Dell Unveils 32", 8K UltraSharp Monitor

[ZeDestructor]

try 1600x900 since that should scale correctly on your laptop screen.
1080p on your screen will looks fuzzy because it is not a whole number:1 ratio of pixels. whereas 900p is 4:1

I actually use only 125% scaling, giving me the equivalent of 2560x1440 on my 15.6" screen. Most things work fine, but older/more technical stuff like MMC is a bit blurry. Perfectly readable.

Dude it's not worth arguing with these people. When I saw a 1440p phone for the first time, its sharpness stood out to me across the room! That's a 5.5" screen from 6 feet away!

Yet I remember people telling me it took a 50" screen to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p. Now they say the same thing with 4K. Just like 144 vs 120 vs 60 fps - the peasant arguments will never end.


Better is better, and it is easy to tell the difference. If you can't tell the difference - well I am sorry then you have terrible eyesight.

On phones I can't tell past ~400ppi during normal use at normal phone distances 15-30cm. It's good enough for me and I welcome the lower power usage of "only" using a 1080p screen on the various Sony Xperia flagships.

For the record, I owned an HTC 10, that had a 2560x1440 screen in the same 5.2" size as the 1920x1080 in my Xperia Z2, and it improved nothing for what I use my phone for (primarily IM and reddit). Sadly, the HTC's firmware had an annoying number of niggles, so I sold it on and went back to my now quite old Z2 despite the performance improvement in places.

 

[Captain_Tom]

I actually use only 125% scaling, giving me the equivalent of 2560x1440 on my 15.6" screen. Most things work fine, but older/more technical stuff like MMC is a bit blurry. Perfectly readable.



On phones I can't tell past ~400ppi during normal use at normal phone distances 15-30cm. It's good enough for me and I welcome the lower power usage of "only" using a 1080p screen on the various Sony Xperia flagships.

For the record, I owned an HTC 10, that had a 2560x1440 screen in the same 5.2" size as the 1920x1080 in my Xperia Z2, and it improved nothing for what I use my phone for (primarily IM and reddit). Sadly, the HTC's firmware had an annoying number of niggles, so I sold it on and went back to my now quite old Z2 despite the performance improvement in places.

I didn't say I would pay for that extra resolution, but I can 100% tell the difference.

I have an Xperia Z3 with a 1080p screen, and indeed I have no use for a higher resolution on my phone if it means a lower battery life.


But desktops don't have this problem, and so truly a higher resolution is always nicer (If you are willing to pay for it). Sorry, but I get mad when people say "Can't tell" or "No difference". That is just people telling themselves it's not better so they can feel good about themselves.

 

[dalekdukesboy]

I'm amazed with all the theories and mathematical bullshit numbers (not dismissing them just saying you did some impressive math exercises) that no one brought up the obvious simple point that makes this the most irrelevant to gaming/moving images at 8k....anyone care to guess what the input lag may be and then factor in how many million milliseconds of response time this monitor has? I notice they didn't even bother to tell us, it's probably like 50 ms or something at 8k lol.

 

[Blueberries]

Did anyone notice how small the taskbar is from the last picture?!!

I thought it was just displaying a picture!

 

[matar]

Make sure you have 2 Titan X Pascal. before buying this monitor

 

[ZeDestructor]

I'm amazed with all the theories and mathematical bullshit numbers (not dismissing them just saying you did some impressive math exercises) that no one brought up the obvious simple point that makes this the most irrelevant to gaming/moving images at 8k....anyone care to guess what the input lag may be and then factor in how many million milliseconds of response time this monitor has? I notice they didn't even bother to tell us, it's probably like 50 ms or something at 8k lol.

Given the lac k of extra inputs, it probably doesn't have any form of input switching, and most likely no scaler in-built. With a good ASIC, the DP -> panel conversion latency should be measured in microseconds based on how fast other really high-bandwidth (100+Gbit/s) kit runs in networking

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Given the lac k of extra inputs, it probably doesn't have any form of input switching, and most likely no scaler in-built. With a good ASIC, the DP -> panel conversion latency should be measured in microseconds based on how fast other really high-bandwidth (100+Gbit/s) kit runs in networking

Lol microseconds? If I get what you're saying you're implying the response time will be so bad it won't be millionth of a second type measurements they'll have to "upscale" it (pun intended) to like half seconds or tenth of seconds because it will be so horrific your game will be so bad you'll be playing 8k online COD or something and you'll be literally shot/stabbed dead ingame and you'll still be playing the game till 5 minutes later when you first see the kill move.

 

[Brusfantomet]

Lol microseconds? If I get what you're saying you're implying the response time will be so bad it won't be millionth of a second type measurements they'll have to "upscale" it (pun intended) to like half seconds or tenth of seconds because it will be so horrific your game will be so bad you'll be playing 8k online COD or something and you'll be literally shot/stabbed dead ingame and you'll still be playing the game till 5 minutes later when you first see the kill move.

No, you are not getting what he is saying, since the signal path from input to panel is simpler (less inputs) the screen should have low input lag

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Ah, ok well that addresses the input lag, however what about the response time?

 

[ZeDestructor]

Ah, ok well that addresses the input lag, however what about the response time?

Should be the standard IPS response times, so 8ms or less, which is plenty for 60Hz.

 

[punani]

Did anyone notice how small the taskbar is from the last picture?!!

 

[64K]

LOL. That's actually a fact!


Although 3 x Vega 10 should run 8K quite well in the games that support crossfire.

umm no. We don't know the performance of Vega at this time but let's assume it's somewhere around a GTX 1080.

Crossfire and SLI don't scale that well on 3 GPUs generally. You get at best 90% to 100% additional performance from adding the second GPU but less additional performance as an overall percentage with the third GPU as you did by adding the second GPU so let's say you get 2.5 times the performance of a GPU with a triple GPU then what you are saying is that 2.5 times the performance of a Vega (or a 1080) is enough for 8K in games which is 4 times the number of pixels of 4K?

No, not even with Tri-Titan XP for gaming.

We are a long way away from gaming on 8K. I doubt it will be possible on silicon no matter what the lower process node we can wrench out of this nearly obsolete material.

 

[hellrazor]

I'm not happy about it being 32", but I suddenly need $5000 by March.

 

[Mussels]

and i'm having enough trouble with 4K on a 40", with apps not scaling and being impossible to read

 

[D007]

Lmfao.. 32" @ 8k.. Worthless..
You will see none of that resolution at 32"... Maybe at 50" or higher but at 32", the most you need or can even see, will be like 2560x1440..

 

[dalekdukesboy]

Should be the standard IPS response times, so 8ms or less, which is plenty for 60Hz.

Ok, but still 5-8 MS for gaming sucks, sorry that is why many of us like me had a CRT 2k monitor as long as we could with essentially zero ms response and only just this past year just upgraded to a 1 ms 4k monitor. Yeah more pixels sure and more detail/crisp etc no doubt, but with moving images there is still a difference and wtf is the point of getting 8k to stare at a motionless picture because otherwise as I said 5-8 ms is not what I want in 32" of 8k detail blurred to shit as it moves constantly. Monitor is a great first step as people say all for the innovation, but it's practical application is close to zero. Also I'm not totally sure it will be 8 ms or less honestly, to do 8k and being among the first of its' kind I'd not be surprised if the response time was an unusually high number and not standard like any other 4k or less screen.

 

[cdawall]

Lmfao.. 32" @ 8k.. Worthless..
You will see none of that resolution at 32"... Maybe at 50" or higher but at 32", the most you need or can even see, will be like 2560x1440..

I use a 24" 4K, I prefer it to both my 1080P and 1440P monitors by far

 

[Mussels]

I use a 24" 4K, I prefer it to both my 1080P and 1440P monitors by far

300% zoom on the desktop? i find a lot of programs arent high DPI aware, even the steam overlay is broken

 

[cdawall]

300% zoom on the desktop? i find a lot of programs arent high DPI aware, even the steam overlay is broken

150% honestly no scaling was fine the only thing that bugged me was the browser.

 

[Mussels]

150% honestly no scaling was fine the only thing that bugged me was the browser.

at 200% on a 40" i cant read half the text as it is! i'm rubbing my eyeballs on the screen to read the FPS/ping counter in starcraft, or read the steam overlay

 

[cdawall]

at 200% on a 40" i cant read half the text as it is! i'm rubbing my eyeballs on the screen to read the FPS/ping counter in starcraft, or read the steam overlay

I couldn't fit everything I do on screen if I did that.

 

[Mussels]

i need to find you and scrape our your eyeballs, mine seem to be in need of an upgrade.

 

[cdawall]

i need to find you and scrape our your eyeballs, mine seem to be in need of an upgrade.

You will lose the thought of far away vision. I am great up close, not so much at a distance.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Guys, this is not a gaming monitor. Is perfect for professional use.
However good luck with Java/Flash applications and web pages. Is going to be a horror running those properly.

 

[ZeDestructor]

and i'm having enough trouble with 4K on a 40", with apps not scaling and being impossible to read

I'm curious what apps those are, cause aside from the Microsoft Management Console, and various game launchers (Steam, Battle.net, Origin, GOG Galaxy, UPlay) I just don't have anything I regularly use that doesn't do scaling...

i need to find you and scrape our your eyeballs, mine seem to be in need of an upgrade.

You will lose the thought of far away vision. I am great up close, not so much at a distance.

/me gets some eye insurance

I can see close up just as well as cdawall, but I'm just fine for far distance viewing too.. and everything in between D:

Ok, but still 5-8 MS for gaming sucks, sorry that is why many of us like me had a CRT 2k monitor as long as we could with essentially zero ms response and only just this past year just upgraded to a 1 ms 4k monitor. Yeah more pixels sure and more detail/crisp etc no doubt, but with moving images there is still a difference and wtf is the point of getting 8k to stare at a motionless picture because otherwise as I said 5-8 ms is not what I want in 32" of 8k detail blurred to shit as it moves constantly. Monitor is a great first step as people say all for the innovation, but it's practical application is close to zero. Also I'm not totally sure it will be 8 ms or less honestly, to do 8k and being among the first of its' kind I'd not be surprised if the response time was an unusually high number and not standard like any other 4k or less screen.

Unfortunately, as much as we want faster panels, IPS just can't go much lower than 4ms with current tech. I personally don't notice any blurriness with my older 8ms IPS screens, so I'm fine on that front. The bigger worry for me is the scaler/TCON/interface conversion step, where there have been recorded cases of a 50+ms extra delay there... That's a literal continent worth of extra lag for gaming!

As for it being 8ms or less right now, I'll point to the current crop of 15.6" 4K panels that are shipping in laptops: they do 8ms or less already. This 8K panel is basically a higher-end, 32-ish" variant of those (4 of em stuck together). Likely cut from the same substrate, but 4x bigger.

Guys, this is not a gaming monitor. Is perfect for professional use.
However good luck with Java/Flash applications and web pages. Is going to be a horror running those properly.

From experience, not really.. in fact, unless the developer has been particularly idiotic and put in very small bitmaps, both scale rather well.