Dell's UP3218K UltraSharp 32-inch 8K monitor (worth $5,000) goes on sale
- D
- AnonD-655396
- ntk
- 24 Mar 2017
So, 4320 is 16 times greater than 1080...where did you go to school...or perhaps it's a matter of honesty... The data flow and pix # is 16 times greater NOT the resolution! Comparing the total number of pixels with the horizontal resolution is like comparing apples with trees...or bricks with houses..not to mention that 4k and 8k are vertical resolutions and 1080, 720 are a horizontal resolutions (which is the industry standard for pic resolution since the TV exist)...
- D
- AnonD-558092
- 6Ba
- 24 Mar 2017
Anyone buying that without even having Photoshop/CAD/Catia and similar, and a GTX 1080 (reccomended: 1080Ti) is really dumb. But that display is very interesting. To say that in some years, 8K displays will be standard on TVs and PCs/laptops.
- D
- AnonD-602637
- 38X
- 24 Mar 2017
Got Philips 5K 27' - worth every penny, after getting use to Retina monitor -you can't go back for ~100 PPI monitors.
- z
- zeno
- ABF
- 24 Mar 2017
280ppi
31.5"
- D
- AnonD-337832
- wdR
- 24 Mar 2017
$5000 for LCD! lmao
- E
- Eske Rahn
- s0C
- 24 Mar 2017
Most people can only distinguish details down to about 1/12000 of the viewing distance to the device in ideal conditions anyway, so most people would need to be closer than 1m to this monitor for it to make any sense at all even in ideal conditions.
See e.g. this for details and test your own vision: http://eskerahn.dk/wordpress/?cat=5
For special usages where the user frequently put the head closer to the screen to study details it could make sense, but for 99% of the population, beyond 4K for a desktop monitor is pretty much pointless...
- ?
- Anonymous
- pYg
- 24 Mar 2017
Anonymous, 24 Mar 2017LOL funny. All the ulta-mega-hyper resolutions and yet they... morewhat thechnology would you suggest for a monitor? an OLED? hahaha
You need accurate colour reproduction... I mean really accurate. This monitor is for the design/ CAD/ Photoshop market. Not movies.
- ?
- Anonymous
- gNW
- 24 Mar 2017
I suppose 5000 is already expensive
- ?
- Anonymous
- nxq
- 24 Mar 2017
Anonymous, 24 Mar 2017LOL funny. All the ulta-mega-hyper resolutions and yet they... moreIPS is pretty much the only reliable consistent display technology ATM.
- B
- Boldy
- 9xn
- 24 Mar 2017
Anonymous, 24 Mar 2017LOL funny. All the ulta-mega-hyper resolutions and yet they... moreDo you have any idea how expensive and difficult it is to make an OLED panel of that size and resolution.
OLED and Quantum dot monitors will soon be coming, but they would have been way too expensive right now.
- A
- Almand
- YUf
- 24 Mar 2017
sohail shafayat, 24 Mar 2017I just hate 16:9 displays. 3:2 is better. Btw, what is the ppi?7680x4320 on a 32inch display would be 275 PPI
- ?
- Anonymous
- 0BG
- 24 Mar 2017
LOL funny. All the ulta-mega-hyper resolutions and yet they are still using IPS. Enjoy the glow!
- M
- MAX
- nD%
- 24 Mar 2017
sohail shafayat, 24 Mar 2017I just hate 16:9 displays. 3:2 is better. Btw, what is the ppi?275 ppi
- r
- redspider
- hac
- 24 Mar 2017
AnonD-523334, 24 Mar 2017Why it is not called 16k? They use 8k because the resolution is close to 8000 pixels width (7680 pixels) ... 4k refers to a resolution having 3840 pixels width ... which is close enough for it to be used as a catchy marketing name.
NOTE: This is for the mainstream UHD standard, there is also a cinematic/true 4k/8k resolutions.
- D
- AnonD-523334
- 7k7
- 24 Mar 2017
Why it is not called 16k?