Here at Golgotron, we consider ourselves scientists. We go where others dare not go, and we get the info others dare not get. So, when we were introduced to the Nintendo Wii U and realized that Nintendo only had some of the answers to our many questions, we set out to find the answers ourselves. We found one.

What is the screen resolution of that fancy wireless LCD built into the Wii U tablet controller?
 
First off, we knew it wasn’t super high res. You could tell that just by looking at it, and no one expects a 6.2 inch screen to be 1080p. At least, not anyone who knows anything about present-day LCD technology. However, we were kind of hoping for what is commonly referred to as QHD – 960 x 540. That’s a quarter of the 1080p that we love so much, and if you didn’t already know, hi-def scales down better when it works out evenly like that. Unfortunately, it looks like the units at E3 were not quite that good. Now, they didn’t look bad. In fact, the screens looked quite good in practice, but technically speaking, QHD is a bit better than WVGA, especially when the source material is hi-def. Just think about all the NetFlix’ing that’ll happen on this thing.

So this is what we found after staring at some hi-res photos and manually counting individual pixels – by our estimation, the screen on the Wii U tablet is about 870 pixels wide. However, that doesn’t jive with any standard screen resolutions and it certainly doesn’t match any LCDs commonly in production. 854, though… now that’s a winner. 854 x 480 (WVGA) is a very common widescreen resolution, and it’s within 2% of our not-scientific-enough measurement. Unless Nintendo changes things for the final units, we’re confident the Nintendo U tablet resolution is WVGA.

If you’re up for it, you can use our images to count the pixels for yourself. Click on the thumbnails for the full resolution images.

http://golgotron.com/2011/06/nintendo-wii-u-tablet-screen-resolution-revealed/

I want it to be better resolution, but I want the battery to be good as well...

I'm surprised that it isn't qHD. That would seem simpler. Maybe the extra pixels were just a little too much data for the videostream to handle?

i am confused but entertained at the same time.

Should be fine in that size and distance and purpose.

Isn't that what Apple manges to cram in to 3.5 inches on the Iphone 4?

edit - it isn't, its less than the iphone...

They counted the pixels?! That's ridiculous and amazing.

A higher resolution sure would be appreciated, but it's nothing to worry about.

It needs to be cheap enough after all.

while a higher resolution would be nice, I would prefer a very good battery life

We will naver be happy in any case, we liek to post because we like to moan.

High definition, Higher Price (so people will call it Flop)
Low Definition, better Price (and people will still call it flop)

Wait, it's not an OLED?
Not exactly a smart decision considering the thing is battery powered.