I do not understand the hate for the studio display

[ddhhddhh2]

That is not correct. The iMac (Retina and Non-Retina) has been used for years for professional design work and photo and video editing. The Studio Display was marketed alongside the Mac Studio as Apple's answer for a Pro Apple Silicon workstation. Saying that it's only intended for basic tasks is absurd and goes complexly against the original intention of the display. With that being said, the old XDR display was a niche product, which is why many Pros went for the Studio Display instead. Based on how the new XDR is priced, that isn't going to change anytime soon.

Alright, yeah, I’ll admit I probably exaggerated a bit. Hopefully I didn’t annoy any Studio Display owners.

I’m not saying the Studio Display has no real advantages, because it definitely does. But honestly, compared with “other” brands, I think its biggest strengths are style and taste. Owning one and not putting it somewhere everyone immediately sees it almost feels like a crime.

I guess the best way to explain it is with Dell. I obviously don’t know any of Dell’s monitor designers, but based on the Dell monitors I’ve used, I imagine their process is something like: first, put in everything users actually need—solid construction, lots of adjustability, easy height and angle changes—and then figure out a reasonable price.

Apple, on the other hand... well, we all know how Apple works. First they decide how beautiful, polished, and consistent they want the whole experience to be, and then they figure out how much we’re going to have to pay for it.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Honestly, it’s an advantage pretty much only Apple can get away with.

 

[Sosab123]

Apple has a specific standard. If I was working with colors on a professional level I would certainly get one as my first choice.

 

[Jumpthesnark]

I guess the best way to explain it is with Dell. I obviously don’t know any of Dell’s monitor designers, but based on the Dell monitors I’ve used, I imagine their process is something like: first, put in everything users actually need—solid construction, lots of adjustability, easy height and angle changes—and then figure out a reasonable price.

Hard pass. I've used Dells before and everything, from the resolution to the brightness to the contrast to the plasticky construction to the controls, were subpar. Except for the wobbles. They can make a first-class wobbler.

I'm sure they make some better "pro" models, but from my experience I do not see them as monitors that have "everything users actually need," not by a long shot.

I'm glad I no longer work at a place where they put a Dell on my desk.

 

[Petite messe solennelle]

There are not many displays with the same resolution. A quick search gave me these (I included the new XDR at the top as a comparison, then the Studio Display, then the other alphabetically):

Apple Studio Display XDR
– Regular monitor
– Mini-LED panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 120 Hz (variable)
– 100% DCI-P3
– 1.000 nits, 2.000 nits peak HDR brightnesses
– 5 ms

Apple Studio Display (2026)
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– 99% DCI-P3
– 500 nits, 600 nits peak HDR brightnesses
– 14 to 16 ms

Acer Nitro XV270X P (announced in January 2026)
– Gaming monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 165 Hz / 2560 × 1440 at 330 Hz
– 95% DCI-P3
– 350 nits, 400 nits peak HDR brightnesses
– 0.5 ms

ASUS ProArt Display PA27JCV
– Content creator monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– 99% DCI-P3
– 400 nits, 500 nits peak HDR brightnesses
– 5.0 ms

ASUS ROG Strix XG27JCG
– Gaming monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 180 Hz / 2560 × 1440 at 330 Hz
– 97% DCI-P3
– 350 nits, 600 nits peak HDR brightnesses
– 0.3 ms

BenQ PD2730S
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– 98% DCI-P3
– 400 nits
– 5.0 ms

KTC H27P3
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz, 2560 × 1440 at 120 Hz
– 99% DCI-P3
– 500 nits
– 7 to 14 ms

Kuycon G27P
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 75 Hz
– 99% DCI-P3
– 600 nits
– 8 ms (when using Overdrive 4 to 6 ms)

LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KA-B
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– 99% DCI-P3
– 500 nits
– 12 ms

LG UltraFine 5K 27MD5KL-B
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– 99% DCI-P3
– 500 nits
– 12 ms

Philips Evnia 27M2G5800 (announced in July 2026)
– Content creator monitor, gaming monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 180 Hz (8-bit colors) or 144 Hz (10-bit colors), 2560 × 1440 at 330 Hz
– 98% DCI-P3
– 500 nits
– 0.5 ms

Samsung ViewFinity S8 (S80HF)
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– no DCI-P3 specs
– 350 nits
– 5 ms

Samsung ViewFinity S9 (S90PC)
– Regular monitor
– IPS panel
– 5120 × 2880 at 60 Hz
– no DCI-P3 specs
– 600 nits
– 5 ms

I would say, that the Apple Studio Display is not really worth its money for the display specs, especially in 2026. It is a very good display – I just bought some for my company for my employees and installed them myself –, but the reason to buy one is the looks, the sturdiness, the integration with macOS, etc. If it would be only for the display experience itself, I'd go with a cheaper one.

Side note: The XDR is extraordinary. It's like day and night – no other monitor comes close. I now own one privately and use one at work.

 

[TechRunner]

I've always appreciated Apple's monitors but could never justify the prices considering my workflows. While I'd love to see them release a sub-$1000USD monitor I'm not expecting that to happen.

 

[Antilogical]

They can make a first-class wobbler.

Don't forget they also deliver only the finest plastic creaks if you even as so much brush against the display.