
Dell Leaks Details of a 24” UHD 4K (3840x2160) Monitor - mileswu
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7556/dell-leaks-details-of-a-24-uhd-4k-3840x2160-monitor-the-up2414q
======
sillysaurus2
Watch out for problems with the monitor. New ultra-high-def monitors often
have problems such as lag or poor color accuracy.

Before buying this, you need to wait until a professional with a colorimeter
and a lagmeter evaluates this monitor if you remotely care about color
accuracy or gaming. Resolution isn't the only consideration when buying a new
monitor.

~~~
hyperbovine
> Resolution isn't the only consideration when buying a new monitor.

Sure it is! Reading on a monitor is pure torture ever since I bought a Retina
MBP. If this is anywhere close to being affordable (realistically: no) I'd buy
it for that reason alone.

~~~
JoshTriplett
>> Resolution isn't the only consideration when buying a new monitor.

> Sure it is!

So you'd be fine with a 3840x2160 monitor that has a 5Hz refresh rate? Or one
with a 500ms lag time? Or one that only displayed in grayscale, or in 8-bit
color?

Resolution is perhaps the most important consideration, but by no means the
only one.

~~~
derefr
Yes. Actually, I'd be _excited_ about a UHD e-ink display (which is basically
what you're describing.) It'd be perfect as a second monitor to throw
documents up on to read at my desk, while I kept the primary for more
interactive stuff.

~~~
crististm
So it needs to be UHD _and_ e_ink. There goes the "UHD is everything I need"
argument

------
Amadou
With the 39" Seiki 4K "tv" at less than $500 shipped, the $3,500 pricing level
on the Dells seems excessive. I'm certain the Dells are better monitors, but
are they 700% better? If Seiki revs their model line-up to include display-
port, all these official monitors will really be in trouble.

[http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DOPGO2G](http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DOPGO2G)

~~~
seanmcdirmid
A 4K 39" TV has less resolution than a 4K 24" monitor. Just do the math!

This isn't about real estate; it is easy to buy a big monitor, but about pixel
density.

~~~
prutschman
Your point about the importance of pixel density is a good one, but the
pedantry is misplaced. Resolution in the context of display resolution has
referred to pixel count, not pixel density, for decades.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Yes, that was a mistake on my part. I meant to just talk about pixel density
and somehow wrote in resolution.

------
shitlord
I really wish companies would stop selling monitors with their logo placed
obnoxiously on the front. I don't care if they put the logo on any other part
of the display, but why do they have to ruin the front of it? I really love
looking at plain black slabs, with nothing to distract me from the content
within.

I want to buy a couple of monitors and mount them. But there's just one small
thing stopping me. I don't know if it's just me, but something _feels_ wrong
about rotating a monitor with such a prominent logo.

~~~
Theodores
I think this is a problem too. I can understand the manufacturers wanting
their logo on the bottom though.

If I was a screen manufacturer I would have a speaker bar on the bottom that
has the logo and a few easy brightness controls on it - total Fisher Price
usability.

I would then add in a feature for the pros - have it so the speaker/controls
bar can be folded up under the screen.

In that way people that like their bling logos could have the logo on view,
those that just want a panel can have no distractions.

If engineered nicely you could have USB and video inputs on the drop-down bar
made accessible from the front.

------
solox3
I have recently gotten a taste of ultra high resolution monitors.

My coworker got the new Dell XPS 15, which has a QHD+ 3200x1800 screen. Just a
heads up to coders, unless you plan to hunch your back or get new glasses,
very few of you will enjoy the screen as much as you think you would.

~~~
Encosia
Why's that? I picked up a QHD+ Samsung a few weeks ago and have been loving it
for development work. All of the development tools I've needed so far have
respected Windows' DPI scaling (which came set at 200% on the Samsung, making
it easy to spot when a program failed to scale correctly).

The only major culprit so far has been Dropbox, which is infuriatingly
frustrating to use at HiDPI. So bad it makes me want to move everything to
SkyDrive or Google Drive.

~~~
Crito
How much do you actually interact with dropbox's UI? I would think that most
of the time you would just be using it through the standard file/directory
interaction things (file browsers, shell, etc).

~~~
Encosia
Configuring selective sync (which was a must since this was on a laptop with a
relatively small SSD) is particularly excruciating, and I do need to tweak
that from time to time when large folders are added. The window that pops up
when you click the system tray icon also has the scaling issue, which is
something that I do need to interact with on a daily basis. Luckily, it's not
quite a bad as the selective sync configuration, but it's still pretty rough.

------
masklinn
3840 x 2160 in 24 inches = 183.58 pixels per inch, compared to 204 for the IBM
T220/T221

We're almost back to 10 years ago, yay.

~~~
venomsnake
And in 10 years we may even return to CRT refresh rates.

------
chucknelson
I'm left wondering how long until we have mainstream video cards capable of
driving games at these resolutions? Seems like we're a ways off...

~~~
ekianjo
Oh yes, we are way, way off at this stage. Check this recent benchmark from
Phoronix (on Linux, at least, Windows gaming may be a little better in
performance...):
[http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_uhd...](http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_uhd4k_gpus&num=4)

With a Titan card from nVidia, maxing out at 20 FPS on Unigine, it's pretty
depressing. We need to see a 2 to 3x fold performance increase in graphics
cards for gaming to be realistic on 4k screens.

~~~
adamors
Bare in mind that the Titan is not the fastest GPU, the 290x and the 780ti
are. And they're decent at 4K:
[http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/11/geforce_gtx_780_ti...](http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/11/geforce_gtx_780_ti_vs_radeon_r9_290x_4k_gaming/)

~~~
ekianjo
Depends what you call decent. 15 FPS(minimum) at medium settings in Crysis3 is
hardly what I'd call decent for the best graphics chip out there. I'd say it's
playable at best, but far from being where you want to be.

~~~
kllrnohj
No, they both had 24 FPS minimum at medium settings.

Minimum really isn't all that interesting, though. A single low spike won't
ruin a gameplay session. The average FPS was 42, the low spikes were few and
far between. It's absolutely playable - that's the entire basis for which the
settings were picked btw.

~~~
ekianjo
Average FPS of 42 is OK, but in any serious FPS you'd want to have 60 FPS
constantly at least. Any number lower than that and your shooting accuracy
decreases greatly with the framerate.

So, playbable, probably, but enjoyable, not so sure about that.

------
kevin818
most impressive stat to me: 1.07 billion colors

my how far we've come from the good ol' days of CRT

~~~
jfb
Err ... color resolution was never really the problem with CRT technology.

~~~
simoncion
Yeah. I hope that I'll live to see non-CRT consumer displays with _actual_
5->10 ms response times and _real_ blacks, but I'm not too optimistic.

~~~
Leynos
An OLED screen will deliver that (pure black and sub-ms response time). And
they are on sale now as televisions (albeit at scary prices along the lines of
US$13000 for a 55" screen). 4k OLED screens with a 55" diagonal have also been
demonstrated. From the sounds of things, new manufacturing techniques are
being developed that will bring the prices down to sensible levels.

Here's a review of one of the screens currently on the market:
[http://www.digitalversus.com/tv-
television/lg-55ea980w-p1619...](http://www.digitalversus.com/tv-
television/lg-55ea980w-p16197/test.html)

Strangely, the first few OLED TVs at size have been concave (presumably more
"because they can be" rather than because they need to be). Flat screens are
also hitting the market now: [http://www.oled-
info.com/oled_devices/tv](http://www.oled-info.com/oled_devices/tv)

~~~
simoncion
We'll see how long it takes for good OLED tech to make it into the consumer
computer monitor market. When I was younger, it was predicted that we would
have affordable 600dpi, sub ms switching time time LED computer monitors by
the early to mid 2000s.

"The market" is often an obstructionist bitch.

------
jaredstenquist
And to think I thought the Thunderbolt display was pricey at $1k. I love it,
but I don't think I could possible realize (or notice) the increase in
capability unless working heavily in graphics and video, and that's assuming
that the machine attached to it has a card that takes advantage of it.

~~~
seiji
The Monoprice 27" (using the same panel as the Apple Thunderbolt display) is
under $400 this weekend:
[http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=109&cp_id=10909&cs_id=...](http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=109&cp_id=10909&cs_id=1090901&p_id=10489&seq=1&format=2)

I have one beside the same size thunderbolt display and I like the monoprice
one better (it seems to have a more effective anti-reflective coating).

~~~
shurcooL
Not too mention the Thunderbolt Display is outdated with its MagSafe 1, USB
2.0 ports, still present FireWire and it's thicker than the new iMacs.

~~~
alexgaribay
Thunderbolt displays come with a MagSafe 1 -> MagSafe 2 converter in the box
now.

~~~
shurcooL
I'm aware of that. But it's not quite the same as an updated Thunderbolt
Display that will come with a native MagSafe 2 cable.

------
steveridout
I'd be very happy with an 8-bit colour 2560x1600 24" monitor. It would be more
affordable and way easier for graphics cards to run, why is no-one making one
of these!?

~~~
zokier
The whole idea behind 4k is that you can feed it 1080p content and it will be
displayed no worse than it would be on native 1080p display. In other words it
allows easily swap between having conventional 24" 1080p performance or full
4k resolution, and this swapping can be relatively easily be done on a _per-
application_ basis, or possibly even more granually. Imagine eg having a WebGL
context being pixel-doubled while the text on the same page being rendered at
full resolution.

In comparison, in a 2560x1600 24" monitor you'd get either quite big/ugly
double-pixels, or scaling artifacts of non-integer multiple scaling.

------
cpks
Dude. Sweet! If the price is reasonable, I'll buy 2-4 for my desktop. I'd love
to have the knock-off cheap dead pixels Korean version even more, actually.

~~~
mortyseinfeld
I picked up a couple Korean 27" 1440ps for the desktop for around $300 and
loving them. They're even overclockable.

~~~
shitlord
Yeah, Korean monitors are great if you're on a budget. My only complaint is
that they are ugly as hell. Every single one I've seen. But hey, you can buy 3
1440p monitors for under a grand!

------
icecreampain
I've been looking at a higher resolution monitor than my 30" Dell and found
that there are these things called "TVs" that apparently have 4K resolution
but in 55" format.

I'm after screen real estate and want to see a lot of code at the same time.
Does anyone have any thoughts about replacing my 30" work monitor with a 55"
TV with a lot more resolution?

~~~
agilebyte
Although not 55", a post above refers to:
[http://tiamat.tsotech.com/seiki-4k](http://tiamat.tsotech.com/seiki-4k)

It seems like if you do not do gaming, you should be fine.

