Dell 5K Monitor Hands-On [Updated]

35

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

maxeeemum

OK! But I'll wait till they get to 128K before I upgrade. LOL!

I'm happy with 1080p thank you!

avatar

MrHasselblad

Anyone remember the recent news when film movie houses were forced to upgrade?

There will be another one of these forced upgrades within the next two years. Soon the local (and even regional) movie houses will be forced completely out of business.

Let's just "say" that it's because of technology directly related to this

avatar

Rottenham

Many (most) PC programs have UIs that are unusable at 2560. The UI text does not scale. The icons do not scale. These UIs were coded for 1280 years ago, and have never changed. I had to dial my resolution back to 1600 to use some of my newest graphics programs. I'm not the only one who sees this.

Until (unless) software makers get off the dime and recode their UIs to make them scalable, high pixel density monitors are of little value.

avatar

LatiosXT

Web pages have been picking up with scalable layouts and most of them work quite well. A lot of GUI tools don't offer that flexibility, but for the most part, a lot of GUI elements are scalable.

At least games have gotten scaling down to a T. Now aren't you happy those developers coded for "watered down consoles"? It forced them to make the UI scalable.

avatar

bpstone

Yes! It is extremely annoying. T_T

avatar

bpstone

Too much too soon. GPUs need to catch up first.

avatar

wintercoder

I don't get it:
"Other specs we just dug out of our reporters notebook: 218 pixels per square inch ... "

Do you actually mean "218 pixels per inch" ??

avatar

LatiosXT

It's per square inch. You're measuring how many pixels are there in a given area. Plus per inch in which direction?

avatar

wintercoder

That cant be right... 218 ppsi would mean that there were only 14 pixels in the x direction and about 15 pixels in the y direction.

It should read 218 pixels per inch.

avatar

bensen408

LG showed off a 98" 8K TV yesterday.

Look it up!

avatar

ApathyCurve

Wider, not higher rez, is the secret to increasing usability and immersion. Human eyesight operates in a range of 160+ degrees horizontally. HORIZONTALLY. We don't see the world through a tube.

I've used 4K single monitor and I've used superwide (triple monitor) at regular resolutions; the latter is hands-down the more useful and impressive option, and far more cost effective. If you haven't tried both, your opinion isn't valid; go get yourself some experience before you start your bleating.

To be clear, when there is a video solution capable of running it, I will use 4K monitors... three of them. When the prices come down to something reasonable, that is.

avatar

DirtModeler

I'm looking forward to these monitors coming down in price.. I have a nice Dell 27" 1080p IPS monitor that i love, but a 5K IPS 27 incher would be even better.

I do a lot of vector line artwork, mostly viewing them in wireframe mode, so you see only black lines on a white background... The extra pixels would help smooth them out, and help me pick out different details while zoomed out.. on a lower res monitor, details start to meld together unless you are zoomed in.

For me, frame rate isn't quite as important.

I'm not going to get one until they are <$1000 though.

avatar

John Pombrio

Samsung's new UD970 may have two out the three. IPS and a 31.5 inch screen size with full color gamut. $2K tho...

avatar

jim2point0

If "4K" is 3840x2160, wouldn't "5K" be 4800x2700?

avatar

dashize

Update: Dell didn't know the price this morning, but according to a press release from the company this afternoon, the monitor will cost $2,499.99. Whew, we thought it might actually cost $2,500, but that's much cheaper.
1 penny is but much cheaper, but reading the line after i assume you were going to say that it might actually cost $3,500?

avatar

sam80jr

they were being facetious...i can't tell if you were too, but if you weren't, then grow a brain.

avatar

Insula Gilliganis

3D capable?? If not.. fugetaboutit!! Will wait until 16K is available because I want MORE than just "10K real life"!!

avatar

NavarWynn

Sweet! More pixels is better!
(Never mind that the card they used is another $2K ;) )

As a cautionary note, Dell has been doing a shitty job supporting their existing 4k monitors, with up to date and functional drivers (for full 4k resolutions...) hopefully they'll be doing a better job going forward, because frankly, what's the point if every other reboot you only end up with half the screen functioning... With the bump in res, I expect that job just got harder...

Obviously, at such resolutions, making the panel with enough pixels is only 1/3 the battle, the other 2/3 are (a) having enough GPU punch to push that many pixels (especially at decent frame rates), and (b) having compatible drivers that allow all your components to get along well enough...

avatar

John Pombrio

I was all against the "marginal" benefits of 4K until a couple of months ago. I walked by a 55 inch 4K Samsung TV running 4K source material at a BJs. Stopped dead in my tracks, my jaw dropping open, the theme music from Jurassic Park playing my head, and saying "they DO run in herds!" It was just stunning. I got within inches of the screen before I could discern any pixels, any more resolution might as well be a window. This is a major leap forward in technology but only when the TV or monitor are HUGE, like the dinosaurs.

avatar

vrmlbasic

The only 4K TVs that I've seen have been running The Hobbit bluray, which is obviously not 4K native as BD doesn't yet have that capacity, and the upscale didn't really impress me :(

avatar

jgrimoldy

Maybe I'm going to need to give this a second chance. I saw a 4K setup in Best Buy (heavens do I hate that place, but I won a gift card). Comparing 480i to 1080p shows an astounding difference. BB's 4K setup (55", I think) just didn't WOW me the same way 1080p did when I first saw it. It looked nice, yeah. But from 8' I just couldn't appreciate the difference. I had to practically get my nose to the screen to see pixels which is something 1080p can't do... I usually don't sit quite that close to the screen though.

Very descriptive way of describing your astonishment, btw. Maybe BB's setup was poorly tuned... I will need to take another look.

Either with very big screens or 4K projectors doing 150", I'd imagine it would be breathtaking. Still 1080p on a 150" screen looks pretty darned nice from 12' away.

avatar

John Pombrio

Indeed, the material that was being displayed was a demo loop from Samsung. Only part of the presentation was in true 4K which is where I happened to walk in. The detail of a cityscape was unreal, seeing tiny full formed people on the street. I never backed up enough to a proper viewing distance to baseline one 55" from a lower 1080P one nor did I see upscaled 1080P content on the screen (except for what was in the demo loop). I am sure the wow factor would fade but still... DAMN.

avatar

guppieman

Just Announced - Real life is only 10K!

Really though, has anyone seen any studies on what the human eye/brain can actually analyze from a distance of, say 2 feet? What is the real world horizontal resolution, and are we even close?

avatar

John Pombrio

As I said above, I got close and personal to a 55 inch 4K TV until I could see the pixels, maybe 8 inches or so. But then I looked at my son's 13.3 inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display (TM) which packed my 2560x1440 27 inch monitor into that 13 inches and thud, nothing. No Jurassic Park themes, no big deal. Extremely sharp text was the most I noticed. It takes BIG to really see the difference.

avatar

LatiosXT

I believe when Apple announced the retina display, a scientist basically said the human eye could resolve better. The question then becomes when does that happen? When a black pixel on a white field is no longer visible?

The other question though becomes even if we knew that value, would the average person even care to resolve it? Apparently audiophiles claim that 24-bit 192KHz audio is superior to 16-bit 44.1KHz audio. But the average person probably can't tell the difference because they can't care to resolve that much.

Plus there's the fact that some women have four primary colors they can sense... so the whole 16 million color limit is kind of false when taking that into account.

avatar

gamingwithnetbooks

"Just bought a 4K panel? Well guess what, it's obsolete already."

You're basing the obsolescence of an entire product category on the demo of a single product that hasn't been released?

Makes perfect sense.

avatar

gordonung

This just in: 6K panels announced. The 5K panel just announced but not sold yet already obsolete. 

Kidding. I'm just trolling you. 

 

But yeah, there is a certain amount of "Damn, I just bought the highest resolution panel on the market! I've been saving months for this and I'm king of the world! Doh!"

 

Also, LGA1150/Haswell did not make LGA1155/Ivy Bridge obsolte from an operational point of view, but you know damn well that if you bought a Core i7-3770K and LGA1155 board that morning and the next day, Core i7-4770K and LGA1150 was announced, you'd be feeling pretty bad. I would. 

avatar

praetor_alpha

Or you can be the opposite like me, and build a Sandy Bridge system the week it was released, then tear it apart a few months later because the chipset was bad. Eh, you win some benchmarks, and you have some risks, but that CPU still makes me happy.

avatar

Innomasta

Wowzers

avatar

LatiosXT

So by the time 60FPS 4K gaming is possible on games today with GPUs tomorrow, we'll be stepping up to higher resolutions (6K? 8K)?

Welp, I'm glad we're finally moving on. Wish it went smoother rather than in bursts.

avatar

Volleynova

Eeeeeeeeek!

avatar

John Pombrio

Heh, good one, Gordon! If they can pack umteen number of pixels into a smartphone or tablet, this 5K panel is just a blown up version of them. I wonder what the yields are on these puppies? I have a feeling that the number of pixel rejects has been dropping a lot in recent years considering the number of high res phones, tablets, monitors, and TVs are going out the door.
Am I interested in a higher res monitor or TV? Not yet. Once I got my hands on a Dell IPS monitor, I simply refuse to go back to a TN monitor, no matter what the benefits. My living room cannot really support anything larger than a 46 inch TV so 4K would be overkill, especially since I do not have any source material good enough for that kind of resolution.
One point that I just thought of is all my older games and Steam library. I wonder how many of the games would look horrible on a 4K monitor? Then there is the matter of driving the frame rates with "only" a GTX 780.

avatar

gordonung

It's a nerdworld problem live in: Do you buy a 27-inch Gsync/144Hz panel at 2560x1440 or 4K or wide aspect ratio or just stick with three 1080P's in surround? It's better to have choices than have the decisions made for us with no ability to vary it. That would be another company we know rather well.

avatar

LatiosXT

However I would like to say too much choice is a problem. Would it be better for our current technology to run on x86 and ARM? Or would it be better for our current technology to run on x86, ARM, MIPS, SPARC, POWER, IA-64, AVR32, and SuperH?

avatar

AFDozerman

Oh-a my-a god-ta