3 ms·
At first I thought "Lower power consumption" vs. e-ink may be a fat finger copy/paste. After searching for color e-ink power consumption, I find the chart at rd
by fuzzythinker 4y ago
At first I thought "Lower power consumption" vs. e-ink may be a fat finger copy/paste. After searching for color e-ink power consumption, I find the chart at rdot [1] sums it up pretty well. If e-ink is being used as a monitor, its power consumption will still be much better vs. LCD, but it won't have the almost zero power profile of static e-ink rendering.
If price, resolution, and quality keeps up, it won't be just for outdoors. It may eat up most of the portable monitor/laptop market in not too distant future.
[1] https://rdotdisplays.com/articles/the-most-energy-efficient-display https://rdotdisplays.com/articles/the-most-energy-efficient-...
- ThrowawayR2 4y agoThe lower power consumption claim seems to be against ordinary (backlit) LCD monitors, not e-ink. It's kind of surprising that their tech specs section doesn't actually list typical power consumption given that claim. Their technology page claims "Sun Vision Display's reflective LCDs consume less than 6 watts..." and also later "Sun Vision Display’s 32” reflective color LCD panel uses less than 5 watts of energy." (not a typo; the two numbers are different). Still, if that's true, 5-6W is much better than the equivalent sized Samsung Frame TVs in art mode.