba11ef83dd02090a1cb825&error=cookies_not_supported&code=7789fe0b-8b53-4683-b9e7-cbe6181e16df

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eONWY3kbZc0



Acronym salad (Score:4, Funny)

by r1348 ( 2567295 )

Having a stroke.

Most of us... (Score:3)

by devloop ( 983641 )

Most of us watch streamed video that is already highly compressed.

Even OT and Cable programming today is of mid to low quality.

Gaming might benefit the most from this type of technology.

MicroLED (Score:2)

by backslashdot ( 95548 )

What happened to microLED? That was supposed to be the next display tech for power smartwatches, phones, and home TVs. Instead what we got was a few ultra-large TVs with 4K resolution price at 100k. Are these QDEL things better, or worse .. or equally vaporware?

Re: (Score:1)

by alvinrod ( 889928 )

What are you even on about with this 100k nonsense? 4K OLED TVs are cheap. TVs around 60" can be had for $1,500 if you want some of the best quality as far as consumer products are concerned. If you just want a cheap consumer OLED 4K television, those can be had for well under $1,000 even at the same 60" size category. If you don't need a display that large and just want to pay as little as possible, there are usually Black Friday deals that venture into the unbelievably cheap (as in under $200 for a ~40" 4

Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

They're all LED displays. The nano ones are just smaller, which is what you need to make smaller displays while keeping the resolution the same.

Those video walls you see in stadiums and Times Square and everywhere else today are LED displays, except they use non-micro (i.e. bigger) LEDs so they're big and/or low resolution. I have a couple of the panels, they're squares with 30 cm sides and 64 x 64 LEDs. A few TV manufacturers made high res video walls with the smallest LEDs they could make, which at the ti

Re: (Score:2)

by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 )

I work in LED signage and the issue as far as I understand it from my industry really a physical constraint thing. Your big roadside billboards and stadium signs might have a pitch of 8-20mm, your better looking retail and office displays signs are very common from 5.5mm down to even 0.7mm is pretty easy. For comparison a merely 1080p display at 55" diagonal has a pitch of around 0.3mm. Also the term "MicroLED" has no actual meaning, years ago they were just calling it "miniLED".

While processes get bette

Power Consumption? (Score:2)

by crow ( 16139 )

For mobile devices (smart phones, smart watches, laptops, and the like), power consumption is a huge factor. The summary doesn't mention it, but I'm guessing that the lack of a backlight gives reason to suspect it will either be the same or better than what's currently used. And considering how many screens get left on all the time, having lower power is important in general.

OLED and Macular Degeneration in my retinas (Score:2)

by Seven Spirals ( 4924941 )

I have dry-form Macular Degeneration in my retinas. OLED screens are so much easier for me to read due to their high brightness and high contrast. Having amazing color depth doesn't hurt one bit, either, but I can probably appreciate it less than some folks. Sounds like this QDEL can be even brighter, I'm all in. I've always spent the majority of my computing dollar on my display. That's only going to get more pronounced as my eyes get worse.

Re: (Score:2)

by Seven Spirals ( 4924941 )

BTW, I use the Aorus 48" OLED display at home and the BenQ 48" OLED display at work. The BenQ is superior in every way but I do love both of them.

There's a disconnect in the summary (Score:2)

by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 )

"More affordable" and "high end" don't typically play in the same space.

Do you know, I think that Dr. Swift was silly to laugh about Laputa. I
believe it is a mistake to make a mock of people, just because they think.
There are ninety thousand people in this world who do not think, for every
one who does, and these people hate the thinkers like poison. Even if some
thinkers are fanciful, it is wrong to make fun of them for it. Better to
think about cucumbers even, than not to think at all.
-- T. H. White