Which display technology is better ips or tft. Comparison of smartphone matrices. What is the difference between TN, IPS, AMOLED technologies

Abbreviations are usually used to indicate characteristics or specifics. In this case, there is terrible confusion regarding the comparison of IPS and TFT screens, because IPS technology (matrix) is a type of TFT matrix and nothing more. It is impossible to compare these 2 technologies with each other.

BUT! There is TN-TFT technology - you can make a choice and compare between it and IPS. Therefore, when we talk about which screen is better: IPS or TFT, we mean TFT screens in any case, but made on the basis of different technologies: TN and IPS.

Briefly about TN-TFT and IPS

TN-TFT is the technology on which the LCD screen matrix is made. Here the crystals, when no voltage is applied to their cells, “look” at each other at an angle of 90 degrees. They are arranged in a spiral, and when voltage is applied to them, they rotate in such a way as to form the desired color.

IPS – this technology is different in that here the crystals are arranged parallel to each other in a single plane of the screen (in the first case, spirally). This is all complicated... in practice, the difference between TN and IPS screens is that IPS displays blacks perfectly, resulting in sharper and richer images.

As for TN-TFT, the color rendering quality of this matrix does not inspire confidence. Here, each pixel can have its own hue, hence the colors are distorted. IPS matrices show the picture much better and also handle colors more carefully. IPS also allows you to observe what is happening on the screen from a large angle. If you look at a TN-TFT screen from the same angle, the colors will be distorted so much that it will be difficult to make out the picture.

Advantages of TN

However, TN-TFT matrices have their own advantages. The main one is the lower pixel response speed. IPS needs more time to rotate the entire array of parallel crystals to the desired angle. Therefore, if we are talking about choosing a monitor for games or for displaying dynamic scenes, when drawing speed is very important, then it is best to choose screens based on TN-TFT technology.

On the other hand, during normal work with a PC, it is impossible to notice the difference in pixel response time. It is only visible when viewing dynamic scenes, which often happens in action films and video games.

Another plus is low energy consumption. IPS matrices are energy-intensive, because They need a lot of voltage to rotate the crystal array. Consequently, TFT-based screens are better suited for mobile gadgets where the issue of saving battery power is an urgent issue.

And one more thing - TN-TFT matrices are cheap. You cannot find a monitor today (not counting used or CRT models) that is cheaper than a model based on TN technology. Any budget electronics device with a screen will definitely use a TN-TFT matrix.

So, which screen is better:TFT orIPS:

IPS is less responsive due to longer response time (bad for games and action scenes);
IPS guarantees almost perfect color reproduction and contrast;
IPS has a wider viewing angle;
IPS are energy-hungry and consume more electricity;
They are also more expensive, while TN-TFT are cheap.

That, in principle, is the whole difference between these matrices. If you take into account all the advantages and disadvantages, then, of course, it is easy to come to a specific conclusion: IPS screens are much better.

Send reply

TFT (Thin film transistor) is translated from English as thin film transistor. So TFT is a type of liquid crystal display that uses an active matrix controlled by these transistors themselves. Such elements are made of thin film, the thickness of which is approximately 0.1 microns.

In addition to their small size, TFT displays are fast. They have high contrast and image clarity, as well as a good viewing angle. These displays do not have screen flickering, so your eyes don't get tired as much. TFT displays also do not have beam focusing defects, interference from magnetic fields, or problems with image quality and clarity. The energy consumption of such displays is 90% determined by the power of the LED backlight matrix or backlight lamps. Compared to the same CRTs, the energy consumption of TFT displays is approximately five times lower.

All these benefits exist because this technology refreshes the image at a higher frequency. This is because the display dots are controlled by individual thin film transistors. The number of such elements in TFT displays is three times greater than the number of pixels. That is, there are three color transistors per point, which correspond to the primary RGB colors - red, green and blue. For example, in a display with a resolution of 1280 by 1024 pixels, the number of transistors will be three times larger, namely 3840x1024. This is precisely the basic operating principle of TFT technology.

Disadvantages of TFT matrices

TFT displays, unlike CRTs, can show a clear image in only one “native” resolution. Other resolutions are achieved by interpolation. Another significant disadvantage is the strong dependence of contrast on the viewing angle. In fact, if you look at such displays from the side, top or bottom, the image will be greatly distorted. This problem never existed with CRT displays.

In addition, transistors on any pixel can fail, resulting in dead pixels. Such points, as a rule, cannot be repaired. And it turns out that somewhere in the middle of the screen (or in the corner) there may be a small but noticeable dot, which is very annoying while working at the computer. Also, for TFT displays, the matrix is not protected by glass, and irreversible degradation is possible if the display is pressed hard.

As is usually the case with abbreviations used to denote specifics and technical characteristics, there is confusion and substitution of concepts in relation to TFT and IPS. Largely due to unqualified descriptions of electronic devices in catalogs, consumers initially pose the question of choice incorrectly. So, the IPS matrix is a type of TFT matrix, so it is impossible to compare these two categories with each other. However, for Russian consumers, the abbreviation TFT often means TN-TFT technology, and in this case a choice can already be made. So, when talking about the differences between TFT and IPS screens, we will mean TFT screens made using TN and IPS technologies.

TN-TFT- technology for making a matrix of a liquid crystal (thin-film transistor) screen, when the crystals, in the absence of voltage, are rotated to each other at an angle of 90 degrees in the horizontal plane between two plates. The crystals are arranged in a spiral, and as a result, when the maximum voltage is applied, the crystals rotate in such a way that black pixels are formed when light passes through them. Without tension - white.

IPS- technology for making a matrix of a liquid crystal (thin-film transistor) screen, when the crystals are located parallel to each other along a single plane of the screen, and not spirally. In the absence of voltage, the liquid crystal molecules do not rotate.

In practice, the most important difference between an IPS matrix and a TN-TFT matrix is the increased level of contrast due to almost perfect black color display. The picture turns out clearer.

The color rendering quality of TN-TFT matrices leaves much to be desired. Each pixel in this case may have its own shade, different from the others, resulting in distorted colors. IPS already treats images much more carefully.

On the left is a tablet with a TN-TFT matrix. On the right is a tablet with an IPS matrix

The response speed of TN-TFT is slightly higher than that of other matrices. IPS takes time to rotate the entire array of parallel crystals. Thus, when performing tasks where drawing speed is important, it is much more profitable to use TN matrices. On the other hand, in everyday use a person does not notice the difference in response time.

Monitors and displays based on IPS matrices are much more energy-intensive. This is due to the high level of voltage required to rotate the crystal array. Therefore, TN-TFT technology is more suitable for energy saving tasks in mobile and portable devices.

IPS-based screens have wide viewing angles, meaning they do not distort or invert colors when viewed at an angle. Unlike TN, IPS viewing angles are 178 degrees both vertically and horizontally.

Another difference that is important for the end consumer is the price. TN-TFT today is the cheapest and most widespread version of the matrix, which is why it is used in budget electronics models.

Conclusions website

IPS screens are less responsive and have longer response times.
IPS screens provide better color reproduction and contrast.
The viewing angles of IPS screens are significantly greater.
IPS screens require more power.
IPS screens are more expensive.

When choosing a monitor, many users are faced with the question: which is better PLS or IPS.

These two technologies have existed for quite a long time and both show themselves quite well.

If you look at various articles on the Internet, they either write that everyone must decide for themselves what is better, or they do not give an answer to the question posed at all.

Actually, these articles make no sense at all. After all, they do not help users in any way.

Therefore, we will analyze in which cases it is better to choose PLS or IPS and give advice that will help you make the right choice. Let's start with the theory.

What is IPS

It’s worth saying right away that at the moment it is the two options under consideration that are the leaders in the technology market.

And not every specialist will be able to say which technology is better and what advantages each of them has.

So, the word IPS itself stands for In-Plane-Switching (literally “in-site switching”).

This abbreviation also stands for Super Fine TFT (“super thin TFT”). TFT, in turn, stands for Thin Film Transistor.

To put it simply, TFT is a technology for displaying images on a computer, which is based on an active matrix.

Hard enough.

Nothing. Let's figure it out now!

So, in TFT technology, the molecules of liquid crystals are controlled using thin-film transistors, this means “active matrix”.

IPS is exactly the same, only the electrodes in monitors with this technology are on the same plane with liquid crystal molecules, which are parallel to the plane.

All this can be clearly seen in Figure 1. There, in fact, displays with both technologies are shown.

First there is a vertical filter, then transparent electrodes, after them liquid crystal molecules (blue sticks, they interest us most), then a horizontal filter, a color filter and the screen itself.

Rice. No. 1. TFT and IPS screens

The only difference between these technologies is that the LC molecules in TFT are not located in parallel, but in IPS they are in parallel.

Thanks to this, they can quickly change the viewing angle (specifically, here it is 178 degrees) and give a better picture (in IPS).

And also due to this solution, the brightness and contrast of the image on the screen has significantly increased.

Now it is clear?

If not, write your questions in the comments. We will definitely answer them.

IPS technology was created in 1996. Among its advantages, it is worth noting the absence of the so-called “excitement,” that is, an incorrect reaction to touch.

It also has excellent color rendition. Quite a lot of companies produce monitors using this technology, including NEC, Dell, Chimei and even.

What is PLS

For a very long time, the manufacturer did not say anything at all about its brainchild, and many experts put forward various assumptions regarding the characteristics of PLS.

Actually, even now this technology is shrouded in a lot of secrets. But we will still find the truth!

PLS was released in 2010 as an alternative to the aforementioned IPS.

This abbreviation stands for Plane To Line Switching (that is, “switching between lines”).

Let us recall that IPS is In-Plane-Switching, that is, “switching between lines.” This refers to switching in a plane.

And above we said that in this technology, liquid crystal molecules quickly become flat and due to this, a better viewing angle and other characteristics are achieved.

So, in PLS everything happens exactly the same, but faster. Figure 2 shows all this clearly.

Rice. No. 2. PLS and IPS work

In this figure, at the top there is the screen itself, then the crystals, that is, the same liquid crystal molecules that were indicated by blue sticks in figure No. 1.

The electrode is shown below. In both cases, their location is shown on the left in the off state (when the crystals do not move), and on the right - when they are on.

The principle of operation is the same - when the crystals begin to work, they begin to move, while initially they are located parallel to each other.

But, as we see in Figure No. 2, these crystals quickly acquire the desired shape - the one that is necessary for the maximum.

Over a certain period of time, the molecules in the IPS monitor do not become perpendicular, but in the PLS they do.

That is, in both technologies everything is the same, but in PLS everything happens faster.

Hence the intermediate conclusion - PLS works faster and, in theory, this particular technology could be considered the best in our comparison.

But it is too early to draw final conclusions.

This is interesting: Samsung filed a lawsuit against LG several years ago. It claimed that the AH-IPS technology used by LG is a modification of PLS technology. From this we can conclude that PLS is a type of IPS, and the developer himself admitted this. Actually, this was confirmed and we are a little higher.

Which is better PLS or IPS? How to choose a good screen - guide

What if I don't understand anything?

In this case, the video at the end of this article will help you. It clearly shows a cross-section of TFT and IPS monitors.

You will be able to see how it all works and understand that in PLS everything happens exactly the same, but faster than in IPS.

Now we can move on to further comparison of technologies.

Expert opinions

On some sites you can find information about an independent study of PLS and IPS.

Experts compared these technologies under a microscope. It is written that in the end they did not find any differences.

Other experts write that it is still better to buy PLS, but do not really explain why.

Among all the statements of experts, there are several main points that can be observed in almost all opinions.

These points are as follows:

Monitors with PLS matrices are the most expensive on the market. The cheapest option is TN, but such monitors are inferior in all respects to both IPS and PLS. So, most experts agree that this is very justified, because the picture is better displayed on PLS;
Monitors with a PLS matrix are best suited for performing all kinds of design and engineering tasks. This technique will also cope perfectly with the work of professional photographers. Again, from this we can conclude that PLS does a better job of rendering colors and providing sufficient image clarity;
According to experts, PLS monitors are virtually free from problems such as glare and flicker. They came to this conclusion during testing;
Ophthalmologists say that PLS will be much better perceived by the eyes. Moreover, your eyes will find it much easier to look at PLS all day than IPS.

In general, from all this we again draw the same conclusion that we already made earlier. PLS is a little better than IPS. And this opinion is confirmed by most experts.

Which is better PLS or IPS? How to choose a good screen - guide

Our comparison

Now let’s move on to the final comparison, which will answer the question posed at the very beginning.

The same experts identify a number of characteristics by which different ones need to be compared.

We are talking about indicators such as light sensitivity, response speed (meaning the transition from gray to gray), quality (pixel density without losing other characteristics) and saturation.

We will use them to evaluate the two technologies.

Table 1. Comparison of IPS and PLS according to some characteristics

Other characteristics, including richness and quality, are subjective and vary from person to person.

But from the above indicators it is clear that PLS has slightly higher characteristics.

Thus, we again confirm the conclusion that this technology performs better than IPS.

Rice. No. 3. The first comparison of monitors with IPS and PLS matrices.

There is a single “popular” criterion that allows you to accurately determine which is better – PLS or IPS.

This criterion is called “by eye”. In practice, this means that you just need to take and look at two adjacent monitors and visually determine where the picture is better.

Therefore, we will present several similar images, and everyone will be able to see for themselves where the image visually looks better.

Rice. No. 4. Second comparison of monitors with IPS and PLS matrices.

Rice. No. 5. The third comparison of monitors with IPS and PLS matrices.

Rice. No. 6. The fourth comparison of monitors with IPS and PLS matrices.

Rice. No. 7. Fifth comparison of monitors with IPS (left) and PLS (right) matrices.

It is visually clear that on all PLS samples the picture looks much better, more saturated, brighter, and so on.

We mentioned above that TN is the most inexpensive technology today and monitors using it, accordingly, also cost less than others.

After them in price come IPS, and then PLS. But, as we see, all this is not at all surprising, because the picture really looks much better.

Other characteristics in this case are also higher. Many experts advise buying with PLS matrices and Full HD resolution.

Then the image will really look just great!

It is impossible to say for sure whether this combination is the best on the market today, but it is definitely one of the best.

By the way, for comparison you can see what IPS and TN look like from an acute viewing angle.

Rice. No. 8. Comparison of monitors with IPS (left) and TN (right) matrices.

It is worth saying that Samsung created two technologies at once that are used in monitors and in / and were able to significantly outperform IPS.

We are talking about Super AMOLED screens that are found on mobile devices of this company.

Interestingly, Super AMOLED resolution is usually lower than IPS, but the picture is more saturated and bright.

But in the case of PLS above, almost everything that can be, including resolution.

The general conclusion can be drawn that PLS is better than IPS.

Among other things, PLS has the following advantages:

the ability to convey a very wide range of shades (in addition to primary colors);
ability to support the entire sRGB range;
lower energy consumption;
viewing angles allow several people to see the picture comfortably at once;
all kinds of distortions are absolutely excluded.

In general, IPS monitors are perfect for solving ordinary home tasks, for example, watching movies and working in office programs.

But if you want to see a really rich and high-quality image, buy equipment with PLS.

This is especially true when you need to work with design/design programs.

Of course, their price will be higher, but it’s worth it!

Which is better PLS or IPS? How to choose a good screen - guide

What is amoled, super amoled, Lcd, Tft, Tft ips? Do not you know? Look!

Which is better PLS or IPS? How to choose a good screen - guide

4.7 (93.33%) 3 votes

It’s worth noting right away that each technology has enough fans, and therefore fierce debates on the Internet do not subside for a moment. This mainly concerns the topic “AMOLED vs IPS”, since TN matrices stand somewhat apart and do not claim the laurels of “the coolest technology”. After reading several reviews, we still formed our opinion, which we will share with you.

Comparison of IPS and TN matrices

The fact that screens created using TN technology have not disappeared from the market suggests that they are still in demand. Their main advantage is considered to be price, since the cost of TN displays is on average 20-50% lower than that of equivalent IPS devices. The second competitive advantage is called low response time: modern screens with a TN matrix have a response time of about 1 ms, while IPS monitors have a characteristic of 5 - 8 ms. However, the latter is quite sufficient for displaying movies and even 3D games with a large number of dynamic scenes, and therefore you can ignore this parameter as long as it is in the specified range.

Asus MeMO Pad ME172V tablet with TN screen

Contrary to the above, IPS screens show higher contrast, as well as picture brightness and, most importantly, excellent viewing angles. In addition, the thickness of devices with IPS matrices is slightly lower than that of TN opponents, which is sometimes important for smartphones and tablets. Another advantage is better image quality when the IPS screen is exposed to direct sunlight, which is again important for wearable devices. Agree, constantly covering the smartphone screen with your hand in order to at least see something on the street is not very convenient, and therefore phones with TN screens are gradually fading into oblivion.

Conclusion: Screens with TN matrices are suitable for the corporate sector, as well as for monitors and tablets of not too demanding clients who do not mind saving money. For smartphone owners and those who are not strapped for cash, it is worth choosing devices equipped with IPS screens.

Comparison of AMOLED and TN

People who do not delve too deeply into screen production technology sometimes call displays with TN matrices nothing more than TFT. They ask sellers questions like: “Which is better AMOLED or TFT?”, forcing the latter to smile forcefully and explain the hardware to curious customers. We will assume that there are no such people among our readers, and therefore let’s move on to the topic of the title.

Ramos W30 tablet with ISP screen

In general, it is difficult to compare these two technologies, since devices made using them are designed for different categories of clients. AMOLED is primarily a tribute to fashion and a step towards innovation. Customers considering the purchase of equipment with an AMOLED screen expect to purchase a modern device with top-end characteristics and only secondarily study the price tag and make a decision. Buyers of equipment with a TN screen, on the contrary, are looking for the most for their money, and the budget here is the primary factor when purchasing. In terms of characteristics, AMOLED is closer to IPS, and therefore appropriate conclusions for comparison arise.

Conclusion: Since AMOLED displays are even more expensive than IPS, you probably shouldn't look at them when choosing a budget or mid-budget option. If your goal is a device with a high level of image quality, then you go straight to the next subheading.

Comparison of AMOLED and IPS

So we get to the main question of the article: “Which is better AMOLED or IPS?” And, of course, in order to draw a conclusion, you need to consider the strengths and weaknesses of each technology.

Viewing angles. Both technologies have excellent viewing angles, and owners of smartphones and tablets vying with each other to say that their AMOLED/IPS screen is definitely better. There really are no big differences, however, users and experts note that at large viewing angles, the difference between IPS and AMOLED screens manifests itself in a bluish or greenish tint to the image of the latter.

Energy saving. The point is that it needs to be said here about one feature of these two technologies. Screens with IPS matrices produce the best white color among competitors, while AMOLED displays are leaders in displaying black colors (by the way, because of this they are called even more contrasting). If an AMOLED screen often has to display white colors, for example, when using a browser, then its energy consumption increases by about 5 times.

Hybrid tablet Samsung ATIV Smart PC with AMOLED screen

Image clarity. Most AMOLED displays use a PenTile subpixel structure. Although the developers claim that this does not affect the image, many users, when comparing, call the picture of IPS screens clearer. On the other hand, maybe they are just suspicious?

Screen thickness. Here the advantage of AMOLED displays is undeniable. The absence of a separate backlight layer makes such screens really thinner.

Brightness and contrast. These characteristics of AMOLED screens are indeed higher than those of competitors. On the other hand, many people find them oversaturated and tiring for the eyes, especially with prolonged use. It seems that this item remains a matter of taste for each individual user.

Screen burn-in. This paragraph concerns mainly organic displays. The sad fact is that when a static picture is displayed for a long time, “traces” of it remain on the screen. For example, “images” of constantly displayed icons appear on smartphone screens.

Response time. AMOLED screens are said to have lower response times than IPS screens. In practice, this difference is insignificant and is only suitable for marketing techniques.

Conclusion: Let fans of AMOLED technology throw tomatoes at me (that is, the author), but my subjective opinion leans in favor of IPS. The technology has more advantages, but the price of the devices is still lower. We believe that organic displays will still show themselves after several years of improving the technology in all their glory, but for now, their characteristics are inferior in the price-quality category.