Hands on Dell Precision 7710

I just sent back my second UP3216Q (ordered from Amazon.) Both had physical defects (see attached photos of the second monitor.) I talked to a rep at Dell and he said the monitors sold by Amazon are *not* referbs and the are same that you would get ordering straight from Dell. After hearing that I'm gonna try a different brand...

I'm on the fence regarding the best size for 4k, but probably going to try another 32"er . Probably the ASUS PA328Q which has gotten really good reviews.

 

I'm deciding if I would be happy with a 32" 4k like that PA328Q or maybe instead go with a 34" ultrawide (LG 34UC98 3440x1440) using native resolution. I'm concerned about possible scaling issues in some software using a 4k. Although with a large 32" 4k display I wonder if I keep native resolution and not be a problem. Note: I have not used a 4k display so I'm going based on what I read in reviews and forum. I've been reading that 27" is often too small for 4k because of need to rely on software scaling to enlarge. So I'm focusing on 32" if I do go for a 4k external

 

Have not seen the 1080 (edit - thnx Aaron) option on the 7710. Have seen it on the 5510 and 7510. Both were good displays that covered sRGB.

The 4K panel on the 7710 covers much more than sRGB. It covers AdobeRGB and NTSC. Like the 4K panel on the 5510, it is on a whole other level than what I am used to seeing. Color and contrast are better than the IPS panel on the M6700. In software that supports scaling, it is incredibly sharp. 1080 scaling also looks good.

Unless I were forced to run Windows 7 again, the 1080 screen is no longer an option. The jump in quality on the 4K panel is just too great.

 

With a 32" 4K at native resolution, pixel size would be similar to 1080p at 17" (actually, at 16"), so it should be readable. The problem I can see would be, maximizing a window to fill the screen may give it way too much space (depending on the app), so you might live in a windowed world more. Or use the new Windows 10 feature which makes it easy to snap windows into "quadrants" of the screen.

Wouldn't a 1080p screen be more like "2K"? The horizontal resolution is where the "4" in "4K" comes from.

 

Was using the same language as the question, but yes, you are right.

 

Yeah I was considering one of the widescreen LGs as well- another developer at my company has one and I've checked it out, but the lack of vertical was a turnoff for me. I tried out the first Dell monitor I recieved (while waiting for the replacement to arrive) and I didn't need to use any DPI scaling. IIRC I just upped the font sizes to 12 point instead of my usual 10. The only thing that took some getting used to was having to work harder to see the corners. My normal setup is 4 x 24" 19x12s (center two vertical, outside two horizontal) all arranged so they curve a bit around my field of view. This is one benefit of the curved LG my friend has. If that curved LG had more vertical than 1440 I'd buy one in a second as I think that would help with the corner issue.

 

Heh, sorry, you are right... 4 times the rez confused me a bit.

 

I assume you mean you see no difference in the random read/write IOPS numbers since the sequential are higher?

 

Technically 4k refers to the movie standard today of 4096x2160, UHD (or more specifically UHD-1) refers to 3840x2160 which is the TV and monitor standard. As opposed to to the older standard of vertical resolution (which would be called 2160p or 2160i, depending whether progressive scan or interleaved.) Hope that cleared things up

 

I should add I use an older VIZIO "4K" TV as a second monitor though limited to 30Hz I find the scale fine for my needs...