So yeah, that's basically my question. By following my simpleton logic I always assumed that the challenge in making a monitor/ panel in regards to resolution wasn't making a panel of high resolution, but rather of high pixel density. I feel like if they can make a smartphone panel with 500+ppi there's no reason they can't make an affordable "4K" panel, which even at 28" would only have a ppi of roughly 157.35. Obviously I'm wrong about this, because a good 28" 4K panel (like the one Linus just did a video on from Samsung) is still upwards of $700, while a new flagship phone costs ~$600 unlocked, or ~$200-300 under contract. Is there really that much of a difference in display technology? Shouldn't manufacturing smaller and smaller pixels be harder than simply finding a pixel size/ density and replicating it across a larger surface?
tl;dr : Why do 4K panels cost so much when we have 500ppi+ 1440p phone screens.
Wow I didn't even think of that. I suppose if they decreased the price in general the demand would go up, but then again there's sort of a threshold in regards to who actually needs and can run 4K, and that's not many people. PC gamers don't have the hardware yet (affordable) and Professionals who need the resolution for productivity don't care about price. I'm an idiot for not seeing that.
Pixel density is one thing, but once you scale up the size of the panel, you'll exponentially add cost. Bigger panels require more materials. That's why a 4k monitor currently costs less than a 4k TV.
more materials basically , and besides, those new 4k phones are coming in at 600-700 dollars anyways. about the same price as the 27" and all that thing does is display.
What I was wondering (on sort of the same idea): if we have 1080p smartphones less than five inches, how come the only 1080p monitors are over 21 inches? I don't want a huge panel because I appreciate pixel density (also space requirements), but apparently decent high resolution monitors in smaller scales don't exist.