UP3214Q - it has arrived!

notarat

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
2,111
As some may know I went through three new Dell 4K (UP3214Q) displays. The number of pixel defects just didn’t sit well with me considering the cost of the display. I also had a stand issue with one of the three displays. Eventually I had a full refund issued.

This week a Dell VP contacted me directly to let me know that they would be sending me a brand new Dell 4K display, which I was told was specifically inspected for defects, for me to keep at no charge.

I picked it up today. Normally they're not double boxed. This one looks like it was send directly from China to Dell at Texas and then to me.



I have to give props to Dell - well done!
I considered getting one of these instead of picking up the 39" Seiki. I'm sorry to hear you had so many problems with the Dell. It's got to be frustrating to go through the problem resolution steps again and again and again...

Dell does try to make things right in the end. I had a similar experience with a computer I got from them several years ago.

Hope the new unit works out for you. :)
 

Psychor

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 22, 2007
Messages
388
I considered getting one of these instead of picking up the 39" Seiki. I'm sorry to hear you had so many problems with the Dell. It's got to be frustrating to go through the problem resolution steps again and again and again...

Dell does try to make things right in the end. I had a similar experience with a computer I got from them several years ago.

Hope the new unit works out for you. :)
Thanks. It was a pain but what really bothered me is that I wanted one to actually work out (e.g., no noticeable pixel defects). The damn thing is beautiful to stare out. We'll see how this one turns out.
 

Sufu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
2,007
Welp, all I can say is that I'm glad I purchased my Asus PQ321Q when it was $3k on Amazon instead of jumping in with Dell. To me, any stuck/dead pixels and stand issues (which shouldn't exist) are totally unacceptable on such a high price item. However, I'm glad Dell sorted OP out. Asus support is non-existent.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,507
You guys may want to look into the UP2414Q if this screen does not satisfy you. At first I also thought 24" 4K would be too small, but it's just a stunning display. Plus it doesn't have as much IPS glow, backlight uniformity problems, and horrid low frequency PWM that the 31.5" IGZO displays have (I had one). All for about 40% the cost.
 

Sufu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
2,007
You guys may want to look into the UP2414Q if this screen does not satisfy you. At first I also thought 24" 4K would be too small, but it's just a stunning display. Plus it doesn't have as much IPS glow, backlight uniformity problems, and horrid low frequency PWM that the 31.5" IGZO displays have (I had one). All for about 40% the cost.
You should do a 5monitor portrait setup with the 24" 4k Dells
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,507
Would need like 16GB VRAM GPU's. Alas, connecting 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz is impossible with any GPU. ;)
 

Skott

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,120
Would need like 16GB VRAM GPU's. Alas, connecting 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz is impossible with any GPU. ;)
Yeah, imagine the cost of that card. Make the $1,000 Titan look cheap I bet. :D
 

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,082
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
1,622
Would need like 16GB VRAM GPU's. Alas, connecting 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz is impossible with any GPU. ;)
Any single GPU sure but you could with 2 ATI cards or 3 nvidia cards... atleast under linux. Good luck getting the windows driver to play nice on windows to even get two displays working...

Technically a single eyfinity 6 card *should* be able to do it but I am guessing there is a 6 monitor limit even with MST hubs and each display would take up 2 connection slots. I know that explicitly the nvidia cards have a 4 display limit not sure what the eyefinity cards are really (when using display hubs).

EDIT: The eyefinity 6 card could do it for sure with one GPU if their existed any SST displays but the problem is lack of dispays.

EDIT 2: Just saying it could actually run it.. not run it well..
 
Last edited:

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,507
NVIDIA cards cannot run more than three screens in Surround. Even Eyefinity 6 cards (which top out at 7870's and are incredibly slow and have 2GB VRAM), I doubt have a full 20 DP 1.2 lanes required to run 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz.

It could be done at 30Hz, but then you would have to stab your eyes out and I'd wager CCC would have a nuclear melt-down.
 

octoberasian

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
4,082
NVIDIA cards cannot run more than three screens in Surround. Even Eyefinity 6 cards (which top out at 7870's and are incredibly slow and have 2GB VRAM), I doubt have a full 20 DP 1.2 lanes required to run 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz.

It could be done at 30Hz, but then you would have to stab your eyes out and I'd wager CCC would have a nuclear melt-down.
Well, I did not know that about Nvidia Surround, thought it'd be like Eyefinity.
 

DVerde

n00b
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
50
NVIDIA cards cannot run more than three screens in Surround. Even Eyefinity 6 cards (which top out at 7870's and are incredibly slow and have 2GB VRAM), I doubt have a full 20 DP 1.2 lanes required to run 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz.

It could be done at 30Hz, but then you would have to stab your eyes out and I'd wager CCC would have a nuclear melt-down.
I believe some FirePro cards actually can run that many 4k displays on one card... Want to try it for us? :p
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
1,622
NVIDIA cards cannot run more than three screens in Surround. Even Eyefinity 6 cards (which top out at 7870's and are incredibly slow and have 2GB VRAM), I doubt have a full 20 DP 1.2 lanes required to run 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz.

It could be done at 30Hz, but then you would have to stab your eyes out and I'd wager CCC would have a nuclear melt-down.
I am talking about the physical hardware here and not possible driver limitations. Linux does not have a lot of the same driver limitations as windows. You can definitely do 2, 3 or 4 displays in surround (well horizontally and/or vertically spanning) on linux. The cards have a physical hardware limit of 4 displays. I am running a 4k (3840x2400 display) via DP + DVI (each driving one half) plus a seiki 39 inch (3840x2160) plus a dell 3007-WFP all from a single geforce gtx 460 (4 outputs).

It would surprise me greatly if the Eyefinity cards couldn't do full spec DP 1.2 on its ports. Maybe it would have trouble rendering anything at 60 FPS but I would expect it to be able to do 60Hz on all outputs if in SST mode. Pretty sure the mac basically has this same eyefinity 6 style setup and its supposed to be able to run 6x4k displays.

Total dimensions would be 10800x3840 right? Only about twice the number of pixels on the screen that my single geforce gtx 670 is doing now. My current desktop size is 10240x2400 but some of that is black space. FYI my geforce gtx 670 works just fine for desktop compositing and other stuff. Games might run like shit but I think it would work just fine for non game stuff.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,507
There is a massive difference in complexity between running something in true "Surround/Eyefinity" which is combining all displays to run as a single larger display/image and have an app such as a game treat it as a single display, versus using extended desktops.

Your display setup above, with a split 4K, a 30Hz 4K and a 1600P monitor really has nothing to do with Surround and are just extended desktops.

I would have to see 5 to 6 4K displays actually running in Eyefinity at 60 Hz to believe it. Not to mention 4K @ 60 Hz SST displays don't even exist. Like I said though, the point is moot for gaming as nothing could even come remotely close to running something like that properly. I would wager even if you wanted that massive resolution for NORAD or something, the setup would even be incredibly slow just using the desktop.
 

alienate

Gawd
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
601
As some may know I went through three new Dell 4K (UP3214Q) displays. The number of pixel defects just didn’t sit well with me considering the cost of the display. I also had a stand issue with one of the three displays. Eventually I had a full refund issued.

This week a Dell VP contacted me directly to let me know that they would be sending me a brand new Dell 4K display, which I was told was specifically inspected for defects, for me to keep at no charge.

I picked it up today. Normally they're not double boxed. This one looks like it was send directly from China to Dell at Texas and then to me.


I have to give props to Dell - well done!
You made enough noise they wanted to keep you silent from here on out. Due to being a new and expensive unit, your reviews would tend to be quite impressionable on potential customers. My guess is it worked for them. It's a nice gesture from Dell, but hardly the norm.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
1,622
Your display setup above, with a split 4K, a 30Hz 4K and a 1600P monitor really has nothing to do with Surround and are just extended desktops.
Going to disagree with you there... The halfs (or quadrants as I have ran via 4x single link DVI via 1920x1200 quadrants or 960x2400 stripes) are genlocked and perfeclty sync'd to each other and the display is seen as one monitor. It is essentially the same thing as mosaic on windows (or surround which is only 3 displays) when talking nvidia cards or what is 'eyefinity' on ATI. No they are not just extended desktops. On linux its still called 'TwinView' like the old nvidia drivers were on XP which allowed you to do horizontal spanning as one of the options except now on newer cards on linux it supports 3 and 4 monitor configurations as well (not just two).

I could run full screen games and do everything with the monitor and it worked just fine as a single monitor. Here is a picture of quake running full screen:

http://box.houkouonchi.jp/vp2290b_60hz/dsc_2003.jpg

This was back in 2010. I used matrox triple head 2 go's (two of them) doing 3840x2400 spanned in order to get 3840x2400 resolution as at the time I could not get 4 single link DVI outputs on a single graphics card and its before I upgraded to a IBM T221-9503 DGP which took 2x dual link DVI inputs. I actually used to play quakelive often with this setup and had no tearing or any issues and still was able to get 125 FPS @ 3840x2400 (yeah its an old game).


I am not using an 'App' to make things look like one display. I am using functionality which is built into the nvidia driver on linux and yes its way more flexible than what you can do on windows on ATI or nvidia (on ATI you can't have multiple eyefinity display groups).
 

Sancus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,031
Yeah, it's just too bad that Nvidia won't unlock Mosaic on Windows. Quadro only crap. As far as I've heard, it works really well and doesn't have '3 and only 3 displays' limitation of Surround.
 

Vega

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
6,507
You are talking about something totaly different than I am. Your image just shows a single monitor playing Quake via multiple inputs.

The original question was spanning 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz via "Surround or Eyefinity" modes to make one large display of 10,800x2160 that say, could run a full screen game. My point is NVIDIA cannot do it, and I doubt AMD could do it even if at only a practical level.

On top of that, AMD and NVIDIA drivers would literally see 5x 4K 60 Hz displays as ten, yes ten monitors.
 

FM 3370

Gawd
Joined
Jun 29, 2002
Messages
784
All I can say is, I want one. This is now my dream monitor from the size and the specs. I have not seen one in person yet. It would be nice if there were a retail outlet that have these on display.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
1,622
You are talking about something totaly different than I am. Your image just shows a single monitor playing Quake via multiple inputs.

The original question was spanning 5x 4K monitors at 60 Hz via "Surround or Eyefinity" modes to make one large display of 10,800x2160 that say, could run a full screen game. My point is NVIDIA cannot do it, and I doubt AMD could do it even if at only a practical level.

On top of that, AMD and NVIDIA drivers would literally see 5x 4K 60 Hz displays as ten, yes ten monitors.
Vega.. a guy was a little more adamant than you for a different issue which is scaling to lower resolutions on a MST monitor and how it can't be done and I say it could on linux and have done it via displays running off two DVI connections which is no different from MST.

Just FYI the mode I am running on linux is just like eyefinity on windows and no applications are aware it is multiple displays and games glady run over all inputs at full screen, steam on linux shows 3840x2400 (or if i was dual displays 7680x2400). Its not like I am doing some app hack to get it displaying over two monitors. The xv/vdpau output (that mplayer/vlc/etc use for video rending all work as usual). I made a little video showing scaling lower resolution (2880x1800, 2560x1600, 1920x1200) to a 3840x2400 display (first at 48 Hz then 60Hz) via two dual-link DVI which trust me to the drivers is really no different than running it in MST.

The only reason its possible in linux is you can you tell the driver exactly what you want it to do and build the grouped resolution pools yourself and even specify if it GPU scaled or not for each mode. The drivers on windows simply don't give you that kind of power. Hell until nvidia updated their drivers to essentially do surround over 2 displays for single tiled displays you couldn't even do two display surround with nvidia.

Anyway here is a video I made actually showing it. The bar and everything goes over the display as if its a single display. Nothing that runs on X is aware its actually two displays:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EL3Lfvu4UsU
 

Sancus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,031
It's really too bad they don't give you that power in Windows. 1080p GPU scaled to 3840x2160 would be really handy for gaming. But yes, Linux gives you full access to Nvidia's multi-display spanning which is Quadro only on Windows. For some reason Nvidia thinks that this is a selling feature for Quadro cards or something(?) and refuses to fully unlock it in Windows, instead they just do special cased hacks like Surround and the EDID-based support for MST monitors. It is one of the things I find most annoying about Nvidia.
 

Skott

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,120
The review doesn't bode well for the gamer crowd. I wonder when the second gen of these 4k will hit the market? Later this year or next?
 

demu

n00b
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
55
Those of us who also bought a Nvidia high end GPU now have to get a new one just for HDMI 2.0 :mad:
DP1.2 speed (17.28 Gbps) is enough for 4K@60Hz and almost meets HDMI 2.0 maximum speed (18Gbps).
I Guess it might be possible to create DP1.2 -> HDMI2.0 active adapter/converter which supports 4K@60Hz.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
1,622
DP1.2 speed (17.28 Gbps) is enough for 4K@60Hz and almost meets HDMI 2.0 maximum speed (18Gbps).
I Guess it might be possible to create DP1.2 -> HDMI2.0 active adapter/converter which supports 4K@60Hz.

DP 1.2 is more bandwidth than HDMI 2.0.

HDMI 2.0 is 18 gbps (14.4 after overhead).

DP 1.2 is 21.6 Gbps (17.28 after overhead).
 

Sancus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
1,031
Those of us who also bought a Nvidia high end GPU now have to get a new one just for HDMI 2.0 :mad:
That seems like the least of your problems since whatever high-end GPU you bought isn't capable of running games at 4K at a reasonable framerate anyway. Unless you went nuts and bought 3 or 4 cards... but if you did that, it's a pretty poor way to spend your money if you have a budget, since the current gen struggles mightily to play today's AAA games at 4K, let alone the ones that will be coming out developed for next gen consoles in the near future.

Don't care about cost? Buy whatever you want! If you care, though, you should really really stay away from 4K for at least a year, probably two. Heck, even Vega has said 4K isn't worth it to him!
 
Top