Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Successful Sorcerer

macrumors regular
Nov 23, 2019
178
143
That movie is just nonsense, not 120 fps and there are so many camera and codec variables in play. It doesn’t look anything at all like that. In all cases I used it it looks great, that doesn’t mean there can’t be any issues with it, just I didn’t experience any. Best would be if you can take a look in real life somewhere like an Apple store.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3Rock

Love-hate 🍏 relationship

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 19, 2021
3,057
3,235
That movie is just nonsense, not 120 fps and there are so many camera and codec variables in play. It doesn’t look anything at all like that. In all cases I used it it looks great, that doesn’t mean there can’t be any issues with it, just I didn’t experience any. Best would be if you can take a look in real life somewhere like an Apple store.
You should have a look at the video linked ,not just the short 20s video thing

In apple store it didn't look so bad tbf,but I didn't try it for days hence why I'm asking
 

nudoru

macrumors 6502
Feb 27, 2012
294
76
Near Charlotte NC
From what I've heard, apps have to support 120hz refresh rates. Currently, Safari doesn't. In my usage, I don't notice this at all - at worse it's the same as my last laptop, at best it's nice and buttery. I use the terminal at lot, and I've never seen it do this.
 

Jetcat3

macrumors 6502a
May 3, 2015
757
528
The response times are horrendous, no other way to put it.
 

Attachments

  • 1E624313-B030-44CD-8D7C-24413DDCD581.png
    1E624313-B030-44CD-8D7C-24413DDCD581.png
    785.7 KB · Views: 434

synergize

macrumors 6502
Jul 12, 2010
383
687
No problem with mine either. I don't have the charging buzz or feel it when the MBook is connected to power, from another thread today!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diesel79

Sanpete

macrumors 68040
Nov 17, 2016
3,695
1,665
Utah
If you've ever had an Apple laptop, it's like that. Hasn't changed in that way. Doesn't bother me, but it does others. Only you would know if it bothers you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpotOnT

Love-hate 🍏 relationship

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 19, 2021
3,057
3,235
Apparently the 16” is slower than the 14”, according to notebookCheck. White-to-Black response time.

I have no issue with how the 14”looks, faster would be nice but it’s not that bad.
Within a margin of error or like really slower ?

Did notebook check publish their 16" review ?could I have a link ?
 

Love-hate 🍏 relationship

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 19, 2021
3,057
3,235
I know it is , but usually when increasing the refresh rate ,you should decrease the réponse times accordingly.what surprises me is that not only didn't apple Lower then because of double the frames,but they actually INCREASED the response times by rather big amount (for ascending number ) ,which is purely ridiculous.
If you've ever had an Apple laptop, it's like that. Hasn't changed in that way. Doesn't bother me, but it does others. Only you would know if it bothers y
 

fa8362

macrumors 68000
Jul 7, 2008
1,571
498
This isn't a problem that a few have,everyone has it

It's just whether it bothers u or not
Show quoted text
It obviously doesn't bother those who don't perceive it...and it has nothing to do with knowledge.
 

Sanpete

macrumors 68040
Nov 17, 2016
3,695
1,665
Utah
I know it is , but usually when increasing the refresh rate ,you should decrease the réponse times accordingly.what surprises me is that not only didn't apple Lower then because of double the frames,but they actually INCREASED the response times by rather big amount (for ascending number ) ,which is purely ridiculous.
They didn't increase it, it's about the same. It's always been higher than the time between frames, at least since the MBPs have been at 60Hz.

NotebookCheck seems uncertain of their measurements and had put question marks by them, but here are the links.

 

Love-hate 🍏 relationship

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 19, 2021
3,057
3,235
They didn't increase it, it's about the same. It's always been higher than the time between frames, at least since the MBPs have been at 60Hz.

NotebookCheck seems uncertain of their measurements and had put question marks by them, but here are the links.

Afaik there had never been 90-100ms réponse times.worse there has been was 55-60 lol
Thanks for the links man
 

Love-hate 🍏 relationship

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Sep 19, 2021
3,057
3,235
Is this going to be one of those things that nobody notices and then they read an article or watch a video and all of a sudden start suffering?
I wasn't sure but it seems so.as for many things,you don't really notice them before you're being told about .or you do notice but it doesn't bother you because you think that's how it is,should be,always have been,whateverr
 

figbash

macrumors newbie
Nov 10, 2021
11
5
It's a little noticeable but it isn't even remotely as bad as my 2019 16", so if you're ok with that screen you'll love this one. I can honestly barely stand to use my 2019 anymore, and it always bothered me, this is a huge improvement at least. My 2014 15" is noticeably better than both of them response wise though (but certainly not image quality wise!)

I played a few hours of Metro Exodus, Dusk, Inside, and Cuphead and I would say while it's not gaming monitor levels of response time it's fine for games, it's similar to my 4K Dell IPS non-gaming monitor. There is certainly room for improvement in future models though.

I have attached a video of my own terminal recorded using an iPhone 13 pro at at 240FPS slow mo, this is from a 16" M1 Pro with ProMotion active.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Homy
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.