28-Inch '4K' Display from Dell Priced at $699, Launches January 23

[Michael73]

My old, tired eyes...

I LOVE my 30" ACD and it's perfect for the web work I do, whether it's Photoshop, having two browsers or Word documents open side-by-side to compare, creating presentation, etc.

The truth is over the last couple of years, I find myself more and more using ctrl and a two finger zoom on the trackpad to read. Bigger is just easier and less of an eye strain. I know a lot of people say that the human eye can't tell the difference in pixel density at a certain distance. That may be true EXCEPT when zooming in. Although the bigger size does help my old, tired eyes, I can tell that the more I zoom, the blurrier things get.

In part, my reason for getting a 4K monitor is to alleviate the blurriness. Thoughts?

 

[zync]

I LOVE my 30" ACD and it's perfect for the web work I do, whether it's Photoshop, having two browsers or Word documents open side-by-side to compare, creating presentation, etc.

The truth is over the last couple of years, I find myself more and more using ctrl and a two finger zoom on the trackpad to read. Bigger is just easier and less of an eye strain. I know a lot of people say that the human eye can't tell the difference in pixel density at a certain distance. That may be true EXCEPT when zooming in. Although the bigger size does help my old, tired eyes, I can tell that the more I zoom, the blurrier things get.

In part, my reason for getting a 4K monitor is to alleviate the blurriness. Thoughts?

It will always be blurrier if you're using the OS to zoom text using that gesture. That's the equivalent of scaling things up in Photoshop. The OS doesn't use any vector scaling when you do it that way.

Try Command + in things like Safari to increase your text size (that will also scale images though and make them blurry but the text will be crisp). It's the same command as zoom in Photoshop. Command - will zoom out.

Getting a 4K display in the same size or smaller will make text smaller which will compound your problem.

A 4K display would be best for video professionals/graphic professionals who need/want to view their work at 100%. For instance, in After Effects I view 1080p at half res so I can fit all of my panels around what I'm working on. On a 4K I could view 1080p at full res and keep my panels around my comp window.

Once OSX offers full resolution independence, the pixel density of your monitor won't matter. I don't know if they've solved this for all Macs yet or just those with retina displays. Maybe someone else can chime in there. If not, I'd recommend you stick with your current display. I hope this helps and good luck.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Pity it's only 30hz at full resolution :\

 

[deconstruct60]

Hi, for video you actually wont 24 pics/s and 30 is a bad multiplier. You will get jitter as every few pictures, one will have to be shown double. 60 is better but what you really want is 120 (exactly 5 of each frame) or a screen that can do some other multiple of 24 such as 48, 72 or 96. 60 gives 2-3-2-3-2-3.. so it is not so noticeable but the even multipliers are better.

With 30 you wouldn't have any multiplier. 1-1-1-1-1 No multiplier at all is better than having them. If the display controller can shift down to 24 ( it is actually less data to process than 30 or higher ) then it is 1:1.

The 2-3-2-3-2 of 60Hz seems to imply buffering data from on 60Hz cycle for use in the next ( data during 14 of the cyle moved to the next cycle). Larger but simiilar shift at 30. Just move 24 to the 'next' 30 and pipeline the data with a one slot delay.

Gaming could be fine with 30 Hz but since modern games pushes the GPUs so far, the frame rate can go down and when it does and gets off sync from the screen you can get jitter and perceived lag.

that is when the game outmatches the GPU. There are more than a few GPUs where that doesn't happen. Newer games with older GPUs, sure. Older games with newer GPUs is a different story. If throwing money at a 4K display, more than likely have discretionary budget to throw money at a newer GPUs too.

 

[TyPod]

I'm going to be entering the world of super HD displays soon, but am I alone in wanting my pro-workstation display to still carry such things as a webcam, and maybe even, y'know - speakers?

I could see a webcam being incorporated quite easily seeing as it's not that hard to fit somewhere. Speakers on the other hand, I could see not being provided by almost all 4K displays. So much junk to fit in a small bezel. Seems like small bezels are what people look now days.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

that is when the game outmatches the GPU. There are more than a few GPUs where that doesn't happen. Newer games with older GPUs, sure. Older games with newer GPUs is a different story. If throwing money at a 4K display, more than likely have discretionary budget to throw money at a newer GPUs too.

Today, yes. But the issue is that in a year or two, when you want that 60hz because your GPU is older, you'll be "forced" into upgrading your GPU because of an issue with the monitor.

I'd rather wait for a 60hz panel, and by that point the midrange cards should be able to drive it.

 

[MacRumorUser78]

30Hz OK for web and Aperture?

My old white 24" 1920x1200 (i.e. slightly more pixels that 1080p) iMac is very pixellated. Perhaps because I'm used to a retina iPhone and iPad. I have just got a 15" retina MBP, and am interested in this new monitor to complete my desktop replacement. However…

The original story says:



But the 15" rMBP tech specs on the Apple website put the limit much lower:



It only mentions 4K via HDMI at 30Hz, which is too low. I'm hoping the 4K via Thunderbolt is possible. Can anyone confirm that?

Is 30Hz good enough for Aperutre

 

[xmichaelp]

Maybe it's just me but I fail to see the point of a 4k monitor at this size. You're effectively getting a massive 1080p monitor, that would drive me crazy everything being so big.

There's really only two general sizes I could see it being useful. 21.5-23 for a nice retina quality 1080p screen. Or ~32+ at native res so you get a massive usable screen real estate.

I think I'll wait for Apple to release a retina 21.5 iMac.

 

[superman23]

will these 4k monitors be scaled like the MBP retina displays? i have a 30" 2560x1600 display, and for my eyes everything is a good size. i would not be able to handle a 4k 28" without scaling

 

[winston1236]

Thats an awesome price, that one benefit of a bad economy these 4k displays dropped in price by about 95% in less than two years.

 

[Moonjumper]

Is 30Hz good enough for Aperutre

It depends on you. Does it bug you when you move your mouse fast and you can see the jump between frames? That will be twice as bad at 30Hz.

All the games I make are developed to be 60 frames per second. I see the jerkiness at 30 (sometimes even at 60, but that is the refresh rate of many screens, so I can do nothing about that). I would hate to have the same thing on my computer interface.

 

[phoenixsan]

If quality is decent.....

and the display works nice with Apple hardware, I suppose I can recommend this Dell monitor to people asking about 4K displays in the budget.....

 

[ElectronGuru]

Is 30Hz good enough for Aperutre

Yeah, bit like asking if a car with 'play' in the steering wheel is good enough to get you to work every day. It does the A to B, but it will also get on your nerves.

 

[gothamm]

no one is mentioning that these use cheap TN panels that have horrible viewing angles and poor color reproduction

 

[Renzatic]

no one is mentioning that these use cheap TN panels that have horrible viewing angles and poor color reproduction

Viewing angles, yeah, but a relatively high end TN panel can still reproduce colors as well as a mid-line IPS panel. The Macbook Airs use one, and I think they cover around 80% of the sRGB gamut.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

i am still in search of the perfect 27" monitor to pair with my macbook pro. Is thin, hard, functional, beautiful too much to ask?

 

[MacLC]

no one is mentioning that these use cheap TN panels that have horrible viewing angles and poor color reproduction

Thank you for pointing that out. I recently had the opportunity to see a "really good" TN next to IPS and there was no comparison. You don't realize the color distortions of TN until you see what it SHOULD look like with IPS.

4k spreadsheets would be great but content viewers or creaters would be better off with lower resolution IPS. For the rest of us who can't afford either, at least Dell is pushing boundaries with the price. Maybe in 3 more years I could afford a 4k IPS.

 

[hpe]

With 30 you wouldn't have any multiplier. 1-1-1-1-1 No multiplier at all is better than having them. If the display controller can shift down to 24 ( it is actually less data to process than 30 or higher ) then it is 1:1.

The 2-3-2-3-2 of 60Hz seems to imply buffering data from on 60Hz cycle for use in the next ( data during 14 of the cycle moved to the next cycle). Larger but similar shift at 30. Just move 24 to the 'next' 30 and pipeline the data with a one slot delay.


that is when the game outmatches the GPU. There are more than a few GPUs where that doesn't happen. Newer games with older GPUs, sure. Older games with newer GPUs is a different story. If throwing money at a 4K display, more than likely have discretionary budget to throw money at a newer GPUs too.

If the source material is captured at 24 fps you will have to apply some scaling trick to get it to 30. If it was captured at 30 fps you would be correct. The video cameras in use shoot with 24, 25, 30, 50 and 60 fps. Even higher for the ones that are used for slow-motion stuff. It is a very difficult problem to switch between them without visual artefacts as a result. Ever seen a high def panorama of a landscape that sweeps left to right? Very often you'd notice studder/jitter in the image. This is usually the situation where this become the most apparent. How would you go from 30fps to 25? Just throw some pictures out?

24 fps is the frame rate from the cinema which is why the BDs that have 24p use it as a feature. To get it you need a BD player that can output 24p (I guess most current ones but not all of the first gen could) AND a TV or projector that can handle the signal and display it, still not always the case. If the TV or monitor support 48 (uncommon), 72 (pretty common at least for computer screens - not so much for TVs, 96 (same comment as for 72 but change to high quality computer screens only), 120 (is pretty common among high end TVs and computer screens but definitely not on lower end models) you are ok. Best sync is 600Hz plasma, for video that is.

Even a modern GPU will suffer if you throw 4K full detail at it in the most intense games. Just because the average fps might be 60+ doesn't mean the minimum will stay above 30.

 

[Tech198]

neat... affordable 4K displays

now, we just need more content.

 

[laurim]

Exactly, I've been posting this a thousand times now in the forums and still no one seems to get it.

This screen is most likely at least in the beginning not gonna be compatible with the nMP (see anand review) plus the resolution scaling issue.
It drives me crazy! I need to buy a screen for my Mac Pro before it arrives In February and don't know what to do! I'd like to buy this as an investment, being pretty confident that apple will fix the issues in osx in the future but who knows when that will be? And I can't work at 1x resolution!

I was in the same boat but finally decided today to buy a refurbished thunderbolt display from Apple for $799, with my new MacPro and 3T Time Capsule to get them all on the same AppleCare. Figure that's a good compromise for now. This screen sounds like a deal but if it's only 30Hz and won't be compatible with Mavericks it's not a deal at all for me. Probably also has a limited color gamut like other 4ks at this price point.

 

[tann]

I read somewhere 4k is limited (or most sets are limited) to 30hz at the moment? Might be food for thought.

 

[newdeal]

And on a display that small, you won't even notice the difference for a movie.

Just like 1080 was useless on sub 50" screens, 4K isn't truly realized until you're going above 70" and is more a tech for whole wall displays.

But no one ever bothers to learn these details. 4k, oh wow. its so much better i have to have it now!

The only people who actually need this in a monitor are video pros who will be editing and working with 4K content....

But this is marketing at its finest.... and I think they've managed to create a market that everyone said wouldn't hit for at least a decade beacuse no one needs this until tv's hit wall size, 100" plus screens....


*And disclaimer.... those who argue the 1080/720 the components in most 720p tvs were crap which the only reason you saw differences in images not the resolution itself

This is a bit questionable. The difference for a TV will be nothing I agree due to the viewing distance. On a monitor you will likely be able to tell because you general only sit a foot and a half away unlike a TV where you are sitting 10 feet away. The real question is can satellite and cable companies handle the bandwidth of 4K content on their current pipes, that will be the true test for speed of adoption

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Specs?

I looked for specs or pointers to specs. Are they out there somewhere?

Glossy/semi-gloss-coated/matte?
IPS?
HDMI version/specs?
DP version/specs?
Built-in hubs (USB 3.0?)
Max refresh rate @ 3840x2160
Max refresh rate @ 1920x1080

 

[ajresendez]

This is great! I don't need it but I sure want it.

 

[drsoong]

U2713HM price drop?

holy schnikes! and i almost bought one of there u2713hm for 600 bucks...gonna get this joint Fur-Sure

That's bad, I really wouldn't have thought 4K displays to become affordable that soon - compared to the >$3000 price tags of others.

On Christmas I bought a Mac Mini - deliberately now, because I fear the Haswell mini might not useupgradable anymore - and therefore can't drive a 4K display with it.*

So, the U2713HM might be nice as a second (i.e. main) display. It's been 477 Euro here in Germany on Amazon for a while. With the 4K $699 being released, the "old" U2713HM will see a nice price drop.

Though, I don't expect it to drop more than around 100 Euro.

* As others pointed out this might not be the case for future Haswell Minis either.

-drsoong