4 ms·
My calculations might be wrong, but it looks like these Rdot displays use significantly less energy than Memory LCDs. Using numbers from Sharp[0], Memory LCDs
by MRPockets 8y ago
My calculations might be wrong, but it looks like these Rdot displays use significantly less energy than Memory LCDs.
Using numbers from Sharp[0], Memory LCDs use ~226µJ/cm2 each second when static. I'm assuming they are 60Hz displays & therefore require a refresh 60 times each second but even if they only refresh once a second, that's ~3.8µJ/cm2 a second or 13,680 times the power consumption of the Rdot displays.
The article claims these Rdot screens use 0.25mJ/cm2 every 15 minutes when static.
Again, these are my "back-of a napkin" calculations so take with some salt.
[0]https://www.sharpsma.com/products?sharpCategory=Memory%20LCD https://www.sharpsma.com/products?sharpCategory=Memory%20LCD
- Gibbon1 8y agoCalculating out of my Kiester assuming 2.5cm2 display 3.0V it seems Sharp Memory LCD is 200uA vs rdot at 0.25ua. With AA batteries Sharp Memory is only going to last 1 year MAX. That's too short for most consumer applications. Where rdot is much less than the self discharge. So 5-10 years.