Initial Thoughts on Dell UltraSharp U2723QE

[drrich2]

I'm a general home user, not a photo or video professional, content creator, etc... I've benefited from other's input, so I'm paying it forward a bit. My goal is to help people struggling with 4 or 5K 27" monitor options for general home use, especially if they can't observe it first hand before ordering. It's been a long slog for me so this post will be long.

My old 2017 27" 5K iMac is to be replaced by an M4Pro Mac Mini (BTO, not here yet), and it's not practical to use the old iMac as a display for the Mini (note: Luna Display isn't free and I've read of lower frame rates; I lack the knowledge and skills to open the iMac and install new hardware to make it a monitor - plus IIRC you lose some color depth doing that?). I love the iMac's 5K 27" glossy display, so naturally I'd like something equivalent. I ended up with the Dell UltraSharp U2723QE. This post is about my decision process and initial impressions.

1.) The Apple Studio Display sounded great, but way too expensive. Its high build quality and industrial aesthetic would be largely lost on me, the very good in-monitor speaker system isn't needed because I have speakers, the mediocre webcam with Center Stage wouldn't likely get much use, so the 'value add' it offers doesn't offer me enough for the price.

2.) 5K 27" Alternatives got down to Samsung (variable reviews didn't inspire confidence), LG (pretty good reviews) and ASUS ProArt (they recently released a 5K 27" display with good early reviews). I put the ASUS on my short list.

3.) 4K 27 or 32" Displays. Since some people think text quality of 4K on a 27" is noticeably worse than a 5K display, I didn't trust 4K at 32". So stick to 27". The size of a 32" appeals, but I read a lot onscreen. I had a PHILIPS Brilliance 279P1(27", 4K) I liked, but our kid has it now. With the Philips on my old 2017 12" MacBook, I had to choose between 30-Hz refresh rate (with USB-A hub ports at full speed) or 60-Hz (with USB-A hub ports set at USB 2.0 speeds) - I think that's due to DisplayPort 1.2 (using DP over USB-C Alt. Mode), so I hoped to go to DP 1.4 (with more bandwidth) in the new monitor.

4.) I wanted the option for DisplayPort over USB-C Alt. Mode (preferably version 1.4) and ideally some monitor hub ports. That ruled out some of the on-sale roughly $250 monitors (which lacked USB-C). So I looked at this Dell (and a lower end model), some BenQ monitors, another ASUS ProArt display and others. Almost went for a BenQ; their max. brightness is rather limited.

5.) The Dell UltraSharp U2723QE can run around $550 (it's been out for years and consistently gets strong reviews), but Amazon had it around $435 + tax. The new ASUS ProArt Display PA27JCV 27" 5K HDR Monitor was recently released at around $800 from B&H Photo & Video (where using their no-annual fee PayBoo credit card one can be discounted the sales tax) so I anticipated no sales (I just checked; it's $10 less now). So, roughly $460 vs. $800 to get 5K. Both are said to have good color; the ASUS is particularly praised for color accuracy and spaces, the Dell for using an LG IPS Black panel with better-than-usual contrast for IPS displays. Is 5K worth an extra $340?

6.) Online discussions about 4K 27" monitors with Macs get into discussions about scaling, since unlike Windows PCs, Macs don't do sub-pixel anti-aliasing and your processor has to do extra work to drive a display that's not in the sweet spot of DPI range of roughly 110 or 220 dpi. 5K 27" monitors are in the sweet spot (close to 220) and 4K 27" monitors are not. Also, 4K is lower than 5K resolution, so if you have a discerning eye and look up close, at some point 4K text isn't gonna match 5K. The 5K should be sharper.

7.) Unless your Mac's processor is struggling to handle a demanding workload, the added burden of scaling isn't likely to be noticeable (based on other's claims).

8.) Depending on who I listen to, the difference between 4 & 5K 27" text sharpness is either minute or just a little and people vary in whether they detect it at typical use distances. To some it's evident; some wouldn't notice the difference if they didn't deliberately look for it.

9.) iMac displays are glass and glossy; I learned most 4K 27" displays I studied were matte. Matte is a matter-of-degree, cuts down glare (not an issue in my 'man cave') and per some may make text less sharp (already a fear) and cause colors to have less 'pop.' In their review of the ASUS, KitGuru had this to say about the PA27JCV's anti-glare coating in comparison with a 2019 iMac side-by-side: "To my eye, the iMac looks slightly sharper, and lacks the slight coating grain that I believe is visible on the ProArt." "To be clear, I really don't think it is particularly bad or overly distracting, especially if you sit at a normal viewing distance. It may just depend how close you are to the screen, and how sensitive you are to this sort of thing, as to how much this is a factor for you with your potential buying decision." "The other niggle is perhaps more subjective, but it's worth pointing out the PA27JCV uses what ASUS calls ‘LuxPixel AGLR (Anti-Glare, Low Reflection)'. In other words, it's a fairly strong matte coating, and while ASUS claims ‘the user only sees accurate colors and sharp details' thanks to the LuxPixel tech, some coating grain is still visible. Compared against a 5K Apple iMac (2019), I did find myself preferring the appearance of text on the Apple display, but everyone has their own preference when it comes to gloss vs matte."

At some point pouring over monitor reviews I saw one that likened a matte display to appearing as though it had a thin film of dust on it. I don't recall which monitor that was.

10.) Longtime personal computing followers may recognize the term FUD - Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt, an unscrupulous marketing ploy to manipulate customers into paying more for their 'sure thing' product over competitors (like when your car maker encourages you to use 'GENUINE' <insert brand name> parts). It goes beyond that; we do it to ourselves. So 4K at 27" is probably fine, but 5K would be more sure. I was steeling myself to bite the $800 bullet when...

Woot had a holiday shopping season sale offering me a basically new condition, 'open box' Dell UltraSharp U2723QE for $320.50 (that's with my state's sales tax, shipped). Suddenly the price delta to go to the ASUS 5K was nearly $480.

The Dell got here yesterday and I hooked it to my 2017 12" MacBook, which is running 4K at 30-Hz. Stand appears to have aluminum inside with plastic outside. Much more adjustable than iMac stand. The Dell has really thin bezels and looks like the image is floating compared to the 27" iMac (which is like a tank). Photos taken with my iPhone 12 Pro Max.

It's hard to show you color differences (since my iPhone's camera and your monitor impact the images) or even slight text sharpness comparisons. Let's talk about text first, since that's easier. I typically sit with my face about 4-5 feet from the screen (in a recliner; I use the Command & + keys to magnify text so I can read easily), but I put my face in close to scrutinize the text to describe to you. In a nutshell, I don't notice substantial difference in text sharpness even up close. I'm not a 'pixel peeper' and don't claim a particularly discerning eye.

iMac:

Dell:

By the way, that 'hole in the stand' cord management thing the Dell does is neater than I expected. Sitting on its base is my 12" MacBook (I've got a decorative cover on it).

On the iMac, when I want to change brightness, I hit the brightness keys on my Apple Magic keyboard. Doesn't work on the Dell. I can go to System Settings, Displays and under resolution options I have a Brightness option; that option doesn't exist when I put it up on the Dell (both Macs using Ventura OS). I reached behind the lower righthand corner of the Dell and poked the little joystick, then maneuvered to adjust the brightness; not hard, but less convenient. Then I downloaded Dell Display Manager (free) and there's a new little icon in my top right screen row I can adjust brightness from.

Looking at MacRumor's forum, I noticed differences:

1.) The Dell screen indeed looked like there was a very faint dust layer on it, and the iMac screen was notably brighter.

2.) The Dell screen came set at 75% brightness; the iMac tends to have brightness around between 25 and 50%. I upped the Dell's brightness to 80% which was much more similar to the iMac's. Wonder if chronically running a monitor closer to its max impacts longevity?

3.) The iMac's MacRumor forum white was a purer white and the Dell's a tad warmer. If you think in color temperatures, I'd say the iMac's looked cooler, as if leaning toward the blue end of the spectrum, and the Dell's warmer, as if there was a very faint pinch of yellow in the mix. The higher brightness setting helped with that. I liked the iMac's look a little better.

4.) On the main MacRumor's page, I looked at some graphics used in the articles and on a couple I thought the Dell's display looked slightly preferable to me.

Note: The iMac's Display settings Color Profile just says 'iMac' and the Dell's just says 'Dell U2723QE.' I haven't tried the options; I don't have a practical working knowledge of color spaces and I'm reluctant to mess with things I don't understand.

5.) Sitting here right now typing up this report in a low light level room (and the iMac's set to adjust brightness automatically; currently close to 25%), the Dell's display's webpage background white is considerably brighter than the iMac's display, yet I think there's still that very faint, almost imperceptible hint of an extremely thin dust layer. Text sharp!

If someone bought this Dell monitor without having an iMac or ASD to compare it to side-by-side, they might never notice that.

6.) The Dell is set to 1920x1080 (default) and the iMac to 'Larger Text 1600x900. Since each display actually draws the screen with full resolution and resizes elements and I blow text up to read, I doubt that's making a big difference but some of you may know much better.

So, in a nutshell, I think the Dell is a fine monitor (with a number of hub ports built-in), the adjustability of the stand is very nice, I got it at a killer price, the text looks sharp and photos look good on it to my untrained eye. That said, with a gun to my head I'd give preference to the iMac's 5K display in my room where glare is a non-issue so matte confers no advantage. It's very early in my ownership and use of the Dell, but so far I prefer the iMac's screen (which I'm told is very similar to an Apple Studio Display's).

But I don't prefer it for $1,500 (give or take) + tax! And at that price I'd feel the need to buy AppleCare+, jacking it up even more. So no Apple Studio Display.

 

[Benhama]

What a great post. Thank you.

 

[drrich2]

@Benhama

Some follow up thoughts now that I've mulled the topic over some more.

1.) I thought IPS was pretty much what I'd find most any monitor's technology to be, but ran across a few VA panels.

2.) IPS is reputable and in broad use, known for broad viewing angles but a weakness is contrast (e.g.: blacks can look somewhat gray). The Dell UltraSharp U2723QE was one of the 1st displays to use IPS Black by LG, intended to offer superior contrast.

3.) IIRC, VA panels offer much better contrast than IPS panels but inferior viewing angles - if only you view your monitor and from directly in front that might not be a problem. If you collaborate with others at your side, it can be. I wasn't willing to take a chance on VA panel options due to unfamiliarity. 'When in doubt, stick with the herd, it's safer' (and IPS predominates). The ASUS ProArt PA27JCV 27" 5K is supposed to have good contrast for an IPS panel.

4.) The other obvious option is OLED, which has appeal for gamers. High contrast, deep blacks and fast response times, some with high refresh rates, brighter, very wide viewing angles, strong color accuracy, good for high dynamic range. Concerns include high cost, perhaps shorter life expectancy and permanent 'burn in' risk.

Pauls' Hardware has a Feb. 2023 overview of OLED: To OLED or Not to OLED: Gaming Monitor Pros and Cons

Just Josh Tech has a late 2024 video: OLED Burn-In: Should You Be Worried? The Truth Revealed! They set out to test whether burn in could be demonstrated experimentally on a PC notebook (2023 Zenbook 14) OLED display with a static image (multiple colors including white, hard lines and text) with display set at full brightness for 100 days. Worth your time to watch; my impression was burn in can be induced under extreme conditions but is likely not a major concern.

I'm too cheap to pay for OLED, too paranoid about burn in risk and don't game much, so not for me.

5.) Thunderbolt - I'd thought Thunderbolt was needful for 5K 60-Hz monitors, but as the ASUS 5K proves that's not so. Monitors with Thunderbolt tended to cost substantially more than those relying on HDMI and DisplayPort Over USB-C Alt. Mode.

6.) The 5K (and most 4K) displays I studied had a 60-Hz refresh rate, and reviews tended to mention that's not optimal for some gaming since you may get blur when moving fast on-screen.

7.) One of the selling points of the Dell I chose was the built-in hub functionality, but monitor hub ports are less convenient to use than a stand-alone dock. If torn between monitors and thinking about a more expensive one with hub function, ask whether you'd rather get a cheaper monitor + a stand-alone dock for about the same money.

8.) Price vs. Replaceability. When I buy something expensive, I tend to use it a long time. I expect a monitor to last at least 2 computer systems (over 10-years). When monitors don't progress very fast, that's not a big deal. These days, the increasing penetrance of OLED, slow mainstreaming of higher resolutions, more rapid adoption of higher refresh rates and other advances - I have to ask what the odds are most of us are going to want to use today's monitor in 7 or 8 years.

If that's the case, do you want to pay a grand for a Thunderbolt 5K 27" display, or 1.5 grand+ (with AppleCare+, etc...) for an Apple Studio Display?

Particularly if what you really want isn't available or workable yet. Here's my wish list:

1.) 32" Display (or ultra wide if resolution and text sharpness aren't sacrificed).
2.) 6K Resolution.
3.) 120-Hz Refresh rate.
4.) Glossy or light matte.
5.) Cost with sales tax & shipped under a grand.
6.) OLED sounds great if the burn in concerns are addressed.
7.) Strong brand name.

The Windows PC world is much larger than the Mac world and I imagine the main driver of the display market. The Windows crew seem happy with 4K 27" displays, and fairly happy with 4K 32" displays, so I doubt we're going to get a lot of cheap high quality 5K 27" displays anytime soon. I suspect 6K 32" would be more compelling, and 6K ultra wide screens, so maybe we'll see some (as Thunderbolt 5 and similar high-bandwidth technologies make 5 and 6K resolutions at refresh rates beyond 60-Hz practical go mainstream without such high prices).

If anyone else has advice for computer display shoppers, let us know!

 

[jabbr]

this is heck of a write up

the Dell is obviously a better value for most people. That said, if you're sitting 5 feet away and blowing up the text super huge you'd probably be perfectly happy with even a 1440p monitor.

 

[drrich2]

That said, if you're sitting 5 feet away and blowing up the text super huge you'd probably be perfectly happy with even a 1440p monitor.

Things have changed a bit for me. Before we downsized, I was in a roomier space with a traditional office 'computer chair.' It got old, an arm fell off, the cat clawed it up and we moved to a smaller home so I finally tossed it. My La-Z-Boy Roland Recliner with swivel base is comfy, and of course reclines plus sometimes a dog joins me and I put the foot rest up. So far the cat seems to understand clawing my beloved leather recliner would be unwise. But you never know...

Which display is best of the available options is an interesting deep dive. I forgot to mention KVM functionality, for people who want to share a monitor between 2 devices (e.g.: home Mac and work Windows notebook PC); a wireless keyboard and mouse with a receiver plugged into a monitor's USB-port can then share that display, mouse and keyboard with either of the 2 devices by switching the KVM.

I don't do that, but it matters to some people.

And some displays have 'smart t.v.' functionality, such as a Samsung I considered. I'm so used to watching Netflix, Amazon Prime, Max and Disney+ in browser windows (and interrupting to web surf and check e-mail) that I have no use for that, but someone else might.

The OSD (on-screen display) for a given model is worth considering if you're torn between options. One monitor may have a row of mostly unmarked buttons you choose amongst to navigate menus and change settings (and where are the buttons located? Do you need to reach under to the rear?). Another, like this Dell, has a little 'joystick' type thing that makes navigation easier. Another might have a remote control. Some BenQ displays have this little 'hockey puck' type customizable thing that gets good reviews.

The only display setting I adjust with any regularity is brightness. People who fiddle with settings a lot should pay more attention, as all monitors are not created equal.

HDR is something a number of these monitors advertise but reviews for the IPS displays at least didn't seem to think HDR made a striking difference. I watch Netflix & such but didn't make video quality a focus of my overview.

Someone expressed a dislike for when a display vendor puts their brand name on the bottom bezel (kinda like a 'bug on the windshield' that draws your eyes, I guess). Given that many monitors use a lot of plastic and aren't that heavy, if it's on a stand and you type and move around some monitors may 'wiggle' a little bit.

 

[jabbr]

beautiful cat and comfy setup

 

[drrich2]

Posting an update, since I designed this thread to help people monitor shopping and the issue of non-optimal 'non-retina' dpi displays and MacOS scaling (and lack of sub pixel anti-aliasing) is oft-mentioned and contentious, 2-days ago I found this YouTube video by Jerad's Tech Tips:

MacOS 4k Monitor Performance Issues? Here's Why​

He talks about using a 16" M3 Max MacBook Pro and seeing a performance cut with more demanding tasks. But drop down to the comment by motionfxes about 1 month ago:

"I have never experienced such a performance drop on a M1 Pro base model (14 core gpu) with 16gb of ram.I did a few tests in Final Cut Pro and DaVinci Resolve. The difference between running a 4k display at 1920p or 1440p equivalent was around 2 o 3% performance lost. Barely noticiable. So run your own tests to see if it's a problem or not based on the software you use, as it seems to be part of the problem."

So, one guy saw impact he deemed significant with an M3 Max, and another guy saw very little with an M1 Pro. What is a monitor shopper 'buying blind' (based off reviews without personally observing and testing) to do?

One thing I notice about the M1 Pro example is he's comparing 2 different settings on what I assume is the same 4K monitor. My understanding is that when you run a 4K monitor, the image is always at 4K resolution - the resolution we set tells MacOS to scale screen elements to the size they would appear to be on a lower resolution display (in other words, usually a lot larger), but the screen is being 'drawn' in 4K anyway. It's scaling those user interface elements to be big that's causing extra work for the processor.

In other words, I wonder how his system's performance would compare if he hooked it to a 27" 5K display and compared test results to the 4K display? Drop down to the comment by hackintoshslovakia368 from about a month ago. He compared an M1 Pro MacBook Pro with Dell 2720Q 4K (scaled to 2560x1440) vs. an Apple Studio Display, tried some benchmarks wrote 2-4% worse on 4K but in real world work in FCP, PS, AI and SWIFT he didn't see any difference. His comment is worth checking out.

To anyone monitor shopping 27" displays trying to figure out whether it's worth a few hundred extra for a 5K over a 4K display, I don't have a definitive answer, but if you think a 4K would probably be fine but have a bad case of FUD (fear, uncertainty & doubt) over all the Mac OS scaling-related warnings, I don't have a definitive answer but if you both watch that video AND read the comments, you should get a balanced overall perspective.

 

[Benhama]

Thank you drrich2 for this post. It gave me the confidence to buy the Dell U2723QE as my secondary monitor for my 2017 27" iMac. It looks superb! Just for reference I am running mine at 2560x1440 @ 60Hz.