MBA vs MBP: screen res and retina display question

[1221320]

I hope this isn't a silly question, but the Apple tech specs pages are a little vague.

I currently have a 14" ThinkPad with a 4K display (3840 x 2160), 315 ppi. On Windows, I run this at 250% scaling.

The display on both the MBA and MBP is listed as being 13.3", 2560 x 1600 native res, 227 ppi, with scaling at 1680 x 1050, 1440 x 900, and 1024 x 640

Am I right in thinking that both displays are actually the same (apart from the extra nits on the MBP)? If I am used to my 4K laptop running at 250% scaling, that actually means screen real estate of 1536 x 864 - close enough to the 1440 x 900 middle res on the MBA/MBP.

It's been a long time since I used a retina MBP (my previous laptop), and I'm thinking of switching back to the MBA, and I'm trying to get my head around the screens. The 4K display on my ThinkPad is incredible, but I'm guessing the MBA/MBP screen is probably more or less on a par, although slightly less sharp due to the lower ppi?

 

[matram]

Your best option may be to take your Thinkpad to an Apple store and compare side by side.

 

[1221320]

Your best option may be to take your Thinkpad to an Apple store and compare side by side.

Good idea! Although who knows when that will be possible again, unfortunately!

 

[matram]

Your math checks out and I would consider Apple screens to be of good quality, but at the same time there are some people on this forum that are unhappy about color fidelity, brightness and temporal dithering. I would not agree, but it is always best to evaluate personally.

Here in Sweden we still have open stores, for better or worse.

 

[leman]

It's been a long time since I used a retina MBP (my previous laptop), and I'm thinking of switching back to the MBA, and I'm trying to get my head around the screens. The 4K display on my ThinkPad is incredible, but I'm guessing the MBA/MBP screen is probably more or less on a par, although slightly less sharp due to the lower ppi?

MBP probably has a slightly higher-quality panel with better color accuracy, higher brightness and it also features variable refresh rate, if I remember correctly. Both should be on par quality-wide with your Thinkpad, and Macs do have slightly wider color space (not that it matters). Resolution is kind of irrelevant here to be honest, Apple just uses a different target. Both are well above the capacity of human eye to discriminate individual pixels.

Good idea! Although who knows when that will be possible again, unfortunately!

Don't forget that Apple has a no-question-asked return policy. Especially in these times it's a great thing to take advantage of. So you an order and compare at home

 

[adrianlondon]

MBP can go slightly brighter than the MBA. As far as I can tell, there's no other screen difference.

Note that you're going from a 14" to a 13" so the slight drop in resolution shouldn't have much impact. I find the screen on my intel MBA very clear and easy to read at the 1680 resolution, although I do use reading glasses

I'd be happy to have some reserve for it to go brighter, but not enough to pay extra for the Pro.

 

[1221320]

Thanks for all the info. I do like the way macOS renders things, especially text, which looks a lot better than on Windows (although Windows scaling is actually very good now - my 4K laptop is certainly the best computer screen I've ever seen).

If Apple went bezel-less next year, I wonder if they could get a 14" display in the same form as the current MBA? I know a lot of Mac users are happy with the current case design, but having used Windows laptops with almost no bezels, edge-to-edge display, I think it does make a difference. My ThinkPad is actually smaller and lighter than the MBA, but with a larger screen.

 

[playtech1]

If you take a look at Notebookcheck's review of the MacBook Pro and Air it gives some pretty detailed information on the display characteristics. You don't mention exactly which Thinkpad you have, but you might also find it there too for comparison.

From a subjective view I find the MBP's display superior to my work-issued windows laptop (not 4K, but still reasonably high PPI), simply because Windows still doesn't scale everything as well as MacOS. The colours and response times are all pretty good too. The one thing Apple doesn't do yet is high and variable refresh rates. I would love to see a 144hz panel in a Mac, as it's one thing I do like about my personal windows laptop.

With the new MBA, on paper it looks like the lower brightness is the only difference with the MBP (both now have a P3 colour gamut, if that's important to you). I worried about that lower brightness of the MBA until I checked and saw that 400nits is the same brightness as pretty much all Macs up to 2015, which has been fine for me for many years.

 

[Serban55]

Thanks for all the info. I do like the way macOS renders things, especially text, which looks a lot better than on Windows (although Windows scaling is actually very good now - my 4K laptop is certainly the best computer screen I've ever seen).

If Apple went bezel-less next year, I wonder if they could get a 14" display in the same form as the current MBA? I know a lot of Mac users are happy with the current case design, but having used Windows laptops with almost no bezels, edge-to-edge display, I think it does make a difference. My ThinkPad is actually smaller and lighter than the MBA, but with a larger screen.

Yes, it is rumoured that next year the 13" mbp will take the route that the 15" mbp did(from 15.4" to 16"), and goes from 13" to 14" with slimmer bezels

 

[1221320]

If you take a look at Notebookcheck's review of the MacBook Pro and Air it gives some pretty detailed information on the display characteristics. You don't mention exactly which Thinkpad you have, but you might also find it there too for comparison.

From a subjective view I find the MBP's display superior to my work-issued windows laptop (not 4K, but still reasonably high PPI), simply because Windows still doesn't scale everything as well as MacOS. The colours and response times are all pretty good too. The one thing Apple doesn't do yet is high and variable refresh rates. I would love to see a 144hz panel in a Mac, as it's one thing I do like about my personal windows laptop.

With the new MBA, on paper it looks like the lower brightness is the only difference with the MBP (both now have a P3 colour gamut, if that's important to you). I worried about that lower brightness of the MBA until I checked and saw that 400nits is the same brightness as pretty much all Macs up to 2015, which has been fine for me for many years.

Interesting, thanks. My ThinkPad is the X1 Carbon, 7th gen, 1.6Ghz Coffee Lake i5 (2019). Nice machine, although I'd prefer a 16:10 display to this 16:9 one, and Windows can sometimes be a bit weird. It does have an industry-leading keyboard (again, in a chassis that is thinner and lighter than the MBA), but I've had to wrap it in a dbrand skin as the odd matte black finish basically looks like you've eaten your lunch off it after just a few days of regular use. For my next one, I want a metal-body computer - my old retired 2012 MBP basically looks brand new on the outside.

Also, the battery life on this thing is insanely bad - about 2 hours. I know the battery is tiny given how small and light this machine is, but my patience with it runs out quite often.

This 4k display is only 60Hz, and it doesn't bother me. My desktop computer is a Windows gaming rig with a 27" 2560 x 1440 165Hz panel, and it's as smooth as silk. I'm not looking to go back to Mac desktops anytime as I'm a gamer in my free time, but for laptops, which are basically work machines, the refresh rate isn't something I think of.