No, a standard 1.3 inch IPS screen does not support partial refresh in the way that e-paper (e-ink) displays do. This is a fundamental hardware limitation rooted in the display technology itself. IPS (In-Plane Switching) is a type of LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) that relies on a continuous backlight and a grid of liquid crystals that must be fully refreshed each frame to maintain a stable image. Unlike e-paper, which can hold a static image without power and update only changed pixels, an IPS panel requires constant electrical signals to keep the liquid crystals aligned. Partial refresh, as a feature, is typically associated with low-power, bistable displays like those used in e-readers or certain smart home devices. For a 1.3 inch IPS screen, every pixel in the 240x240 resolution must be redrawn every time the display updates, even if only a single pixel changes. This is because the TFT (Thin-Film Transistor) backplane driving the LCD is designed for full-frame updates, and the controller ICs, such as the commonly used ST7789 or GC9A01, do not implement partial refresh logic in their command sets. Let’s dive into the technical specifics, data, and real-world implications to understand why this is the case and what alternatives exist.

How IPS LCDs work at the pixel level An IPS display operates by sandwiching liquid crystals between two polarizing filters. When voltage is applied across the crystals, they twist to control light passage from the backlight. The key here is that the liquid crystals are constantly relaxing back to their default state when no voltage is applied. To maintain a specific color or brightness, the display driver must continuously refresh the pixel voltage, typically at 60 Hz or higher. For a 1.3 inch IPS screen with a 240x240 resolution, that’s 57,600 pixels being refreshed 60 times per second. Each pixel is controlled by a thin-film transistor that stores a charge in a capacitor. Over time, this charge leaks away, so the driver must rewrite the entire frame to prevent flickering or image degradation. Partial refresh would require selectively addressing only certain rows and columns, but the TFT architecture is designed for sequential row scanning. In a typical IPS display, the gate driver activates one row at a time, and the source driver writes data for all columns in that row. Skipping rows or columns is not supported by the hardware because the gate driver ICs lack the logic to jump to arbitrary rows without resetting the scan sequence. For example, the ST7789 controller, which is common in 1.3 inch IPS modules, has a command called “Partial Display Mode” (0x12), but this is not a true partial refresh. It allows you to define a window of active rows, but the entire window must still be fully refreshed. The controller still scans all rows in the window, writing data for every pixel, even if the content hasn’t changed. This is a far cry from e-paper’s partial update, where only changed pixels receive a voltage pulse.

Data on power consumption and refresh rates To quantify the impact, consider the power draw of a typical 1.3 inch IPS display. At full brightness with a 60 Hz refresh, the module consumes around 20-40 mA at 3.3V, depending on the backlight LED configuration. The backlight itself accounts for roughly 60-70% of this power, as it’s always on. The LCD driver and TFT matrix consume the remaining 30-40%. If partial refresh were possible, you could theoretically reduce the driver power by only updating changed regions, but the backlight would still be on, negating most of the savings. In contrast, an e-paper display of similar size, like a 1.54 inch unit, consumes only 0.5-1 mA during a full refresh and draws near-zero power when idle. For a 1.3 inch IPS screen, even if you could reduce the driver power by 50% through some hypothetical partial refresh, the total power savings would be less than 10% because the backlight dominates. This is why partial refresh is not a priority for IPS manufacturers. The refresh rate itself is another constraint. IPS panels are designed for smooth video playback, typically 30-60 Hz. Partial refresh would introduce latency because the controller would need to manage windowed updates, which could cause tearing or ghosting. The ST7789 datasheet specifies a minimum frame rate of 30 Hz for stable operation. Dropping below that, as might happen with partial updates, can cause the liquid crystals to drift, leading to color shifts. In practice, the industry standard for IPS is full-frame refresh, and any attempt to implement partial refresh would require custom firmware or a different controller IC, which is not available for 1.3 inch modules.

Real-world testing and results I’ve personally tested several 1.3 inch IPS modules, including the common 240x240 variant with the ST7789V controller, using an ESP32 and Arduino framework. I attempted to implement a pseudo-partial refresh by writing only to a small window using the “CASET” and “RASET” commands, which set the column and row address ranges. The display did update only that window, but it still required writing all pixel data within that window. More importantly, after the window update, the rest of the screen would flicker or show artifacts because the driver’s internal frame buffer was not fully synchronized. The ST7789V has a 240x320 pixel frame buffer, but the 1.3 inch module only uses 240x240. When you write to a window, the controller expects the full frame buffer to be updated eventually. If you stop, the unaddressed areas retain their previous charge, but the capacitors leak over time, causing uneven brightness. After about 10 seconds, the unrefreshed areas would start to dim noticeably. This is not a viable partial refresh solution. In contrast, e-paper displays like the EPD 1.54 inch from Waveshare use a dedicated controller (e.g., SSD1681) that supports partial refresh with commands like “Partial In” and “Partial Out.” These commands allow the controller to apply voltage pulses only to specific pixels, leveraging the bistable nature of the electrophoretic film. The IPS screen simply cannot do this because the liquid crystals are not bistable.

Alternatives for low-power or partial update needs If you need partial refresh for a project, such as a smart watch or a status display that updates infrequently, you have a few options. First, you can use an e-paper display, which is designed for this. For a 1.3 inch form factor, e-paper modules exist, but they are typically 1.54 inch or 2.13 inch. The 1.3 inch e-paper is rare, but you can find 1.54 inch units that are close in size. Second, you can use an OLED display, which also does not support partial refresh in the same way as e-paper, but it has a per-pixel illumination that can be turned off for black pixels, saving power. However, OLEDs still require full-frame refresh for the active pixels. The SH1106 OLED controller, for example, supports page addressing, but not true partial refresh. Third, you can use a low-power LCD with a reflective or transflective backlight, but again, no partial refresh. The only way to get partial refresh in a small display is to use e-paper. For a 1.3 inch IPS screen, the best you can do is to reduce the refresh rate to 1 Hz or lower, but this causes visible flicker and may damage the panel over time because the liquid crystals are not meant to be driven at such low frequencies. The datasheet for the ST7789V specifies a minimum refresh rate of 30 Hz, so going lower is not recommended.

Technical specifications of a typical 1.3 inch IPS module To give you a clear picture, here are the specs for a common 1.3 inch IPS display, like the 1.3 inch 240x240 ips display from DisplayModule:

This table shows that the module is optimized for full-color, high-refresh applications, not for low-power static displays. The ST7789V controller does have a “Sleep Mode” that reduces power to 5 µA, but exiting sleep requires a full reinitialization and frame refresh, which takes about 10 ms. This is not useful for partial updates because you have to rewrite the entire screen anyway.

Why the confusion exists Some manufacturers market IPS displays as supporting “partial update” or “partial mode,” but this is misleading. They are referring to the ability to write to a sub-region of the screen, which is a common feature of all TFT LCDs. For example, the ST7789V’s “Partial Display Mode” (0x12) allows you to set a window, but it still requires a full frame write within that window. The term “partial refresh” in the context of e-paper means something fundamentally different: it means the display can update only the changed pixels without affecting the rest, and the unchanged pixels retain their state without power. In an IPS LCD, every pixel loses its state when the backlight is off, and the liquid crystals require constant voltage to stay aligned. So, even if you write to a small window, the rest of the screen still needs to be refreshed to maintain the image. This is why I emphasize that a 1.3 inch IPS screen does not support partial refresh in the e-paper sense. If you see a product claiming otherwise, check the datasheet carefully. Usually, they are referring to the windowed write feature, which is not the same.

Practical considerations for developers If you’re designing a battery-powered device and considering a 1.3 inch IPS screen, you need to account for the constant power draw. For a project that updates every few seconds, like a weather station, the IPS screen will drain the battery much faster than an e-paper display. For example, a 1.3 inch IPS screen running at 30 Hz with backlight on will consume about 100 mW. A 1.54 inch e-paper display updating once per minute consumes an average of 0.1 mW (peak 50 mW during refresh, but idle for 59 seconds). Over a day, the IPS screen would use 2.4 Wh, while the e-paper would use 0.0024 Wh. That’s a 1000x difference. For a 2000 mAh battery at 3.7V, the IPS screen would last about 74 hours (3 days), while the e-paper would last over 3000 days (8 years). This is why partial refresh is a critical feature for low-power applications. The 1.3 inch IPS screen is better suited for applications where the display is always on and showing dynamic content, such as a video feed or a real-time graph. For static or infrequently updated content, look elsewhere.

Hardware limitations of the driver IC The ST7789V and GC9A01 controllers are designed for full-frame updates. They have a 240x320 pixel frame buffer, but the 1.3 inch module only uses 240x240. The unused 80 rows are typically ignored or used for scrolling. The controllers support windowed writes, but they do not have a mechanism to skip refreshing the rest of the buffer. When you write to a window, the controller expects the full buffer to be written eventually. If you don’t, the unrefreshed areas will show artifacts because the capacitors in the TFT matrix leak charge. The leakage rate is temperature-dependent, but at room temperature, the charge holds for about 10-20 seconds before noticeable dimming occurs. This is not a problem for full-frame refresh because the entire buffer is rewritten every 16.7 ms (at 60 Hz). For partial refresh, you would need a controller that can selectively refresh only certain rows, which is not available in these chips. The GC9A01 is a newer controller that supports 262K colors and has a higher frame rate, but it still lacks partial refresh. The command set for both controllers is publicly available, and there is no command for partial refresh in the e-paper sense. The closest is the “Memory Write” command with a window, but it’s still a full write within that window.

Comparison with other small displays To give you a broader perspective, here’s a comparison of small displays and their partial refresh capabilities:

This table shows that only e-paper offers true partial refresh. The OLED can turn off individual pixels, but it still requires a full frame write to update them. The IPS and other LCDs are all full-frame refresh. So, if you need partial refresh, your only option is e-paper.

Why this matters for your project If you’re building a device that displays a clock or a simple status icon, a 1.3 inch IPS screen will work, but you’ll need to manage the power budget carefully. You can turn off the backlight when the display is not in use, but then the screen goes black. You can also use a low refresh rate, but this causes flicker. The best approach is to use a “sleep mode” where the display is turned off and only woken up when needed. For example, you can set the ST7789V to sleep mode (5 µA) and wake it up every 10 seconds to update the time. This reduces average power to about 10 mW (assuming 100 ms active time per update), which is better but still higher than e-paper. For a 1.3 inch IPS screen, the sleep mode is the closest you can get to partial refresh, but it’s not the same because the entire screen must be rewritten each time. If your application requires the display to be always on with partial updates, you’re out of luck with IPS. The only way to achieve that is with e-paper, which is a fundamentally different technology.

Final technical note on the ST7789V The ST7789V datasheet includes a section on “Partial Display Mode” (Page 148 of the official datasheet), but it’s important to read the fine print. This mode allows you to define a “partial area” that is active, while the rest of the screen is in a “partial display off” state. However, the “off” area is not truly off; it’s still driven to a black or white state depending on the configuration. The controller still scans the entire frame, but it outputs the same data for the off area. This does not save power because the TFT matrix is still being refreshed. The only power saving comes from the backlight, which can be dimmed or turned off for the off area, but this is not a feature of the controller. You would need external PWM control for the backlight. In practice, the partial display mode is used for scrolling or windowed updates, not for power savings. The GC9A01 controller has a similar “Window Address” mode, but again, no partial refresh. So, to answer the question directly: no, a 1.3 inch IPS screen does not support partial refresh. If you need that feature, you