Not sure how to quantify this effect tho (without access to the high-speed blur camera that the blur test site recommends). It is definitely making a difference to my now-trained (lol!) eyes. I really hope there is a software way to make this better (at least to the level of iGPU). Thankfully it is not the other around, because keeping the dGPU is a major power hog (as expected) and I dont need it 95% of the time for my use-cases.
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
I mean, even a repeat of the iPhone slow-mo test would be better than nothing. Even if it's not the most accurate way to test, it could at least show if there's a real difference.
Ah, true. As long as I can lock the camera to a specific framerate, then it becomes a purely relative test. Makes sense, I'll do it later.
Yep, relative is what I'm interested in. It could provide insight into whether the severity of the issue is being amplified by software on top of LCD's intrinsic characteristics.
No they have not. Neither did they fix the dim screen. The biggest question is, can these screen issues even be addressed via software update?
No, and they won't. It's just how laptop screens have worked in Apple laptops and people are trying to find ridiculous things to nitpick about
Notebookcheck has tested the 16” to have the worst response time out of any recent MacBook. I don’t think it’s something ridiculous to nitpick if you’re spending over $2K for a laptop. Why are you even bothering with this thread if you’re just going to complain about people complaining?
Do you own a 16” or seen one in person yet?
Objectively though, how many units did they test? 1? When was the testing machine last calibrated? Was it calibrated correctly? Is it even the same equipment they were using 2, 3, 4 years ago and was that calibrated correctly? Did they also test a mere 1 unit? What are the lab conditions for the testing, are those consistent?
I mean we are talking a handful of milliseconds here between machines once compared. It's going to take some really sensitive, really well calibrated, really consistent equipment testing numerous samples to get any type of useful dataset. Books have been written about selecting a proper sampling frequency, and right now it looks like notebookcheck is testing a single machine, so the peanut gallery should really take a step back and think about that for a minute. 1 sample doesn't mean dick.
For all we know the single unit they've tested in every single year has been an outlier, good or bad. But we will never know when their sample size is...1.
This issue is NOT universal to all 16 inch models. Mine is absolutely fine and compares well against my 2016 15 inch.
It has to be a display supplier issue or something else. For what it’s worth I run both of my MBPs with True Tone and auto brightness disabled. If you disable auto brightness while at maximum brightness, you can see the display slowly increase in brightness even though it’s maxed out.
It has to be a display supplier issue or something else. For what it’s worth I run both of my MBPs with True Tone and auto brightness disabled. If you disable auto brightness while at maximum brightness, you can see the display slowly increase in brightness even though it’s maxed out.
I didn't do due diligence (research), but do all the models have the same physical panel? You can determine the panel model identifier using the command (run from Terminal):
The second line is the model id. Can we compare these?
Explanation: The command is reading the configuration data, or more precisely the I/O kit (driver) registry (ioreg), searching for EDID info (grep), and formatting the resultant binary output (sed, xxd, strings). ioreg is macos specific, while the other commands are just basic UNIX utilities. It will not make any changes to the system and is safe to run. It appears on some other threads as well.
I'll update this post with mine when I get back home. I disable auto brightness, night shift, and true tone while doing image processing and am very pleased with the display on mine. The smearing seems similar to the 2012 rMBP I have been using.
Bash:
ioreg -lw0 | grep "IODisplayEDID" | sed "/[^<]*</s///" | xxd -p -r | strings -n 6Explanation: The command is reading the configuration data, or more precisely the I/O kit (driver) registry (ioreg), searching for EDID info (grep), and formatting the resultant binary output (sed, xxd, strings). ioreg is macos specific, while the other commands are just basic UNIX utilities. It will not make any changes to the system and is safe to run. It appears on some other threads as well.
I'll update this post with mine when I get back home. I disable auto brightness, night shift, and true tone while doing image processing and am very pleased with the display on mine. The smearing seems similar to the 2012 rMBP I have been using.
Last edited:
You're asking questions like I would be able to answer for a reviewer. Also since you seem like an expert, do you recall many people complaining like this before on any previous models?
Last edited:
Actually not the slowest 15" MBP they tested since 2016, but close, and about 10% slower than the average since 2016. This is pretty much how the screens have been lately.
He’s right they won’t release a patch because MacBooks just have slow screens with good colour calibration and that’s how they’ve been for years. The LCD here isn’t significantly slower than other LCD’s. I get identical ghosting on my iPhone XR in dark mode and on my 4K Phillips monitor. I got identical ghosting on a surface book I tried in store. This isn’t a problem they will fix because they most likely prioritized cost/colour calibration/battery etc over response times because it doesn’t bother the average user. If you want a faster screen you can buy an oled laptop like the XPS 15. I didn’t even notice ghosting till I saw these threads and now I’m seeing it on every lcd in my house including the old MacBook pros my parents have. And yes I own a 16 and ive seen it on every 16 other tried because all the panels are identical.
My company ordered 26 MBP 16” before Christmas for new staff and I personally checked them one by one today just by fast scrolling the privacy policy very fast on the welcome page. As I can tell based on my eyes, all of them have ghosting problem. I have contacted Apple via their regular customer support and ACPS department by email. Hope I can get some replies.
They can’t do anything to fix it except order some mass recall and redesign the laptop with a new panel. If this is a serious issue just return them, this has been discussed to death.
exactly my point. if you cant answer those questions, it does nothing but a disservice parroting notebookcheck's singular, unverifiable result as a condemnation of the entire generation.
and yes, there have been ghosting threads going back to 2012 when the retina first appeared - do a search.
You can answer your own questions by reading the reviews at Notebook Check. It's not a disservice to cite actual measurements by people who have the proper equipment and expertise. The 2016-19 15" screens are known to be slow.
The 13in ones are too they all ghost in dark mode when I try them
I just ordered a new 16" and it just shipped today. I am hoping they are using better panels. Will update and let you know.
Got my 16" three days ago and upgrading from the maxed out late 2013 15". I understand that some are more and some less sensitive to the issues. If I hadn't read about this, I surely wouldn't have noticed anything and it doesn't bother me at all.
When scrolling text, I don't notice anything that bothers me, even when looking for the issue.
Here is a comparison of the ufo test filmed with iPhone slow motion:
late 13 15":
16":
Both have some ghosting but the 16" has clearly more.
Now that I am used to the 16", the 15" seems a bit glossy and the image and text not as crisp to me, so in actually use, I definitely prefer the 16".
When scrolling text, I don't notice anything that bothers me, even when looking for the issue.
Here is a comparison of the ufo test filmed with iPhone slow motion:
late 13 15":
16":
Both have some ghosting but the 16" has clearly more.
Now that I am used to the 16", the 15" seems a bit glossy and the image and text not as crisp to me, so in actually use, I definitely prefer the 16".
Last edited:
Got my 16" three days ago and upgrading from the maxed out late 2013 15". I understand that some are more and some less sensitive to the issues. If I hadn't read about this, I surely wouldn't have noticed anything and it doesn't bother me at all.
When scrolling text, I don't notice anything that bothers me, even when looking for the issue.
Here is a comparison of the ufo test filmed with iPhone slow motion:
late 13 15":
16":
Both have some ghosting but the 16" has clearly more.
Now that I amused to the 16", the 15" seems a bit glossy and the image and text not as crisp to me, so in actually use, I definitely prefer the 16".
Man - that looks awful on the 16
It's definitely not the ideal laptop to watch flying saucers scroll by at high speeds on.