4K - 28" Dell P2815Q

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
7,115
Dell_UltraSharp_UP2414Q_01.jpg


IPS panel with 99% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB coverage and 178/178 degree viewing angles, an 8 ms GTG response time, a contrast ratio of 1,000:1 (dynamic contrast ratio is 2,000,000:1), a media card reader, a 4-port USB 3.0 hub, HDMI, DisplayPort and Mini DisplayPort inputs, and a stand enabling tilt, swivel, pivot and height adjustment. The P2815Q is scheduled to arrive early next year priced at under $1,000.
 
I believe the specs were for the 24" UltraSharp. If the 28" is a P-series monitor it might not have the same specs.

Coming Soon: Dell 28 Ultra HD Monitor– Expected to be The Industry’s Most Affordable Ultra HD Monitor
The Dell 28 Ultra HD Monitor will be available in early 2014. Offering the same incredible Ultra HD screen performance as the Dell UltraSharp 32 and Dell UltraSharp 24 Ultra HD Monitors, but priced at under $1,000, this 28-inch monitor can help boost user productivity with its multiple adjustability features, including the ability to pivot to portrait mode, plus multi-task applications. The energy efficient monitor has multiple input ports that allow users to display content from smartphones and tablets on the larger screen, and conveniently connect laptops, PCs and essential accessories. Dell expects this monitor will be the most affordable Ultra HD monitor in the industry when it is launched.


http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/uscorp1/secure/2013-12-2-dell-ultrasharp-ultra-hd-monitors
 
Last edited:
Hopefully standard gamut and low input lag as well but that might be out of the question. I'd rather get a 27" then a 24" though since I would want to actually try to use it without any high-dpi mode. Maybe a 1.5x blowup in Windows :)

Must not buy anymore monitors...
 
What panel would this use? One of the recently announced AUO ones? With that pricing, I would think it has to be VA-based.

I just find the 28" screen size a bit odd...and I hope the inclusion of HDMI is indicative of 2.0 not 1.4...
 
Last edited:
just bought the Seiki 39'' a month ago for 520$ but I can't wait to sell it and nab this in February/March
 
There is no way this will have Wide Gamut support, as that would cannabilize their current 32 inch display and their upcoming 24 incher. Also, VA is far more likely than IPS.

Edit: You quote the article wrong. -_- The IPS part is referring to the 24 inch model. There is no data on the 28 inch model in the first place, just price.
 
Edit: You quote the article wrong. -_- The IPS part is referring to the 24 inch model. There is no data on the 28 inch model in the first place, just price.

Yeah, I said that in the first reply ;). The press release circulating doesn't have specs either just yet.
 
Woa, simmer down there guys and breath in deeply. I am well aware those aren't the official specs, as official specs haven't been released yet. Just placeholder info for now and will update when more info is known.
 
16:9 isn't so bad at 4K. You've still got 2160 vertical resolution, which is more than any current 16:10 monitor.
 
Holy shit. Maybe I want this. Maybe. I'm running 30"rs, so maybe I want the 32", but it's too expensive.
 
About god damn time, hopefully the other manufacturers follow suit soon given Dell's recent appalling spec and quality control.
 
So should I return this Dell U3014 30" that I just bought a week ago and get the 28" when it comes out?
 
Holy shit. Maybe I want this. Maybe. I'm running 30"rs, so maybe I want the 32", but it's too expensive.

This is my thought. I originally wanted the 32", but after seeing the pricing for this it's really tempting. Ugh. Maybe it's worth waiting for a second gen 32" that will likely be cheaper in another couple years.

16:9 isn't so bad at 4K. You've still got 2160 vertical resolution, which is more than any current 16:10 monitor.

Exactly. It's starting to sound like a broken record...

Agreed. The resolution of this display completely dwarfs this argument. If people are that determined to continue to use 16:10, they can stick with 2560x1600 which is less than half the pixels of 3840x2160.
 
@ <= $1000 this is really enticing.

Now where are the 1440p 120Hz+ 5ms panel (forget the no-name shit and panel overclocking).
 
Whatever happened to that Asus 39" 4k display that was supposed to cost ~ $1k? I guess that's nothing but a pipedream now...
 
We're not going to see 4k 120hz soon, we won't even see 4k 60hz that uses a single display stream for like, a year still.

The new Dell 32" 4k has the Displayport 1.2 that can do 60hz. And so will be their new 24" and 28".
 
The new Dell 32" 4k has the Displayport 1.2 that can do 60hz. And so will be their new 24" and 28".

With any luck we'll see monitors driven by two display port connectors to reach 120hz, but that won't be cheap in terms of monitor or the hardware required to actually reach that refresh rate.
 
the pricing seems really odd

24" $1399
32" $3499

28" under $1000

I realize they are UltraSharp vs Ultra HD, but as others have said, to get the price that much lower, what was given up? IPS? And why no UltraSharp 27 or 28" for say $2000?

If Apple produces a 27" at $2,000 or less, they will get my money this time (have a Dell 27" 1440p right now).

As another person said, 2014 could be a great year for resolution upgrading! NVidia Maxwell plus 4K monitor.
 
The new Dell 32" 4k has the Displayport 1.2 that can do 60hz. And so will be their new 24" and 28".

With MST. Not single stream. It's same as the Sharp PN-K321 and Asus PQ321. If anyone is thinking these are standard monitors that use a normal display stream, they're not. They're tiled, that means that even though there's one physical cable, it connects to your video card as if it's two displays. Nvidia and AMD drivers handle these as Eyefinity/Mosaic multi-displays behind the scenes.
 
Last edited:
guys have you seen the panels at tftcentral? Only 4k panel at the moment at 28 inch is a .......... TN PANEL :D

28.0WS CMO TN Film M280DGJ-L30 3840x2160 5ms 1000:1 300 170/160 1.07b sRGB W-LED
 
16:9 isn't so bad at 4K. You've still got 2160 vertical resolution, which is more than any current 16:10 monitor.

At 4k resolution how small is the text?

You can increase the text size or system GUI size but then you shrink the overall real estate again, thus defeating the purpose of the higher resolution.

If you can't see things properly using the extra resolution what's the point?
 
At 4k resolution how small is the text?

You can increase the text size or system GUI size but then you shrink the overall real estate again, thus defeating the purpose of the higher resolution.

If you can't see things properly using the extra resolution what's the point?

If you do scaling like on OS X it comes in handy for video and photo editing. They still show those assets at their native resolution so you can see more of whatever you are working on. I just appreciate the clear text though, but 1440p on a 27" screen is already pretty good :)
 
No, it's single stream for Displayport 1.2

I have a displayport 1.2 monitor. It's multi-stream. Trust me. Just in case anyone else is trying to live in a fantasy world where these monitors are single stream, from the UP3214Q user manual:

"To enable 3840 x 2160 at 60 Hz, ensure the graphics card of the DP source is DP1.2 certified with MST feature." - page 46. ftp://ftp.dell.com/Manuals/all-prod...t_Display/dell-up3214q_User's Guide_en-us.pdf

Not real sure why we need to keep rehashing this silly argument. Displayport 4k monitors are MST, period.
 
Last edited:
If you can't see things properly using the extra resolution what's the point?

The scaling in Windows 8.1 is very good. The text gets sharper, and thus easier to read, than on a lower resolution screen of the same size, and photo/video content remains unscaled to take advantage of the resolution as well.

Basically, it's perfect, and if you'd used it you wouldn't want to go back :).
 
Agreed. The resolution of this display completely dwarfs this argument. If people are that determined to continue to use 16:10, they can stick with 2560x1600 which is less than half the pixels of 3840x2160.

Exactly.

If they made a 16:10 version with a slightly lower res at the same size (bigger text) 16:10 lovers would complain about the lower resolution. If the 16:10 versions resolution was higher scaling issues would be even worse and the panels would cost more.

So tired of the "but it's not 16:10," whining. 16:10 lovers should be complaining about the ridiculous prices they charge for most 30" 16:10 monitors and fact that they are all wide gamut.
 
About the panel,

M280DGJ-L30 by Innolux seems reasonable.

4k, 28", Mass production 2013 Q3.

And it is a TN panel, a reason for the cheap price.
 
Back
Top