Friday, March 24th 2017

Dell Starts Selling its 32-inch 8K UltraSharp Monitor

Dell today started selling its flagship 32-inch (31.5-inch viewable) 8K monitor on its website. The Dell UltraSharp UP3218K boasts of "visuals that rival life," thanks to its gargantuan 7680 x 4320 pixels resolution, which is four times that of 4K Ultra HD, and sixteen times that of Full HD. At its size, the display offers a stellar pixel density of 279 ppi. Under the hood is an IPS panel with 178°/178° viewing angles, 60 Hz refresh rate, 6 ms response time (GTG), 1,300:1 static contrast ratio with dynamic mega-contrast, and 400 cd/m² maximum brightness. The display takes input from two DisplayPort 1.4 connectors. Backed by a 3-year warranty, the UltraSharp UP3218K is priced at USD $5,000.
Add your own comment

26 Comments on Dell Starts Selling its 32-inch 8K UltraSharp Monitor

#1
P4-630
Nice! Now I only need 4 GTX1080Ti's in quad SLI and not to forget, a deep wallet..:p
Posted on Reply
#2
dj-electric
If i had a screen like that i would probably still game at 4k. Editing videos and photos? Absolutely in full glorious 8k
Posted on Reply
#3
Prima.Vera
P4-630, post: 3625803, member: 22154"
Nice! Now I only need 4 GTX1080Ti's in quad SLI and not to forget, a deep wallet..:p
You can only use 2 cards. Quad is no longer supported by nVidia. Besides you can play on 1080p with a little blurness
Posted on Reply
#4
dj-electric
Technically there shouldn't be blurriness in 4k and 1080p with this monitor. You got a perfect alignment with the pixels. Its either 1:4 or 1:16
Posted on Reply
#5
NdMk2o1o
And all yours for only a measley $5k I'll have 3 in 23'040 x 4320 eyefinity :eek:
Posted on Reply
#6
Naito
Prima.Vera, post: 3625810, member: 98685"
Besides you can play on 1080p with a little blurness
From my experience, that isn't true. I've had to stop playing most games I had been enjoying on my 1080P monitor because 1080p on my 4K monitor just makes them look too muddy. My GTX 670s are definitely not capable of pushing 4K in newer titles and I'm waiting yet another year to see what Nvidia/AMD can bring to the table.
Posted on Reply
#7
Aenra
P4-630, post: 3625803, member: 22154"
Nice! Now I only need 4 GTX1080Ti's in quad SLI and not to forget, a deep wallet..:p
Not quite, nope. After you get all that, you'd need also let me know so i could gift you these:

Posted on Reply
#8
Prima.Vera
Dj-ElectriC, post: 3625812, member: 87186"
Technically there shouldn't be blurriness in 4k and 1080p with this monitor. You got a perfect alignment with the pixels. Its either 1:4 or 1:16
Is a blurriness fest, trust me. Been there, tried that.

Naito, post: 3625814, member: 76645"
From my experience, that isn't true. I've had to stop playing most games I had been enjoying on my 1080P monitor because 1080p on my 4K monitor just makes them look too muddy. My GTX 670s are definitely not capable of pushing 4K in newer titles and I'm waiting yet another year to see what Nvidia/AMD can bring to the table.
That's what I said :) but for some reasons 1080p on 8K looks better than 1080p on 4K... saw a demo on an exhibition some times ago...
Posted on Reply
#9
PowerPC
8K? Pathetic... (Me, 50 years from now [hopefully])
Posted on Reply
#10
Ferrum Master
Prima.Vera, post: 3625822, member: 98685"
Is a blurriness fest, trust me. Been there, tried that.


That's what I said :) but for some reasons 1080p on 8K looks better than 1080p on 4K... saw a demo on an exhibition some times ago...
Them subpixels.

Aenra, post: 3625815, member: 169274"
Not quite, nope. After you get all that, you'd need also let me know so i could gift you these:
Rubbish, haven't you noticed that such DPI in phones is already late news and inhibit no problems?
Posted on Reply
#11
Naito
Prima.Vera, post: 3625822, member: 98685"
That's what I said :) but for some reasons 1080p on 8K looks better than 1080p on 4K... saw a demo on an exhibition some times ago...
My apologies. I've been awake too long today. :slap:
Posted on Reply
#12
Octavean
Since this screen requires dual DisplayPort to achieve 8K resolution it would seem to use MST to do so rather then SST. There is every reason to suspect that it can do SST at a lower resolution such as 4K though. MST was used with early 4K monitors but it comes off as a bit of a hack and is less then ideal. Simple actions like scrolling a webpage can cause screen tearing about the vertical axis due to the render being divided by the dual DisplayPort inputs.

I'm not in a rush for 8K, I can wait at least until a single video card is capable of rendering an 8K display at least for 2D / desktop purposes. I passed on 4K until they were able to do this in the industry so I see no reason to deviate from that tactic.

Oh and the price is outrageously expensive too,....
Posted on Reply
#13
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
And her I am still watching most of my content in 720p like a poor person...

Prima.Vera, post: 3625822, member: 98685"
That's what I said :) but for some reasons 1080p on 8K looks better than 1080p on 4K... saw a demo on an exhibition some times ago...
It is going to depend on the scaler used in the monitor/TV. I've seen some that do it right, and align 1:4, and I've seen others that do the standard scaling crap and it makes it blurry.

IMO, it is best to actually leave the monitor/TV out of the scaling and have the GPU do the scaling. From what I can tell, at least nVidia I haven't really tested it with AMD, when you enable the option to have the GPU do the scaling, the pictures looks much better. And they do properly do a 1:4 scale when the resolutions line up and it can be done.
Posted on Reply
#14
Brusfantomet
Octavean, post: 3625839, member: 52351"
Since this screen requires dual DisplayPort to achieve 8K resolution it would seem to use MST to do so rather then SST. There is every reason to suspect that it can do SST at a lower resolution such as 4K though. MST was used with early 4K monitors but it comes off as a bit of a hack and is less then ideal. Simple actions like scrolling a webpage can cause screen tearing about the vertical axis due to the render being divided by the dual DisplayPort inputs.

I'm not in a rush for 8K, I can wait at least until a single video card is capable of rendering an 8K display at least for 2D / desktop purposes. I passed on 4K until they were able to do this in the industry so I see no reason to deviate from that tactic.

Oh and the price is outrageously expensive too,....
since its DP 1.4 it should be able to do 30 Hz 8K normaly and 60 Hz with some compression magic, according to Wikipedia

Fun fact, dual link DVI is just that, two sets of cables in one cable, it even gives the odd screen tear.
Posted on Reply
#15
alucasa
So, 4k is yesterday thing, right?

I feel so left out, stuck at 1080p and downloading most of things at 720p....
Posted on Reply
#16
Ferrum Master
alucasa, post: 3625886, member: 68481"
So, 4k is yesterday thing, right?

I feel so left out, stuck at 1080p and downloading most of things at 720p....
Blame US Internet providers and their "quality" services.
Posted on Reply
#17
Captain_Tom
P4-630, post: 3625803, member: 22154"
Nice! Now I only need 4 GTX1080Ti's in quad SLI and not to forget, a deep wallet..:p
You can only crossfire 2 of Nvidia's made-for-1080p cards.

I wouldn't count on that either. Nvidia is clearly close to just completely dropping SLI.
Posted on Reply
#18
Rowsol
They should include a magnifying glass.
Posted on Reply
#19
Air
I recently became a little underwhelmed with the quality jump from my current 1080p tv to a 55" 4k set... I guess I'm too casual, but I'm pretty damn sure I wouldn't notice a difference between 4k and 8k on a 32" at a normal viewing distance.
Posted on Reply
#20
las
1080p look fine on my 4K TV's, KS9000 and B6V. Not blurry at all. Most quality 4K TV's will show 1080p perfectly fine.
Posted on Reply
#21
Nabarun
Why can't we just have some affordable 1080p 144Hz stuff?
Posted on Reply
#22
ZeDestructor
Rowsol, post: 3626026, member: 94165"
They should include a magnifying glass.
We use DPI scaling in most parts, and it works pretty OK for my sort of usage (and pretty damn near perfectly for the vast majority of office+net users like my dad).

Air, post: 3626044, member: 152268"
I recently became a little underwhelmed with the quality jump from my current 1080p tv to a 55" 4k set... I guess I'm too casual, but I'm pretty damn sure I wouldn't notice a difference between 4k and 8k on a 32" at a normal viewing distance.
The difference is more obvious the smaller the distance (which is very probably why your TV doesn't look all that much better). I'm looking for 250+ppi myself so I can have on-screen text in the same range of sharpness as books (your average paperback 600dpi cause it's printed on a 600+dpi end-to-end press). For now, even 4K isn't enough at 24" (~189ppi) based on my rather extensive experience with ~235ppi in my laptop. Should really upgrade the bugger to 4K (~282ppi), but ugh $$$...

8K at 31.5" like in this monitor does ~280ppi.
Posted on Reply
#24
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
Ferrum Master, post: 3625907, member: 90058"
Blame US Internet providers and their "quality" services.
It is amazing service.......kappa
Posted on Reply
#25
djemergenc
5,000 can go a long way, but not in this case
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment