17" 4K 3840x2160 IPS display incoming!

This is something I always wanted to see on notebooks. Earlier only 13 and 15" had beautiful displays with high res while 17" which is pretty popular for notebooks had to settle for 1080p.

But fear no more. Apparantly Lenovo is soon out with two notebooks (with Xeon and Quadro may I add) and they say the P70 (17") will be available with

Optional 3840x2160 IPS display with X-Rite Pantone Color Correction



Review/Previews:
http://www.notebookreview.com/feature/lenovo-thinkpad-p50-and-p70-first-look-preview/
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/laptops-portable-pcs/lenovo-thinkpad-p70-1301484/review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9503/...ile-workstations-with-first-mobile-xeon-chips

Happy days ahead for mobile. Finally they are coming. Lets hope other OEMs pick these displays up too soon

 

I wish there was a 1440p option too as 4k on 17.3" is still a bit on the small pixel side.

 

While I`m at it, I will add Quadro M5000 information which I think this notebook will use.
Quadro M5000 is a new workstation graphic card which seems to be identical to GTX 980M but with far better GPGPU.

Xeon Skylake processor, Quadro M5000 and 4K IPS display. Man this notebook is pretty sweet!









GPGPU GTX 980M



GPGPU Quadro M5000 (Talk about crushing the 980M)


Cheers

 

Completely agree. 144Hz, 1440p would be quite amazing, especially with an SLI setup.

 

I will care when I can have power of 3 980M in a single card. Until then, F 1440 144 hz.

 

If this 990M is real and performs better than a GTX 980, I would expect NVIDIA to make Pascal much more powerful, probably more than 3x 980M's in a single 1080M. Originally, the 1080M was rumored to perform like 980M SLI, but now the 990M is apparently on the way.

Considering all that Pascal brings to the table, it only makes sense.

 

I would not expect triple the performance myself, HBM helps remove bottlenecks to progress rather than being a huge advance in performance.

 

It's always exaggerated. 980M was supposedly to be a monster blah blah, and it really isn't. 675MX was weak to begin with, so the improvements on the 980M aren't earth shattering. 980M isn't even close to being 3x a 675MX, so why would you think a Pascal would be 3x 980M?

And if anyone believes Pascal will be 3x more powerful, well, you win an award for delusion. 990M being more powerful than a GTX 980 desktop? Again, you can get an award for being clueless. GTX 980 is a 400 watt card, and you expect a 100 watt mobile card with trashy cooling system to exceed that? Whatever you want to believe, but I'll keep my beliefs here on earth and not the moon.

 

Pretty much everything you said is wrong or incomplete. Why are you talking about the 675MX?

The last architectural jump was 580M to 680M, and it doubled the performance. Maxwell cores are much more efficient than Kepler cores, and Pascal cores are 4x more efficient than Maxwell cores. Have you even looked at the Pascal threads, yet? The information there is great and provided by NVIDIA.

And I never said the 990M will be better than the GTX 980. I'm relaying what is expected based on rumor. Personally, I still don't believe the 990M is real because we haven't heard anything from NVIDIA about a GTX 990 desktop card. Historically, desktop variants have always come first.

 

Eh, 1440p with 90% color gamut would be more than enough for me.

Well, we know it's real, what's in serious doubt is the claim it equals 980M SLI on the same 28nm Maxwell architecture.

But I wouldn't base my doubt on nomenclature, as Nvidia has never cared about the continuity of its mobile and desktop naming.

 

The REAL question is what's the response time, colour gamut and colour bit of the panel? If it's a 60% NTSC 6-bit 35ms response time 4K IPS, it might as well be pointless for gaming though.

 

They skipped the desktop 800 series to match mobile naming scheme... So, maybe they care now?

 

They did it with the 300 series as well

 

Rebels.

 

100 and 300 series had both desktop and mobile cards but they were OEM-only

 

I knew 100 series did, but I don't remember seeing any desktop 300 series cards, even on nVidia's website.

Edit: yeah I see them on the desktops, I stand corrected.

 

time frame of the 17 inch 4k screens or a big event where it may be released?

 

Well this is going to be interesting.

So much real estate on laptops now, and here I am sitting almost blind with my glasses and lenses.

 

Its different gaming on 4K than reading fonts on 4K

 

The 980M at stock is pretty good, tweak it a bit though and it's very nice, put two of those tweaked cards in SLI and it does very well at 1440p beyond 60hz.

 

So for now a non-issue then since I'll wait a single card solution first. Also I have my doubts since the 980M overclocked plays my games fine, but Witcher 3 still taxes it and I do not get consistent 60+ FPS with it.

 

Most definitely, but I can't be gaming at all times haha

 

i'd like 17 inch 4k screen for more real estate. having to use multiple monitors for heavy work related tasks. plus it would make it possible to game at 4k with 980m sli, versus just one. I don't really see any 17 inch laptops running the rumored 990m in sli. if that were true, 4k gaming would be perfect!

 

I'd so very much like a 2560 x 1600 low refresh IPS LCD. Forget about 4k. Give us something in between. Heck it's hard enough to get a decent 1080p IPS 17". Give us a mid-res awesome LCD, and 16:10 at that.

 

You still believe this fallacy?

 

Yep...

 

I'm fine with 1080p, just increase the pixel density. I can't see pixels on my Nexus 5 because the pixel density is 430 or around that.

 

Absolutely 100% not interested. Give me a 90% 120hz 1080p

 

Desktops are even struggling with 4K, for office or editing work 4K is awesome, for gaming it's like a Ferrari chassis with a 2-cylinder engine.

 

The only way to do that is a smaller display.

 

Yeah... Throw A/C at that four banger...

Seriously... 2K doesn't work. 4K is even worse. If you can deal with input lag and all that... Good on you... Don't mess it up for the rest of us.

 

someone else said it first lol. I'd be okay with a 15 inch 4k display. 17 inches would just allow sli gpus and be nicer for movies. i don't know why everyone complains so much about 4k on a small screen. windows 10 does a decent job with scaling, and even applications that don't scale very well, i can see fine. yeah the text is smaller and crisp, but i guess it's because i'm only 23 and have really good eyes.

 

Saw my first 3K screen on Gigabyte P35W and Arorus X5... It is too much for 15.6" however for 17.3", 3K will be fine...

 

the 15 inch macbook pros are like 3.5k displays and i don't think i've ever heard anyone says '' i hate these retina display macbooks!''

 

15" rMBP is 2880x1800 and OS X defaults to 200% scaling so you get the same viewable area as 1440x900

 

So what exactly is the point? It's 1440 x 900 but twice as crisp? >__>

 

Pretty much. Apple led the charge of "let's make pixels so small you can't see them with your nose pressed against the display" with few functional benefits.

 

Apple... makes it so very very difficult for me to not hate them.

 

It was actually nice in the beginning. You can actually see the difference between older iPhones and anything above iPhone 4 - smooth fonts, crisp picture. It just happened that everyone else went ballistic from there on - 1080p?! 4k @ 5"?!?!@#$!# As for the Retina MacBooks, they just render pixels differently than Windows machines and it is actually smoother at double res. I guess then the marketing department came in (shocker) and said "We'll list it as 2880x1800 even though users wont be able to use it this res (without mods that is)". Windows is really terrible at high DPi with some scaling involved. That's why 2560x1600 @17" would be perfect for me.. but who's asking me (or us, the minor minority)...

 

True, and the colors and calibration of the Retina screens were much better than the non-Retina ones. I don't blame Apple for starting the HiDPI trend because they handled it elegantly and understood the point of finishing returns, but I blame the Android and Wintel makers for turning it into an arms race and dick measuring contest even before their OS and apps/software were ready.

 

Exactly. Humans can only see that much. And Windows at anything but 100% starts to get ugly really quick.

 

well being a content creator is my main reason for 4k screens. photography and video

 

Not sure why anyone would not want 4K IPS in notebooks. We have been stuck in 1080p for far too long. Although its no 1440p 120Hz its still vastly better than 1080p 60Hz freaking TN displays which was introduced in the stone age anyway.

Time to move on.

 

plus it sucks to say to people with apple products that my windows laptop is only 1080p =(

 

Sucks to say that to anyone really.

TVs got 1080p a decade ago and moved on.
Mobile phones moved on to bigger resolutions many years ago.
Desktop guys are laughing at notebooks because of 1080p

Its one of the reasons I have "RIP mobile gaming" in my signature.
Now I hope other OEMs start using this 4K display from Lenovo and its not just them offering it

 

While it's not quite as ridiculous as 2K-2.5K phone screens, the resolution arms race on laptops is almost as stupid. I would rather have a calibrated sRGB 1080p 144Hz IPS with fast pixel response and variable refresh rate tech. Then I have the choice of either playing my games at a high FPS or turning up the eye candy to 4x SSAA which looks better than a native 4K w/no AA. Conversely if I have a 4K display and have to drop down to 1080p for gaming it looks blurry and crappy due to the poor scaling algorithms in modern video card drivers and I'm still stuck at 60Hz.

Why would desktop users laugh at resolutions on notebook displays. That just shows how dumb they are. Their monitors are 2-3x the surface area of laptop screens so a higher res is a given.

 

Because you are blind if you can`t game with 4K on a 17" display and you are clueless if you can`t change DPI in Windows and you are too picky if you can`t game on resolutions between 4K and 1080p and think the picture is too blury.

Time to retire if the above is the case

I have absolutely zero issues using my 1080p mobile phone and I have no issues noticing the crisp and clearer pictures above my previous sub 1080p phones. I can even notice that the 1440p phone my friend have got crisper pictures and letters due to more PPI. Those two phones got vastly less surface area than a 17" notebook with 1080p display.

Maybe time to change your attitude that other people are stupid because they don`t share your view on things. They may actually think you are stupid..

 

Yet you are name calling, because of the different point of view. How very gentleman of you. Please, do tell how many people can make the difference above certain level? Secondly, how many people can make use of those extra pixels? Why should I change the DPi? The whole point of having those pixels is to actually use them, not to brag how many pixels you have and then kick the slider to 200%! Thirdly, I'll repeat myself, but Window's scaling is ugly, that's it. Oh and ergonomics. Have you ever heard of this word? 4K on anything but big-@$$ TV/monitor is NOT ergonomic for the reasons stated above.

If you can make use of it @100% scaling, I salute you. Then again you'll be 1 : very-large-number of people who can make use of it.

 

I didnt call him stupid, I said the other people might see him as stupid since he see them as stupid..Meaning his opinion might not be shared by many other. It was octiceps own wording...

Why change DPI? Who said you are gonna go all the way up to 1080p scaling?
You still will benefit of 4K gaming and not sub 4K DSR quality. Like Phase said, photographs and pictures look better on a 4K IPS vs a 1080p TN display as well.

Why do you think Macbook is popular? How many of those with Macbook are unhappy with the 2880x1800 display? Extremely few...Are those stupid? No. Are there reasons to believe that these would highly disagree with octiceps and take offence that he called them stupid? Absolutely.

People need to be more open minded

 

Way to totally miss the points of my post and resort to name calling, but you are good at that