Dell to Price its 27-inch 5K Monitor Under $2,000

[btarunr]

Dell plans to launch the first consumer 5K monitor some time in December 2014, priced at just under $2,000 a pop. This comes in the wake of Apple launching the first consumer product with a 5K display, its latest iMac Retina all-in-one desktop. Dell's UltraSharp UP2715K is a 27-inch display with 5K (5120 x 2880 pixels) native resolution, which lends it a staggering 218 ppi of pixel density. Compare that to the 157 ppi of 28-inch Ultra HD monitors. 5K is four times as many pixels as WQHD.

The UltraSharp UP2715K features a 10-bit IPS panel, with 99 percent Adobe RGB and 100 percent sRGB palette coverage, and a 12-bit LUT. It offers viewing angles of 178°/178°, 8 ms response time, 350 cd/m² maximum brightness, and 1000:1 static contrast-ratio, with dynamic mega-contrast. The display needs two DisplayPort connections for sufficient bandwidth, to beam those many pixels at 60 Hz. There's also a mini-DisplayPort, but using that would either cap resolution at 3840 x 2160 @ 60 Hz, or drop refresh-rate at the native resolution.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[cadaveca]

Rest In Peace, 4K.

 

[HossHuge]

When are we going to see this high res stuff start trickling down to the 22" size? (Example; 22" 2560*1440)

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Drop a zero and we'll shake on it.

 

[rooivalk]

When are we going to see this high res stuff start trickling down to the 22" size? (Example; 22" 2560*1440)

since there's no 13" full HD desktop monitor, I guess it'll never be.

 

[DayKnight]

5k on 27 inch. OK!.

 

[Rowsol]

I must be crazy, but 1080p blurays look outstanding on a 60 inch TV. I really don't see the point of more pixels.

That said, 10-bit IPS panels are great regardless of resolution.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

since there's no 13" full HD desktop monitor, I guess it'll never be.

I really don't get why that is. If laptops and tablets can have them, why can't they stick them in a frame and put ports on it? I think VESA should make a panel standard not unlike SATA-IO group did with the SATA data + power connectors. I'm not aware of any technical reason why you shouldn't be able to buy any given panel in a specific form factor and be able to upgrade/downgrade it just by removing the frame and popping another in. One should be able to buy a laptop with a 15" 1600x900 screen, for example, and upgrade it with a 15" 1920x1080 touchscreen. What we have now is terribly inefficient and wasteful.

 

[buildzoid]

I really don't see the point of these ridiculous resolutions. On a phone I want about 290-300PPI and on a laptop I want around 150PPI and on a desktop I like it around 120PPI but in 21:9 so ideally a 29" 3440x1440 screen.

 

[JDG1980]

I must be crazy, but 1080p blurays look outstanding on a 60 inch TV. I really don't see the point of more pixels.

You're not crazy, you're just overlooking the fact that people sit a lot closer to monitors than they do to TVs. The closer you are, the higher DPI you need to not see the pixel edges.

Besides, text at small point sizes is a lot more demanding than video images. Once you've used a high-resolution smartphone or tablet, the text on a standard 96 DPI computer monitor looks blurry around the edges in comparison.

 

[dj-electric]

Rest In Peace, 4K.

Nah. 5K Gaming is so astronomically heavy that it will take quite some time to kill the 4K market.

 

[lemonadesoda]

Native 5120 x 2880 pixels, but no comment about the quality and lag of the internal TFT scaler when feeding it a 2560x1440 signal. 5120 x 2880 for desktop, 2560x1440 for gaming. Perfect.

 

[bpgt64]

Untill they can do single panel, like the samsung UD590 or Acer Xb280HK. The display is useless for gaming.

 

[P4-630]

What single cards can drive this display at respectable framerates in gaming?

 

[Breit]

What single cards can drive this display at respectable framerates in gaming?

Short answer? None.

The question is: Do you need to game at 5K? I might go so far to say that you don't see any difference whether it is 2560x1440 or 5120x2880 on the same screen-size while gaming. So why not doubling each pixel for gaming and enjoying high-DPI while on the desktop? 2560x1440 is easy, even for midrange cards now...

 

[64K]

What single cards can drive this display at respectable framerates in gaming?

Just speculation on my part but I think a single full chip Pascal GP210 will probably be able to handle almost all games at high to ultra settings on 4K. Maybe 2 years for that to come. As for 5K then I would guess the full chip successor to Pascal. probably another 2 years so my guesstimate is ~4 years before a single card will be able to run almost all games at high to ultra settings at 5K.

 

[techy1]

nobody needs this... we need more content in 4K so the mainstream can move along pass 1080p already!!!!! (I do not mean desktop icons with word "content" - yes you can look at super crisp recyclebin icon in 5K or "whatever"-K and that is about it)

 

[nickbaldwin86]

That is all subject to what game you are playing. If you are playing the latest and greatest then no single card is going to do the work. but if you still rock old games like me... CS:Go then it will not matter.

 

[Aquinus]

I still think investing in something like this is insane. I would rather wait for a display connector that is designed to handle up to 8k. We know it's coming so we might as well get straight to the point and address the biggest problem with high resolution displays and that's display bandwidth (forgetting gpu performance at resolutions like that for a moment).

 

[ZoneDymo]

Rest In Peace, 4K.

Seeing as we already know 8k is coming soon enough, RIP 5k as well