The other day we reported that Dell had leaked information regarding a high quality, wide color range 24” Ultra HD monitor, named the UP2414Q.  Dell has since placed online a specifications list on their US website to confirm that the panel will operate in 60Hz mode via DP1.2a and MST, the panel is indeed IPS with a brightness of 350 cd/m2, and on mounting the monitor will weigh 4.8 kg (10.58 lbs).  The only salient piece of information missing was the price.  Dell has now sent out a press release confirming this:

Dell UltraSharp 24” Ultra HD: $1,399, available now in the Americas and worldwide on Dec 16th
Dell 28” Ultra HD: <$1000
Dell UltraSharp 32” Ultra HD: $3,499, available worldwide

In the midst of the comments underneath our initial news post, speculation was rife on the pricing: I was expecting in the $2000-$3000 range for the 24” monitor.  But here we have it: the first 60 Hz 4K monitor for under $1500!  Previously around this sub-$1500 price point we had Seiki models (32”, 39”, 50”) that came in as B-grade panels for cheaper, so this is only ever good news.

To complicate matters even further is Dell’s decision to release a 28” version for under $1000 called the P2815Q.  This does not bear the UltraSharp name, so this could mean a variety of things: no out-of-the-factory calibration, smaller color range, fewer connectors (pure speculation at this point).  There is no word on the specifications of this more mainstream model (i.e. if it will support 60 Hz), but Dell is attacking the market with three 4K monitors with the 24” and 28” models looking very appealing from where I am sitting.  Chris has the 32” model in for review, so that will confirm to me if I need UltraSharp or not!

 

POST A COMMENT

51 Comments

View All Comments

  • colonelclaw - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    I'm going to guess that the 28" model is aimed at gamers, and will come with some promotion of Nvidia Maximus and whatever AMD have planned on the 4k front. Reply
  • JDG1980 - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    It's great to see pricing on 4K monitors come down so quickly. While $1399 is still out of most consumers' price ranges, it's a lot better than the $3499 that the IGZO-based 32" monitors were commanding. And this Dell monitor, with its color-calibrated IPS panel, doesn't seem like it will sacrifice much quality to hit that lower price point.

    The upcoming 39" monitors based on 4K VA panels should drive down prices even further. Seiki sells TVs that use these panels, with holiday sale prices as low as $500. The Seiki TVs only support 30Hz, but that is a limitation of the display controller, not the panel itself. Once monitor vendors start pairing these panels with proper DisplayPort inputs, they should provide an excellent, low-cost choice for users wanting to upgrade to 4K. Both Asus and Planar have announced 39" 4K monitors.
    Reply
  • Hrel - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    Meh, I'm more concerned with moving to 120hz at 1080p than I am 4K. I don't think it's a big enough improvement for consumer level electronics. Professional uses sure, it makes sense. But for consumers, there's not even any movies in that resolution, much less tv shows. Most graphics cards can't run video games at that resolution.

    Idk, I think display maker's are just trying to push sales. Come talk to me when you've got 240hz 192,000x108x000 3D holographic display for $300.
    Reply
  • Hrel - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    For comparison there are still a LOT of people running SD, 640x480 TV's out there. It's neat to pursue the technology but I feel like many people still haven't even caught up to 1080p. Hell, cable companies still think it's ok to charge extra for HD, as if it's something rare and special. These companies are trying to grow their industry by increasing their profit margins, when what they should be doing is reducing cost at the same SLIM profit margins to increase market penetration. Let the economy catch up to 120hz 1080p before you go trying to push a new standard on everyone.

    P.S. I think getting hollywood to stop making movies smaller and smaller is a NECESSARY first step. (smaller meaning anything in a wider aspect ratio than 16:9.) 2.44:1, really hollywood?! REALLY!?
    Reply
  • nathanddrews - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    A lot of hyperbole in that comment, but I hear what you're saying.

    I've had the same FW900 for about 10 years. I paid through the nose (at the time) for it, but it has served me well and hopefully continues to. I have to recalibrate it every couple years, but the image is still beautiful. I've seen a few standout LCDs, but they're all stuck at 60Hz or ghost too much when driven higher. As it stands I've got a display that can offer me exceptional color and contrast, zero lag, zero motion blur at 2560x1600@75Hz, 1920x1200@96Hz, or any other resolution at 120Hz+. Not a single LCD can provide all that right now. God willing, this monitor will last until we get native 4K 120Hz displays and the G-Sync dust settles. I don't want to upgrade until then. Those seem to be the biggest upcoming advances for displays.
    Reply
  • Eidigean - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    The price for a good monitor hasn't changed in 25+ years.

    I remember my dad buying a 14" Zenith ZCM-1490 flatscreen CRT in 1987 for around $995. It would do 640x480 easy enough, but could be pushed to 1024x768 with a little bit of timing adjustment on the video card.

    Now we both have HP ZR30w monitors that were about $1,050 on sale.

    The monitor you want is always going to be around $1,000.

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-05-13/busi...
    Reply
  • surt - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    Not buying another monitor unless it's either 120 hz or gsync. Reply
  • djscrew - Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - link

    My only immediate question is will this push primary branded 1440p monitors down to a reasonable $300 price range? because I be po' yo Reply
  • haukionkannel - Thursday, December 5, 2013 - link

    Most propably not... The price is up guality and production volume. When 4K becomes more popular, it means that good guality 1440p monitor will become smaller segment, and that means higher prices. Not we have disty cheap 1080p monitors and expensive 1440p monitors. In the future we have dirty cheap 1080p monitors and expensive 4k monitors.
    In far future we will have cheap 4k monitors, and expensive 4k and/or 8k monitors...
    Reply
  • thedovahkiin909 - Sunday, December 8, 2013 - link

    I would slap my meat on that monitor, and rub it ALL over that thing. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now