My husband loves his Dell 8k but boy is it plagued with quality issues. He puts up with them all though cause it’s worth it to him.
Biggest issue so far: the Dell support experience for a failed display did not feel like we were getting support for a $4k monitor. After many failed replacements they even lost track of what they sent me, accused me of fraud, and tried to cancel the support ticket with my having a broken monitor still.
Thanks for this review. I currently run two 4K 24-inch Dell displays @ 2x but have been waiting for a viable single display to replace them both and I was hopeful this 6K would be the one.
If you want to connect PCs, be sure to use a new-enough nVidia GPU with latest drivers.
I run Linux and avoid NVIDIA due to the hassle of proprietary drivers. Curious to see how the display is handled by AMD gpus.
Surprisingly, I found that I don’t like the matte screen better! It’s hard to describe, but somehow the picture seems more “dull”
This. I absolutely hate how matte is still so prevalent, glossy has been common outside of desktop monitors which are only now barely starting to change. Though it seems that not all matte screens are equally terrible; the Thinkpad I’m currently looking at doesn’t seem to have aaaas much of a prominent muddy effect as the AOC 4K monitor I’ve had.
This is the first time I’ve heard someone actually want glossy. They are worse for reflections and generally worse picture. They became prevalent because the gloss makes the, look better in shops, which makes them sell better.
There is actually a difference between glossy and clear. We don’t really needglossy displays, but clear is better than fuzzy. It would seem it is now possible to make things clear but not shiny 🙂
I was Captain Matte Displays Only for a long time but after working on a gloss monitor (LG 5k) for a few years I’ve come to prefer it. Matte coatings on LCDs tend to “blur” or “dull” the image. They have better uniform image quality but worse peak image quality. A good gloss screen today with a good environment is better than an excellent matte screen in the same environment, although a average gloss screen in a poor environment is much worse than an average matte screen in a poor environment.
I think this is why designers tend to prefer glossy displays. I’d still want a matte display if I’m i.e. outdoors though, but I’m just doing reading/writing there.
I really don’t understand how people can work on displays that turn into a mirror as soon as there’s the slightest amount of light in the room. I hated it on CRTs and I hate it on glossy displays. I agree that with matte screens, there is a minor reduction of clarity, especially on higher pixel densities, but I think that tradeoff is completely worth it. Another downside of matte displays is that they cannot be cleaned properly due to their complex surface which can retain smearing forever. There are also half-glossy displays with anti-reflection coatings, those can be pretty good, so it’s not all black and white. Either way, it’s only matte screens for me, unless it’s a touch screen.
I didn’t see this in the page so I ran the calculation at https://www.sven.de/dpi/ and a 32” 6144x3456 monitor has a PPI of 220.29. Pretty nice. Personally I use the smallest commercial 2160p monitor you can find, the 24” LG 24UD58-B which only reaches 183.58 PPI. At least they’re only about $300 a pop. Wish manufacturers would focus more on the 24” size which is perfect for integer scaling. 27” and higher require weird scaling factors like 1.5.
FWIW you can get a decent 13”/15,6” glossy 4K 60Hz OLED ~300PPI monitor on AliExpress for the same price or less. I’m using 15.6” one and it’s been perfect for my needs (as a side monitor for some YouTube videos, quick code review, etc).
My main monitor is, unfortunately, matte 4K@144Hz 28”. I’d rather get glossy monitor with a higher PPI if one was available, but the market seems to be stagnant for many years now, or at least advancing at a really slow pace.
Oh that’s awesome, I never knew it was an option! Thanks. Will think about how that could fit into my setup, if at all. I would also love for the monitors to have a higher refresh rates but yeah the market for these monitors appears to be taking a breather.
What scale are you using your 24”s at? “200%” or “@2x” (or any other nomenclature to describe using 4 physical pixels for one screen pixel) on a 4K display gives 1920x1080, which to my eyes is “too big”, and thus used mine (2x Dell P2415Qs) at a scaled resolution (“looks like 2304x1296” in macOS), which pretty closely matches the “default” scaling for a ~215-220 PPI screen under macOS.
Ha, I’ve used a 28” 4K with 200% scale, definitely a lot more “too big” than on a 24” but I still liked it. For the terminal and the browser there’s ctrl-minus anyway, and the panels and stuff – big is fine with me as I don’t have perfect vision :)
Distance also matters. I went from a 27” 4K display to a 43” one largely to improve my posture. When I sit at my desk, I hunch over the 27” one but I have to sit further back to fit all of the 43” one in my field of view and so the perceived pixel size is basically the same on both.
I had a 31” LG at “true 4k”, and while the quality of everything at 2x was nice, it all felt a bit too big. I find 5k at 27” to be perfect. I always enjoyed the text/control size of 2560 at 27”, the way the old Dells and original 27” iMacs had was a great physical size for on-screen controls across both Windows and Mac, but of course 2x is mo bettah. Obviously it’s a matter of taste, but I’d suggest finding somebody who has a similar setup before straying too far out of that sweet-spot, if it’s an expensive commitment.
I also found 4k on 27” a bit too small, I usually go for the “More space” on macOS and this setting on 27” with 4k (Dell U2718q) was a bit too small. For me at least 32” for 4k gives me a good balance (also depends on the distance at which you sit from the monitor).
I would love more pixels in the 32” size, sadly, the Dell 8k monitor was not supported properly on macOS (I think now it is, but only on an Intel Mac Pro, the cheese grater one).
Do you notice it? I have a 43” 4K display and, if I see any pixelation, it’s a reminder that I’m hunching over the desk again and I should fix my posture. My laptop, tablet, and phone all have similar resolutions but I hold them closer to my face. 4K seems to be close to the sweet spot where, for any size where I can fit the entire display in my field of view, I don’t see any pixelation and text is smooth. Every resolution increase before then was fixing visible artefacts but at 4K, for the first time, I don’t see anything that annoys me.
I’m not sure if the Author has an older OS release, or took a screenshot while using a non-optimal connection? The screenshot in the article shows the display as being at the “more space” setting in macOS, to produce a “3072x1728” UI.
I have the same 6K display on macOS 13.4.1 (i.e. latest stable) and it shows as “3072x1728” as the “default” middle option, and two options each left and right, with the highest “more space” being 3840x2160”.
The review’s points about matte vs gloss are very helpful! I’m currently on 27” LG 5k which is glossy. I’ve been eying an upgrade to a 6.5K 30”+ unit like this one, and agree some matte displays look “dull” in comparison to the LG and Mac displays. I wasn’t sure how much of it was display quality, color space, or the coating. So it’s helpful to hear of similar experience from someone reviewing a high quality matte display. I will steer clear.
I’ve not put eyes on the Dells mentioned, or the 8k Apple display, but I have switched to a pair of 5k Studio Displays (with the nano-textured glass option) since a power surge killed the displays I was using, and they’re absolutely amazing. Not cheap, but you get what you pay for when it comes to displays these days.
No, you’re right. For some reason I had that at 8k in my head. I’ve given them no real thought since release, as while the price seems reasonable for the colour that screen can reproduce, I have no need of that, and the price is ridiculous for those of us working with text and graphics rather than pro video.
My husband loves his Dell 8k but boy is it plagued with quality issues. He puts up with them all though cause it’s worth it to him.
Biggest issue so far: the Dell support experience for a failed display did not feel like we were getting support for a $4k monitor. After many failed replacements they even lost track of what they sent me, accused me of fraud, and tried to cancel the support ticket with my having a broken monitor still.
Another issue, which is more amusing than bad, is sometimes you do something not dpi aware, like run memtest, and you end up with this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/f96hsy/memtest86_on_8k_dell/
I agree that the 8K monitor has many issues.
I had to exchange one, and my experience with Dell support was good overall. They immediately replaced the monitor.
For some reason, they even sent a second replacement, though! It was a bit of a hassle to get that sorted out.
FWIW the bad support experience I mentioned was the second. The first one was flawless. Mind you, we had to replace it twice, so…
Thanks for this review. I currently run two 4K 24-inch Dell displays @ 2x but have been waiting for a viable single display to replace them both and I was hopeful this 6K would be the one.
I run Linux and avoid NVIDIA due to the hassle of proprietary drivers. Curious to see how the display is handled by AMD gpus.
This. I absolutely hate how matte is still so prevalent, glossy has been common outside of desktop monitors which are only now barely starting to change. Though it seems that not all matte screens are equally terrible; the Thinkpad I’m currently looking at doesn’t seem to have aaaas much of a prominent muddy effect as the AOC 4K monitor I’ve had.
This is the first time I’ve heard someone actually want glossy. They are worse for reflections and generally worse picture. They became prevalent because the gloss makes the, look better in shops, which makes them sell better.
There is actually a difference between glossy and clear. We don’t really needglossy displays, but clear is better than fuzzy. It would seem it is now possible to make things clear but not shiny 🙂
I much prefer glossy to matte; colour fidelity was something I used to care about a lot and I’ve never shaken that.
I was Captain Matte Displays Only for a long time but after working on a gloss monitor (LG 5k) for a few years I’ve come to prefer it. Matte coatings on LCDs tend to “blur” or “dull” the image. They have better uniform image quality but worse peak image quality. A good gloss screen today with a good environment is better than an excellent matte screen in the same environment, although a average gloss screen in a poor environment is much worse than an average matte screen in a poor environment.
I think this is why designers tend to prefer glossy displays. I’d still want a matte display if I’m i.e. outdoors though, but I’m just doing reading/writing there.
I really don’t understand how people can work on displays that turn into a mirror as soon as there’s the slightest amount of light in the room. I hated it on CRTs and I hate it on glossy displays. I agree that with matte screens, there is a minor reduction of clarity, especially on higher pixel densities, but I think that tradeoff is completely worth it. Another downside of matte displays is that they cannot be cleaned properly due to their complex surface which can retain smearing forever. There are also half-glossy displays with anti-reflection coatings, those can be pretty good, so it’s not all black and white. Either way, it’s only matte screens for me, unless it’s a touch screen.
I didn’t see this in the page so I ran the calculation at https://www.sven.de/dpi/ and a 32” 6144x3456 monitor has a PPI of 220.29. Pretty nice. Personally I use the smallest commercial 2160p monitor you can find, the 24” LG 24UD58-B which only reaches 183.58 PPI. At least they’re only about $300 a pop. Wish manufacturers would focus more on the 24” size which is perfect for integer scaling. 27” and higher require weird scaling factors like 1.5.
FWIW you can get a decent 13”/15,6” glossy 4K 60Hz OLED ~300PPI monitor on AliExpress for the same price or less. I’m using 15.6” one and it’s been perfect for my needs (as a side monitor for some YouTube videos, quick code review, etc).
My main monitor is, unfortunately, matte 4K@144Hz 28”. I’d rather get glossy monitor with a higher PPI if one was available, but the market seems to be stagnant for many years now, or at least advancing at a really slow pace.
Oh that’s awesome, I never knew it was an option! Thanks. Will think about how that could fit into my setup, if at all. I would also love for the monitors to have a higher refresh rates but yeah the market for these monitors appears to be taking a breather.
What scale are you using your 24”s at? “200%” or “@2x” (or any other nomenclature to describe using 4 physical pixels for one screen pixel) on a 4K display gives 1920x1080, which to my eyes is “too big”, and thus used mine (2x Dell P2415Qs) at a scaled resolution (“looks like 2304x1296” in macOS), which pretty closely matches the “default” scaling for a ~215-220 PPI screen under macOS.
Ha, I’ve used a 28” 4K with 200% scale, definitely a lot more “too big” than on a 24” but I still liked it. For the terminal and the browser there’s ctrl-minus anyway, and the panels and stuff – big is fine with me as I don’t have perfect vision :)
I badly want more pixels. I’m tired of 4k @ 27”, dammit! I do hope that there will be a new 8k option, maybe at 32 or 36”.
I think you’d definitely want 36” for 8k.
Distance also matters. I went from a 27” 4K display to a 43” one largely to improve my posture. When I sit at my desk, I hunch over the 27” one but I have to sit further back to fit all of the 43” one in my field of view and so the perceived pixel size is basically the same on both.
I don’t know; 4k native on this 27 is just slightly too small. On a 32”, at 2x, I think it’d be perfect. But I know that this is silly.
I had a 31” LG at “true 4k”, and while the quality of everything at 2x was nice, it all felt a bit too big. I find 5k at 27” to be perfect. I always enjoyed the text/control size of 2560 at 27”, the way the old Dells and original 27” iMacs had was a great physical size for on-screen controls across both Windows and Mac, but of course 2x is mo bettah. Obviously it’s a matter of taste, but I’d suggest finding somebody who has a similar setup before straying too far out of that sweet-spot, if it’s an expensive commitment.
I also found 4k on 27” a bit too small, I usually go for the “More space” on macOS and this setting on 27” with 4k (Dell U2718q) was a bit too small. For me at least 32” for 4k gives me a good balance (also depends on the distance at which you sit from the monitor).
I would love more pixels in the 32” size, sadly, the Dell 8k monitor was not supported properly on macOS (I think now it is, but only on an Intel Mac Pro, the cheese grater one).
Do you notice it? I have a 43” 4K display and, if I see any pixelation, it’s a reminder that I’m hunching over the desk again and I should fix my posture. My laptop, tablet, and phone all have similar resolutions but I hold them closer to my face. 4K seems to be close to the sweet spot where, for any size where I can fit the entire display in my field of view, I don’t see any pixelation and text is smooth. Every resolution increase before then was fixing visible artefacts but at 4K, for the first time, I don’t see anything that annoys me.
Oh, almost certainly not. I just want the pixels. GIVE ME MORE PIXELS!
I’m not sure if the Author has an older OS release, or took a screenshot while using a non-optimal connection? The screenshot in the article shows the display as being at the “more space” setting in macOS, to produce a “3072x1728” UI.
I have the same 6K display on macOS 13.4.1 (i.e. latest stable) and it shows as “3072x1728” as the “default” middle option, and two options each left and right, with the highest “more space” being 3840x2160”.
I’m running macOS 13.4.1, too! Not sure why you get different options.
The review’s points about matte vs gloss are very helpful! I’m currently on 27” LG 5k which is glossy. I’ve been eying an upgrade to a 6.5K 30”+ unit like this one, and agree some matte displays look “dull” in comparison to the LG and Mac displays. I wasn’t sure how much of it was display quality, color space, or the coating. So it’s helpful to hear of similar experience from someone reviewing a high quality matte display. I will steer clear.
I’ve not put eyes on the Dells mentioned, or the 8k Apple display, but I have switched to a pair of 5k Studio Displays (with the nano-textured glass option) since a power surge killed the displays I was using, and they’re absolutely amazing. Not cheap, but you get what you pay for when it comes to displays these days.
Does apple have an 8k display? I thought they only have a 5k one (which you mention) and a 6k one (‘pro display xdr’).
No, you’re right. For some reason I had that at 8k in my head. I’ve given them no real thought since release, as while the price seems reasonable for the colour that screen can reproduce, I have no need of that, and the price is ridiculous for those of us working with text and graphics rather than pro video.