Conclusion

Offering a blend of 4K and HDR visuals, the £725 IPS display has the ability to dazzle but struggles to reach its full potential due an immature ecosystem.

The Dell U2718Q is an intriguing addition to the popular UltraSharp range. Offering a blend of 4K and HDR visuals, the £725 IPS display has the ability to dazzle but struggles to reach its full potential due an immature ecosystem.

HDR functionality in Windows 10 is far from ideal, with the user having to choose when to enable the feature, and finding HDR-enabled games and movies is easier said than done.

It's a case of waiting for the industry to catch up, but in the meantime, the Dell display does hold merit. The 4K resolution is primed for multi-tasking, the InfinityEdge bezel and versatile stand make for a very tidy package, and by adding support for HDR10 content the U2718Q serves as an attractive choice for users wanting to dip their toe in HDR waters.

There are a few inevitable caveats - the display isn't ideally suited to gaming and the panel specification is such that the HDR effect isn't as jaw-dropping as could be - yet we can think of at least two potential usage scenarios. The U2718Q would be ideal with a PC connected via DisplayPort and, say, an Xbox One S via HDMI, and content creators can view this panel as an opportunity to venture into HDR workflows.

Bottom line: HDR on the desktop still has some way to go, but it remains one of the most exciting display developments to date and the Dell UltraSharp U2718Q is a sign of good things to come. For the moment, it is playing serious catch-up to large-screen TVs employing established HDR technology.

The Good		The Bad
4K UHD resolution Ultra-slim InfinityEdge bezels Element of future proofing with HDR Three-year warranty Versatile stand		HDR support in Windows is lacking No HDMI cable in the box HDR not available via DisplayPort Some evidence of backlight bleed

Dell UltraSharp U2718Q

HEXUS.where2buy

The UltraSharp U2718Q 27in 4K HDR monitor is available to purchase from Dell.

HEXUS.right2reply

At HEXUS, we invite the companies whose products we test to comment on our articles. If any company representatives for the products reviewed choose to respond, we'll publish their commentary here verbatim.

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!

4K on a 27' screen…no,no,no..FFS.

When will these idiot manufacturers stop it and make 32inch the standard for 4K monitors.

Anything less is just too damn small at that resolution.

Bagpuss
4K on a 27' screen…no,no,no..FFS.

When will these idiot manufacturers stop it and make 32inch the standard for 4K monitors.

Anything less is just too damn small at that resolution.

I tend to agree. The sweet spot for 27" is WQHD (2560 x 1440) …in the absence of WQXGA (2560 x 1600).

Also…

Article
The catch is that 27in 4K IPS monitors are readily available for less than half the asking price of the UltraSharp U2718Q…

Can't say that I've readily seen one, and if they were as ubiqituous as claimed why was none tested alongside the U2718Q.

“in the absence of WQXGA (2560 x 1600)”

Precisely the problem (and no gsync or freesync). Without this, I'll be planning OTHER purchases for some time. Never mind the stupidity of 4K on a 27in. I hope this has ZERO sales (same for all 4k 27in). For the love of god, someone please bring back 16:10 across the board. The monitor problem is even holding up my gpu purchase…ROFL. But at some point I'll make that move anyway. I can game fine on my old monitors until they die and I have a spare 22in replacement (an old test monitor from my PC biz). There are a few 16:10's out there (dell's 30in, and I think they have a 27in also) but not gamer models. I can't believe nobody takes a shot at one built for gamers. Surely it would be a big hit. I think half the market would revolt if given a choice. There is no point in wide on PC's unless you're a spreadsheet guy by day (or perhaps some content people I guess). This WIDE crap is all because it's cheap to produce, but given how much we're spending on cpu/gpu etc these days, why not put out a GREAT 16:10 27-32in and see what happens. Charge what you have to in order to make profit, but it can't be that bad. Anyone know the cost difference on a 24-30in that would be 16:10 vs regular wide crap?

I'd easily pay $100 EXTRA at any size 24in or above for 16:10, and more than likely more…ROFL. I spend $600-1200 on my monitor usually (at least the main one) so I have no problem waiting if forced a while longer. It's a 7yr+purchase for me so far (and I buy great ones, I like my eyes) so I have no need for $129 or some crap on this item.

It's not the monitor's fault that Window's UI is poo. 4K is no problem in 27“ - Dell have had a 4k 25” screen out for ages and there is value in having pixels smaller than you can resolve (well, if you've got the choice of slightly too small or slightly too large, you want the former).

4K also gives nice scaling down to 1080p

Bagpuss
4K on a 27' screen…no,no,no..FFS.

When will these idiot manufacturers stop it and make 32inch the standard for 4K monitors.

Anything less is just too damn small at that resolution.

I agree, although for my less than perfect eyes 1440p @ 32" is the sweet spot.