Other How Much Does ProMotion Cost Apple?

[42545]

It is very *** to give one of two devices with almost the same display a 120hz ($999) and the other a 60hz ($799). But what I'm wondering is what ProMotion costs. This is such a magnificent and luxurious thing that it is only available in a device that costs $200 more. Joke of course. I think Apple should offer an option for base models. Let's pay whatever it costs. If you want, put it at 120hz; If you pay less, 90hz is enough. But those who don't care can stay at 60hz. But how much?

Now some may say "if you don't like it, don't buy it"; -You are right, I'm sorry.

When I had an iPhone 13 and had never used a 120hz screen before, yes, I could feel how bad (39%) 60hz was. Because we look closely at the phone...

 

[Account25476]

It will cost a lot this year, as I believe that, at least in Europe, buying a phone without AI and a 120Hz display (considering that even my parents’ €250 smartphone has these features) is no longer significant in 2024 and 2025. Especially with all the buzz around AI, where every website and service discusses it—even though most of it is just if-then-else logic—the average customer understands this.

 

[42545]

@Account25476 You should also see Turkiye. Hhahah. The base 16 model is $1900. Moreover, the purchasing power is not very good, the minimum wage is 500 dollars. So, for example. In countries like Turkiye, where these phones are difficult to access, 60hz becomes more annoying.

 

[snipr125]

It probably does not cost Apple all that much because VRR 120 hz is pretty much standard on all midrange Android devices, with fixed 90/120 hz displays standard on budget Andoid phones (im talking less than £200).

In fact Apple maybe paying more than expected for the 60hz display from Samsung in the regular iPhone as it has very low demand.

 

[DSTOFEL]

It is very *** to give one of two devices with almost the same display a 120hz ($999) and the other a 60hz ($799). But what I'm wondering is what ProMotion costs. This is such a magnificent and luxurious thing that it is only available in a device that costs $200 more. Joke of course. I think Apple should offer an option for base models. Let's pay whatever it costs. If you want, put it at 120hz; If you pay less, 90hz is enough. But those who don't care can stay at 60hz. But how much?

Now some may say "if you don't like it, don't buy it"; -You are right, I'm sorry.

When I had an iPhone 13 and had never used a 120hz screen before, yes, I could feel how bad (39%) 60hz was. Because we look closely at the phone...

I can’t tell you “what” it would cost them, but I can tell you “when” it would cost them. That would be: When they offered it on a base model for as an option for whatever it costs them. Then…more people would flock to the base model and they’d lose revenue.

 

[Total Respray]

I can’t tell you “what” it would cost them, but I can tell you “when” it would cost them. That would be: When they offered it on a base model for as an option for whatever it costs them. Then…more people would flock to the base model and they’d lose revenue.

You might be right and I’m sure Apple has done the cost-benefit calculations. However there are cases where Apple may lose sales including (a) some people (myself included) who won’t upgrade while they persist with 60hz and (b) those who may be put off from switching from a 120hz Android.

 

[42545]

It probably does not cost Apple all that much because VRR 120 hz is pretty much standard on all midrange Android devices, with fixed 90/120 hz displays standard on budget Andoid phones (im talking less than £200).

In fact Apple maybe paying more than expected for the 60hz display from Samsung in the regular iPhone as it has very low demand.

Okay, I would like to pay the most money and get the Pro version; But when we think about the world, this may not always be possible for everyone.

I can’t tell you “what” it would cost them, but I can tell you “when” it would cost them. That would be: When they offered it on a base model for as an option for whatever it costs them. Then…more people would flock to the base model and they’d lose revenue.

It's funny. They treat an 800 dollar phone like a child's device. I don't know, it turns me off a bit. I have used iPhone 14 in the past. There was no problem; It was very difficult for 2 weeks after switching from s23 to it, but I got used to it. Yet I knew it was there.

You might be right and I’m sure Apple has done the cost-benefit calculations. However there are cases where Apple may lose sales including (a) some people (myself included) who won’t upgrade while they persist with 60hz and (b) those who may be put off from switching from a 120hz Android.

You are so right. For example, if I buy 13 instead of 16 to be more affordable, I think like I won't lose anything.

 

[42545]

"Add Promotion with +$50" ??

 

[mtrm]

It’s not a matter of how much it costs them. But rather a matter of how different would the pro and non pro phones would be so that they can justify the pricing of the pro models. The non pro iPhones main reason to exist is to upsell the more expensive pro iPhones. Samsung does the same with the Sxx and Sxx+ to upsell the Ultra. They just do it with features other than a high refresh rate display.
But I fully agree. At this day and age a 120hz (heck, even 90 would do) display should be standard on the baseline iPhone. Doesn’t even have to be a VRR down to 1hz. Just a regular 60/120 would be fine.

 

[JPack]

Only $5 according to Counterpoint Research.

iPhone 12 Pro Max = $80 | 60Hz

iPhone 13 Pro Max = $85 | 120Hz

iPhone 14 Pro Max = $93 | LTPO AOD

 

[saberfi]

Nothing. Everything. -Salahuddin