Nice. I was concerned it might drop to 30Hz. Do you believe it was still running at 60Hz?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dell P2715Q and P2415Q 4K IPS Displays
- Thread starter VirtualRain
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nice. I was concerned it might drop to 30Hz. Do you believe it was still running at 60Hz?
hey. i'd like to know what resolution are you running at on your 27" 4k? How does it look at 2560x1440p?
1440p i think, i still can't figure out how to get the retina setting, maybe it's auto implemented? i go to display and i see no such option for hidpi settings
yeah it ran at 60hz, moved a window around and saw no visible lag.
P2415Q working fine in all scaled resolutions @90 degrees on base riMac 5k. Would of personally never tried this if not for this request, but I can certainly see some great uses. Text looks same as in 0 degrees rotation ( or at least to me )
Thanks a lot! I am now in a dilemma whether to buy this now or wait for Apple's own retina 27-inch external display that should be out early next year with new rMBPs.
Let me say ( my opinion of course ), after day with it ( P2415Q ) and it sitting next to my base riMac 5k, I personally can't stand AG monitors. This is of the best AG coatings I've experienced but still too much interference for me for at these resolutions, I'm sending it back and will keep my fingers crossed there are some glossy 4k monitors soon ( apples's offering would be most welcome ). Don't get me wrong it's an awesome monitor, just not for me.
Thanks. If it works as well as you guys say, I'll probably use one of my displays in landscape and one in portrait mode all the time. I do a lot of photo work and being able to see my portrait oriented photos a bit larger will be awesome. Plus the portrait display will be ideal for web pages and writing while the landscape display will be great for email, Camtasia, Powerpoint, etc. Now I just need Purolator to get off their a$$ and deliver them!
Hmm... I really hope I don't hate it as much as you. At work I have a Lenovo 24" 1920x1280 display with a nasty AG coating... I hope it's not that bad. I much prefer bare glass and controlled lighting... I really wish AG was a configurable option on any display.
Hmm... I really hope I don't hate it as much as you. At work I have a Lenovo 24" 1920x1280 display with a nasty AG coating... I hope it's not that bad. I much prefer bare glass and controlled lighting... I really wish AG was a configurable option on any display.
Would like to say this is my opinion toward AG coatings in general and in no way should it take away from the P2415Q, as it is an awesome monitor with a great AG solution. As we enter the age of HiDPI display devices these coatings are more relevant than ever, it has become my preference over last few years as most devices I use have no/min AG ( rMPB, 27" TBD, r iPad, iPhone, Dell S2240M, Dell S2220T ) so now I've become very sensitive to anything on top of pixels. Even glossies are not all created equal ( iMac 5k is one of the best in my opinion, I think Dell 5k uses similar glass covering ).
As this is an mostly an apple thread some users looking into 4k solutions should be aware of this. Thankfully Dell has a great return policy ( at least here in the US ) so someone looking for 4k should try it and come to their own conclusion.
Anyway you hit the nail on the head and it's really unfortunate that these monitors ( not just Dell's ) aren't available with the option to choose display coating.
Last edited:
I tested the input lag vs. a BenQ XL2411z (which itself has a display lag of 10ms). I tested using display mirroring on a PC at 1920x1080 60hz. With "Response Time" set to "Fast" on the P2715Q, and scaling off, the input lag is about 26ms (i.e., it is 16ms higher than the BenQ). I didn't notice any difference with those settings set to "on."
That's a pretty high number for a modern display, but it's totally usable in my opinion. I gamed for years with a Dell U3011, which has about the same input lag.
I would be interested if anyone else found anything different.
As far as gaming, I am happy to report that the response time seems totally normal, at least to me. It's possible that it is slightly slow, but that the increased sharpness makes up for it -- I'm not sure. In any case, 4K gaming is pretty awesome.
That's a pretty high number for a modern display, but it's totally usable in my opinion. I gamed for years with a Dell U3011, which has about the same input lag.
I would be interested if anyone else found anything different.
As far as gaming, I am happy to report that the response time seems totally normal, at least to me. It's possible that it is slightly slow, but that the increased sharpness makes up for it -- I'm not sure. In any case, 4K gaming is pretty awesome.
I plan on buying the P2415Q to be my external when using it at home in a desktop setup. I have a rMBP Mid-2014 with only Intel Iris Pro graphics. Running it at the scaled resolution of 1920x1080 via the included mini DP cable, there shouldn't be much stuttering, right? I will be using the rMBP in clamshell mode when powering the external.
I'm using a nMP and have two P2415Q displays connected. Running Yosemite 10.10.1.
D500. I will say that the nMP definitely runs hot with dual 4K, but, unlike the UP2414Q, the monitors themselves stay reasonably cool.
Just got the 24 up and running on nMP D-500 on 10.10.1. (also works on oMP flashed to 5.1 with GTX 670, but not tested beyond boot).
Thoughts: Anti-glare ugly when monitor off, but not bad at all lit up. Surprisingly, I might even say I prefer it over glossy as on my TB monitor also hooked up to the nMP. As usual, OS X is driving me nuts with the dumbed down iOSification interface. Specifically, the P2415Q runs at 1920x1080p60 at best for display, and native rez doesnt show up under scaled, UNLESS, you hit option key plus scaled button. While best for display is still 1080p60, native rez at 3840x2160 then shows up. If selected, I do get 3840x2160 at 60 Hz. per the system profiler and my eyeballs.
It is maddening though that you dont get native rez without jumping through those hoops. Spent a ton of time talking to Apple (dont bother calling Dell FYI) and long story short, it is what is. Thats the current state of generic unofficial 60 Hz. SST support in 10.10.1. My concern was degraded performance when native rez only was only selectable under scaled options. Bottom line: if you dont see lag, and sys info says 3840x2160 @ 60, then thats what you are getting. I hope thats true. When some heavy UHD lifting starts, well see how it works. Right now, with basic tasks/apps, no artifacts, tearing, or other glitches beyond the aforementioned OS issue just getting 3840x2160 to display.
Thoughts: Anti-glare ugly when monitor off, but not bad at all lit up. Surprisingly, I might even say I prefer it over glossy as on my TB monitor also hooked up to the nMP. As usual, OS X is driving me nuts with the dumbed down iOSification interface. Specifically, the P2415Q runs at 1920x1080p60 at best for display, and native rez doesnt show up under scaled, UNLESS, you hit option key plus scaled button. While best for display is still 1080p60, native rez at 3840x2160 then shows up. If selected, I do get 3840x2160 at 60 Hz. per the system profiler and my eyeballs.
It is maddening though that you dont get native rez without jumping through those hoops. Spent a ton of time talking to Apple (dont bother calling Dell FYI) and long story short, it is what is. Thats the current state of generic unofficial 60 Hz. SST support in 10.10.1. My concern was degraded performance when native rez only was only selectable under scaled options. Bottom line: if you dont see lag, and sys info says 3840x2160 @ 60, then thats what you are getting. I hope thats true. When some heavy UHD lifting starts, well see how it works. Right now, with basic tasks/apps, no artifacts, tearing, or other glitches beyond the aforementioned OS issue just getting 3840x2160 to display.
If you go to the monitor's menu screen and look at the bottom of it, it shows what the signal the monitor is actually receiving.
Dell P2715Q and P2415Q 4K IPS Displays
So you're running 24" native? Isn't everything too tiny?
BTW, hitting option to reveal more resoltion settings is just Apple's way of simplify the user interface... It's not a big deal for us power users... At least the option is there!
----------
Great news indeed!
So you're running 24" native? Isn't everything too tiny?
BTW, hitting option to reveal more resoltion settings is just Apple's way of simplify the user interface... It's not a big deal for us power users... At least the option is there!
----------
Great news indeed!
Last edited:
It isn't accurate. It says 3840x2160 at 60 even when the eye, and per Apple System Info, it is only at 1920x1080 when "best for display" is selected. According to 3rd tier Apple tech support, only sys info is a real poll of the data stream. I suspect the Dell menu is reflecting what you want to run it at, or what it is capable of, but it is not what OS X is allowing it to do. Tried the Dell menu with multiple rez's selected in OS X display prefs. The rez changes. The menu readout does not. It always says native rez. The only way to get UHD at 60 Hz. SST in 10.10.1 is to select it as an option key scaled option.
----------
Yes, as a second monitor and rarely mirrored. I wanted the Dell to preview UHD content natively and that's about it.
As for the option key hassle, I disagree. SJ, rest his soul, would fire a dozen people over this junk. The nMP has 4K on every other paragraph in the marketing info, and to use it for 4K, or more accurately, UHD, we have to jump through hoops to get the native rez.
And since posting, I ran some FPS tests and I do believe there is a definite performance loss by running it via the scaled selection. Something behind the scenes in the OS is going on that is unnecessary and resource intensive when the monitor should just run at its highest capable rez, or that set in the monitor menu, without running through any other algorithms. That's not what is happening per my tests so far. I run a simulation at 3840x2160 on the Apple TB monitor at native rez (so obviously some of the screen isn't visible, but I can move the window around and see that the full 3840x2160 is getting spit out and processed by the GPU), and I get 50 FPS. If I run it on the Dell at native rez chosen, which is however, available only via scaled option, I only get 35 FPS. Something isn't kosher about this. My bet though is that the 3840 is only available via option/scaled, and there's some unneeded processing going on. In other words, due to the current state of OS X and AMD drivers, to get 2160p60 SST, there's some indirect route being taken that causes a performance hit that would not be taken if the GPU simply sent 2160p60 straight to the monitor at native rez. That's close to the bandwidth limit of DP 1.2, but not over it, so it should work without funky workarounds.
One other thing I noticed. Apple identifies the monitor as a TV. This can be seen in the system report. Again, something isn't right in the OS and/or driver(s).
Update: Tried it on the cheese grater 4.1/5/1 running Win 7 (updated) and latest Nvidia drivers for the GTX 670. Works perfectly at native rez with zero user input. Select the 150% text option in display in CP, and it's actually usable...small text still, but sharp as a tack. Everything but text of course runs native. The glitches mentioned above must be an OS X/AMD thing.
Last edited:
A few thoughts...
Apple identifying it as a TV could simply be a matter of time.
The setting for 3840x2160 is not a scaled setting, it's just a way of hiding what would is an impractical working resolution for most people. When running at a scaled resolution, Apple renders the desktop at double the selected resolution. You can confirm if it's scaling or not by doing a screen cap of the desktop (shift-cmd-3). If the image is 3840x2160 there's no scaling happening. If it's double that size, then it's scaling.
There's also the input lag that may be a factor in what you're perceiving.
And I wouldn't consider having to press the "Option" key jumping through hoops. UHD at 24" isn't useful for most people... these displays are designed to be used as retina displays.
BTW, I'm curious why you would want to preview 4K on a screen that small. The pixels are imperceptible. Why not preview it on a much bigger display/tv?
I'll try the screen cap test and post results. However, I did an FPS test and there does seem to be lowered performance via scaled selection. Besides, it's in two Apple KB articles that scaled rez degrades performance. I'll do further testing. Meanwhile, we'll just have to agree to disagree about having native rez only available through a somewhat hidden option listed as a scaled rez, especially if isn't being scaled, and I still think it is. When I run the SS test, I don't care if it is 3840x2160, that still won't convince me it isn't running through some sort of scaling like up and back down or something. Otherwise, why isn't native rez listed anywhere else? Screen size doesn't matter. I bet the same thing would happen on a 32 inch 60 Hz. SST UHD monitor. Makes zero sense, just like ID as a TV. Tested the oMP in Win 7 via BC with a GTX 670 SC and the thing booted right up at native rez. No issues whatsoever. Still to be tested: Win 8 on the nMP. But again, as for 4K in OS X, whatever happened to the "It just works" mantra?
As for preview at 24 inches, I get a "Retina" experience in terms of eye candy. It is gorgeous when pixels are unseen. My work is often similar, in terms of display requirements, of what a diagnostic radiologist would love to have. I need maximum detail and sharp definition, but no visible pixels or anything like a "screen door" effect. Of course, there are times when I literally MUST see the pixels. Virtually every audiovisual app I have is capable of zoom down to pixel level, or close enough. When it isn't, I've got a half dozen varieties of 10X magnifiers lying around for just that purpose, say, when key framing an animation overlay at pixel level accuracy. (tedious work BTW)
For the final product, sure I view it like my average client would, on a 40 to 65 inch UHD TV (mine is a 55" Sony XBR), and on 1080p HDTV's (again mine is a Sony 37" XBR), as well as on Win and Apple laptops and desktops. I may end up with as many as three or four delivery formats. That will definitely be the case when 4K Blu-ray comes out. Ditto for decent 4K stream boxes. I'll have that, high rez for hard disk and/or flash drive playback, streaming, and whatever else is necessary for the end user to get the best possible experience within budget.
The limit is when compression yields an unacceptable result or the rez is too low. Example: Client asks for a DVD. I might laugh and buy them a Bluray player and if it's a big enough project, I'll spring for an HDTV or HD monitor just so they can see the difference. As for upper limits, there is no such thing...yet. For viewing in a normal sized room with an average display, 8K will be overkill, but great for acquisition maybe. My vision is not perfect at my age, but these theoretical viewing limits are nonsense. I can spot the difference between UHD and HD three or four times further away than those charts all over the WWW claim to be the max. If they were true, a 55 inch 4K UHD TV would be useless from 10 or 12 feet away compared to 1080p. Plenty of web pundits say that. To me, there's a HUGE difference. Even with Netflix 4K content, it's noticeable. With my own stuff, it's clearly obvious.
Last edited:
Also has it been confirmed these displays run at 60 Hz at 4K over DP to mini DP with OS X Yosemite?