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

Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

michael.stapelberg.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 470 posts

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#81

Post by smcleod »

walrus01 wrote: post #15
justahuman74 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not for tmux + firefox

Unless people are far more sensitive than I am, I don't see how >60Hz is needed for a desktop workstation environment. High frame rate is really only noticeable for very fast reaction time gaming. 4K 120Hz may be noticeable if editing ultra high frame rate video on a video editing workstation, but if you are a video production crew with a camera capable of recording at that framerate, you probably already know that.

60Hz is really noticeable when you’ve been using 120Hz even for a few minutes. 120Hz feels a lot less tiring and work in a terminal, editor and websites is just a lot smoother.

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#82

Post by smcleod »

goosedragons wrote: post #74
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s crazy how much of a regression there was in resolution and picture quality when we went from CRT to LCD displays. In the late 90’s you could get a CRT that did 2048x1536 no sweat with great color and decent refresh rate. Then suddenly LCD displays became the standard and they looked awful. Low resolutions, terrible colors and bad viewing angles. The only real advantage they had was size. It took a decade or so t…

How much did a 2048x1536 CRT monitor cost though? That's usually high and I bet it probably priced similar to what a 6K or 8K monitor is today.

Not at all! Your common as milk Philips and ViewSonic 19-21” could do that easily!

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#83

Post by snovv_crash »

goosedragons wrote: post #74
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s crazy how much of a regression there was in resolution and picture quality when we went from CRT to LCD displays. In the late 90’s you could get a CRT that did 2048x1536 no sweat with great color and decent refresh rate. Then suddenly LCD displays became the standard and they looked awful. Low resolutions, terrible colors and bad viewing angles. The only real advantage they had was size. It took a decade or so t…

How much did a 2048x1536 CRT monitor cost though? That's usually high and I bet it probably priced similar to what a 6K or 8K monitor is today.

Also that CRT was probably 21" max, and weighed 20% of the human looking at it.

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#84

Post by clhodapp »

nine_k wrote: post #72
hedora wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern Linux DPI support is a nightmare. It's a shame, since if you just run and old-school software stack (X11; minimal window manager; xrandr to adjust DPI if you hotplug a monitor), then it has much nicer font rendering than Mac OS. This is particularly frustrating since I've been using high DPI displays since the CRT days. Everything horribly regressed about a decade ago, and still isn't back to 1999 standards.

IDK, high DPI worked fine for me under Linux. I just set the desired DPI in Xfce settings, and everything scales properly. (Except Firefox, which has its own DPI setting! But it works equally painlessly.) Where things go haywire is mixed resolution. It's best avoided :-\ Hence now I have a 28" 4k external screen which is exactly like four 14" FHD screens of my laptop, so the DPI stays strictly the same.

Mixed resolution can look great on X11 if you do it with super-sampling, especially if you're able to do it via integer downscaling.

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#85

Post by 111111IIIIIII »

I just purchased 2 of the 6Ks and I am keeping both. AMA.

I do not understand the complaints about pixel density. The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. I am using them in a dual display configuration with an M1 Macbook Pro via TB4 and a Windows PC with an RTX 4090 via DisplayPort. The KVM feature makes switching back and forth a breeze. I am using 175% scaling (in Windows) and I don't think 8K with 1:2 scaling would give suitably sized OS components for me, so it would be fractional scaling either way.

The startup time doesn't matter in practice because they still wake up from sleep instantaneously.

The mini-DP IN port would be inconvenient but Club3D makes a bi-directional adapter that makes it regular DisplayPort for about $20.

I am fine with the camera defaulting to ON for Windows Hello to work in my 2 computer setup.

My only serious complaint is the piss poor speakers and the fabric covering them.

I would also prefer a glossy display, but in practice I just don't find it makes any difference. I arrange my office for no reflections anyhow, which results in an equivalent experience. Additionally, the Dell 6K has excellent blacks. It has much better blacks than any IPS panel I have used.

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#86

Post by duskwuff »

xnyanta wrote: post #32
filoleg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OS X just scales the entire surface and as result it always look blurry. I genuinely have zero idea what you are talking about. Typing this from my macbook connected to a 5k LG ultrawide monitor, and it is as crystal sharp as it can get. As opposed to my windows 10 desktop (connected to the same monitor) having some occasional application windows render fairly blurry and inconsistently (one of the main offenders of…

macOS will render at the next highest integer scale factor and then downscale to fit the resolution of your monitor instead of just rendering at the fractional scale in the first place

Does macOS support any scaling factors above 2x?

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#88

Post by zone411 »

rektide wrote: post #19
Matheus28 wrote: post #3

Slightly off topic but I can’t wait until there’s a 120 Hz 8K monitor. It’s the only thing holding me back from upgrading from 4K. I wonder if the current limitation is on the panels, cable bandwidth or absurd price tag…

It's been pretty amazing how stagnant the monitor space is. I too am really craving an 8k@120 monitor, although there's a decent chance I'll balk at the price.

I agree, but we got LG's 16:18 DualUp monitors a year ago. Having a 43'' monitor in the middle and these two on the sides creates a better setup than it was than what was previously possible.

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#89

Post by sedatk »

dewey wrote: post #76
steveBK123 wrote: post #48

Friends dont let friends buy Dell monitors.

What's the issue with Dell monitors? I'm still using my Dell P2715Q (4k) from > 5 years ago every day and the only reason that would make me switch is that it doesn't support the latest HDMI connections any more.

Yeah, until I got enamored by 144Hz, I'd exclusively buy Dell monitors because of their great price/performance.

Re: Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

#90

Post by sedatk »

Clamchop wrote: post #55
howinteresting wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people buying high-end monitors prioritize high refresh rates over pixel densities.

High refresh rates seem to have gotten quite cheap. In addition to refresh rates, the high end is concerned with HDR, resolution, color reproduction, curve, and width, depending on the professional segment being targeted. The products exist but they're not as numerous as I'd expect (certainly not outside of the Apple ecosystem), and it's an eye-watering leap as far as prices go, hundreds of dollars at one end and mul…

My experience is that HDR is rarely worth it on a computer monitor because OLED is so rare. FALD or other non-OLED HDR displays don't get near a decent OLED TV's HDR performance.
Post reply on HN