Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Dell Reveals the UltraSharp 32-inch Ultra HD Monitor

By - Source: Engadget | B 19 comments

The Dell UltraSharp 32 features a Matte 32-inch IGZO panel with a resolution of 3480 x 2160.

Dell’s upcoming UltraSharp 32-inch monitor made an appearance at SIGGRAPH 2013. It features a 32-inch IGZO panel that provides 1.07 billion colors and an Ultra HD resolution of 3840 x 2160. The monitor features a new aluminum stand with the same height adjustment, pivot and swiveling features as the Ultrasharp U2412M, and houses a built-in USB hub and SD card reader along its left side.

Though Dell has yet to reveal further information on the IGZO panel, Engadget has noted it features a matte finish with “tweaks to reduce any grainy images that may creep in” and that they can “confirm the image quality – especially when it comes to handling rich blacks."

The Ultrasharp 32 Ultra HD monitor is expected to be released in Q4 2013. Dell has not yet provided further information on its technical specifications, pricing or availability.

 

Display 19 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 3 Hide
    vmem , July 29, 2013 11:50 AM
    with a Q4 release, pricing will be interesting. Sharp's 4k panel is already below $4k, by Q4 I'd say it'd be worth around $3k. for Dell, they'd obviously want to sell this above other models, so at least $2k, but I'm not sure how much above. maybe $3k or so? as long as it's below $3k I think it'll be a strong contender and an indication of 4k resolution starting to go mainstream.
  • 3 Hide
    KING_85 , July 29, 2013 11:50 AM
    Definitely looking forward to more information on this product. I think it's safe to say that it'll ring in over 2 grand as a 1600p is around $1400 at dell. Imagine the graphic card(s) you'll need to have to play games at the native resolution. Wish I had held off on purchasing their 1440p, but then again I don't think i'll be dropping 2-3 grand on a monitor anytime soon.
  • -5 Hide
    Giovanni-L , July 29, 2013 12:05 PM
    The number of people who will actually buy it is rather small. For casual gamers, the 1440x800 should still be plenty. For "light-hardcore" gamers, who play when they get back from work just for some distraction but still like pretty graphics and high fps, 1080p is pretty much the best still. "True hardcore" gamers also don't need much more. If they REALLY wanna crank it up the next notch, people usually buy 3 narrow-bezeled monitors and go triple headed. 4k monitors are just gimmicky and dream-oriented for MOST people. Not even small and medium-sized professional won't buy it. People with that kind of money to spare today are somewhat rare. The relevance of that is put in question by me.
  • 1 Hide
    ikyung , July 29, 2013 12:41 PM
    I remember there were people talking about how the difference between 2k and 4k being almost non existent for monitors since it's so close to your face. Yet, all the review for ASUS 4k monitors says that the difference is really noticeable.

    I'll probably wait till other panel manufacturers start mass producing for the price to come down even faster. Also, HDMI 2.0 please.
  • 2 Hide
    ikyung , July 29, 2013 12:51 PM
    Quote:
    The number of people who will actually buy it is rather small. For casual gamers, the 1440x800 should still be plenty. For "light-hardcore" gamers, who play when they get back from work just for some distraction but still like pretty graphics and high fps, 1080p is pretty much the best still. "True hardcore" gamers also don't need much more. If they REALLY wanna crank it up the next notch, people usually buy 3 narrow-bezeled monitors and go triple headed. 4k monitors are just gimmicky and dream-oriented for MOST people. Not even small and medium-sized professional won't buy it. People with that kind of money to spare today are somewhat rare. The relevance of that is put in question by me.

    4k panels at this point in time is definitely not intended for gamers. Refresh rate is another important factor for gaming. Also, HDMI only provides support for 4k at 30 frames per second, so you have to go display port or wait for HDMI 2.0. But, the price point is actually pretty decent, considering there is only one manufacturer pumping these out. Remember when 1080p first came out? Holy balls. Once LG and Samsung joins the party and mass produces 4k monitor panels, the price should drop even faster. I wouldn't be surprised to see 4k monitors hit close to $1,000 by Q4/Q1 2014/15.
  • 0 Hide
    JPNpower , July 29, 2013 1:01 PM
    I assume that Sharp manufactures the actual panel, as with the Asus.

    This will be interesting. I will also like to disagree strongly with GIOVANNI-L. First off, you refer to gamers, for which you a true about meaninglessness. They just want a bigger 1080. However, professionals should love this thing. I for one think that the 2~4k will be well worth it. You will know when you have serious work to do.
  • 0 Hide
    master_chen , July 29, 2013 1:10 PM
    Of course it's a very boring thing to make any prognoses or bets, but...I think we should expect a price tag of AT LEAST 1500$. :\
  • -1 Hide
    hannibal , July 29, 2013 2:26 PM
    This has higher colour count than Asus version so this will cost more, so 5000-6000$ is guite good price for this product.
    It will take some more time to get this near 3000 or even less...
    I am really happy that we are now getting some really good monitors to desktops too! So far it has been a luxury reserved for highed phones and tablets!
  • 1 Hide
    piklar , July 29, 2013 3:13 PM
    I agree with iKyung , this is good times ahead for us once the other big names jump onboard although I suspect that the cost of a 4K display will still be well over $1000USD by the end of 2014 unless South Koreans come up with an alternative or two. Giovanni-L in the here and now I agree that 4K displays are dream orientated as was the 1st 1080p displays then 2560x1440/1600 etc . Its call 4K gimmicky? Come on mate see the bigger picture! I bet there's millions just waiting to get their hands on one, I most certainly am! as a 2560x1600/1440 multi display user myself its the only way forward and by the time 4Ks can be had for around the $1000USD mark think of the graphic cards that will be available by then! Exciting times indeed!
  • 0 Hide
    skit75 , July 29, 2013 4:17 PM
    I guess I could spare both my legs but, I need to keep my arms to game with.
  • 1 Hide
    Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer , July 29, 2013 6:54 PM
    Needless to say, I'm drooling. I'll wait to see what the price is before making grandiose statements about buying N of them, but...if they can reasonably compare with Dell's high-end 2560x1440/1600 monitors price-wise, while managing a similar color gamut, I'll be fantasizing about owning three or four of them while buying at least one. :) 
  • 0 Hide
    Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer , July 29, 2013 6:55 PM
    I swear to f--- I only pressed the submit button once...this comment system has to be designed to discourage commenters from continuing to comment on articles.
  • 0 Hide
    hakesterman , July 29, 2013 7:03 PM
    I'm Guessing this is a monitor for watching movies on your PC and not a gaming Monitor. A Gaming monitor has to have a refresh rate high enough to handle 60 FPS or higher and i see no mention of that. So i guessing it refresh rate is rather low since it is a first generation ultra display.
  • 1 Hide
    Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer , July 29, 2013 7:07 PM
    I swear to f--- the comment system is designed to actively discourage people from commenting on articles; I'm not even kidding. I only clicked "Add Your Comment" once and still ended up with duplicate posts. The old system wasn't 10% as messed up as this one. :( 
  • 0 Hide
    Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer , July 29, 2013 7:11 PM
    I give up. 囧​TZ
  • 0 Hide
    eddieroolz , July 29, 2013 10:27 PM
    One monitor to destroy my dual 1080p. Do want!
  • 0 Hide
    Gnug315 , July 30, 2013 2:04 AM
    I got their first 30" in '07, and it was the best hardware investment I ever made, for work and play both.

    Looks like I finally found a worthy successor.
  • 0 Hide
    CaedenV , July 30, 2013 7:00 AM
    This would be an awesome display for content creation! Sadly I would use it mostly for web browsing and games, so the price is not justifyable. Once we start seeing single cable, single link panels become available with 60Hz refresh for ~$2000 then I will look into jumping on board. Until then I will sit and drool over how quickly these displays are dropping in price and gaining popularity; while the introduction of 4K was ~2 years later than I was expecting, they are becoming affordable much faster than I could have ever dreamed possible.
  • 0 Hide
    Bolts Romano , August 20, 2013 5:58 PM
    It will be interesting to compare the price with the upcoming Apple Cinema Display.
    If Apple can sell the new Display below 2K than this new 32 will be around the same price range or less.