MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
53,026
14,771



dell-up2414q-hero.jpg
Dell has posted details of a new 24-inch monitor sporting a 3840x2160 "4K" Ultra HD resolution at 185 pixels per inch on its website (via Anandtech), suggesting the company may soon be selling 4K monitors to its consumer and business customers. No pricing or release date information, however, was included in the listing.

The development could provide insight into future Apple 4K monitor offerings as the two companies have historically used the same supplier for their display panels.

From Dell's listing:
See more of everything -- down to the smallest detail

Whether it's video editing, CGI animation or application and game development, the Dell UltraSharp 24 Monitor - UP2414Q gives you an up-close-and-personal view.

- Our highest pixel density sharpens the tiniest details in videos and images for stunning results.
- Ultra HD 3840 x 2160 packs in four times the resolution of Full HD.
- Get a clear and consistent view with an ultrawide 178°/178° viewing angle.

Diagonally Viewable Size: 60.47 cm 23.8" (23.8-inch wide viewable image size)
Aspect Ratio: Widescreen (16:9)
Panel Type, Surface: In-plane switching, anti glare with hard coat 3H
Optimal resolution: 3840 x 2160 at 60 Hz (DP1.2*)
3840 x 2160 at 30 Hz HDMI
Contrast Ratio: 1000: 1 (typical) 2 Million:1 (Max) (Dynamic Contrast Ratio)
Brightness: 350 cd/m2 (typical)
Response Time: 8 ms (gray to gray)
Viewing Angle: (178° vertical / 178° horizontal)
Color Support: Color Gamut (typical): Adobe RGB 99%, sRGB 100%
1.07 Billion colors (8 Bits +AFRC)
Pixel Pitch: 0.137 mm
Pixel Per Inch (PPI): 185
Backlight Technology: LED
Display Type: Widescreen Flat Panel Display
Display Screen Coating: Antiglare with hard-coating 3H
It is unknown if Apple would use the same 16:9 3840 x 2160 panels for a 4K display, as some have suggested that the company may prefer to push Thunderbolt 2 to its limit and support the wider 4096 x 2160 "Cinema 4K" standard given that the display will undoubtedly be targeted at professionals, many of whom in the film industry will be working with content using that resolution standard adopted for film production.

With the new Mac Pro, expected sometime this month, supporting up to three 4K displays simultaneously, there had been hopes that Apple would release updated Thunderbolt displays with 4K displays in the near future. Though these new 4K display panels have been announced from a number of potential suppliers, we have heard no firm details about new Thunderbolt displays from Apple.

Update: Dell has now officially announced the UP2414Q display, which launches in the Americas today for $1399 and will be available worldwide on December 16. A 32-inch UP3214Q model is also available for $3499 and a 28-inch model priced at under $1000 will follow in early 2014.

Article Link: New 24-Inch 4K Monitor Detailed on Dell's Website [Update: $1399]
 

skysurfer

macrumors newbie
Apr 28, 2005
19
9
Make it 27" or even 30" and maybe then it would be worth looking at
 
Last edited:
Comment

RobinHood5

macrumors regular
Apr 23, 2012
157
0
Wait, It's 4k and only 24"??? I'd want the darn thing to be 30" and have 3 of them...
 
Comment

Bensalama21

macrumors regular
Jul 17, 2011
234
3
Great... And the current applications on my computer just caught up to supporting the resolution on my current retina mac. :(
 
Comment

macaddiict

macrumors regular
Oct 22, 2005
130
136
Albuquerque, NM
Assuming this is a decent price, I'll likely be buying one. After upgrading to a retina MacBook Pro, using a regular monitor is like sand in the eyes.
 
Comment

chirpie

macrumors 6502a
Jul 23, 2010
645
179
I don't know... even at a 2 foot viewing distance, I would wish for at least 27 inches at that resolution.
 
Comment

Macman45

macrumors G5
Jul 29, 2011
13,198
133
Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
Now all we really need is 4K content. Sure that looks like a great monitor, and Dell's tend to be competitively priced too, but without a lot more 4K Ultra HD son tent, it's not going to make a great deal of difference...except for looking better than my iMac :)
 
Comment

undesign

macrumors regular
Nov 4, 2013
241
0
With the forthcoming lousy Intel graphics chips in pretty much all macbooks and imacs, gaming will be rendered completely USELESS in OS X.

No video card on an imac or macbook could handle that kind of resolution unless your significantly crippling the quality settings or playing a very old game.

I like the resolution, but GPU options in apple computers has gone to *****. It used to be pretty bad.... now its next to non-existent.
 
Comment

v0lume4

macrumors 68000
Jul 28, 2012
1,789
3,555
With the forthcoming lousy Intel graphics chips in pretty much all macbooks and imacs, gaming will be rendered completely USELESS in OS X.

No video card on an imac or macbook could handle that kind of resolution unless your significantly crippling the quality settings or playing a very old game.

I like the resolution, but GPU options in apple computers has gone to *****. It used to be pretty bad.... now its next to non-existent.

Maybe (hopefully) this'll make Apple step up their game again and not rely on integrated graphics. Orrr not. At this rate...

No. :(
 
Comment

9000

macrumors 6502a
Sep 29, 2013
519
0
Hyrule
Now all we really need is 4K content. Sure that looks like a great monitor, and Dell's tend to be competitively priced too, but without a lot more 4K Ultra HD son tent, it's not going to make a great deal of difference...except for looking better than my iMac :)

I think a lot of content is already in 4K but just isn't released at 4K because nobody has 4K TVs. Theaters already use it. Also, I'm using a 1920x1080 monitor, and it doesn't give me enough screen space. Wish I at least had 1920x1200, but those are seen as worse since they're not 1080p :rolleyes:

----------

With the forthcoming lousy Intel graphics chips in pretty much all macbooks and imacs, gaming will be rendered completely USELESS in OS X.

No video card on an imac or macbook could handle that kind of resolution unless your significantly crippling the quality settings or playing a very old game.

I like the resolution, but GPU options in apple computers has gone to *****. It used to be pretty bad.... now its next to non-existent.

I understand integrated graphics on MacBooks, but why iMacs???! They're desktop computers! Nobody cares about an iMac's battery life! But even with a dedicated GPU, good luck playing a high-graphics game at 4K.
 
Comment

sentiblue

macrumors regular
Aug 2, 2012
218
155
Silicon Valley
So I had two 27" cinema displays working with a mini....

Then I switched to an Air... the dual displays go back too often because the GPU performance requirements are too high... it runs OK with a single display.

I went and sell one of the displays... Now it looks like I'm gonna have to sell both the remaining display and the Air to get the new Apple 4K Cinema (whenever it arrives)... and then whatever thinnest laptop at that time works with the new display, will be the one ;)
 
Comment

Eric5h5

macrumors 68020
Dec 9, 2004
2,419
448
With the forthcoming lousy Intel graphics chips in pretty much all macbooks and imacs, gaming will be rendered completely USELESS in OS X.

You wouldn't actually game at that resolution. Even a high-end GPU would struggle on many games, so integrated or not isn't really the issue. Just use 1920x1080.

--Eric
 
Comment

retroneo

macrumors 6502a
Apr 22, 2005
721
93
No video card on an imac or macbook could handle that kind of resolution unless your significantly crippling the quality settings or playing a very old game.

I like the resolution, but GPU options in apple computers has gone to *****. It used to be pretty bad.... now its next to non-existent.

The MacBook Pro 15" and iMac upper configs have solid GPUs, and all Mac Pro configs have two.

So only the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro 13" are really out of the question - but would a gamer really be considering those?

We'll have to wait until next year to see what the Mac mini update brings.
 
Comment

Tankmaze

macrumors 68000
Mar 7, 2012
1,689
326
Yes !!!!
This goes to show the screen technology is ready for the masses.
Hope it doesn't cost above $2000
 
Comment

Icaras

macrumors 603
Mar 18, 2008
6,255
2,979
I like the resolution, but GPU options in apple computers has gone to *****. It used to be pretty bad.... now its next to non-existent.

I've gotta disagree. I must say I'm thoroughly impressed with the Iris Pro's performance in my wife's new 2013 iMac. It does pretty much everything last year's base model can do without having to be discreet whilst cutting down on noise (one less fan) and saving in energy. Base models may not be intended to drive 4K displays but its an achievement that Intel has finally caught up with entry level discreet graphics.

Meanwhile my 2012 iMac with the 680MX is handling Battlefield 4 just fine. And now we're up to 4GB of video memory? I'd say this is the best era for GPUs in all-in-one Macs.
 
Last edited:
Comment

designgeek

macrumors 65816
Jan 30, 2009
1,064
0
"Town"
Doesn't Dell often use the same panels as apple? Wasn't the first IPS 27" iMac panel used in a Dell monitor as well? I wonder if this seals Apple's fate...
 
Comment

wxman2003

Suspended
Apr 12, 2011
2,580
294
Once again the industry trying to sell something useless. 4K monitors are a joke. Unless you sit 1 foot away, you won't notice any difference between a 1080p and a 4K monitor. You want real quality, with the best colors and the ultimate black levels, wait for OLED to come down in price. Give it 2 to 3 years. The 4K monitors will have the same problems that current LED monitors have. Clouding, motion blur, and of course, poor blacks and colors.
 
Comment

3282868

macrumors 603
Jan 8, 2009
5,281
0
It's ugly as heck too.

That was my first thought.

I've used Apple displays with my Mac Pro's for years. The 20"/23"/30" CCFL LCD's Apple released first in 2004 were phenomenal; they required little to no calibration, lasted until 2010 when I replaced 2 23" models with 2 24" LED LCD's. Sadly Apple ditched a full line for one size display using the same LED LCD panel in their then largest iMac (24" 2008-2010, now 27"), and plagued with quality control issues. Apple replaced both my 24" LED LCD's as they had their panels and power supplies replaced 2-3x each, replacing them w/ two 27" LED LCD's with AppleCare. If it weren't for Apple stellar customer service, I would have purchased elsewhere.

My only complaint, while function is primary I do like a clean desktop and Apple's displays have always looked excellent, a big benefit when/if clients see my systems. I tried Dell displays, never again. I hope Apple releases improved displays soon.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.