Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Dell 6K U3224KB Monitor

hardwickj said:
If this thing seriously gets priced in the low $2k range, then Apple should be embarrassed for their XDR and ACD. They're both such ripoffs that it makes Apple look like a bunch of con artists in comparison. It's legit offensive.
Click to expand...
I'm agnostic about the XDR's pricing, because I don't know how much more it cost Apple to offer the XDR with a native 10-bit panel (yes, no doubt Apple charges a health margin).

But certainly that does make things embarrassing for the ASD, since the Dell, with its high-contrast panel, might actually exceed the ASD's performance—while, of course, also being substantially larger.
 
Last edited:
Eager to see how this pans out. The rumored price is a little steep but given the lower volume of models in this category, the targeted market, newness of the panel, etc it's not that outlandish. A well built monitor has many years of life in it, as can be attested by my 27" Thunderbolt Display and ASUS PB278Q which are hovering around a decade of usage at this point. Let's just hope it doesn't turn out to be the mess that the LG UltraFine 27 turned out to be…

It is kinda ugly, but I'm not particularly bothered by that. If they end up offering a version without the webcam and speakers that'd be cool but it's hardly a dealbreaker. I'm just glad to finally have real competition for the XDR (even without local dimming) and for the selection of 2x scaling monitors to grow at long last.
 
  • Like
Reactions: enc0re and Lava Lamp Freak
@joevt I believe this at least partially answers your earlier question? Does this imply that it can run 2 monitors daisy chained at 6K (presumably only on Windows) w/ TB4 and DSC?

Screenshot 2023-05-09 at 12.26.26.png
 
I expect daisy chaining to work on the Mac as well. I think the bigger unanswered questions revolve around Macs using TB3/USB4:

1. Will they be able to support TB functionality at 6K (USB 3.0 speed, sleep/wake) or will this monitor force them to connect as USB-C?
2. Can this Macs go to 6144 x 3456, or will they top out at 6016 x 3384? I can't help but notice that the latter is a preset display mode on this monitor according to page 18 of the manual.
 
enc0re said:
2. Can this Macs go to 6144 x 3456, or will they top out at 6016 x 3384? I can't help but notice that the latter is a preset display mode on this monitor according to page 18 of the manual.
Click to expand...
Ah, I hadn't realized their resolutions were different. But yes: Their aspect ratios are the same (16:9), but Apple and Dell list their pixel densities as 218 ppi and 223 ppi respectively, which would account for the difference in resolutions (assuming the diagonals are the same).

Surely Dell was interested in the Apple market when they designed this, so it would be surprising if the difference in resolution forced this to run non-natively (i.e., at other than 2:1) on MacOS. But we shall see....

Wonder what the rationale was for going 223 ppi...and what the ppi of the upcoming Samsung 5k will be.
 
Last edited:
theorist9 said:
Ah, I hadn't realized their resolutions were different. But yes: Their aspect ratios are the same (16:9), but Apple and Dell list their pixel densities as 218 ppi and 223 ppi respectively, which would account for the difference in resolutions (assuming the diagonals are the same).

Surely Dell was interested in the Apple market when they designed this, so it would be surprising if the difference in resolution forced this to run non-natively (i.e., at other than 2:1) on MacOS. But we shall see....

Wonder what the rationale was for going 223 ppi...and what the ppi of the upcoming Samsung 5k will be.
Click to expand...
Something I noticed with the resolution is that the UI will be the same size as a Windows PC connected to a 4K monitor set to 125%. 6144/2 = 3840/1.25.
 
Lava Lamp Freak said:
Something I noticed with the resolution is that the UI will be the same size as a Windows PC connected to a 4K monitor set to 125%. 6144/2 = 3840/1.25.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that's only if the 4k monitor has the same 32" diagonal. I'd say most 4k's designed for computer work are 27".
 
Freida said:
I really hope Dell releases a variant without the ugly camera etc. as this is shaping up to be an awesome display. Will see for reviews but the specs look great, no?
Click to expand...
I actually like having webcam and speakers built into the monitor. I move my monitor between landscape and portrait a lot and not having the rigging get in the way would be nice.

If the Studio Display wasn’t so small, the speakers and mic would be a big draw for me. Obviously the camera is not so good.

Unfortunately the Dell Ultrasharp 4K is not that great of a camera. A $150 Logi Brio is better. So now you’re stuck with a subpar webcam on your monitor and it will get in the way of mounting the real deal. I’ve heard bad reviews about the speakers on the 4K video conferencing monitor too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision and Lava Lamp Freak
Well, I like cam too but not that monstrosity. Either its hidden in the bezel or something like Samsung Viewfinity S9.
In terms of quality - I have MBP 2017 now which has average camera but who cares about it? for zoom meetings etc. it doesn't really matter as it does the job.
I would only care about the camera if I was buying something that is overpriced (like the Apple Studio Display) - at that price I expect great camera etc.

You simply cannot charge more and then give crap back.

Hence why I decided not to support Apple with this nonsense and I will vote with my wallet and buy something else. Not the hideous Dell but hopefully another version without the crappy camera bar on the top. :)

Or Viewfinity S9 as I think it looks absolutely awesome.

enc0re said:
I actually like having webcam and speakers built into the monitor. I move my monitor between landscape and portrait a lot and not having the rigging get in the way would be nice.

If the Studio Display wasn’t so small, the speakers and mic would be a big draw for me. Obviously the camera is not so good.

Unfortunately the Dell Ultrasharp 4K is not that great of a camera. A $150 Logi Brio is better. So now you’re stuck with a subpar webcam on your monitor and it will get in the way of mounting the real deal. I’ve heard bad reviews about the speakers on the 4K video conferencing monitor too.
Click to expand...
 
hardwickj said:
@joevt I believe this at least partially answers your earlier question? Does this imply that it can run 2 monitors daisy chained at 6K (presumably only on Windows) w/ TB4 and DSC?
Click to expand...
I think the "TB4 (alt mode DP 1.4 DSC Enabled)" should also apply to TB3 and USB4 hosts that support Thunderbolt, two displays, and DSC from their TB/USB4 port.
The daisy chaining appears to be using the dual display support of Thunderbolt. It is not using an MST hub. If it were using an MST hub, then a USB-C connection could allow dual 4K60.

Also USB 3.0 doesn't have a gen 2. They should have said USB 3.1 gen 2 if they truly mean 10 Gbps (or USB 3.2 gen 2x1).

enc0re said:
I expect daisy chaining to work on the Mac as well. I think the bigger unanswered questions revolve around Macs using TB3/USB4:

1. Will they be able to support TB functionality at 6K (USB 3.0 speed, sleep/wake) or will this monitor force them to connect as USB-C?
Click to expand...
The only reason Macs claiming TB3/USB4 can't claim TB4 is because they cannot connect two displays to a single Thunderbolt port. They should be able to get one 6K60 and USB 3 at least.

enc0re said:
2. Can this Macs go to 6144 x 3456, or will they top out at 6016 x 3384? I can't help but notice that the latter is a preset display mode on this monitor according to page 18 of the manual.
Click to expand...
This might be the most important issue. If the Mac can't support 6144x3456 then it's most likely an Apple driver issue. Whether it support 6144x3456 or 6016x3384, a TB4 Mac (or TB3 Mac with DSC) should be able to support two of them.
 
I'm sure they will but it will not be as cheap as this DELL.

I used to defend Apple most of the times but after the Studio Display and all the shenigans with stands I got fed up as they are just taking the piss out of us.
So will buy elsewhere.

Honestly, the more customers that will show them the finger the more quality we will get in the end.

$999 stand for a monitor? Please!

dbrewood said:
LOL I hope....... I'm still wondering if it is worth hoping Apple will bring out a 32" Studio display....
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision
dbrewood said:
LOL I hope....... I'm still wondering if it is worth hoping Apple will bring out a 32" Studio display....
Click to expand...
That's what I really want. The speakers on the Studio Display are nice. Apple could probably get me to part with $4,000 for that, assuming they put a non-stupid webcam in there.
 
A 32" Studio Display would be great, but it's unlikely to sport multiple inputs like this Dell does which for me would make it hard to justify its almost certainly higher price.

Would love to be wrong about that though…
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lava Lamp Freak and Freida
As expected it's just a worse XDR display. No thanks Dell.

Freida said:
$999 stand for a monitor? Please!
Click to expand...
Obviously it's absurd but there are high quality third party stands that work perfectly well with the VESA mount. There are many reasons not to get a monitor from Apple, but that overpriced stand is not one of them.

Zest28 said:
MacRumors will call this display garbage because it's not a gaming monitor.
Click to expand...
It's garbage because it's releasing more than 3 years after the XDR yet it's got worse specs. Pricing isn't good enough to consider it a bargain either. The XDR at least doesn't compromise much in terms of HDR support (and I would not buy a monitor without proper HDR with dimming zones anymore) and is well priced for the features (as long as you don't pay MSRP obviously).

Freida said:
XDR does NOT have miniLED!
Click to expand...
It does not have static backlighting either, the tech is close to miniLED and for all intents and purposes it behaves like a miniLED. The amount of dimming zones is low due to that, for a panel this size. But there are monitors out there in this size that have literally 8 dimming zones. Eight, vs. multiple hundred in the XDR.
 
I'd much rather have the Dell with a KVM and a higher contrast ratio than have to live with the XDR's blooming and vignetting on a daily basis. The only thing positive I can say about the XDR is that it has a better design and a glossy screen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freida
Its the principle that comes with it. (stand)

If you charge $5000 for a monitor and don't include a stand then something is wrong. Not to mention that Apple said its referenced monitor but its not. They even compared it to the Sony one HX3.... and as we now know it was pure marketing crap.

As for Dell - I would rather have the Dell over XDR simply because of the price. I don't need fancy peak brightness 1000 or even 1600. I need big screen (32" is perfect) and high ppi resolution.

Apple does everything retina and yet they don't have a display that is for consumers in bigger sizes.
Remember the Apple Cinema Displays back in 2010? 20" 23" 30" ?

Those were awesome and priced really well. I think I bought the 30" for about £1200 back then. So Apple can easily get us 30-32 retina display in around $2500-$3000 mark and then have XDR for the more demanding customers. Instead we got 27" that is very expensive and again height adjustable stand (dammit we are in 2023) is extra $400. Sad reality.

Regardless, I want more manufacturers come out with retina displays as that will be good for all of us. More options to choose from - always a good thing

okkibs said:
As expected it's just a worse XDR display. No thanks Dell.


Obviously it's absurd but there are high quality third party stands that work perfectly well with the VESA mount. There are many reasons not to get a monitor from Apple, but that overpriced stand is not one of them.


It's garbage because it's releasing more than 3 years after the XDR yet it's got worse specs. Pricing isn't good enough to consider it a bargain either. The XDR at least doesn't compromise much in terms of HDR support (and I would not buy a monitor without proper HDR with dimming zones anymore) and is well priced for the features (as long as you don't pay MSRP obviously).


It does not have static backlighting either, the tech is close to miniLED and for all intents and purposes it behaves like a miniLED. The amount of dimming zones is low due to that, for a panel this size. But there are monitors out there in this size that have literally 8 dimming zones. Eight, vs. multiple hundred in the XDR.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision and Lava Lamp Freak
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back