12 ms·

New Dell UltraSharp Monitors

193 points by susi22 13y ago

ck2 13y ago
Thank you to all the early adopters which will make this $500 in a few years so I can buy one.
- Negitivefrags 13y ago
  I bought a Dell 30" for $2.6k NZD in 2006. In 2013 the same Dell 30" costs $2,239 NZD right now on their store. The monitor still works, and still looks great. It must be the best tech purchase I ever made. I actually bought a second one earlier this year.
  - ck2 13y ago
    Yeah I am on a $600 27 inch U2713HM I got when it came out a year ago. Took me a long time to accept the steep price but it has been worth it for my eyes. $2600 nzd = $2200 usd, now that much I couldn't afford/justify. I think the old Dell 30 inch has a harsh anti-glare coat that makes it sparkle? They finally solved that with the U2713HM which has a much lighter coat.
    - NickNameNick 13y ago
      The exchange rate between nz and us dollars shifted dramatically in the 2006/2008 timeframe, I suspect in US dollar terms he spent rather less than that, probably closer to $1800 USD.
  - vietor 13y ago
    I've a Dell 2000FP that's still getting 8+ hours of serious use a day, even as it's coming up on its 11th birthday in a few more months. (And still looking pretty great compared to a current gen budget monitor.) There has been so little movement in mid-quality LCD systems, it's nice to see some change. (Even if the 24" is ... profoundly uninteresting to me at 1080p) Edit: Not that this changes the original point, just that, as an early adopter, I've been burned a lot less by monitors than by ... everything else.
  - marvin 13y ago
    Hehe, Norwegian here - I bought the same monitor you did, and have made the same thoughts about it.
jmccree 13y ago
With the new resolutions being pumped out on laptops, (2,880 x 1,620 for 15" Thinkpad W series) it was inevitable desktop monitors would have to catch up.
- bsimpson 13y ago
  A friend of mine had a retina-quality screen on his laptop in 2003. I think it was a ThinkPad with a 2048 x 1536 screen. Of course, at the time there wasn't a concept of resolution-independent scaling, so it didn't look as nice as today's retina displays. specs: http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:R50p http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:R50p
  - cglace 13y ago
    could laptop graphics cards handle that type of resolution back then?
    - claudius 13y ago
      1600x1200 was commonplace as early as 2001 (in a Dell Inspiron 8000, I believe).
      - jl6 13y ago
        I feel obliged to mention that I have an i8k and it's still working beautifully.
    - foley 13y ago
      Back then almost all UI rendering was software based. The graphics card just needed a large enough frame buffer. The lack of fancy compositing and animation effects gave these high resolutions devices comparable performance to their standard resolution counterparts.
    - kalleboo 13y ago
      It was a lot easier back when all you cared about was the 2D performance of basic shapes (lines, circles, fills), and the animation for moving a window was just an outline.
alexgaribay 13y ago
I wonder if the resolution is meant to be scaled like a retina screen (i.e. 1920x1080). I haven't used a high dpi monitor on Windows. Can anyone that has a high dpi monitor comment on this?
- wmf 13y ago
  The elephant in the room here is that there's no good way to use this monitor. If you run in 1x mode everything is probably too small but if you run in 2x mode you have less resolution than an old and much cheaper 30" monitor.
  - outworlder 13y ago
    You mean, there's no good way to use this monitor with Windows, right? Every sane OS nowadays can be run at high resolutions. Apparently, this even applies to Windows 8, but I can't vouch for that.
  - Stratoscope 13y ago
    So you run it in Windows 8.1 and let it pick the scaling per app. High-DPI aware apps will get the full resolution and wil will 2x scale older apps (assuming you set the scaling to 200%). See the link in my other comment.
    - wmf 13y ago
      My point is that setting scaling to 200% is a waste of money. It needs to be something like 160% which is not handled well AFAIK.
      - NickNameNick 13y ago
        I've been using 140% dpi on a vista laptop since 2007, and it's worked just fine for everything.
  - lowboy 13y ago
    1x is only too small if you're concerned with things other than visual creative work. I would love if my Photoshop menus could scale down to leave more room for the content I'm creating.
Kiro 13y ago
Do you need massive computer power in order to run these?
- CaveTech 13y ago
  Not particularly. A Macbook Pro should be able to drive one, an air couldn't though.
  - npalli 13y ago
    Which pro model are you thinking of? To my knowledge none can. Including the latest. The only 4K that can be output is via HDMI (in the late 2013 models) and that too at 30Hz. So only for TV.
    - caryhartline 13y ago
      The product page says that all Macbook Pro(retina)(late 2013) models have the same output which is: Support for 1080p resolution at up to 60Hz | Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz | Support for 4096-by-2160 resolution at 24Hz
- Guvante 13y ago
  Gaming yes, daily computing tasks shouldn't be so hard.
mcav 13y ago
Looks like it'll still be fairly expensive (~$4K+) if the exchange rate conversion is to be believed[1]. FWIW, I have an ASUS 4K monitor I purchased recently, and it feels like a world apart. It's not quite retina, but the extra real estate makes all the difference. I've used multiple 27" displays side-by-side before and the effect isn't nearly as useful even though the screen area is greater. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=HK%2441%2C899+to+usd&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-beta&channel=fflb https://www.google.com/search?q=HK%2441%2C899+to+usd&ie=utf-...
- Kiro 13y ago
  What's better with retina? And are you saying multiple 27" are worse or better than 4K?
  - Kungpaoshizi 13y ago
    Dudes crazy. Retina was a fancy name to call 2048x1536. Apple is stupid.
  - mcav 13y ago
    I'm saying two things: - A 4K monitor has less DPI than a "retina" monitor, so you still see the pixels, thus it's not like someone took a 27" cinema display and doubled the pixels. - Two 27" displays feel 'worse' to me: While it seems like dual 27" displays would be able to display more, I can't use them both horizontally because my head has to pan too much. And if I switch them to portrait, it's hard to fit two editing windows side-by-side in 1400 pixels comfortably. So I like the 4K better than the 27" (or dual 27") setup I used before.
    - gknoy 13y ago
      You could put one in landscape (code), and one in portrait (browser, email, etc). that solves some of the width issues, though it might offend one's aesthetic sensibilities. I got over that very quickly when I decided to try it.
jrockway 13y ago
My almost-10-year-old 24" Dell monitor is 1920x1200. Why is the new one lower resolution?
- meritt 13y ago
  Because http://xkcd.com/732/ http://xkcd.com/732/
  - josteink 13y ago
    Reading the alt-text of that one is particularly depressing. I want 60fps movies damnit.
- Guvante 13y ago
  At least vertically you can achieve 2160 x 1920 with two of them.
  - gonzo 13y ago
    But 27" 2560 x 1440 monitors exist now.
- lowboy 13y ago
  Because 16:10 monitors have been phased out for 16:9.
- mtsmithhn 13y ago
  The 2nd monitor is mentioned because of the new mini bezel. They still have 1920x1200 resolution monitors but they aren't new nor do they have the mini bezel. I'm running three of them.
  - ddeck 13y ago
    As am I. I really hope they don't phase them out. The current 16x10 24" ultrasharp (U2412M) is a great monitor at less than $300.
- deleted 13y ago
timc3 13y ago
No mention of refresh rates which is somewhat of a make it break it for me, at least we are moving in the correct way though.
- graedus 13y ago
  Yeah, I looked into it[0]: Optimal resolution: 3840 x 2160 at 60 Hz (DP1.2*) 3840 x 2160 at 30Hz HDMI Hmm, I think I'll stick with my $270 144hz 1080p 24" for a few more years. [0] http://accessories.ap.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=hk&cs=hkdhs1&l=en&s=dhs&sku=210-ACBV http://accessories.ap.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=hk&c... (tech specs tab)
- hershel 13y ago
  Another thing that's missing is whether the backlight is based on PWM(meaning flashing at some frequency) and what's it's PWM frequency, Because it causes some people headaches.
aheilbut 13y ago
Does anyone have the ($600!) 39-inch Seiki 4K display? If so, do you like it?
- spot 13y ago
  i want to know this as well!
- gllen 13y ago
  I have 2. Beautiful picture but it's 28hz @ 4k. This causes a "lag" between the mouse and cursor that is completely unbearable for me (not a gamer, I'm talking just web browsing / email / coding), and I've pretty much stopped hooking them up. Try adjusting your display settings to sub-30hz to see what it feels like.
  - eddieh 13y ago
    To be fair that is a limitation of HDMI 1.4. You'd have the same problem if you bought the ASUS PQ321Q and connected it with HDMI. Personally, I'd never buy an HDMI anything...DisplayPort is the current standard and the future of displays.
- bhicks005 13y ago
  I have had the 50 inch version for about six weeks. For programming and office work, I love it. It's basically the same as having 4 24" 1080p monitors put together- just without the bezels. I was worried that the 30hz refresh rate would really bother me, but it's not really noticeable. I'm not sure I'd want to play games on it though.
  - fizzbar 13y ago
    How much did that set you back? And how far away from it do you sit?
- g0atbutt 13y ago
  The problem with that display is that it's only 30hz. Any movement on the screen looks terrible.
r00fus 13y ago
Anyone else notice that the bezels shown in the single-monitor view and the dual-portrait view look different? I want that dual-portrait view (it's what I have at work but without wide-angle IPS, and given standard bezels, it's a bit limiting). IPS + ultrathin bezel (at least one side) would make it nearly immersive.
- wmf 13y ago
  The article is about two different models.
- kylec 13y ago
  I think that's a picture of two U2414H monitors, which they're touting as having thin bezels, and not two UP3214Q 4K monitors.
- kapsel 13y ago
  it's two different monitors.
- c54 13y ago
  I'm pretty sure the single monitor picture is of the 32" monitor, the pic with 2 monitors has two 24" ones edit: lmao, 3 other people said exactly this in the time it took me to type out the comment...
- pilsetnieks 13y ago
  That's because those are two different displays - the large one with the uniform bezel is the 32" 4K display but the ones in dual configuration are just some new 24" Full HD (that is, 1080p not 1200p) IPS displays.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- ck2 13y ago
  I'm really tired of IPS glow, I hope they come up with a new technology soon that doesn't have that problem. MVA was decent but they seem to have retired that technology.
NLPsajeeth 13y ago
While I hope that this will be the first 4K monitor to do 4K 60p over DisplayPort using SST I highly doubt this is the case. I was hoping the same for the Panasonic's 4K 65" LCD but no such luck. Still waiting for the first 4K display to support 10-bit 4K 60p over DisplayPort SST and have HDMI 2.0 ports. Will have to wait until CES 2014 for more HDMI 2.0 displays.
lawn 13y ago
I have two 21" older UltraSharp monitors and I just want to say: They are amazing.
BigTuna 13y ago
Yes, yes, but does it smell like cat piss?
djhworld 13y ago
Why do Dell make such good monitors? I bought the 24" u2412m earlier this year and it's superb. It doesn't look flashy, but cosmetics are not important. The build quality and color calibration on these things is absolutely incredible.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- seiji 13y ago
  They use the same panels Apple uses, so it's just a matter of plastics engineering and choice of I/O (giant displayport, hdmi, vga, dvi, ... instead of just thunderbolt). I think the monoprice monitors use the same 27" panel as well? http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=1130703&p_id=10489&seq=1&format=2 http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=...
  - coryfklein 13y ago
    Wow! Monoprice does monitors now? mind blown
    - wffurr 13y ago
      Note that the Monoprice (and MicroCenter Auria and Nixeus and Catleap) models are short on features and build / OSD quality and calibration. The really annoying missing feature on these is audio-passthrough for HDMI and DisplayPort. I'd so much rather have a 3.55mm audio out instead of some crappy 2W built-in speakers.
      - taude 13y ago
        On my Auria, I missed the USB hub functionality, too.
- jotm 13y ago
  Thank LG for the latter - their IPS panels are used in pretty much every IPS monitor on the market, and I've never seen one with a single dead pixel, amazing QC...
callesgg 13y ago
Probably smells like piss.
gnator 13y ago
Interesting that the 24 inch is now 1920x1080 rather than 1920x1200 I guess I will be skipping the 24 inch.
stephen 13y ago
The U2414H is 1920x1080, that's only 91 DPI. Wtf? The UP3214Q is 3840x2160, but it's huge, 31.5", so it's only ~140 DPI. Neither of these are mind-blowing, especially the U2414H. I suppose it is nice to see >100 DPI on a really large monitor, given how stagnated/shitty external monitors have been for so long. But, still, doesn't quite seem "front page of HN" exciting?
- jamesrom 13y ago
  "It's only 140 DPI". Do you know how long it took to get there? http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/06/where-are-the-high-resolution-displays.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/06/where-are-the-high-...
  - e12e 13y ago
    Erm, I pretty sure the old 17" crt Dell monitor at home was able to deliver SXGA (1280x1024) -- and even if we assume a generous 16" of picture, that's over 100dpi. edit: It would claim to do 1600x1200 as well, IIRC -- but that wasn't really usable.
- jacques_chester 13y ago
  > But, still, doesn't quite seem "front page of HN" exciting? It's exciting because there is movement at the top end of the general monitor market (ignoring specialist stuff like medical imaging), for the first time in almost a decade. Dell moving into this new segment is particularly important because they make excellent monitors as a rule.
  - jader201 13y ago
    Movement is terribly slow though. I remember keeping an eye on anything greater than 1920x1200 (16:10) since I got my monitor at this resolution 8 years ago. The best thing has been 2560x1600 that are still priced higher [1] than the price I paid for this one 8 years ago (~$800). To put it another way, after 8 years, you still can't buy a 24" monitor at a resolution above 1920x1200. And when I saw this link, I thought the drought was finally over -- only to realize that it's still not. So yeah, this news didn't really excite me. It seems that display technology advances much more slowly than that of any other component, especially on pixel density of larger (20+ inch) displays. [1] http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007617+600012686&IsNodeId=1&Subcategory=20&AdvancedSearch=1 http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=...
doublerebel 13y ago
An important caveat: will the new monitors be VESA-mountable? I have a pair of Viewsonic VX2370Smh-LED with almost identical specs: * 1920x1080 at 23" = ~96ppi * Nearly 'frameless' 11mm bezel * 178/178 deg. viewing angle * _Full_ sRGB support * Samsung PLS panel (Samsung's IPS) * Matte screen * Multiple input types But, to make it 'frameless' the controls are placed in the non-removable stand! Notice that Dell has left out any mention of mounting, as did the creative Viewsonic copywriters. After discovering this I hacked the Viewsonic and turned the stand into a discreet VESA mount -- giving me an incredibly nice HD panel considering the price (~$150 each). But, there are almost no VESA-mountable quality panels for that price. Viewsonic _doubles_ the price to almost $300 for the nearly-identical VP2365-LED with VESA mounts.
- pmh 13y ago
  Both monitors are VESA 100 compatible. It's on the spec page for the 32 and in the user guide/elsewhere on the web for the 24. The 24 is technically not frameless, it just has a very thin top (and perhaps side) bezel.
  - doublerebel 13y ago
    Wow you're quite right, Google has already indexed the manual, if anyone else is looking for more details: ftp://ftp.dell.com/Manuals/all-products/esuprt_display_projector/esuprt_Display/dell-u2414h_User's%20Guide_en-us.pdf Too bad the panel is not a bit nicer...
- jotm 13y ago
  Yeah, Dells have VESA mounts. Also, I'm pretty sure the VX2370 uses LG's AH-IPS panel, I've considered them myself, but decided against them because of the non-removable stand...
  - doublerebel 13y ago
    Looks like you're right, according to tftcentral.co.uk, it is LG AH-IPS. I didn't know the "SuperClear IPS" refers to firmware, not hardware [1], the 27" VP-series ViewSonics use Samsung panels. [1] http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/viewsonic_vp2770-led.htm http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/viewsonic_vp2770-led.htm
ijl 13y ago
Does anyone know how much it costs to produce desktop-sized displays compared to phone-sized? I'm wondering why Dell would still make the 24" UltraSharp just 1920x1080.
- jpalomaki 13y ago
  They are dependent on the panel manufacturers. Quite many (if not all) of the new 32" 4K seem to be using the panel from Sharp. It could be that nobody is making high res 24" panels right now.
simplyinfinity 13y ago
Those look amazing! tho the price of the 4k isn't that great and the resolution on the 24' is lower than the current U2412/13m models. Just FYI , there is a batch of Dell P/U (and probably other series) that is revision A00 that have yellow tint, beware of that ! so far there are 7 revisions but Dell are shiping A00 manufactured in january - july 2013
mmgutz 13y ago
Is the 'dirty' anti glare coating still there? The UltraSharp monitors haven't compared well against my Apple Cinema Display. I love all the inputs and stand of the UltraSharp but ultimately it boils down to how good it is for work and the coating is horrible.
- what_ever 13y ago
  The coating is in fact great. I use U3014 at work and love the that there is no glare on the screen compared to that on my MBP. If I am going to edit photos or watch videos/movies, I wouldn't like it. But for coding it's good.
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
    I run a U3011 primary display next to one of the cheap 2560x1440 27" displays that were being sold out of China a year or so ago for ~$350/free shipping. After calibration, the cheap Chinese display blows the image quality of the U3011 away, and the Vaseline-like antiglare treatment on the U3011 is mostly to blame. As nice as their monitors are, I won't buy another Dell display until they ditch that ridiculous coating. The way you fix monitor glare is by not working with a bright light at your back, not by fucking up the screen.
    - gioele 13y ago
      > The way you fix monitor glare is by not working with a bright light at your back, not by fucking up the screen. Some people live in places where they have these things called windows...
      - CamperBob2 13y ago
        Then put the frosted glaze on the window, not on the monitor.
- paddy_m 13y ago
  I like my apple screens because I can get them clean easily. I never could for plastic screens.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
rikacomet 13y ago
Still a lot far from true bezel less future, not a complaint, just an observation. http://rikacomet.blogspot.in/2013/01/the-next-screen-evolution-bezel-less.html http://rikacomet.blogspot.in/2013/01/the-next-screen-evoluti...
jccooper 13y ago
Funny how this landed the same day as ESR's rant about Dell UltraSharp resolution modes (different model) through various connectors. http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5089 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5089 At least the 3214 notes that HDMI can't drive it to full capacity. Guess the lesson is "use DisplayPort".
- ericabiz 13y ago
  Not just Dell. I have two ASUS PB278Q (27", 2560x1440) and they have the same problem. It so threw me when I got the first one that I ended up having to overnight a Mini Displayport->Displayport cable from Amazon Prime to drive it. They work fine on Displayport. Seems any high-res monitor is doing that these days--I do wish the manufacturers would be more upfront about it, but is it really worth it to threaten "15K social media followers...give Dell a public black eye about it" when the solution is a $6 cable?
- ibrahima 13y ago
  That's a problem with the HDMI standard, not with the monitor specifically. The cheaper random manufacturer monitors do things like run the electronics out of spec to get away with things like higher resolution support or 120hz on IPS. Yes, just use DisplayPort, it's just better.
knodi 13y ago
Smells like cat piss.
pdfcollect 13y ago
Where is my $500 25600 x 16000 30" monitor :)?
x0x0 13y ago
UP3214Q : 41,899 $HK = 5404.01 $US
nfriedly 13y ago
BTW, the price it quoted me for the 32-inch screen is HK$41,899. According to Wolphram|Alpha, that works out to in $5403.92 USD.
marvin 13y ago
Wow. It's about time - I've had a 30 inch UltraSharp since 2007 (at which time it cost $2000, and that was with 25% off), and it is the best computer-related purchase I've ever made. You'll get _so much stuff done_ on this amount of monitor real estate. It's a shame that things haven't been happening on this front in a while. Probably won't upgrade right now, but this is warmly recommended to people who need to have many windows on-screen at once. It's better than a 2-monitor solution for most situations.

193 points by susi22 13y ago

ck2 13y ago

Thank you to all the early adopters which will make this $500 in a few years so I can buy one.

Negitivefrags 13y ago
I bought a Dell 30" for $2.6k NZD in 2006. In 2013 the same Dell 30" costs $2,239 NZD right now on their store. The monitor still works, and still looks great. It must be the best tech purchase I ever made. I actually bought a second one earlier this year.
- ck2 13y ago
  Yeah I am on a $600 27 inch U2713HM I got when it came out a year ago. Took me a long time to accept the steep price but it has been worth it for my eyes. $2600 nzd = $2200 usd, now that much I couldn't afford/justify. I think the old Dell 30 inch has a harsh anti-glare coat that makes it sparkle? They finally solved that with the U2713HM which has a much lighter coat.
  - NickNameNick 13y ago
    The exchange rate between nz and us dollars shifted dramatically in the 2006/2008 timeframe, I suspect in US dollar terms he spent rather less than that, probably closer to $1800 USD.
- vietor 13y ago
  I've a Dell 2000FP that's still getting 8+ hours of serious use a day, even as it's coming up on its 11th birthday in a few more months. (And still looking pretty great compared to a current gen budget monitor.) There has been so little movement in mid-quality LCD systems, it's nice to see some change. (Even if the 24" is ... profoundly uninteresting to me at 1080p) Edit: Not that this changes the original point, just that, as an early adopter, I've been burned a lot less by monitors than by ... everything else.
- marvin 13y ago
  Hehe, Norwegian here - I bought the same monitor you did, and have made the same thoughts about it.

jmccree 13y ago

With the new resolutions being pumped out on laptops, (2,880 x 1,620 for 15" Thinkpad W series) it was inevitable desktop monitors would have to catch up.

bsimpson 13y ago
A friend of mine had a retina-quality screen on his laptop in 2003. I think it was a ThinkPad with a 2048 x 1536 screen. Of course, at the time there wasn't a concept of resolution-independent scaling, so it didn't look as nice as today's retina displays. specs: http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:R50p http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:R50p
- cglace 13y ago
  could laptop graphics cards handle that type of resolution back then?
  - claudius 13y ago
    1600x1200 was commonplace as early as 2001 (in a Dell Inspiron 8000, I believe).
    - jl6 13y ago
      I feel obliged to mention that I have an i8k and it's still working beautifully.
  - foley 13y ago
    Back then almost all UI rendering was software based. The graphics card just needed a large enough frame buffer. The lack of fancy compositing and animation effects gave these high resolutions devices comparable performance to their standard resolution counterparts.
  - kalleboo 13y ago
    It was a lot easier back when all you cared about was the 2D performance of basic shapes (lines, circles, fills), and the animation for moving a window was just an outline.

alexgaribay 13y ago

I wonder if the resolution is meant to be scaled like a retina screen (i.e. 1920x1080). I haven't used a high dpi monitor on Windows. Can anyone that has a high dpi monitor comment on this?

wmf 13y ago
The elephant in the room here is that there's no good way to use this monitor. If you run in 1x mode everything is probably too small but if you run in 2x mode you have less resolution than an old and much cheaper 30" monitor.
- outworlder 13y ago
  You mean, there's no good way to use this monitor with Windows, right? Every sane OS nowadays can be run at high resolutions. Apparently, this even applies to Windows 8, but I can't vouch for that.
- Stratoscope 13y ago
  So you run it in Windows 8.1 and let it pick the scaling per app. High-DPI aware apps will get the full resolution and wil will 2x scale older apps (assuming you set the scaling to 200%). See the link in my other comment.
  - wmf 13y ago
    My point is that setting scaling to 200% is a waste of money. It needs to be something like 160% which is not handled well AFAIK.
    - NickNameNick 13y ago
      I've been using 140% dpi on a vista laptop since 2007, and it's worked just fine for everything.
- lowboy 13y ago
  1x is only too small if you're concerned with things other than visual creative work. I would love if my Photoshop menus could scale down to leave more room for the content I'm creating.

Kiro 13y ago

Do you need massive computer power in order to run these?

CaveTech 13y ago
Not particularly. A Macbook Pro should be able to drive one, an air couldn't though.
- npalli 13y ago
  Which pro model are you thinking of? To my knowledge none can. Including the latest. The only 4K that can be output is via HDMI (in the late 2013 models) and that too at 30Hz. So only for TV.
  - caryhartline 13y ago
    The product page says that all Macbook Pro(retina)(late 2013) models have the same output which is: Support for 1080p resolution at up to 60Hz | Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz | Support for 4096-by-2160 resolution at 24Hz
Guvante 13y ago
Gaming yes, daily computing tasks shouldn't be so hard.

mcav 13y ago

Looks like it'll still be fairly expensive (~$4K+) if the exchange rate conversion is to be believed[1]. FWIW, I have an ASUS 4K monitor I purchased recently, and it feels like a world apart. It's not quite retina, but the extra real estate makes all the difference. I've used multiple 27" displays side-by-side before and the effect isn't nearly as useful even though the screen area is greater. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=HK%2441%2C899+to+usd&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-beta&channel=fflb https://www.google.com/search?q=HK%2441%2C899+to+usd&ie=utf-...

Kiro 13y ago
What's better with retina? And are you saying multiple 27" are worse or better than 4K?
- Kungpaoshizi 13y ago
  Dudes crazy. Retina was a fancy name to call 2048x1536. Apple is stupid.
- mcav 13y ago
  I'm saying two things: - A 4K monitor has less DPI than a "retina" monitor, so you still see the pixels, thus it's not like someone took a 27" cinema display and doubled the pixels. - Two 27" displays feel 'worse' to me: While it seems like dual 27" displays would be able to display more, I can't use them both horizontally because my head has to pan too much. And if I switch them to portrait, it's hard to fit two editing windows side-by-side in 1400 pixels comfortably. So I like the 4K better than the 27" (or dual 27") setup I used before.
  - gknoy 13y ago
    You could put one in landscape (code), and one in portrait (browser, email, etc). that solves some of the width issues, though it might offend one's aesthetic sensibilities. I got over that very quickly when I decided to try it.

jrockway 13y ago

My almost-10-year-old 24" Dell monitor is 1920x1200. Why is the new one lower resolution?

meritt 13y ago
Because http://xkcd.com/732/ http://xkcd.com/732/
- josteink 13y ago
  Reading the alt-text of that one is particularly depressing. I want 60fps movies damnit.
Guvante 13y ago
At least vertically you can achieve 2160 x 1920 with two of them.
- gonzo 13y ago
  But 27" 2560 x 1440 monitors exist now.
lowboy 13y ago
Because 16:10 monitors have been phased out for 16:9.
mtsmithhn 13y ago
The 2nd monitor is mentioned because of the new mini bezel. They still have 1920x1200 resolution monitors but they aren't new nor do they have the mini bezel. I'm running three of them.
- ddeck 13y ago
  As am I. I really hope they don't phase them out. The current 16x10 24" ultrasharp (U2412M) is a great monitor at less than $300.
deleted 13y ago

timc3 13y ago

No mention of refresh rates which is somewhat of a make it break it for me, at least we are moving in the correct way though.

graedus 13y ago
Yeah, I looked into it[0]: Optimal resolution: 3840 x 2160 at 60 Hz (DP1.2*) 3840 x 2160 at 30Hz HDMI Hmm, I think I'll stick with my $270 144hz 1080p 24" for a few more years. [0] http://accessories.ap.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=hk&cs=hkdhs1&l=en&s=dhs&sku=210-ACBV http://accessories.ap.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=hk&c... (tech specs tab)
hershel 13y ago
Another thing that's missing is whether the backlight is based on PWM(meaning flashing at some frequency) and what's it's PWM frequency, Because it causes some people headaches.

aheilbut 13y ago

Does anyone have the ($600!) 39-inch Seiki 4K display? If so, do you like it?

spot 13y ago
i want to know this as well!
gllen 13y ago
I have 2. Beautiful picture but it's 28hz @ 4k. This causes a "lag" between the mouse and cursor that is completely unbearable for me (not a gamer, I'm talking just web browsing / email / coding), and I've pretty much stopped hooking them up. Try adjusting your display settings to sub-30hz to see what it feels like.
- eddieh 13y ago
  To be fair that is a limitation of HDMI 1.4. You'd have the same problem if you bought the ASUS PQ321Q and connected it with HDMI. Personally, I'd never buy an HDMI anything...DisplayPort is the current standard and the future of displays.
bhicks005 13y ago
I have had the 50 inch version for about six weeks. For programming and office work, I love it. It's basically the same as having 4 24" 1080p monitors put together- just without the bezels. I was worried that the 30hz refresh rate would really bother me, but it's not really noticeable. I'm not sure I'd want to play games on it though.
- fizzbar 13y ago
  How much did that set you back? And how far away from it do you sit?
g0atbutt 13y ago
The problem with that display is that it's only 30hz. Any movement on the screen looks terrible.

r00fus 13y ago

Anyone else notice that the bezels shown in the single-monitor view and the dual-portrait view look different? I want that dual-portrait view (it's what I have at work but without wide-angle IPS, and given standard bezels, it's a bit limiting). IPS + ultrathin bezel (at least one side) would make it nearly immersive.

wmf 13y ago
The article is about two different models.
kylec 13y ago
I think that's a picture of two U2414H monitors, which they're touting as having thin bezels, and not two UP3214Q 4K monitors.
kapsel 13y ago
it's two different monitors.
c54 13y ago
I'm pretty sure the single monitor picture is of the 32" monitor, the pic with 2 monitors has two 24" ones edit: lmao, 3 other people said exactly this in the time it took me to type out the comment...
pilsetnieks 13y ago
That's because those are two different displays - the large one with the uniform bezel is the 32" 4K display but the ones in dual configuration are just some new 24" Full HD (that is, 1080p not 1200p) IPS displays.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ck2 13y ago
I'm really tired of IPS glow, I hope they come up with a new technology soon that doesn't have that problem. MVA was decent but they seem to have retired that technology.

NLPsajeeth 13y ago

While I hope that this will be the first 4K monitor to do 4K 60p over DisplayPort using SST I highly doubt this is the case. I was hoping the same for the Panasonic's 4K 65" LCD but no such luck. Still waiting for the first 4K display to support 10-bit 4K 60p over DisplayPort SST and have HDMI 2.0 ports. Will have to wait until CES 2014 for more HDMI 2.0 displays.

lawn 13y ago

I have two 21" older UltraSharp monitors and I just want to say: They are amazing.

BigTuna 13y ago

Yes, yes, but does it smell like cat piss?

djhworld 13y ago

Why do Dell make such good monitors? I bought the 24" u2412m earlier this year and it's superb. It doesn't look flashy, but cosmetics are not important. The build quality and color calibration on these things is absolutely incredible.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
seiji 13y ago
They use the same panels Apple uses, so it's just a matter of plastics engineering and choice of I/O (giant displayport, hdmi, vga, dvi, ... instead of just thunderbolt). I think the monoprice monitors use the same 27" panel as well? http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=1130703&p_id=10489&seq=1&format=2 http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=...
- coryfklein 13y ago
  Wow! Monoprice does monitors now? mind blown
  - wffurr 13y ago
    Note that the Monoprice (and MicroCenter Auria and Nixeus and Catleap) models are short on features and build / OSD quality and calibration. The really annoying missing feature on these is audio-passthrough for HDMI and DisplayPort. I'd so much rather have a 3.55mm audio out instead of some crappy 2W built-in speakers.
    - taude 13y ago
      On my Auria, I missed the USB hub functionality, too.
jotm 13y ago
Thank LG for the latter - their IPS panels are used in pretty much every IPS monitor on the market, and I've never seen one with a single dead pixel, amazing QC...

callesgg 13y ago

Probably smells like piss.

gnator 13y ago

Interesting that the 24 inch is now 1920x1080 rather than 1920x1200 I guess I will be skipping the 24 inch.

stephen 13y ago

The U2414H is 1920x1080, that's only 91 DPI. Wtf? The UP3214Q is 3840x2160, but it's huge, 31.5", so it's only ~140 DPI. Neither of these are mind-blowing, especially the U2414H. I suppose it is nice to see >100 DPI on a really large monitor, given how stagnated/shitty external monitors have been for so long. But, still, doesn't quite seem "front page of HN" exciting?

jamesrom 13y ago
"It's only 140 DPI". Do you know how long it took to get there? http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/06/where-are-the-high-resolution-displays.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/06/where-are-the-high-...
- e12e 13y ago
  Erm, I pretty sure the old 17" crt Dell monitor at home was able to deliver SXGA (1280x1024) -- and even if we assume a generous 16" of picture, that's over 100dpi. edit: It would claim to do 1600x1200 as well, IIRC -- but that wasn't really usable.
jacques_chester 13y ago
> But, still, doesn't quite seem "front page of HN" exciting? It's exciting because there is movement at the top end of the general monitor market (ignoring specialist stuff like medical imaging), for the first time in almost a decade. Dell moving into this new segment is particularly important because they make excellent monitors as a rule.
- jader201 13y ago
  Movement is terribly slow though. I remember keeping an eye on anything greater than 1920x1200 (16:10) since I got my monitor at this resolution 8 years ago. The best thing has been 2560x1600 that are still priced higher [1] than the price I paid for this one 8 years ago (~$800). To put it another way, after 8 years, you still can't buy a 24" monitor at a resolution above 1920x1200. And when I saw this link, I thought the drought was finally over -- only to realize that it's still not. So yeah, this news didn't really excite me. It seems that display technology advances much more slowly than that of any other component, especially on pixel density of larger (20+ inch) displays. [1] http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007617+600012686&IsNodeId=1&Subcategory=20&AdvancedSearch=1 http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=...

doublerebel 13y ago

An important caveat: will the new monitors be VESA-mountable? I have a pair of Viewsonic VX2370Smh-LED with almost identical specs: * 1920x1080 at 23" = ~96ppi * Nearly 'frameless' 11mm bezel * 178/178 deg. viewing angle * _Full_ sRGB support * Samsung PLS panel (Samsung's IPS) * Matte screen * Multiple input types But, to make it 'frameless' the controls are placed in the non-removable stand! Notice that Dell has left out any mention of mounting, as did the creative Viewsonic copywriters. After discovering this I hacked the Viewsonic and turned the stand into a discreet VESA mount -- giving me an incredibly nice HD panel considering the price (~$150 each). But, there are almost no VESA-mountable quality panels for that price. Viewsonic _doubles_ the price to almost $300 for the nearly-identical VP2365-LED with VESA mounts.

pmh 13y ago
Both monitors are VESA 100 compatible. It's on the spec page for the 32 and in the user guide/elsewhere on the web for the 24. The 24 is technically not frameless, it just has a very thin top (and perhaps side) bezel.
- doublerebel 13y ago
  Wow you're quite right, Google has already indexed the manual, if anyone else is looking for more details: ftp://ftp.dell.com/Manuals/all-products/esuprt_display_projector/esuprt_Display/dell-u2414h_User's%20Guide_en-us.pdf Too bad the panel is not a bit nicer...
jotm 13y ago
Yeah, Dells have VESA mounts. Also, I'm pretty sure the VX2370 uses LG's AH-IPS panel, I've considered them myself, but decided against them because of the non-removable stand...
- doublerebel 13y ago
  Looks like you're right, according to tftcentral.co.uk, it is LG AH-IPS. I didn't know the "SuperClear IPS" refers to firmware, not hardware [1], the 27" VP-series ViewSonics use Samsung panels. [1] http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/viewsonic_vp2770-led.htm http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/viewsonic_vp2770-led.htm

ijl 13y ago

Does anyone know how much it costs to produce desktop-sized displays compared to phone-sized? I'm wondering why Dell would still make the 24" UltraSharp just 1920x1080.

jpalomaki 13y ago
They are dependent on the panel manufacturers. Quite many (if not all) of the new 32" 4K seem to be using the panel from Sharp. It could be that nobody is making high res 24" panels right now.

simplyinfinity 13y ago

Those look amazing! tho the price of the 4k isn't that great and the resolution on the 24' is lower than the current U2412/13m models. Just FYI , there is a batch of Dell P/U (and probably other series) that is revision A00 that have yellow tint, beware of that ! so far there are 7 revisions but Dell are shiping A00 manufactured in january - july 2013

mmgutz 13y ago

Is the 'dirty' anti glare coating still there? The UltraSharp monitors haven't compared well against my Apple Cinema Display. I love all the inputs and stand of the UltraSharp but ultimately it boils down to how good it is for work and the coating is horrible.

what_ever 13y ago
The coating is in fact great. I use U3014 at work and love the that there is no glare on the screen compared to that on my MBP. If I am going to edit photos or watch videos/movies, I wouldn't like it. But for coding it's good.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  I run a U3011 primary display next to one of the cheap 2560x1440 27" displays that were being sold out of China a year or so ago for ~$350/free shipping. After calibration, the cheap Chinese display blows the image quality of the U3011 away, and the Vaseline-like antiglare treatment on the U3011 is mostly to blame. As nice as their monitors are, I won't buy another Dell display until they ditch that ridiculous coating. The way you fix monitor glare is by not working with a bright light at your back, not by fucking up the screen.
  - gioele 13y ago
    > The way you fix monitor glare is by not working with a bright light at your back, not by fucking up the screen. Some people live in places where they have these things called windows...
    - CamperBob2 13y ago
      Then put the frosted glaze on the window, not on the monitor.
paddy_m 13y ago
I like my apple screens because I can get them clean easily. I never could for plastic screens.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

rikacomet 13y ago

Still a lot far from true bezel less future, not a complaint, just an observation. http://rikacomet.blogspot.in/2013/01/the-next-screen-evolution-bezel-less.html http://rikacomet.blogspot.in/2013/01/the-next-screen-evoluti...

jccooper 13y ago

Funny how this landed the same day as ESR's rant about Dell UltraSharp resolution modes (different model) through various connectors. http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5089 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5089 At least the 3214 notes that HDMI can't drive it to full capacity. Guess the lesson is "use DisplayPort".

ericabiz 13y ago
Not just Dell. I have two ASUS PB278Q (27", 2560x1440) and they have the same problem. It so threw me when I got the first one that I ended up having to overnight a Mini Displayport->Displayport cable from Amazon Prime to drive it. They work fine on Displayport. Seems any high-res monitor is doing that these days--I do wish the manufacturers would be more upfront about it, but is it really worth it to threaten "15K social media followers...give Dell a public black eye about it" when the solution is a $6 cable?
ibrahima 13y ago
That's a problem with the HDMI standard, not with the monitor specifically. The cheaper random manufacturer monitors do things like run the electronics out of spec to get away with things like higher resolution support or 120hz on IPS. Yes, just use DisplayPort, it's just better.

knodi 13y ago

Smells like cat piss.

pdfcollect 13y ago

Where is my $500 25600 x 16000 30" monitor :)?

x0x0 13y ago

UP3214Q : 41,899 $HK = 5404.01 $US

nfriedly 13y ago

BTW, the price it quoted me for the 32-inch screen is HK$41,899. According to Wolphram|Alpha, that works out to in $5403.92 USD.

marvin 13y ago

Wow. It's about time - I've had a 30 inch UltraSharp since 2007 (at which time it cost $2000, and that was with 25% off), and it is the best computer-related purchase I've ever made. You'll get _so much stuff done_ on this amount of monitor real estate. It's a shame that things haven't been happening on this front in a while. Probably won't upgrade right now, but this is warmly recommended to people who need to have many windows on-screen at once. It's better than a 2-monitor solution for most situations.