Yep. Look for 14", 2880 x 1800 pixel, 90 hz Amoled panels of Yoga 7 Slim Pro, Zenbook 14 or Vivobook 14 Pro. The brightness is much lower for hdr content, but the rest is worlds better.
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.
M1 Macbook Pro 2021 "120 hz" mini led display very slow, 120 hz are fake, old lcd technology!
- Thread starter ASX
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Show us the difference between a MacBook Pro and a Windows laptop with 120Hz with workflow people use their Macs for:
* Typing in Word, Excel
* Answering an email in Outlook or Gmail
* Chatting in Teams
* Editing photos in Photos
* Using Photoshop
* Editing movies in Premiere, FCP or similar
"Up to 1000 nits sustained (full-screen) brightness, 1600 nits peak brightness"
MacBook Pro - Tech Specs
See all the technical specifications for the 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro with the M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max chips.
www.apple.com
I guess you don't know how to read technical specifications. "Up to" means it only happens during specific circumstances and not all circumstances.
Apple is only intersting as a standalone device for people who are only working with their tools. For others who have a wider usecase it's defintely the wrong device. I bought it only because i needed a silent mobile device with longer battery life @ office. I wouldn't think about mostly or only using macos.
I don't think there is a real competition between apple, amd and intel. Apple is not producing universal hardware. Only for me and other consumers boring use cases, mac os with it's cutting and rendering programs. But some consumers use this devices really as a status symbol. For me they are no status symbols. Usual mass production hardware. In my opinion Apple devices have a negative touch. Because it's a golden cage, many are associating Apple with something for people who are arrogant and have not enough it knowledge so they need this pre-chewed operating systems
You became member on October 31st this year and started immediately posting about how bad you think it these notebooks are.
You are a PC gamer which builds your own desktop gaming PCs. You really care about techs & specs. You consider many Apple user's to be non-knowledgeable about technology and only buy Apple products as status symbols.
Suddenly your build-your-own-PC-world was shaken to the core by all the reports about the tremendous performance of the M1 SoCs and how it would just crush Intel. And you couldn't believe it was true and you would refuse it even if its was true.
You feel you have to show those Apple Mac users they're wrong, that the new MacBook Pros are not as good as some of us believes and that Windows PCs are still the future.
That's why you are here.
ATTENTION ALL L33T GAM3R$,
THIS IS NOT A GAMING LAPTOP, PERIOD.
THIS IS A LAPTOP FOR PEOPLE WHO MAKE MONEY WITH THEIR LAPTOPS.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
THIS MEANS YOU CAN SAVE ABOUT $1000, GO GET A PC, AND PLAY ALL YOUR GAMES ON IT AND BE HAPPY.
US PROFESSIONALS, WHICH THE MACBOOK PRO IS MADE FOR, DON'T CARE THAT THE SCREENS HAVE SLOW RESPONSE TIME.
DON'T CARE THAT WE CAN'T RUN WINDOWS NATIVELY.
DON'T CARE THAT THE GPU IS WEAKER THAN A RTX 3080 WITH WHATEVER STUPID GAME YOU PLAY.
DON'T CARE THAT THERE AREN'T MANY GAMES MADE FOR IT.
GO BUY YOUR RGB 9 POUND LAPTOPS WITH A POWERBRICK THE SIZE OF A BUILDING BRICK, BE HAPPY, AND LIVE YOUR LIFE.
DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME DREAMING MACS ARE EVER GOING TO HAVE A GAME LIBRARY.
DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME WRITING THREADS ABOUT STUPID SPECIFICATIONS LIKE SCREEN LATENCY THAT NOBODY CARES ABOUT.
DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME POSTING ABOUT HOW THE NEWEST INTEL CHIPS DEMOLISH THE M1 MAX.
WE DON'T CARE.
GOOD NIGHT.
THIS IS NOT A GAMING LAPTOP, PERIOD.
THIS IS A LAPTOP FOR PEOPLE WHO MAKE MONEY WITH THEIR LAPTOPS.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
THIS MEANS YOU CAN SAVE ABOUT $1000, GO GET A PC, AND PLAY ALL YOUR GAMES ON IT AND BE HAPPY.
US PROFESSIONALS, WHICH THE MACBOOK PRO IS MADE FOR, DON'T CARE THAT THE SCREENS HAVE SLOW RESPONSE TIME.
DON'T CARE THAT WE CAN'T RUN WINDOWS NATIVELY.
DON'T CARE THAT THE GPU IS WEAKER THAN A RTX 3080 WITH WHATEVER STUPID GAME YOU PLAY.
DON'T CARE THAT THERE AREN'T MANY GAMES MADE FOR IT.
GO BUY YOUR RGB 9 POUND LAPTOPS WITH A POWERBRICK THE SIZE OF A BUILDING BRICK, BE HAPPY, AND LIVE YOUR LIFE.
DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME DREAMING MACS ARE EVER GOING TO HAVE A GAME LIBRARY.
DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME WRITING THREADS ABOUT STUPID SPECIFICATIONS LIKE SCREEN LATENCY THAT NOBODY CARES ABOUT.
DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME POSTING ABOUT HOW THE NEWEST INTEL CHIPS DEMOLISH THE M1 MAX.
WE DON'T CARE.
GOOD NIGHT.
There is something to refund though.
Of course ghosting is something that happens and even the fastest displays can be made to show it.
However. If they hates the laptop as much as they say. They can return for a refund without reason.
Well maybe not now as they’ve been complaining long enough they gotta be past the return period
The only people who are bigger clowns than OP are people replying to him.
Here you see the pwm flickering of the ipad pro 2021 with the same mini led technology. If the brightness is lower the pwm frequency goes significantly down and you see the annoying pulsing much more. It's stressing the eyes heavily.
The multiple humps mean there will me motion artifacts. Double images. This is so annoying.
These duplicate images are caused by multiple backlight strobe flashes per unique frame (multiple humps):
@hans1972
Im here because i bought m1 pro 16 gb and m1 max 32 gb and want share my impressions about this bad display with other users. It's a shame apple is using such a display for macbook pro 2021 and the ipad pro 12.9" 2021.
@TSE
You as a "professional" should know more about eye harming effects and as well the visual artifacts of a display
. But you don't care .
Last edited:
Thanks for letting me know how to live my life, Joe Rogan. Don't know what I'd do without you. I assure you, nobody cares about you either.
I don't believe you, unless you provide evidence of purchase.
You are not posting any evidence for what's happening in practical use. We don't care about making specialized condition to etch out bad behaviour.
Show us how it behaves when using an application for the MacBook Pro which is common. Then show the same/similar software on a PC laptop not showing the behaviour.
Klick on the photo .
For happening in practical use look for the ufo test picture in start posts. Movement on the screen and static images where pwm could be still observed is no "specialized condition".
I wonder how little you know about displays.
.For happening in practical use look for the ufo test picture in start posts. Movement on the screen and static images where pwm could be still observed is no "specialized condition"
.I wonder how little you know about displays.
I also have a 16" and in my opinion it is also very noticeable, especially while scrolling.
Given the differences noted by Notebookcheck between the 16" and the 14" and the 12.9 iPad Pro (which are quite similar in terms of response time), I am really hoping this is something that will sorted with a firmware update in the near future. If not, I will be swapping my 16" for a 14".
You can improve bad pixel response times by adding more overdrive. Also they have to add variable overdrive to have across the sync range low amount of overshoot. Finally the display is very slow, you cant improve it so much, if you are using so much overdrive you will introduce the dazzling white corona effect. All the smearing will be replaced by it. I really doubt apple will fix anything
The pwm artifacts are not fixable.
The pwm artifacts are not fixable.
Last edited:
Hey, Mr. Professional person.
Can you calculate why Apple deliberately put 91.6 ms on the 16 inch? Is it not meant for 24fps? Is it meant for 10fps movies?
?????
Sorry, I just wanted to expose the ridiculous garbage you wrote previously in an undeniable fashion. I'm BEYOND curious what you will come up with. Can't wait to hear it.
BeSt ScReeN EveR
Last edited:
How about those who create any content (video, animation, etc) where the frame rate is higher than 24fps or just plain working in a 3D app? Professionals aren't just editing text.
He is a different kind of "professional". A special professional.
It's amusing how even that far-fetched science fiction he wrote about 24fps video being the reason for the slow 40ms response is inapplicable for the 16 inch (much more likely to be used by video professionals, by the way) as it is the slowest screen ever tested? I have never seen 90+ms response time before. It is a technological feat to achieve such slowness on such an expensive screen. Ridiculous, as any reasonable person would rightfully say. It's only these special types of professionals in the Apple forums that find ways to defend such atrocities. Hats off to them for being able to lie to themselves so deeply trying to justify the unjustifiable.At this point, it wouldn't even be the constant PWM at all brightness levels that causes the headaches, it would be the sluggish blurry mess instead. But of course the "i DoNt NoTicE iT" crowd is always here to support such technological failures.
Last edited:
I've just visited my local Apple Store. The smearing is easly noticeable if you look for it.
The interesting thing was, that 14" MBP screen performed much better.
As consequence I've cancelled my 2 weeks old maxed-out 16" order and changed it to 14"....
this is really crappy performance by Apple.
The interesting thing was, that 14" MBP screen performed much better.
As consequence I've cancelled my 2 weeks old maxed-out 16" order and changed it to 14"....
this is really crappy performance by Apple.
The 14 inch performs better because it is better in that regard:
I would definitely go for the 14 inch solely based on this. Curious if there would be differences with the M1 Max models considering what a HUGE difference the 14 and 16 inch have.
Of course, this is nowhere to be found in the tech specs. The generic user thinks the difference is in screen size. It is obviously not, the 16 inch is more than twice as slow when it comes to black to white and they are pretty close in gray to gray.
The worst part of this sad story is Apple fans defending these specs. It boggles the mind. The person who is purchasing this product desires to have less quality, I guess? They "don't notice this"?
You went to the store and it was immediately apparent to you. Because it is very easy to notice. It is very easy for me to notice the difference between 30ms and 1ms. God forbid it was 90ms.
I would definitely go for the 14 inch solely based on this. Curious if there would be differences with the M1 Max models considering what a HUGE difference the 14 and 16 inch have.
Of course, this is nowhere to be found in the tech specs. The generic user thinks the difference is in screen size. It is obviously not, the 16 inch is more than twice as slow when it comes to black to white and they are pretty close in gray to gray.
The worst part of this sad story is Apple fans defending these specs. It boggles the mind. The person who is purchasing this product desires to have less quality, I guess? They "don't notice this"?
You went to the store and it was immediately apparent to you. Because it is very easy to notice. It is very easy for me to notice the difference between 30ms and 1ms. God forbid it was 90ms.
Yeah, the 14" screen not only had much less smearing, but it also somehow felt more snappy/reactive. Maybe the input lag was lower also, or maybe it's the same thing - IDK, I spent just a few minutes, but the difference is big between these two.
I'm really shocked that Apple gave an "OK" to 90+ms reaction time.
I haven't seen a screen smearing this much in a loong time xD
I'm so sad that I need a new computer ASAP. Otherwise, I'd probably wait for the next gen.
They've really dropped the ball on this one.
I'm really shocked that Apple gave an "OK" to 90+ms reaction time.
I haven't seen a screen smearing this much in a loong time xD
I'm so sad that I need a new computer ASAP. Otherwise, I'd probably wait for the next gen.
They've really dropped the ball on this one.
This very informative,
BUT I hope you realize you’re read mistakenly (perhaps as it’s translated from german): it says (read carefully) that 100% of tested devices (every screen in the world?) response time surpass AVERAGE of all tested devices, which is 23.8 ms . And perhaps you didn’t notice that maximum measured response was 240 ms. Again, it’s impossible for 100% of devices to be faster. There’s even a 240ms. screen in the bunch!!
I can‘t credit opinions from clumsy readers.
We‘ve been for years enjoying our iPads and retina screens, and everybody was happy. I can’t find a better resolution and color gamut in a laptop screen. Would I like faster response? Sure. But I want 254ppi, wide color gamut, superb brightness and decent calibration by default. Find a portable screen like that and link to it, because it would be of interest for us users.
How wonderful this M1 SOC is, to have gained such a critic attention from Fortnite players!!!
Why are gamers so interested in macs, suddenly?
Me too. Which in this case is you. I have literally written none of what you claimed I have about the statistic. I only posted the screenshot of the averaging out.
I also really can't stand obnoxious people who make presumptions, for some reason thinking they know who they are talking to personally. Which again, would be you.