Can Dell’s 6K monitor beat their 8K monitor?

I think there are three groups of people with opinions regarding 120Hz vs 60Hz refresh rate.<p>Group 1 can tell the difference between the two and strongly prefers 120Hz.<p>Group 2 can&#x27;t tell the difference between the two and prefers the more affordable options.<p>Group 3 has not done a lot of comparisons between the two refresh rates, or has used 120Hz displays that were actually in 60Hz mode, or compared lower resolution 120Hz displays with higher resolution 60Hz displays.<p>I think a lot of people mistakenly think they are in Group 2 when they are in Group 3.

We&#x27;ve had the technology for a while now to make an 8K HDR 120 Hz OLED monitor. The panel tech exists, the scalers exist, the ports and cables also both exist.<p>We&#x27;ll have this available for purchase any decade now... any decade. Soon, perhaps as early as the 2030s, 2040s tops!<p>All joking aside, I&#x27;m tempted to create a GoFundMe page for this and see if there&#x27;s other people out there interested in convincing a panel manufacturer to print some 8K monitor-sized OLEDs...

<i>&quot;Is a matte screen the better option compared to the 8K monitor’s glossy finish? &lt;...&gt;<p>Surprisingly, I found that I don’t like the matte screen better!<p>It’s hard to describe, but somehow the picture seems more “dull”, or less bright (independent of the actual brightness of the monitor), or more toned down. The colors don’t pop as much.&quot;</i><p>A useful post. Whilst I&#x27;ve not yet had the luxury of owning a 6k or 8k monitor his comment about matte and glossy screens is very useful (also I&#x27;m more likely to trust his opinion than many others because his discerning experience is backed by the fact that he&#x27;s actually using an 8k monitor—and that takes money and commitment).<p>Over the years I&#x27;ve made many comparisons between matte and glossy screens and I have to agree with him for the same reasons. Despite being more susceptible to reflections, glossy screens always seem brighter and somehow sharper than matte ones of the same resolution and brightness. I&#x27;ve never investigated the reason in depth but I suspect the matte finish disperses the light from the screen and the net visual effect is a &#x27;rounding&#x27; of transients resulting in lower contrast somewhat like offset printing which never looks as sharp as letterpress (where the ink dries thicker and looks blacker at the edges of the imprinting, this increases visual contrast even though the resolution may not be much different).

Absolutely, hell no, if you are talking about the screen itself.<p>The difference in crispness between the Dell UP321K (~280ppi at 7680x64280 at 31.5 inches) and this new U3224KBA (~220ppi at 6144 x 3456 at 32&quot;) is <i>dramatic</i>.<p>The new Dell 6K is about the same as the Apple 6K (the XDR Pro Display). I had that 6K Apple and the 8K Dell side-by-side on my desk for a few months (until I could find a buyer for the dramatically inferior Apple). During that time, I asked anybody who happened to stop by to look at the screens and compare them.<p>Almost everybody could see the difference immediately.<p>A few people, admittedly, said they looked pretty much the same. I think there&#x27;s a certain level of eyesight required to discern the difference. Having said that, I got my first prescription glasses 2 years ago, and I can easily see the difference with glasses on or off.<p>I cannot see pixels on either one. But what I can see is a slight fuzz at the edges of letters on the lower res display. Moreover, I need my glasses to use the 6K for long stretches and I don&#x27;t even really need to wear them with the 8K. That&#x27;s what made me so attached to this monitor.<p>I was therefore bummed to see Dell release this 6K. I want a modern version of the 8K! Two cables sucks, it&#x27;s quite a compatibility nightmare to get configured properly on Linux if you want to use cheaper monitors alongside it (because the software support for multiple displays at different scaling factors is pretty bad still on most Linux). On Mac it never worked at all, until they released the M2 chip(!).<p>(It has always worked fine on Windows, just plug it in.)<p>Having used this for a few years, I don&#x27;t ever want to go back to 6K, or 5K, or 4K. I just want 8K to get cheaper so that I can rock 3 8K displays, instead of the 4K-8K-4K I suffer today.... also, 120Hz please.

Slightly off topic but I can’t wait until there’s a 120 Hz 8K monitor. It’s the only thing holding me back from upgrading from 4K. I wonder if the current limitation is on the panels, cable bandwidth or absurd price tag…

I also bought one of these, but ended up returning it.<p>The technical aspects of this review are interesting, especially the wide range of machines tested. I finished writing a review of my own[0] a few days ago, which is less technical but goes into some other aspects of the monitor.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wells.dev&#x2F;dell-ultrasharp-u3224kb-squandered-potential&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wells.dev&#x2F;dell-ultrasharp-u3224kb-squandered-pot...</a>

Just give me a 2K monitor that turns on instantly, doesn’t hunt for sources, consumes less than 20W of power and I’ll be a happy guy. Bonus for having physical buttons to select explicit input sources without delays.

&gt; To drive that resolution at 60 Hz, about 34 Gbps of data rate is needed.<p>... But then the table just below states the MacBook does it at 8gbps without DSC. What&#x27;s going on here?

I feel like a fish out of water - I understand the importance of having an external monitor, maybe even 2 monitors if you&#x27;re on desktop, but...8K ? 32 inch? curved? 120hz ... wow I feel like I have absolute no problems sitting here with a 27 inch 60 hz monitor alongside my Macbook pro...

Michael Stapelberg&#x27;s blog was a source for me when I bought my Dell UP3218Ks specifically for usage with Linux. A great resource!<p>The article mentions that &quot;it (the Dell UP3218K) needs two (!) DisplayPort cables on a GPU with MST support, meaning that in practice, it only works with nVidia graphics cards.&quot;<p>I would like to tell people here that this is not true in my experience (which might be related to advances in amdgpu and&#x2F;or linux in general): I&#x27;m running one Dell on a Vega (64) Frontier Edition and one on a 6900XT, both on Linux 6.3 with the amdgpu driver. It sets up correctly, using DP TILE extension, so both cables used, 7680x4320@60hz.<p>Also I would like to add (subjectively) that <i>nothing</i> beats the display quality of these screens. It&#x27;s literally life&#x2F;eye-changing.. insanely nice, sharp. I could never go back to sub ~200ish DPI displays.

&gt; it needs two (!) DisplayPort cables on a GPU with MST support, meaning that in practice, it only works with nVidia graphics cards.<p>This is nonsense, of course AMD graphics cards support MST. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;user&#x2F;hubsdocks&#x2F;comments&#x2F;rcf6vz&#x2F;dell_wd19_thinkpad_x13_gen1_amd_ryzen_4000&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;user&#x2F;hubsdocks&#x2F;comments&#x2F;rcf6vz&#x2F;dell_w...</a> Perhaps some weird Linux driver limitation...?<p>As for DisplayPort, the only semi-modern customer grade video card with four DisplayPorts is the AMD Radeon™ RX 5700 XT Taichi X 8G OC+ RX5700XT TCX 8GP.

FYI in Macrumors [1] forum users found that when connected via thuderbolt 4 in Apple Silicon Macs, you dont get the full resolution, because MacOS does not enable DSC. In short you get max 6016 x 3384 instead of the native for the monitor 6144×3456.<p>You have to either use the HDMI port from the Mac (if you have an M2 one) or use a usbc to HDMI converter which for some reason triggers the DSC.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;forums.macrumors.com&#x2F;threads&#x2F;dell-6k-u3224kb-monitor.2387515&#x2F;page-25" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;forums.macrumors.com&#x2F;threads&#x2F;dell-6k-u3224kb-monitor...</a>

I&#x27;m surprised no one is talking about the Dell screen bugs with macOS&#x2F;M1&#x2F;M2. I have the 27&quot; and 32&quot; curved monitor, and they both suffer from massive flickering issues with some hues.<p>And yes I have it pegged at 60hz, unlike the &quot;solution&quot; says, removing the variable rate does not solve the problem.<p>Buyers beware of Dell screens with macOS on Apple Silicon.<p>And yes I&#x27;ve tried many different cables... :)

Why is it that pretty much all displays in the PC world have such dismal pixel densities (&lt; 226 ppi)? It would be nice to be able to shop for a new desktop display without having to give up Retina in macOS.

People are happy using DSC for a pixel perfect monitor? I&#x27;d never trust it for graphics work.

I switched from a pair of 27&quot; 4K to a 34&quot; Ultrawide and I like it but I miss the pixel density. Hope we get a &quot;Retina&quot; Ultrawide before too long.

Monitors are frustratingly slow to evolve.<p>What would really make a dent in experience is OLED + HDR. In the TV world, the combination with HDR is relatively new as OLED displays struggled with brightness. This particular combination working well is a sight to behold. It makes you consider what absolute crap image you were looking at before.

Link to the monitor in the US site if your German is rusty (the monitor is $2.4k)<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dell.com&#x2F;en-us&#x2F;shop&#x2F;dell-ultrasharp-32-6k-monitor-u3224kb&#x2F;apd&#x2F;210-bhbz&#x2F;monitors-monitor-accessories" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dell.com&#x2F;en-us&#x2F;shop&#x2F;dell-ultrasharp-32-6k-monito...</a>

I don&#x27;t understand why these monitors are so expensive. I&#x27;ve been using a 55&quot; 8k TV as my main monitor for years and paid less than USD 1000 for it new. Recently I saw a similar deal for a 8k tv again, so making panels at 8k and shipping them around the world at around USD 1000 is certainly still possible, but the Dell 8k is 4000+ and the 6k is 2300+.<p>Using a tv as a monitor has downsides (Only HDMI, doesn&#x27;t detect inputs automatically etc) but having 55&quot; of retina screen real estate is such a great experience that I&#x27;m sticking with it. The same panel sold as a PC monitor with proper inputs (and maybe a matte screen) would be ideal.

I bought this 6K monitor, but I did not like<p>1) The scaling on macOS. Everything was way too big. There were not enough options for fractional scaling.<p>2) The matte finish. I came from another matte Dell monitor, but the whole screen looked slightly fuzzy, like a permanent oil stain all over the monitor.<p>3) The contrast sucks. They call it &#x27;IPS Black&#x27; but I was not impressed. The colors look different depending on the angle. This is probably an issue with the size of the monitor as well, as when you look at the left size, the angle to the right size is pretty big.<p>Lastly I did not like the size either, but I will have that with every 31.5 inch monitor.

You&#x27;ll never pry my Retina MacBook from my hands, and I love my original USB-C LG 4K, but I&#x27;ve really started to like my 42&quot; 4K TV that I have been hah g the last two years.<p>It was $300, the color isn&#x27;t perfect, it has a little glare, it can be choosy when it comes to ports and cables, but having such a large desktop is great. It&#x27;s a large enough screen to run at native resolution.<p>I&#x27;m interested in things like Apples 6K monitor but the cost and the fact that it&#x27;s only really work with my Mac, as well as not giving me that much usable space, make it an easy decision to not buy.

The problem is 16:10 22” at 1680x1050 nas been always the sweet spot for me. No zooming, everything visible perfectly, ideal font size for coding and etc.<p>I’m at 16:9 (nearly impossible to get 16:10 today :&#x2F;) 4k 32” and honestly this is freaking small. What’s the point of all the space if it all looks really good without zooming at maybe 2500-ish pixels wide. I’d gladly get a good 42” display at 4k, would be perfect.

Having owned Dell&#x27;s 5K for years, last year I finally upgraded to their 8K model. I could never go back to anything less. If you need it and can justify the cost, you will know; but I don&#x27;t see either being justifiably true for very many people at this point. While higher refresh would be nice, 60Hz is more than adequate for me, as it&#x27;s the screen real estate that matters, and you really don&#x27;t have many options to choose from.

The larger the monitor, generally the better. However, considering GPU performance and power consumption, compromises must be made somewhere. I have a $500 Dell 4K 32-inch monitor, which is the maximum I can accommodate in terms of desk space. (The desk space is greatly influenced by real estate prices, currently estimated at $12,000 per square meter based on my home.)

Recently there was an article here on HN declaring that LCDs are on their way out now in favor of OLED. That doesn&#x27;t seem true at all for the monitor market. The author doesn&#x27;t even mention that both monitors are LCDs.

Great review. Are you returning the monitor? Also, have you kept the Kinesis 360 keyboard and did you get used to the plam pads? Personally, I&#x27;m using the palm pads of the Advantage 2.

I wonder what impact Apple&#x27;s VR headset is going to have in, say, 10 years. Hopefully prices for their headsets as a complete unit will have dropped, and at that point, while I&#x27;m no optical scientist, we must be approaching the limits of eye clarity, no? So eventually VR headsets will offer effectively 360 degrees of &quot;monitor&quot; that can&#x27;t be matched by any panel, and the only actual pixels they will need to produce are a postage stamp sized thing in front of your eyeball.<p>I can imagine that a lot of personal computing is going to transform into some kind of &quot;screen+lens+eyeball&quot; as COGs for these kinds of headset displays are going to be lower than traditional monitor (or possibly even smartphone) displays.

The top part looks really bad to my eye at least. Would totally buy it if didn&#x27;t look this ugly

6k is even way too much to spend.

I just purchased 2 of the 6Ks and I am keeping both. AMA.<p>I do not understand the complaints about pixel density. The display is 223 ppi, which is the same or slightly higher than Apple displays. I am using them in a dual display configuration with an M1 Macbook Pro via TB4 and a Windows PC with an RTX 4090 via DisplayPort. The KVM feature makes switching back and forth a breeze. I am using 175% scaling (in Windows) and I don&#x27;t think 8K with 1:2 scaling would give suitably sized OS components for me, so it would be fractional scaling either way.<p>The startup time doesn&#x27;t matter in practice because they still wake up from sleep instantaneously.<p>The mini-DP IN port would be inconvenient but Club3D makes a bi-directional adapter that makes it regular DisplayPort for about $20.<p>I am fine with the camera defaulting to ON for Windows Hello to work in my 2 computer setup.<p>My only serious complaint is the piss poor speakers and the fabric covering them.<p>I would also prefer a glossy display, but in practice I just don&#x27;t find it makes any difference. I arrange my office for no reflections anyhow, which results in an equivalent experience. Additionally, the Dell 6K has excellent blacks. It has much better blacks than any IPS panel I have used.

Although I haven’t used these monitors, my experience with high dpi on windows and Linux has been a nightmare compared to OSX. It’s surprising me the non Mac world hasn’t made this a bigger priority.

Dell cuts cost anywhere they can. Their power cable, keyboard, and mouse have the tiniest gauge wire I have ever seen and this is a $2500 system. Do not buy Dell.

Friends dont let friends buy Dell monitors.

I find a 2Kish (2560x1440or1600) resolution on a 24-27&quot; Monitor to be the most usable for text.<p>I understand things like fonts render smoother on a 4-6-8K monitor but it also draws more power usually to power all those pixels.<p>The use of a Chroma 4:4:4 capable 4K tv is also often really helpful because one 4K screen at large enough size gives four 1920x1080 working surfaces. 4K seems to become useful at 38&quot; Or so in a TV.<p>Is there something I&#x27;m missing out on in terms of option that are superior to 2K for external monitors in terms of usability?<p>Many of the ultrawide monitors sometimes have worse or close to the same resolution as a single 2K monitor.

The comments regarding matte vs glossy and text sharpness resonates with me. It’s really hard to use any non-Apple screens since their color is completely washed out and lifeless and text lacks crispness on all screens at a range of price points I’ve ever tried. What’s even more puzzling is how a large number of people online seem to adamantly defend widely sold lower-dpi 32” 4k matte screens as a superior product. It’s been over a decade since first retina products shipped and somehow 200 dpi+ desktop screens is still an extremely niche product.