4k on a P870DM?

Who sells them? What kind of panels are they? Like Alienwares 100% rgb gamut?

I've been wondering if I should get one if I can find one, or if 1080p is enough for me. I heard scaling is an issue. Is there a way to make 4k resolutions at 17.3"s behave exactly like monitors native to them?
edit: and how does gsync work with 4k?

 

I'm going to copy/paste my response to another thread asking about ultra-high-resolutions on notebooks:

DPI scaling is terrible in Windows, especially 10. I have poor eyesight and need some scaling on my 2560x1440 external monitor. At 125% it's not awful, especially since I use a program that makes W10's scaling behave more like Windows 8.1's, which looks better overall.

My Yoga 2 Pro has a 3K (3200x1800) screen, and its 13-inch size means I have to really crank up scaling to make it even somewhat usable. Dropping to 1600x900 looks even more awful. I absolutely hate it and wish I would have gotten the 1080p version instead.

4K on a 17-inch screen isn't worth it, IMO.

 

Interesting... Care to elaborate about what specifically looks so awful? I have a 4k desktop monitor with scaling on and I have almost no issues. Everything looks really crisp. All normal applications like Word, Chrome, etc... all look really sharp. I don't have some crappy programs that don't scale very well, but they aren't honestly all that common anymore, even Origin and iTunes work fine now.

Especially since you said you preferred Windows 8 scaling, which I thought was horrendous. What in particular looks so bad to you?

 

When I have scaling set to anything over 100% in Windows 10, menus and dialog boxes don't look right. It's not a problem on my Yoga 2 Pro, which runs Windows 8.1. This program corrects Windows 10. Right now, though, I'm trying 100% scaling on my 1440p monitor, and it's not taking long to get used to at all, so I'll probably stick with that.

 

Interesting. Not sure something like that will bother everybody. I would definitely say try a high resolution display and see if you like it (to OP). I'm not 100% sure what you mean by the dialogue boxes not looking right, but if they don't it doesn't bother me at all, I consider it irrelevant to impacting my usage experience.

 

Here is my take on 4K screens on a laptop:

How does anyone in his right mind buy a 4K screen laptop?

 

Windows 10's scaling is broken more than any OS out there.

You apply a scaling level and you'd notice as you said, everything looks nice an sharp. BUT, there are a few apps like for example, if you go to services.msc or computer management, you would notice that they are blurred as heck, as if you were running them in a non-native resolution. It's like the scaling applied is not universal some things adhere to it and other don't.

Hence why if one MUST use DPI scaling on Windows 10, then I recommend: Windows 10 DPI Fix

That tool will allow you to use the old Windows 8 scaling algorithm which was much better

 

I've demoed a few 4K monitors, and IMO they're overkill even at 28-32 inches. My work just issued me a MacBook Pro with Retina display, and while it's not my favorite thing, it's tolerable because the scaling works superbly.

The external monitor I use at home is 1440p, IPS, G-Sync, and 144Hz. When I first got it, I didn't think the ultra-high refresh rate would be a big deal, but it's really nice, especially on older games. G-Sync allows me to crank up the resolution and detail in newer titles without tearing or input lag, so I'm able to reap benefits at both ends of the spectrum. Unfortunately, the combination of frame-pacing, high resolution, and IPS on a 4K screen won't be available until DisplayPort 1.3/1.4 is more widely integrated across monitors and computers. A 4K, IPS, 120-144Hz, G-Sync monitor with a 10-bit color panel would be a sight to behold, albeit at what I'm sure would be a ludicrously expensive price. My current monitor is just about perfect and should scale nicely with future PC upgrades. About the only thing I would want is a separate HDMI input, which was a limitation of the first-generation of G-Sync monitors. Newer models address this, but I can't justify the cost to upgrade since I wouldn't use it that often.

 

Dell UP3017Q is an OLED 4k 120hz monitor

It is however as you predicted, expensive at $4999.

No G-sync however.

 

Hence why I put the "frame pacing" qualifier in my post.

 

I got the Asus swift 1440p 144hz, I might want 3440x1440 120-144hz IPS next. That or VR perhaps.

 

Lol I guess I just don't care. I mean yeah, I notice sometimes things look non native and blurry, but I don't really care. I'm not messing with Windows settings constantly or anything, I'm far far far more interested in how my games, videos, and actual programs are running then the menus and options look on Windows. I get what your saying, and 100% understand how it bothers you, but good god I can't imagine going back to 1080p videos and gaming because of blurry menu windows. It's like not even a sacrifice for me, just pretend that those windows run at 1080p or something. As long as I can still read it without much effort I don't think about it.

 

Some are fine, but most old ones have issues. There are ways to fix this, but it about 15-20 mins to set it all up.

 

To each his own, to me if everything is not 100%, my OCD kicks in

 

More than you know I understand the feeling, but that in particular doesn't bother me. I just mean so let OP decide for himself if he likes high res screens. We've described what its like pretty well, so its up to him to see if it's something he'd enjoy or be bothered by.

Pros:
Amazing video
Crisp picture most of the time

Cons:
Not everything is perfect
Older programs will be super tiny
You most likely will not be able to game on one with a single 980, even 980m sli doesn't really put up great numbers

 

How does power consumption play a role with it? With Alienware, it has 180w brick, my friend has this. I am not impressed by the 4k.

I can still play games in 1080p and 2k with no issues?

 

4K screens tend to draw more power due to the higher pixel density of the screen.

 

They consume more power, but you can still easily play at 1080p.

 

It's enough extra that battery life takes a decent hit going from 1080p to 4k.

 

As a 4k user this post sums it up for me. The cons are true, but do not affect me and hence had no bearing on my decision. Only the cost, extra resolution for games and programs, and refresh(see below).

I notice no blurring when I run at 125 or 150%, and I gain a ton of screen real estate. I change my browser zoom often depending if I am running a 1/4 of the 4k screen or 1/2, or full etc. If it would have bothered me, i would have noticed it going back and forth between zooms constantly. I even do this on my 1080p screens, but they are less effective and I can only make the text so small before it cannot be read regardless of how good your vision it (not enough pixels to make the fonts).

The ONLY thing I miss, and have some small regret on, is that I can't overclock the 4k display at all. Honestly that would bug me only running at 75, 90 or even 100 hz rather than an even 120 or 144hz like my externals I've used in the past. So essentially I am screwed until 120/144 laptop screens become available in high(or any) resolution. I had to make a choice,and either way it was a compromise, I just had to decide which was less of a compromise for me.

 

4k P870DM is 99% adobe and 99% sRGB, same screen as the Alienware 17R3 4K / 4K Touch "IGZO"

You cannot put 100% coverage without getting sued by someone, and it's impossible to get 100% coverage no matter what display you buy.

 

It is 100% actually. Ill post a measurement report once im home. Another member who is a pro photographer, posted his reports from his Spectrometer, and the volume is around 125% with the coverage at pretty much 100%.

 

Yes, but on a legal ground, you can't say 100% without being sued.

Even EIZO and NEC don't put 100% on the description of pro monitors.

 

That im not sure about. Never heard or read anything about it. But doesn't mean it isn't true. Will look into it.