Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Just picked up the Dell U4025QW here are my thoughts after 24 hours.

R

richard371

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Feb 1, 2008
3,763
1,952
I have the MBP M3Max 16/40, 48 GB/1 TB. My current monitor was a LG 4K U850 16:9 which has been great but I do a lot of Lightroom/productivity and wanted bigger. My Thoughts:

1. It's big, much bigger than when you see it online or in pics.
2. I'm running it though my single TB4/usb-c cable and getting full 5k2k 120hz 30 bit color
3. Just like with my LG, I have my DDJ-800 mixer plugged into the monitor and it works great.
4. No issues so far, knock on wood, with wake, sleep etc. Everything seems to work. See comment 7 though.
5. Screen is very uniform and nice. I don't bother with HDR unless OLED or mini LED.
6. Its feels like a dual monitor setup but no odd gap and the curve makes it more immersive. I have 2 safaris running side by side.
7. I have not upgraded the FW to the latest version nor have I updated to 14.4 Mac OS as I hear these can cause issues with the usb hubs built into monitors etc. I'll hold off a bit.
8. The color is a bit on the warm side but as advertised seems very accurate for what I do.
9. In a perfect world, i'd prefer to have a 40" 8K micro led monitor that's 1/2 " thin but for now this is as good as it gets as those don't exist yet. Oled is great for gamers but not so much for photography or productivity.
10. It just looks bad ass on my desk with the studio monitors etc. and 120 hz is icing on the cake.
IMG_1352.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: BotchQue, DeltaHF, tranceking26 and 5 others
That image is while running natively at 5k/2k? I ask bc the UI looks big...too big. Like it looks more akin to 3840 x 1620 HiDPI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
anthonymoody said:
That image is while running natively at 5k/2k? I ask bc the UI looks big...too big. Like it looks more akin to 3840 x 1620 HiDPI.
Click to expand...
The resolution is 5k2k. The scaling scales it to run at 3840x1620. I run mine at that resolution. It's perfect. I used to have a 38" monitor that ran at a native resolution of 3840x1600. The UI elements are SLIGHTLY bigger on the 40" Dell, but it's tough to tell. 2" more display, 20 more vertical pixels. However the smoothness is super noticeable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigKahunaBurguer
I'm just now learning more about features in monitos, but doesn't 40" at 3840x1620 equate to say the 27" at 5k of a apple studio display? It seems that at this scaled version you can fit just as much stuff on your screen.
 
dhulke said:
I'm just now learning more about features in monitos, but doesn't 40" at 3840x1620 equate to say the 27" at 5k of a apple studio display? It seems that at this scaled version you can fit just as much stuff on your screen.
Click to expand...
The difference is the aspect ratio. It's the same # of effective pixels but with a widescreen AR you can comfortably fit 3 columns of applications on your screen. On a 27" display you're not really going to do that. Or if you do you'll have very narrow windows for your apps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dhulke
anthonymoody said:
The difference is the aspect ratio. It's the same # of effective pixels but with a widescreen AR you can comfortably fit 3 columns of applications on your screen. On a 27" display you're not really going to do that. Or if you do you'll have very narrow windows for your apps.
Click to expand...
Understood. Thank you very much. I'm a coder and I wanted to fit 3 editor screens of 120 characters side by side on a Macbook Pro M1 Max and given these descriptions I think I'm able to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anthonymoody
dhulke said:
Understood. Thank you very much. I'm a coder and I wanted to fit 3 editor screens of 120 characters side by side on a Macbook Pro M1 Max and given these descriptions I think I'm able to.
Click to expand...
Yup that should be no problem, though the actual PPI won't be as high, thus the text not as razor sharp, as on the ASD. That's why 3840x1620 is so important: it runs in HiDPI so it's still reasonably sharp.
 
anthonymoody said:
Yup that should be no problem, though the actual PPI won't be as high, thus the text not as razor sharp, as on the ASD. That's why 3840x1620 is so important: it runs in HiDPI so it's still reasonably sharp.
Click to expand...
You mean I’m able to get the 3 windows side by side with HiDPI 3840x1620, but it won’t be as sharp as the ASD?
 
dhulke said:
You mean I’m able to get the 3 windows side by side with HiDPI 3840x1620, but it won’t be as sharp as the ASD?
Click to expand...
Correct. These 40" 5k/2k have a PPI of something like 142. The ASD is 218. The 40" is more than useable IMO, but OTOH if/when they release a monitor this size with a higher PPI I will get one :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision and dhulke
anthonymoody said:
Correct. These 40" 5k/2k have a PPI of something like 142. The ASD is 218. The 40" is more than useable IMO, but OTOH if/when they release a monitor this size with a higher PPI I will get one :)
Click to expand...
The Dell U4025QW has a ppi of 218 (without scaling)
 
mistrrmac said:
Oof. You’re right. I just quoted someone else from YouTube without double checking. It’s around 139 based on Sven.de calculator. My apologies!
Click to expand...
No worries :)

218 is proper retina-level. I'd kill (ok maybe not literally, but maybe) for a 40" 21:9 display at 218 PPI :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back