Using a 144Hz PC monitor and a 120hz IPad Pro.
the 60Hz < panel in the 16” MBP is non useable.
the 60Hz < panel in the 16” MBP is non useable.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
16" MacBook Pro ghosting / smearing...
- Thread starter StONE_ROdGEr
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hey, come on man, I'm only in my mid-forties! Ugh, you're right. I just realized I don't even have a 16", my wife just put an old TV in front of me and said it was a MBP.
It's measurably slower by about 15%. Yes that's a difference, yes it's worse. The thing is, it puts it right in line with multiple competitors from the likes of Lenovo and Dell where the MBP previously had the edge for response time. Nobody's pulling out the pitchforks over those machines, so that leaves us with one of two options.
1) This "ghosting" that people are perceiving isn't even related to the response time, which would make sense because going from ~40ms to ~50ms is not going to make the difference between "perfectly fine" and "smeary mess".
2) The ghosting problem is related to the response time, and most of the other professional laptops on the market with similar response times also exhibit the problem, including the previous MBPs to a ~15% lesser degree which *may have* crossed the threshold of tolerability for some of the users in this thread claiming that this problem came out of nowhere and only exists on the 16" models.
Then, our question becomes: how much does it really matter? Knowing how all 60hz panels have looked for decades now, I find it incredibly hard to believe that pre-existing bias is not informing the perception of some of the more... exaggerated accounts in this thread.
I should be clear- I'm not a die-hard Apple apologist. I think it's important that consumers stick up for themselves and get what they pay for. The butterfly keyboard problems, for example, were very real and quantifiable. Certainly something to be wary about going into a purchase decision.
So far with this ghosting thing, we haven't seen a shred of actual numbers-based testing outside of response time measurements which show the 16, while slower than the outgoing model, falling right in line with the vast majority of it's competitors. Meanwhile, we've heard claims that the variance from unit to unit is so high that it can go from unacceptable to unnoticeable with a single "panel revision" which is entirely unconfirmed to... well, to even be a thing at all.
As a prospective buyer of the new machine and a consumer that has been waiting for Apple to get their act together with their Mac notebooks for a while now, of course I hope that this issue is negligible- as do we all. I do think it's important to hear all of the facts, and I'm disappointed that many people here seem to be getting defensive and thinking that we're calling them out as "liars". Of course we're not. You see what you see, and hopefully you report it back here in good faith. We're all on the same side here.
At the end of the day, the numbers are what matter. We can crowdsource spreadsheets of anecdotal feedback all day long- it won't get anywhere.
/endrant
While I agree with you in principle, the problem here is that this issue is very hard to quantify by anyone without specialized equipment.
This isn't like the keyboard problems of the last generation, wherein simply having a pulse provided all but the least perceptive among us with the necessary tools to perceive, quantify, and report the issue.
Of course, it would be wonderful if everyone here had high-speed cameras and whatever else is required to do a proper frame time/response rate analysis, but since we don't, anecdotal evidence and recordings of varying quality are about all the majority of users can provide.
I'm also aware of the selection bias inherent to collecting information in a thread like this, but again, what's the alternative?
Related: I also don't understand the attitudes of some in this thread who are so quick to dismiss or invalidate reports of this problem due to things like video quality, or the blind assertion that the different part numbers are unequivocally not revision numbers.
I'd remind those people that they have exactly the same amount of information as anyone else here about that number: precisely zero.
It's a big problem. Try doing animation/editing on a ghosting display vs. 'fast' display. It's a huge difference. The added motionblur changes the way everything looks, and in most cases you'd prefer less motionblur and only add it to content when needed. This is all besides the fact that those screens aren't even adobe rgb...but that's another story.
The biggest problem for years has been the average user buying a macbook pro. The ones that think they need all the power while they actually don't. This waters down any real criticism! The crowd that's cheering for the thinner/lighter models has been most damaging to the pro brand. The macbook pro is supposed to be a mobile workstation. Not your easy to bring along internet browsing laptop. When I see a project manager, copy writer and content creator all having a macbook pro, you have to realize something is very wrong. The 'pro' is gone, everyone has a macbook nowadays. Apple doesn't mind, they can sell more to the crowd. /rant
The biggest problem for years has been the average user buying a macbook pro. The ones that think they need all the power while they actually don't. This waters down any real criticism! The crowd that's cheering for the thinner/lighter models has been most damaging to the pro brand. The macbook pro is supposed to be a mobile workstation. Not your easy to bring along internet browsing laptop. When I see a project manager, copy writer and content creator all having a macbook pro, you have to realize something is very wrong. The 'pro' is gone, everyone has a macbook nowadays. Apple doesn't mind, they can sell more to the crowd. /rant
Very well put! I feel that most folks who are easily dismissing this issue come from the 2016-2019 laptops and their bar has been low(ered by Apple). Coming from the 2014 MBP, I feel let down by this screen's response rate, hinge tightness, etc.
[automerge]1576595616[/automerge]
I am really confused by your statements...
re: Lenovo/Dell - no one is paying the kind of money that the MBP costs. Also this is a Mac forum so yeah you may want to look for complaints on Lenovo/Dell in their respective forums.
re: "Then, our question becomes: how much does it really matter? Knowing how all 60hz panels have looked for decades now, I find it incredibly hard to believe that pre-existing bias is not informing the perception of some of the more... exaggerated accounts in this thread."
Not sure where you got all that. Pre-existing bias? Exaggerated accounts? I am speechless. First, this is a thread about ghosting/smearing, so yeah, most folks who post in this thread tend to have those issues - that is not exaggeration, it's called sticking to the topic.
re: "I'm disappointed that many people here seem to be getting defensive and thinking that we're calling them out as "liars". Of course we're not."
Just see https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...panel-rev-database-wiki.2215886/post-28072038 and https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...panel-rev-database-wiki.2215886/post-28072070. The original poster removed this language from their post, hence the link to someone who had (thankfully!) quoted that portion.
re: "At the end of the day, the numbers are what matter. We can crowdsource spreadsheets of anecdotal feedback all day long- it won't get anywhere."
What type of numbers do u think we should gather here? (keep in mind we dont have access to high-speed blur detection cameras)
Thanks!
Last edited:
For those saying there's 'no ghosting', it's because you don't know how it is defined or how to reproduce it.
All displays have ghosting. The way to minimise it is to have very high refresh rates and very low response times. For example, the Razer Blade 17 goes up 240Hz and down to 1ms response time. A typical OLED or QLED television has 8ms average response time, because they are used for watching a lot of fast moving content.
The high response time and visible ghosting you're seeing on the MacBook Pro has been around every since the introduction of the 'Retina display'. It can't be fixed with software or small revisions. It's part of the hardware spec and is probably being used to save battery life, keep costs down and increase profit margins.
All displays have ghosting. The way to minimise it is to have very high refresh rates and very low response times. For example, the Razer Blade 17 goes up 240Hz and down to 1ms response time. A typical OLED or QLED television has 8ms average response time, because they are used for watching a lot of fast moving content.
The high response time and visible ghosting you're seeing on the MacBook Pro has been around every since the introduction of the 'Retina display'. It can't be fixed with software or small revisions. It's part of the hardware spec and is probably being used to save battery life, keep costs down and increase profit margins.
Agree with everything you said, except it has gotten worse with the newer retinas (2016+) it would seem. I have a 2014 rMBP to compare side-by-side with my 2019 16" MBP and the difference is stark. Ghosting and text smearing is very evident on the 16" while my 2014 runs with no / very little text smearing.
i sent gif image of this ghosting and blurring and final words were this 2 device and both of this was A2 panel
From the specs someone posted earlier, you are right. The retina displays have had a range of 25-45ms response times since they were introduced. That's very slow if you require a fast display. But if you require better battery life then this is an energy saver.
EDIT: Ignore this top part, effed up my formatting.
[automerge]1576626363[/automerge]
@sat24 Here's my responses to you, wasn't sure exactly how to quote your other post properly because it was merged and behaving weirdly when I tried to quote it.
re: Lenovo/Dell - My point wasn't that I expected active discussion of those machines on this forum, just that they're also popular units with many users (and likely similar panel sources) and they haven't had a similar uproar to my knowledge.
re: My quote about bias - I'm not chastising people for sticking to the topic, not sure where you got that idea. All that I'm saying that it's not a far fetched proposition that - after reading a thread like this, where people are essentially deeming it some sort of major defect - that people might go into their first experience with the machine expecting "ghosting" and thus thinking that they're seeing it.
Many of these people may not even know what "ghosting" means outside of the context of this thread, or understand the inherent technology behind LCD panels, refresh rates, response time etc. in the first place.
A 60hz panel will always demonstrate visual "trailing" artifacts during movement, and if you went into your 16" MBP impressions expecting some sort of crazy unusable smearing it may not be very hard for your brain to convince you that you're seeing it- even subconsciously. This is just how humans human.
Of course, I'm also not saying that there aren't reports of it from people who are more intimately familiar with the tech.
re: Being defensive - I don't condone the accusatory nature of the other poster, and I guess I should've added that I'm not speaking for everyone here when I say that we're "not calling people out." It's a super lengthy thread at this point and I'm sure there have been some less than productive back-and-forths among the actual discussion.
re: Numbers - I'm not condemning the gathering of information, but plenty of people here are treating the "A#" as if it is confirmed to represent a panel revision, which will only make things more confusing to people just now stumbling upon the thread who don't want to take an hour of their time to read all 16 pages.
@protean6 - Same as above. I'm not saying that it doesn't denote different panels. I just wanted to point out how silly it is to suggest that the supply chain is moving at such a rate that revisions are being made every couple of days to work on the issue, as people were implying earlier in the thread. This simply isn't how this kind of stuff works.
[automerge]1576626549[/automerge]
???
Who are you corresponding with in this photo?
[automerge]1576626363[/automerge]
@sat24 Here's my responses to you, wasn't sure exactly how to quote your other post properly because it was merged and behaving weirdly when I tried to quote it.
re: Lenovo/Dell - My point wasn't that I expected active discussion of those machines on this forum, just that they're also popular units with many users (and likely similar panel sources) and they haven't had a similar uproar to my knowledge.
re: My quote about bias - I'm not chastising people for sticking to the topic, not sure where you got that idea. All that I'm saying that it's not a far fetched proposition that - after reading a thread like this, where people are essentially deeming it some sort of major defect - that people might go into their first experience with the machine expecting "ghosting" and thus thinking that they're seeing it.
Many of these people may not even know what "ghosting" means outside of the context of this thread, or understand the inherent technology behind LCD panels, refresh rates, response time etc. in the first place.
A 60hz panel will always demonstrate visual "trailing" artifacts during movement, and if you went into your 16" MBP impressions expecting some sort of crazy unusable smearing it may not be very hard for your brain to convince you that you're seeing it- even subconsciously. This is just how humans human.
Of course, I'm also not saying that there aren't reports of it from people who are more intimately familiar with the tech.
re: Being defensive - I don't condone the accusatory nature of the other poster, and I guess I should've added that I'm not speaking for everyone here when I say that we're "not calling people out." It's a super lengthy thread at this point and I'm sure there have been some less than productive back-and-forths among the actual discussion.
re: Numbers - I'm not condemning the gathering of information, but plenty of people here are treating the "A#" as if it is confirmed to represent a panel revision, which will only make things more confusing to people just now stumbling upon the thread who don't want to take an hour of their time to read all 16 pages.
@protean6 - Same as above. I'm not saying that it doesn't denote different panels. I just wanted to point out how silly it is to suggest that the supply chain is moving at such a rate that revisions are being made every couple of days to work on the issue, as people were implying earlier in the thread. This simply isn't how this kind of stuff works.
[automerge]1576626549[/automerge]
???
Who are you corresponding with in this photo?
Last edited:
The A# surely represents a batch number rather than revision. As you say, it wouldn’t make sense for that to be a new panel or anything. Will have to be batches.
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking as well. I'm curious whether this will die out or snowball over time. There's certainly a chance that people are getting better or worse panels due to batches, panel lottery, etc.
Definitely not from some sneaky revision conspiracy though lol
OK thanks for your response @harrisonjr98 - I appreciate you keeping it civil (sadly not all have).
It is very frustrating now to have to decide to return/replace hoping to get a better panel - in fact I called the Apple store twice already to check if they knew about this issue and both times, very long hold times (not surprised, but also going to be a long wait when I go in - not at all what I was imagining when I dropped a wad of cash on this bad boy).
Also - the issue is definitely there, at least for a specific set of us whose heads work differently I suppose - because like I said (repeatedly), I have a 2014 15" rMBP to compare side-by-side so there is just no shred of doubt in mind. Now, it may be deemed as "by-design" per Apple - so it may never get fixed - but that doesnt change what my eyes are seeing and telling my brain
. Some of our eyes are seeing the difference, and that's all it matters to validate this thread. And this specific thread is for those that do... it is just not productive at all telling us that the issue doesnt exist - it does to us.I rest my case.
Absolutely agreed. My point is that nobody, other than the panel manufacturer and maybe Apple, can make any valid assertion about that number one way or the other.
Regardless of what the variation in that number actually represents, if there is a substantial difference in the incidence of problem reports between model numbers, we are one step closer to understanding whether or not we are actually dealing with a variance in hardware quality, or simply a variance in perception.
Again, agreed - that could very well be occurring, but I think the far more likely scenario is people are ending up here after experiencing the issue as a means to validate/report their experiences.
The ghosting is clearly a real issue for some people. Not everyone notices it.
The question is what to do about it? Any responses from Apple on this?
I've been holding off on a purchase of this laptop for this reason. I don't want to spend $3k+ and then find out a new model fixes this 3 months later.
The question is what to do about it? Any responses from Apple on this?
I've been holding off on a purchase of this laptop for this reason. I don't want to spend $3k+ and then find out a new model fixes this 3 months later.
I am receiving a replacement for my original device (A1 panel) that was manufactured and shipped yesterday due to unrelated issues (charging not working, display not illuminating after sleep) so I'll hopefully get one that feels a bit better, hopefully this one works properly!
This post is out of touch. Real criticism bleeds through. Negative comments get far more weight than positive ones.
It's a Prosumer laptop. It's not only for you.
I have to be honest - I also noticed something “amiss” on the demo 16” I played with for 30+ minutes at the Apple Store.
I’ve spent a lot of my life looking at Apple monitors from many products and my eyes definitely caught “something” not right with the ones on the 16”.
In any case - obviously I hope they fix whatever it is - but even more so I really hope ProMotion is coming to the next revision.
I’ve spent a lot of my life looking at Apple monitors from many products and my eyes definitely caught “something” not right with the ones on the 16”.
In any case - obviously I hope they fix whatever it is - but even more so I really hope ProMotion is coming to the next revision.
I tried the "UFO" smearing test on my 16" MacBook Pro and 5K iMac yesterday. Yes, the smearing was worse on the MBP, looks similar to a screenshot someone else here posted. However, the 5K iMac's panel developed some strange ghosting / artifacting after running the test a while, and the MBP did not.
So if this is a prosumer laptop (hate that term obviously) what are mobile content creators supposed to use?
Flagship apple laptops should cater to pro people, like they did in the past.
It should be targeted to content creators, not content consumers.
I guess I don't care for the term either. It was designed for creators but the general public uses it. But the fact is, if you criticize it, your comment gets far more weight than the positive ones. That's just the nature of customer service.
The laptop is designed for you, but Apple won't forbid the average consumer from buying it. Literally every piece of marketing for the 16" MBP was catered to professionals.
And how is this is a sad time? How you checked out the panel you received and it's bad?