Samsung filed an interesting trademark with the European Union Intellectual Property Office recently which suggests the company is working on a new AMOLED display for VR that specifically addresses the screen door effect (SDE).

The screen door effect is a visual artifact of displays such as those used in the Rift and Vive. Because there are unlit gaps between pixels or subpixels, they can become more visible when viewed under VR optics, creating unsightly grid-like lines which appear like fine linen mesh, or screen doors between the user and the content.

Uncovered by Dutch website GalaxyClub.nl, the Korean tech giant applied for the name ‘Anti SDE AMOLED’ last Friday. There isn’t any supporting information outside the actual name of the supposed display, but considering it directly references SDE, it’s very likely the company is taking its next step in making more VR-specific hardware.

SEE ALSO
Here's a Look Inside Both Samsung & JDI's High Pixel Density VR Panels

There’s a number of ways to reduce SDE in VR headsets. One way is by creating higher ‘fill factor’ panels, which reduces the spaces between pixels and subpixels. Packing in the pixels at a high PPI (pixel per inch) density, while not a guaranteed way to reduce perceived SDE, does help overall as well. Like with OSVR HDK2, panel makers can also apply a diffusion layer on top of the display, which diffuses light emitted by pixels in order to compensate for the unlit spaces between them (less desirable because it reduces clarity).

Healthy speculation: Samsung showed off a 2.43-inch, 3,840 × 2,160 resolution (120Hz) panel at SID Display Week in May, which featured 1,200 PPI – a clear 2.6 times higher PPI than Rift or Vive’s 460 PPI. It’s possible the company is basing their work off this prototype with the intention of bringing it to market via other manufacturers (Vive Pro contains Samsung displays), or use it in their own bespoke VR headset. Again, we just don’t know, but we’ll certainly be keeping our eyes peeled for a what could be a solution to the screen door effect.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Scott Hayden
Well before the first modern XR products hit the market, Scott recognized the potential of the technology and set out to understand and document its growth. He has been professionally reporting on the space for nearly a decade as Editor at Road to VR, authoring more than 4,000 articles on the topic. Scott brings that seasoned insight to his reporting from major industry events across the globe.
  • Arashi

    Umm this is pretty much non news. We already knew they’re working on nextgen VR panels.

    • JJ

      right

    • twattermaster

      Well keep them updates coming. At least we’re being reassured, that they continue development. Many show floor projects never leave concept stages.

  • Luke

    do it for cv2 please

  • nipple_pinchy

    I’m waiting on that first premium standalone headset. Don’t want to deal with wires and don’t want to deal with all these software conflicts stemming from the current hardware not using proprietary operating systems made specifically for VR.

    • dk

      sure …..but it needs to have an optional pc connection or input for a video receiver …..because using just a phone hardware is so many multiple times weaker it’s not even funny

      • nipple_pinchy

        I mean one with on-board computing, not a smart phone. A premium standalone headset with on-board computing that uses foveated rendering to reduce the minimum power requirements. Santa Cruz is a step in that direction but I don’t want an Oculus HMD.

        • twattermaster

          Allergy to Facebook?

          • nipple_pinchy

            I wouldn’t give Suckerberg a cup of water to put himself out if he was on fire.

        • dk

          “on-board computing”/phone hardware is the same thing u can’t use anything that much bigger or power draining or heavy in a headset……whatever platform it is ….it will be really similar in performance to an expensive snapdragon
          the vive focus with 6dof and 1440×1600 per eye is using the snapdragon 835 “phone hardware” ……and the point was whatever u use even with eye tracking …it will still be laughably weaker compared to a pc

          • twattermaster

            To be fair integrated hardware has huge benefits in comparison to phone based solutions. Better cooling, more battery space, total control over operating systems without bloatware running in the background. It really makes a lot of difference. The performance they squeezed from Go is very impressive.

          • dk

            the “phone hardware” they use in the go the solo the focus …..is integrated hardware………I’m not talking about using a phone in a headset

          • nipple_pinchy

            *sigh* You have no idea what you’re talking about. Just sit down.

          • G-man

            you clearly have no clue what you are actually talking about. what you want is a dream right now, so enjoy waiting a decade or two.

          • Peter Hansen

            True. I believe Intel’s Project Alloy had exactly this issue: too much compute power on your head, meaning too bulky, too much heat and too little battery life.

    • twattermaster

      So you’re most likely waiting for Santa Cruz. Still, such standalone device will always be subpar in comparison to these “flawed” PC headsets.

      • nipple_pinchy

        PC-based VR is a dead-end. PC elitists just DO NOT understand this because they live in a bubble where paying $800 for a GPU is normal. It’s not. I’m a VR enthusiast. I want it to expand to much bigger markets which will attract more developers and publishers but as long as consumer VR requires a connection to a $1500 PC, the market won’t grow beyond a few million tops. That’s a recipe for a slow death.

        Standalone headsets utilizing a combination of eye tracking, foveated rendering, new rendering pipelines and optimizations on the hardware and software end are the future. Anyone disputing this is deluded. It doesn’t matter if you can maybe get slighter better looking graphics if the ceiling consumer base for your industry is two million. The PC elitists need to grow up and realize that their devotion to their ePeens isn’t helping VR become what it has the potential to be.

        • dk

          no one is paying 800 plus 1500 or whatever….. just to play a vr game ….this ain’t a console…….people r paying for a good computer because it’s infinitely versatile including using it for work ……as long as nvidia has the 1060/70/80 class gpus there will be people willing to pay at least 200-400 for a tracked monitor
          ………….that said I do appreciate what all in ones will bring to the table …..and if they have an optional pc connection it will have the functionality of a full desktop experience too

      • nipple_pinchy

        Subpar in what? Graphics? Resolution? Eventually, with foveated rendering you’ll have even BETTER resolution and graphics on a mobile VR headset than you could have on a PC monitor that has to render 100% of the screen regardless of where the user is looking.

        All of your nonsensical assumptions are based on past tech paradigms involving 2D computing for gaming application. Mobile VR is changing paradigms to help it adapt to better suit the markets it’s seeking. Flat gaming doesn’t have to adapt or evolve. This is why “video games” are essentially unchanged since the 90s, except for cut-scene graphical fidelity which doesn’t add anything to the interactive experience. Too many games nowadays are about watching and not interacting.

        VR will thrive once it’s divorced itself from a stagnant gaming industry and stands on its own feet defined by its own rules, tech and terminology.

        • kuhpunkt

          Why are you comparing Foveated Rendering with a PC Monitor? This just makes no sense.

          • nipple_pinchy

            PEOPLE RESPONDING TO ME are comparing a standalone HMD that utilizes foveated rendering with a PC monitor and are saying that no matter what, it’ll still be subpar. Even if wireless data transmission can get us to 120hz at 4K per eye with 150-180 fov, it still won’t be “premium”. They act like somehow over the next few months, all progress in VR tech development will just halt and remain stagnant forever.

            I’m tired of having to push around mental toddlers when you’re clearly not even understanding the basic argument I’m trying to make. Just stay in your lane; the slow lane.

          • G-man

            you know by the time foveated rendering is a thing in vr headsets it would be even easier to implement in a gaming monitor… you say a lot of stupid thing for someone who thinks them self so intelligent. stop being so linear.

    • brandon9271

      I’d rather deal with a wire and have a premium experience vs. Mobile. Mobile hardware just can’t keep up and it never will. Any advancement made in mobile will ALWAYS be behind PC due to cooling and power requirements. Think of the Nintendo Switch. It performs much better when docked but still pales in comparison to a PC or dedicated console. That’s just the nature of technology.

      • Raphael

        Agree dunt I.

      • nipple_pinchy

        PC-based VR is a dead-end. PC elitists just DO NOT understand this because they live in a bubble where paying $800 for a GPU is normal. It’s not. I’m a VR enthusiast. I want it to expand to much bigger markets which will attract more developers and publishers but as long as consumer VR requires a connection to a $1500 PC, the market won’t grow beyond a few million tops. That’s a recipe for a slow death.

        Standalone headsets utilizing a combination of eye tracking, foveated rendering, new rendering pipelines and optimizations on the hardware and software end are the future. Anyone disputing this is deluded. It doesn’t matter if you can maybe get slighter better looking graphics if the ceiling consumer base for your industry is two million. The PC elitists need to grow up and realize that their devotion to their ePeens isn’t helping VR become what it has the potential to be.

        • brandon9271

          ePeens? You have some serious issues, bro. Mobile is weak. VR pushes a lot of pixels, in stereo at 75fps minimum. That’s only ever going to be sub par. Even PS4 struggles and it’s basically a low spec PC. Maybe next gen consoles will be the saving grace of VR for the masses. Not mobile.. Mobile sucks.

        • DiGiCT Ltd

          Indeed, the only bubble i see here is a nipple bubble, you really off the grid here.
          For sure the device you want to mention would be more user friendly and more adopted just like mobile phones are more as PC but that does not mean PC is dead.
          The success of a smartphone is NOT because its awesome to game on, its because it offers other things like camera for making videos and pictures, email, web browsing etc etc.
          Just look how many people own a game console and how many people still buy a switch….
          You are the one in the Nipple bubble, the device you want to mention is the easiest to use but will always lack features of the higher end devices.
          And trust me a device like you mention does not go below $1000 itself either, this world is easy, you want better you going to pay more its always been like that and it never going to change.
          You want cheaper crap then the result is crap.

          • nipple_pinchy

            PC-based VR is a dead end. Period. I love my Samsung Odyssey but VR headsets have to be something you can pick up on your nightstand, put on and be “in” VR in a matter of seconds and which relies on a proprietary OS made specifically for VR.

            What we have right now is jury rigged VR boot-strapped to all-purpose computing machines. That’s not feasible in the long-term. It’s great as an introduction to consumers in regards to what VR can do BEFORE standalone headsets are ubiquitous but PC-based VR won’t be the end game, unless the plan is for it to eventually die off.

            Carmack was always right; mobile VR is the future. Hardcores don’t understand markets; they understand their own subjective desires.

            Casual consumers WILL NOT buy a PC to get into VR. They WILL NOT hook up sensors to their walls and go through any kind of thorough calibration process. They have to be able to go to Walmart, buy a HMD in a single box for the cost of a console, take it home, pop it on their faces, go through a simple calibration process ONCE and then be in VR within seconds whenever the need arises.

            Once such a headset exists, VR adoption rates will skyrocket which will attract developers(big and small), publishers, expansive venture capital investments and THEN the industry will expand and reach its potential.

            VR does not belong to hardcore PC gaming enthusiasts. They helped it get off the ground but they don’t own it and won’t be its future. I love VR above all else and PC hardware was just a means to an end; not an end unto itself.

          • Laurence Nairne

            I don’t disagree that standalone VR with integrated mobile technology is going to dramatically extend the reach of the VR market to a wider audience, but I do disagree that PCVR only served to kickstart VR as an industry.

            It has a very sturdy place in the VR ecosystem and exists to push the limits of what VR can achieve technically speaking – not just graphically, but also complexity. PC has access to the best CPU/GPU setups which is always going to be attractive to peripheral hardware manufacturers. It’s also always going to be attractive to an elite core and they aren’t just going to disappear.

            You could have had the same argument for PC gaming disappearing once consoles became strong enough to challenge what could be achieved on the average consumer PC. It didn’t and is now stronger than ever.

            This industry has a place for more than just one platform strategy and I don’t see HMD manufacturers just abandoning one because they can make money elsewhere as well.

          • nipple_pinchy

            PC-based VR has no future beyond being a stop-gap measure. The market pressures are pushing it to either get to premium mobile or to die.

            The current consumer base for “high-end PCVR” is plateauing. It can’t go much higher than this AND EVEN IF IT GOT CHEAPER, casual consumers will not bear the inconveniences that come with it. They just don’t. Without the casual consumer you have a niche market within a niche and that means limited investment into software development, which limits consumer interest.

            Without a simple, relatively inexpensive standalone headset that hundreds of millions of people would want sitting on their computer desk or nightstand, consumer VR is destined for economic stagnation and slow, slow growth to a total plateau.

            I love VR and want it to succeed but having linear minds insist that because PC-based, wired VR will always be “better” then standalone has no future. They’re like cultists afraid that the hobby will grow beyond this tiny niche and it won’t be theirs anymore.

          • JJ

            no your completely wrong, no matter how powerful you make a mobile platform, a more powerful desktop will be available and people want the most powerful thing they can have. Casual consumers have already participated in pcs and pcvr so your already wrong about that.

            Whats funny is how you don’t see whats really going to happen. none of this is a debate its pretty damn obvious. Were going to transition over to cloud computing, where to us it SEEMS mobile and wireless but really all our processes are happening on very large DESKTOP PC’s/Servers. So in the end we will be wireless and mobile but its going to be made possible by high-end pc’s…
            The fact that you’ve argued this with paragraphs while stating we all have a “linear mindset” yet you couldn’t even bring up where cloud computing is, pretty much sums up your understanding of computers pretty easily for us. You have none and your just shitting out of your mouth right now about how glorified mobile will be because you can’t afford anything more than a 200$ hmd…

          • JJ

            Plus you use BOLD TYPING to highlight things that you think are facts but are really just fallacies that are further revealing your idiocy. Just because you can say it louder/yell doesnt mean your right, it usually means your ignoring what everyones trying to tell you/

          • nipple_pinchy

            I’m trying to help these simpletons by making IMPORTANT THINGS in bold text, but they still DO. NOT. GET. IT.

            Linear minds. You’re one of them and you keep reinforcing these facts by chirping the exact same things the other dummies keep saying because your brains aren’t equipped to understand basic economics and how market pressures work. Unless I’m being paid to further lecture you types, you don’t deserve my time.

          • JJ

            Wow you probably love the smell of your own shit….

            If everyone on this thread is telling you you’re wrong… you’re fucking wrong. The more you try to insult those who gave you facts about why you are wrong the stupider you look. So keep it up were all pretty amused at how low you’ve gotten, can you’re IQ go any lower?

          • JJ

            you sound like a little kid whos had his feelings hurt and doesn’t know how to cope with being wrong. again its really entertaining please tell us more about why you think mobile platforms will be more powerful then desktop pcs…

            Not to mention you have no idea how to formulate an argument.
            I found multiple logical fallacies in every statement you attempted to make. And to top it off you try to make an argument that everyone who doesnt see things your way is linear minded…. well that’s a pretty linear minded way of thinking.

            Please respond, and please look up logical fallacies before you reply.

          • G-man

            lol, what an obnoxious prick. you’re not as intelligent as you think.

          • Peter Hansen

            Cool it a little.

            5G streaming of VR content from dedicated servers directly to headsets might solve this issue: high compute power for everyone without the need for a personal computer. It is being tested right now by Huawei, I believe.

            There might still be room for stand-alone devices. But they will never deliver premium experiences.

          • nipple_pinchy

            Having to deal with small, linear minds repeatedly bringing me non-arguments like they found the Holy Grail is frustrating. It’s like they haven’t been keeping track of anything going on in the space.

          • Peter Hansen

            Such discussions can be a little frustrating somtimes. But getting angry in text usually does not help. And now you are starting to insult them. That is not really accepted anywhere. Please don’t do that.

          • DiGiCT Ltd

            Better have a small, linear mind rather then no mind like you.
            Sad you even dont feel anything as brainless as you are.

          • G-man

            hows this for a “Non argument”, you are talking about what vr could be in 30 years time…. youre not saying anything everyone doesnt already know. yes, vr headset will get better to the point where there will be ones that dont need a pc. There will NEVER be ones that are more powerful than using a dedicated computer though so what you are talking about is the 30 years from now version of the oculus go will be amazing. and there will be the new version of the dekstop headsets thats even more amazing. stand alone will always be less powerfull than desktop. thats just the alaws of physics. you’re just talking about something theres no point even discussing.

        • Dynastius

          Counterpoint: People pay $1000 for mobile phones now. Cost is important for sure, but I think the inconvenience of having a bunch of cables, tracking devices, and the intimidation of setting it all up, making sure their computer can handle it, etc. is an even bigger stumbling block. Needing to learn about things like IPD doesn’t help either.

          You are right that a stand alone device with foveated rendering would make it possible to have premium experiences with much less processing power. And eye tracking would have a lot of other big benefits too…simulated depth of field and auto-IPD adjustment for example.

          I think VR will really take off when we have that, plus inside out tracking that is as reliable as Vive tracking.

        • cirby

          Back in the 1980s, when personal computing took off, a Commodore 64 with a floppy drive was about $1000. That was the “cheap” way to get into computing, and a LOT of families did so.

          Adjusted for inflation, that’s about $2500 today. Which, coincidentally, is about the price for a very nice VR setup, computer and all.

          An Apple IIe, with monitor and floppy, was about $2400 in 1983. That’s about $6000 now, which would buy a pretty much state-of-the-art home VR system (it’s about twice as much as my Vive/1080ti/i7/M.2 setup in the other room).

          People bought millions of C64 and IIe systems. But according to you, that won’t happen.

          Oh, by the way… there are already about 20 million “VR capable” home computers out there. Most people call them “gaming computers,” but the hardware specs are the same.

          Standalone headsets are definitely the way of the future, but that future is more than a few years off. Power and size requirements alone will keep that from happening for at least five or six years. We won’t see true, competitive-quality standalone VR without at least one definitive revolution in graphics chip technology.

        • G-man

          yeah, instead of spending $800 on a gpu, everyone sould spend $5000 on a vr headset with a micro gpu in t as powerful as a desktop but that runs on batteries.

          You’re a nut job

        • katdeskinner

          ps4 has just shot down your theory…sry

          • nipple_pinchy

            Console-based VR is even more of a deadend. Console fatties won’t adopt VR in large numbers. PSVR is proof. 75mil PS4 owners and only 3 million bought PSVR after almost two years. Fail.

    • Lucidfeuer

      Nobody sane wants to deal with wires, but not standalone will ever be “premium” or do the job…wireless free tethering, as in you VR headset is just a visual interface, like any screen/TV and not a computing device, means you should be able to plug or beam from any devices wether it’s PC, smartphone or internet: problem solved.

      • nipple_pinchy

        You people think linearly. That’s your problem. I know because you types keep saying the same thing: “mobile won’t be premium”. CURRENT MOBILE isn’t premium, but for the market to expand, mobile VR hardware is being driven toward being premium by encouraging and incentivizing companies to push developments in the eye tracking, inside-out tracking, wireless data transmission, micro-screens and optics space to actually get it there. It has to or VR is a dead duck.

        The PC-based VR market isn’t going to grow much beyond what it is now, but PC elitists keep demanding “higher resolutions!” like that’s going to do anything. You have to think about what the market wants. They do want higher resolutions(although the current leaders in Odyssey and Vive Pro, for me, are already acceptable), BUT they don’t want wires; they don’t want to buy an expensive PC first; they don’t want to fiddle with external trackers or installing drivers or dealing with Windows-based software conflicts.

        If premium VR remains PC bound, it’s dead. PC-based VR was always just meant to be a stop-gap measure leading to mobile/standalone. In its nature and the nature of the mass market, it has to be.

        You’re obsessed with plugs and wires and can’t imagine a way around it because it’s all you’ve ever known and think that your definition of “premium” is somehow what the market should aim to achieve, which would ironically kill the medium. Even with a high-end Santa Cruz headset on the way, people like you CAN’T IMAGINE that eventually the arc of improvements would ever get it past wired and into a state that would actually push it past current pancake monitor tech, even though all signs regarding current VR tech development say otherwise.

        Small minds thinking linearly isn’t going to help VR.

        • Lucidfeuer

          You make me laugh…you’re probably young and arrogant, but I’m usually the one who accuses people that “thinking linearly isn’t going to help VR”. But then I’m not 21 or whatever and actually work in VR, so maybe I do understand the intricacies of the VR challenges and have evolved multiple times on my opinions, also don’t treat people as “small minds” even though I want sometimes, I mean we’re humans but it’s still an irrelevant remark.

          I actually agree with you, I do think that mobile, as in smartphone, pluggable VR headset is the BEST route to go for the time coming, but by that I mean that it also have to have a tierce device wireless/plugged tethering capability to be of any use, you simply can’t run high-end experience and tools on a mobile processor for now. For the underlaying reason that VR headset where never meant to be standalone or computing terminals but visual and interactive interface that will replace screens and it’s controllers.

          And eventually, one will want to pop-up a foldable headset at home, office, transportation, park bench that can do just that without being plugged to anything but still being wirelessly tethered to a device and network of any sorts. So the device it is plugged or tethered with doesn’t matter that much in the long run, as long as the Virtual Headset does what is intended, and a LOT more than currently achieved is intended in terms of tracking, beaming, ARforwarding, interacting…

          Also “you have to think about what the market wants” is a very wrong approach if you want to achieves things, since the market doesn’t really want anything or acts rationally, they mostly buy whatever they’re fed. Instead you have to think about what the market doesn’t know that it wants yet.

  • Kurius

    Will santa cruz have eye tracking? That will be great. Less energy and processing power required for better display in wireless headset. I think samsung should also do it with their presumed upcoming wireless headset. 6dof for headset and controllers must. I think gen 2 won’t be released until holiday season 2020 as the way things appear constipated and manufacturers are erroneously looking at the vr headset as primarily a gaming device and tying it’s release to appropriate gpu release. I think vr headset will always be more often used as a video consumption device and thrust should be to release better displays with eye tracking. Please correct me if I am wrong.

    • Peter Hansen

      Oculus’ Half-Dome prototype uses eye tracking in order to enable its motorized focus plane adjustment. It wasn’t discussed wrt Santa Cruz, though. I think there is still a slight latency issue with eye tracking, particularly for foveated rendering. And the wireless transmission does not really help in this regard.

    • Molmir

      Without eye-tracking, Santa Cruz will be nothing more than a vive focus with 6dof controllers. Exacly that was shown as a prototype last year, and they did not release then because they knew it would be dead on arrival. That is probably why they kept it in development this year, and as a result they will now announce high res displays with eyetracking+foveated rendering this fall at Oculus Connect 5.

      • JJ

        imo thats pretty much what people want though, the focus with 6of controllers. so if they have that before the focus then it will most likely sell

  • Lucidfeuer

    Not a new screen, but a new led-cell overlay…

  • Good to see that things on display are going on..