Dell's New 30" 4K 120Hz UP3017Q OLED Monitor Coming Soon

Subject: Displays | July 14, 2016 - 12:43 PM |
Tagged: USB 3 Type-C, up3017q, oled, DisplayPort, Dell 4K, dell, 4K 120

Initially teased at CES earlier this year, Dell’s UP3017Q is an amazing 30-inch 4K monitor with an OLED panel capable of running at 120Hz. The thin bezeled UltraSharp is also extremely thin at less than 0.5” at the edges. Running a resolution of 3840 x 2160, the 30” monitor comes in at 146 PPI (pixels per inch). The UP3017Q was originally slated for a March release, but it ended up not being available. Reportedly, Dell is still fine tuning the monitor and it will be available soon though the company has not given a new specific launch date when you will actually be able to buy it.

It has some rather impressive specifications, and I am really interested in seeing it in person! The panel manufacturer is still unknown (though many have guessed it is one from LG), but it offers up a resolution of 3840 x 2160, refresh rate of up to 120Hz, 0.1ms response time, and 400,000:1 contrast ratio. Being OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode), the monitor will be able to deliver true blacks and excellent colors in a very thin profile thanks to not needing a separate backlight (the pixels themselves emit light). Dell claims that the UP3017Q 4K monitor fully supports 100% of the Adobe RGB and 97.8% DCI-P3 color spaces. At a claimed 1.07 billion colors this is a 10-bit color monitor which will be useful in professional applications where color accuracy is paramount.

Dell has further claimed that it has mitigated burn in on this monitor by implementing a “pixel shifting algorithm” as well as placing a sensor on the monitor that can detect when you are looking at it and turn off when no one is watching anything on it (which some might find a bit creepy but it can likely be turned off heh). There are five buttons on this monitor, four on the bottom edge for OSD controls and one on the back to release the monitor from its stand.

View Full Size

One interesting hang up lies in the video inputs on this monitor. It only has HDMI 2.0, Mini DisplayPort 1.2, and USB Type-C. As posters over at [H] pointed out, the HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.2 connections do not have enough bandwidth to support the panels 3840 x 2160 resolution at 120Hz. Fortunately the refresh rate is not a lie. There is a a way to do it, but users will need to use the USB Type-C connector and it’s DisplayPort Alternate Mode feature to do it. At DisplayPort 1.2, the DisplayPort Alt Mode can give you 5.4 Gbps per lanes and using all four available lanes can hit a total of 21.6 Gbps which would be enough to support 4096x2160@60Hz. However, the DisplayPort 1.3 standard (which this monitor and it’s USB Type-C port seems to support) can give up to 8.1 Gbps for up to 32.4 Gbps of bandwidth (25.92 Gbps after 8b/10b encoding overhead) which should allow the full 3840x2160@120Hz to be used. It is unfortunate that Dell opted to go with this odd port arrangement and not include a direct DP 1.3+ port though!

This monitor has a lot of potential, but this massive OLED comes at a price: when it comes to market it will have a MSRP of $4,999! As much as many would want this to be their new gaming PC monitor, I think it will be mainly for commercial and design applications especially with the input lag being unknown and no support for the various variable refresh rate technologies (AMD FreeSync and NVIDIA G-Sync) If that is what you are looking for there are much cheaper options, but if you want an all out OLED monitor for work and media and price is no object I would be very eagerly waiting for reviews on this!

What are your thoughts on this monitor and OLED?

Source: HardOCP

July 14, 2016 | 01:00 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

fully supports 100$ Adobe RGB

Wha ??

July 14, 2016 | 01:30 PM - Posted by Tim (not verified)

100% adobe rgb color space.

July 14, 2016 | 01:06 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Can't wait until things like this are in the $500 range. Might not ever need to buy a monitor again. Which is why these aren't likely to get down to $500.

July 14, 2016 | 01:28 PM - Posted by StephanS

Doesn't the organic material age ?

In the past I recall that the technology had problem because the different material process for red, green, blue where each aging differently. So the color where going out of spec and need re-calibration.

Also, I wonder what happen to aging (like plasma) when a static image is on the screen 24/7 (like the desktop menu)
Do you get a ghost image on full screen ?

I see this even happen on LCD, as the panel ages.
I can only guess this would be a lot worse with organic led that individually receive power. (an always off VS always on. cant age 100% the same year over year)

All that to say, those panels might not last as long as you might hope for?

July 14, 2016 | 10:00 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

~50,000 hours to half brightness, even for blue. You will upgrade to 8K before you reach that point.

September 6, 2016 | 11:43 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You need to do a lot more research before posting so you don't look like such an ignoramus.

October 20, 2016 | 12:43 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Dude, first off, LCD's don't lose their color spec. I've had the same 144hz 24" 1080p monitor for a few years now, and the color is exactly the same as when I bought it, however, the dirt and grim build up on the screen itself was tremendous when one day I decided to clean it with alcohol wipes.

Secondly, the OLED does not have a fade issue nor ghosting like plasma, they are two different technologies that have nothing to do with one another, there are a few websites with smear pieces written about how terrible OLED is.

SAMSUNG has been using OLED in their phones for YEARS now, albeit a variation of the technology called AM_OLED. EVEN the new google pixel will be OLED. There is NOTHING to fear with OLED. It was a technology invented to move us forward in the screen space, not backwards.

While IPS panals can reproduce better colors they still have the issue of high response time and low refresh rates making them pretty but lacking for gaming (unless you pay top dollar for one that has been manipulated to run faster which decreases its overall life aka "overclocked").

Meanwhile OLED can reproduce MORE colors than both TN and IPS and retain low response times and high refresh rates as seen by smart phones WITH OLED technology being used quite easily for VR. VR REQUIRES low response times (1-5ms) and high refresh rates (120+).

December 5, 2016 | 04:48 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Ya to bad you are wrong buddy , OLED on Phones , TV's do suffer screen retention and burn ins like plasma , I've seen it first hand on my old galaxy note 2 , and I've seen it on must amoled phones on display at the phone store.

I've seen it first hand on LG's new OLED tvs if you leave a static image on the screen for a couple minutes then change it you can she the ghost but it did disappear fairly quickly! But to say this technology does not suffer the same as plasma is a bullshit statement!

I defiantly won't be an early adopter of this stuff even tho it looks absolutely amazing, tell then il stick to my IPS sony tv (KDL55/950B with 17ms input lag) and my IPS Ultrawide Gaming Monitor.

I'm sure eventually someone will figure out how to achieve the same effects of OLED without the draw backs!

December 8, 2016 | 02:24 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The ghosting is probably just residual heat...

December 9, 2016 | 10:17 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Vr only requires 60fps. 90fps for high quality. The Gear Vr is 60fps, while the main headsets are 90fps. PS Vr is the only headset thats 120fps. (Out of the three main headsets. Vive, Rift, PsVr) Oculus has a new technique (same as PS Vr) that will run games at 60fps but munipulate the frames so it doubles fps. Oculus is doing this so Vr will be usable on older hardware. Native 90fps or more will always be better expeirence though imo, but 60fps is the standard requirement for Vr.

December 14, 2016 | 05:17 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I have 30" Dell Ultrasharps.. at the time of purchase, I needed both (at least I thought). One never got used. well after 2 years of use on one, I can tell you that the unused looks much more colorful. Not just brightness, thinking it was just the backlight, but the color intensity. You would never know unless you have multiples of each to compare to...

With that said, bring on the OLED (just not at this price point).

July 14, 2016 | 01:06 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Can't wait until things like this are in the $500 range. Might not ever need to buy a monitor again. Which is why these aren't likely to get down to $500.

July 14, 2016 | 01:21 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I'll see it when I believe it. I don't have much trust in this coming out any time soon, and even then, we'll have to wait a year or so to see how these things age.

July 14, 2016 | 01:36 PM - Posted by Jeppe (not verified)

The bigger question is why on earth there has been such a trend the last year for monitor manufacturer to brag about tiny bezels and then having a fatter bezel at the bottom, feels just as fat as it need to be to display the branding on it, seems to be its sole purpose.

Give me a thin bezel on all four edges, i don't need the branding in my face all day long, the bottom bezel is even more shitty in my beloved portrait mode :(

July 15, 2016 | 12:36 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You need an NEC, bro.

December 27, 2016 | 12:45 AM - Posted by Anonymous_anger (not verified)

Right on brother.....They should give us sponsor money for advertising....harumph¡

July 14, 2016 | 01:44 PM - Posted by Rybo

Interested to see how this turns out on release (and beyond!), kinda surprised (just judging by those pictures) that Dell would release a $5K monitor without a HAS or mount points though.

July 14, 2016 | 01:58 PM - Posted by Fubar (not verified)

Too bad about the 4k, even the 1080 can't sustain 60 fps which itself would be a far cry from smooth (below 90 is garbage). 1440p @ >144Hz with freesync and I have extra 1000 euros waiting... Vega could deliver that performance (hopefully)

July 14, 2016 | 02:54 PM - Posted by D00mM4r1n3

I need something for $299 or less that supports HDR10@4K, this apparently will not do what I need. :(

July 14, 2016 | 03:10 PM - Posted by fvbounty

I just got a LG 65EF9500 OLED TV and love it but $5000 for a 30inch is a bit much considering I got the 65 inch for $ the way the LG has a cleaner that runs after your set has been on for at least 2 hours and you turn it help with burn in!

August 31, 2016 | 02:53 PM - Posted by Midotwo (not verified)

I have the new LG C6 oled and I love it too. I have had zero burn in. I played Star Ocean on it for 6 hours straight and the mini-map did not burn in. That is the best stress test I can think of. I would love to have an OLED monitor as well, but this simply is not a realistic option. Laptops are coming out with OLEDs now. Its just a matter of time, but waiting sucks.

July 16, 2016 | 05:47 AM - Posted by Wolvenmoon (not verified)

It's a 10-bit panel, which means it's not meant for gaming at all. The GPU to drive this screen will be as much as the screen itself, if not a bit more. It requires Quadro cards to render/output in 10 bit per channel color for Nvidia cards, and for AMD while Radeon cards can render 10 bit per channel color, they can only output 8 bit per channel color. So you have to buy firepro GPUs.

Having one that can do 4k is going to get really expensive really fast.

September 7, 2016 | 08:03 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

That's not true at all.
Even Nvidia's Maxwell lineup (9xx) could output 10bit color (at 1080p; hdmi doesn't have the bandwidth for 10bit color at 4k).
I don't have a recent AMD card, so I can't chime in on that end, but I can confirm that, from personal experience / ownership, if you have a display that can support it, Nvidia's 970 could do 10bit@1080 (and so can the 1080, etc.)

July 20, 2016 | 06:20 PM - Posted by jeb66 (not verified)

Will be under $1000 as soon as another manufacturer gets one to market. Don't be one of the suckers that pays 5000 for it.

July 20, 2016 | 06:20 PM - Posted by jeb66 (not verified)

Will be under $1000 as soon as another manufacturer gets one to market. Don't be one of the suckers that pays 5000 for it.

November 28, 2016 | 04:05 PM - Posted by Pakalini (not verified)

yes my friend, overpriced gadget

December 23, 2016 | 08:09 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

wrong, it's a tool for professionals and there are plenty of people who already spend thousands of dollars on high quality LCD monitors and this is a step up

August 19, 2016 | 01:59 PM - Posted by zipzeolocke

I might pay $1500 for this, but not $5000

August 21, 2016 | 09:30 AM - Posted by MaxxOmega (not verified)

You won't see thing under $4K in less than a year... A thousand bucks? Keep dreaming...

September 19, 2016 | 12:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous-DEAF (not verified)

Why should I buy the monitor if it has no display port 1.3 that supports 120hz? No way! What a waste and idiot!

But Any latest graphics card cant even run 60 and 120 fps for 4K 60hz and 120hz. I guess I can wait until early 2018 year to hit new NRAM and PCIE 4.0 will come out.

October 14, 2016 | 09:34 AM - Posted by Ninjawithagun

All Nvidia Pascal cards come with DisplayPort 1.4 ports, each capable of supporting 4K @ 120Hz without a problem. So, for example, if you decide to buy a Dell UP3017Q 120Hz 4K monitor, all you will need is a USB-C to DP 1.4 adapter and you will be good to go. FYI< USB-C has 40Gbps bandwidth, more than enough to handle 4K @ 120Hz. In fact, USB-C can even support 8K resolutions @ 60Hz:

Knowledge is power.

October 15, 2016 | 12:41 PM - Posted by ER (not verified)

Is there any update on this? Dying to see it come out and for the prices to start dropping!

October 16, 2016 | 01:56 AM - Posted by Frank Subercaseaux (not verified)

Dell UP3017Q







November 13, 2016 | 05:07 PM - Posted by Anonymouse (not verified)

I think a 4k 120hz monitor will still remain as a wet dream for a while.

November 14, 2016 | 05:19 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

4k 30 inch true 120 hz VS 5k 32 inch 60hz. Both coming soon.

not worth the upgrade of any 2 of them. Already have 4k - 60hz.

I will wait for 4k - 34 inch - 120hz VS 5k - 34 inch - 60hz minimum requirement for a real update.
they won't make a cent with me until a couple of years.

November 20, 2016 | 06:14 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

This looks like vaporware. :(

May 2, 2017 | 06:12 AM - Posted by Harmik

Would be great to get a proper review on this I believe its now down to 60Hz and the price is lower.

If it had G-SYNC I would buy it.

Are there any rumors of anyone ells coming out with a 30" OLED that has G-SYNC.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.