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.
The display on the new MBP is really incredible.
- Thread starter Pro Apple Silicon
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not everyone. Just one person who is completely annoyed that FreeSync is not as appreciates as he thinks it should be, and refuses to acknowledge that ProMotion is actually a meaningful change to the MacBook Pro.
Doesn’t sound amused most of the time
It’s just marketing, if people want to refer to it as ProMotion, who really gives a rats bahookey?Incidentally, this comment I do take umbrage with……
It's like those who claim that "High Res" audio is so much better, and yet >90% of people can't tell the difference in a blind test between 320 kbps mp3 and uncompressed audio.
But only because it’s a bit of a flawed argument, >90% !=100% therefore there’s a fairly significant amount of people out there who can tell the difference. How many millions, billions? Of people listen to music, even 5% of that is a heck of a lot of people.
The same logic would apply to people who perceive a difference in fluidity of their displays due to higher refresh rates. Or notice less tearing in a game because of the variable refresh rate. Just because some of us can’t, doesn’t mean everyone can’t. They were created for a good reason, and most companies call them different things for the sake of marketing and promotion….. pun intended
Given that until recently, OS X was only available at 60Hz, why are these forums not full of people bemoaning the terrible flickering? And if 120Hz is significantly better, would 240Hz be better still? what about 480Hz?
Do people really perceive a difference in fluidity of their displays given they already known that their new MBP is 120Hz? I would be very intererested in a blind test between 2 identical MBPS, one set at 60Hz, one at 120Hz. Then just carry out browsing, email, office work. Betcha most couldn't tell the difference.
Do people really perceive a difference in fluidity of their displays given they already known that their new MBP is 120Hz? I would be very intererested in a blind test between 2 identical MBPS, one set at 60Hz, one at 120Hz. Then just carry out browsing, email, office work. Betcha most couldn't tell the difference.
You've been able to run macOS at high refresh rates for many years.
The only thing Monterey added was adaptive sync.
So how did you survive with your terrible flickery "only 60Hz" desktop before Oct 2021?
Surely you would gone out and bought a readily-available 144Hz monitor already.
Because high refresh monitors all have fuzzy (aka matte) screens and generally have lower brightness and pixel density than Apple’s displays. It’s been impossible to find a display that’s good at everything until the new MBPs came out. Now we can have the best of all worlds instead of just some of them.
There difference between AMD FreeSync, AMD FreeSync Premium, and AMD FreeSync Premium Pro, G-Sync, G-Sync Ultimate and G-Sync Compatible, and ProMotion.
Sadly that is exactly what I had to do. Had it connected to an external monitor. How people said that screen in the 2019 "was the best ever" I can not understand. This slow response time on these screens is just wow. The 2021 I can actually use the internal screen without getting motion sickness. But still a bit blurry imo.
I'm looking for a 4K monitor. Please disclose the name and model number of your display.
It's the
It's the ASUS ROG Strix XG27UQ. Like all high-refresh rate 4K monitors, it's difficult to find right now.
It's the ASUS ROG Strix XG27UQ. Like all high-refresh rate 4K monitors, it's difficult to find right now.
Nice refresh rate, but 27" is way too large for 4K, so not an option for a Mac user. Not going to trade refresh rate for pixel density below Retina. Or at least, not that far below Retina.
Makes me wonder if there will be an updated XDR pro display and at a lower price. I still would like one. But not the original one. Obviously they can do better.
I received the 14". I am pleased with it. I bought it just for the display. Everything else is a bonus.
All preference my friend, and they are just tools. Get the tool that will allow you to do your work, but don't think better tools = better designer. Mistake I made going to school and learning the trade was obsessing over the tools. You can do UX design on a netbook if you really wanted to.
Go to the apple store, play around with them, and ask yourself: portability (14") or bigger canvas (16")?
That's your opinion, not an iron law for Mac users. I generally prefer using my high-refresh rate 4K monitor at 2560x1440 (scaled) resolution over my MBP at 1728x1117 (retina) resolution because it gives me nearly twice as much desktop space, even if the lines are less crisp.
It’s a nice display, but I have yet to see a 16“ without dead pixels. Five units through our company and the twinnings we bought personally. Each and every one of them has at least 2 dead subpixels. They are subtle, but if I know they exist, they annoy the **** out of me.
The biological limit of the human eye varies between 160-200 dpi at 2ft viewing distance for adults. Apple only went with 220dpi (Retina™) as it was double the density a normal monitor so they would avoid issues with fractional scaling.
I have a 185 dpi monitor and it is 100% indistinguishable from 220 dpi, so I imagine that 165 dpi would only be minimally different.