Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 238 posts

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#131

Post by steveridout »

300bps wrote: post #107
steveridout wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bear in mind that higher resolution display != smaller UI elements. It gives you that option of course, but for most people the benefit is that fonts, icons and images look so much crisper and more readable. You're definitely not the only one who thinks it's overkill. I've shown my retina iPad and MacBook to a few people who don't get the fuss at all. I guess this reaction could be due to a) not caring much about aes…

I've shown my retina iPad and MacBook to a few people who don't get the fuss at all...Myself, I think the screens are amazing Over a decade ago, I bought one of those Sharper Image ion air purifiers. I told all my friends how great it was - totally silent but really cleaned the air and left it with a fresh scent. About a year later I started reading scientific assessments and reviews of it. It in fact did nothing to…

I know what you mean, that it's easy to fool yourself and fall into marketing traps. But in this case of monitor resolution, there is a very noticeable difference (to me at least) between current desktop monitors and retina ones. If in 5 years some company tries to push the trend even further with 8K extreme retina or something like that I'm sure I'll be on your side, but for now, please, bring on the 4K desktop displays!

(Actually, when it comes to TVs I do think we're getting into overkill territory with 50" 4K displays, when for typical TV viewing distances 1080p is fine)

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#132

Post by introspectif »

timr wrote: post #87
knightni wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's two really great things about retina screens on desktops/laptops: - Firstly, I definitely notice the difference. The higher res screen is noticeably nicer to read. Sure, you don't need to go to the crazy extremes of some newer high res phones, but standard desktop monitors are noticeably ugly by comparison. - Secondly, the res is high enough that you can finally change (apparent) resolution. My parent…

A human eye with 20/20 vision can distinguish ~150ppi at 2 feet (a typical screen-to-eyeball distance). Beyond that, it's overkill. The apple thunderbolt display is at 109ppi, so there's a bit of room for improvement, but not 60% improvement. Beyond this limit, I suppose there are people with 20/1 vision or something, but they're pretty rare.

I've never gotten this argument. I mean, I have totally normal (nearly 20/20, but not quite... thanks to aging) vision, yet I can see the blurred edges of diagonal and rounded images perfectly fine on an iphone 5s at 2 feet. I think people just aren't really looking. I tried a thunderbolt display recently, and it was painfully low resolution. I haven't seen the math recently, but I have hard time believing that any phone today, let alone any monitor or television, really reaches the resolution of print.

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#133

Post by bryanlarsen »

tibbon wrote: post #130
bhauer wrote: post #126

Excellent. Again, a big thank you to Seiki for dropping a bomb on the display industry, whether or not Dell acknowledges it. 3840x2160 at 28 inches is quite fantastic. A step closer to 10,000+ horizontal pixels in a single ~50 inch display, which I consider an ideal for desktop computing. The burning question for me right now is who will sell me a GPU with three DisplayPorts to drive three of these? The top-end nVidi…

Whatever Apple is putting in the Mac Pro I think will do it.

You can't buy those off the shelf. The cards used in the Mac Pro are a cross between AMD Radeon and FirePro cards. You can step up to "full" FirePro cards, and get 2, 4 or 6 display ports, depending on model.

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#134

Post by bryanlarsen »

bhauer wrote: post #126

Excellent. Again, a big thank you to Seiki for dropping a bomb on the display industry, whether or not Dell acknowledges it. 3840x2160 at 28 inches is quite fantastic. A step closer to 10,000+ horizontal pixels in a single ~50 inch display, which I consider an ideal for desktop computing. The burning question for me right now is who will sell me a GPU with three DisplayPorts to drive three of these? The top-end nVidi…

If you're happy with the HDMI port driving your 4K monitor (which means you're running at 30Hz), it seems that a GTX 660 or better will work. (AMD cards have similar port layouts)

DP: 4K @ 60Hz

HDMI: 4K @ 30Hz

2xDVI: use dual-link DVI->HDMI adapters (which are expensive, granted)

If your monitor supports being driven by 2 HDMI cables, you can use 2 of the HDMI ports to drive one of the monitors at 60Hz.

Of course, I haven't actually tried this.

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#135

Post by talmand »

Jongseong wrote: post #118

Such high resolution displays may sound like overkill for many people, but improved resolution is a big deal to those who care about screen typography—specifically, in layman's terms, about how fonts look on screen. When displaying letters in small sizes, the pixel grid becomes increasingly coarse and the result often becomes ugly and less readable. To prevent this, "hinting" instructions need to be built into the fo…

For every designer out there that really cares about typography in their designs that has high end monitors that are expertly calibrated, most of your audience probably doesn't.

Also check your work on a normal monitor.

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#136

Post by bhauer »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #134
bhauer wrote: post #126

Excellent. Again, a big thank you to Seiki for dropping a bomb on the display industry, whether or not Dell acknowledges it. 3840x2160 at 28 inches is quite fantastic. A step closer to 10,000+ horizontal pixels in a single ~50 inch display, which I consider an ideal for desktop computing. The burning question for me right now is who will sell me a GPU with three DisplayPorts to drive three of these? The top-end nVidi…

If you're happy with the HDMI port driving your 4K monitor (which means you're running at 30Hz), it seems that a GTX 660 or better will work. (AMD cards have similar port layouts) DP: 4K @ 60Hz HDMI: 4K @ 30Hz 2xDVI: use dual-link DVI->HDMI adapters (which are expensive, granted) If your monitor supports being driven by 2 HDMI cables, you can use 2 of the HDMI ports to drive one of the monitors at 60Hz. Of course, I…

I am presently happy with 30 Hz—very happy in fact because the resolution is so spectacular. However, if I owned three of these Dell monitors, I would definitely want them to all function at 60 Hz. And I don't believe the dual-link DVI ports on the nVidia cards will do greater than 2560x1600.

I think the only way to drive three of these Dells at 60 Hz would be a 3x DisplayPort GPU. nVidia and AMD, are you listening? With an affinity for a wide spectrum of GPU options, especially at nVidia, why is this not a thing?

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#137

Post by bhauer »

dmm wrote: post #129
bhauer wrote: post #126

Excellent. Again, a big thank you to Seiki for dropping a bomb on the display industry, whether or not Dell acknowledges it. 3840x2160 at 28 inches is quite fantastic. A step closer to 10,000+ horizontal pixels in a single ~50 inch display, which I consider an ideal for desktop computing. The burning question for me right now is who will sell me a GPU with three DisplayPorts to drive three of these? The top-end nVidi…

> who will sell me a GPU with three DisplayPorts to drive three of these? Visiontek makes a couple of eyefinity cards with 6 mini-dps. I didn't see the measurements but it doesn't look too long. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814129...

I so want to believe you're right, but I don't see anything on that page that suggests those DisplayPorts can drive 3840x2160. The footnotes imply, but do not say specifically, that 2560x1600 is the maximum resolution supported by each port. Am I wrong?

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#138

Post by tbrownaw »

timr wrote: post #87
knightni wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's two really great things about retina screens on desktops/laptops: - Firstly, I definitely notice the difference. The higher res screen is noticeably nicer to read. Sure, you don't need to go to the crazy extremes of some newer high res phones, but standard desktop monitors are noticeably ugly by comparison. - Secondly, the res is high enough that you can finally change (apparent) resolution. My parent…

A human eye with 20/20 vision can distinguish ~150ppi at 2 feet (a typical screen-to-eyeball distance). Beyond that, it's overkill. The apple thunderbolt display is at 109ppi, so there's a bit of room for improvement, but not 60% improvement. Beyond this limit, I suppose there are people with 20/1 vision or something, but they're pretty rare.

That is, you can distinguish lines that are about 1/150 inch apart.

But for a display, you want to be able to have diagonal (or curved) lines at 1/150 inch apart, with pixellation artifacts that are small relative to those lines.

That probably translates to something like 450ppi (line width of 3px, so the artifacts should probably be about 1/3 of the line size).

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#139

Post by AJ007 »

talmand wrote: post #135
Jongseong wrote: post #118

Such high resolution displays may sound like overkill for many people, but improved resolution is a big deal to those who care about screen typography—specifically, in layman's terms, about how fonts look on screen. When displaying letters in small sizes, the pixel grid becomes increasingly coarse and the result often becomes ugly and less readable. To prevent this, "hinting" instructions need to be built into the fo…

For every designer out there that really cares about typography in their designs that has high end monitors that are expertly calibrated, most of your audience probably doesn't. Also check your work on a normal monitor.

If your audience is on a smartphone or tablet released within the past two years, they probably are.

Re: Dell Wasn't Joking About That 28-Inch Sub-$1000 4K Monitor; It's Only $699

#140

Post by bryanlarsen »

bhauer wrote: post #136
bryanlarsen wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're happy with the HDMI port driving your 4K monitor (which means you're running at 30Hz), it seems that a GTX 660 or better will work. (AMD cards have similar port layouts) DP: 4K @ 60Hz HDMI: 4K @ 30Hz 2xDVI: use dual-link DVI->HDMI adapters (which are expensive, granted) If your monitor supports being driven by 2 HDMI cables, you can use 2 of the HDMI ports to drive one of the monitors at 60Hz. Of course, I…

I am presently happy with 30 Hz—very happy in fact because the resolution is so spectacular. However, if I owned three of these Dell monitors, I would definitely want them to all function at 60 Hz. And I don't believe the dual-link DVI ports on the nVidia cards will do greater than 2560x1600. I think the only way to drive three of these Dells at 60 Hz would be a 3x DisplayPort GPU. nVidia and AMD, are you listening?…

It's probably worth testing if you can borrow a dual-link DVI->HDMI adapter, but I would be surprised if it didn't work. Those adapters don't actually do a full conversion; they work by telling the video card to send HDMI signals out of the DVI pins. It's obviously physically possible, 4K@30Hz requires less bandwidth than 2560x1600 @60Hz.

nVidia is supposed to release its next generation of cards (AKA Maxwell) in the spring. They will likely support HDMI 2.0, which will support 4K@60hz. I'm really surprised that the new AMD cards that came out this fall don't support HDMI 2.0.

Post reply on HN