Top
Best
New

Posted by victorbjorklund 8 hours ago

Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR(www.apple.com)
199 points | 219 comments
densh 8 hours ago|
I might be the only one, but it's still to this date (and dating all the way back to 2014 with the first iMac 5k display) Apple is the only company that truly gets HIDPI desktop displays with high quality gloss and 200+ ppi at screen this large. In the meantime popular and widely sold gaming screens with matte blur filters and mediocre ppi give me headache and eye fatigue after a few hours of use. Prior generation Studio Display is the only external display that truly worked for text heavy work with my eyes (including software engineering), and I'm sure the latest generation is fantastic as well.
praseodym 6 hours ago||
The hardware is great, but the software is lacking. macOS only supports resolution-based scaling which makes anything but the default 200% pixel scaling mode look bad. For example, with a 27" 4K display many users will want to use 150% or 175% scaling to get enough real estate, but the image will look blurry because macOS renders at a higher resolution and then downscales to the 4K resolution of the screen.

Both Windows and Linux (Wayland) support scaling the UI itself, and with their support for sub-pixel anti-aliasing (that macOS also lacks) this makes text look a lot more crisp.

badc0ffee 1 hour ago|||
I would love to see examples of this. I have a MBP and a 24" 4K Dell monitor connected via HDMI. I use all kinds of scaled resolutions and I've never noticed anything being jagged or blurry.

Meanwhile in Linux the scaling is generally good, but occasionally I'll run into some UI element that doesn't scale properly, or some application that has a tiny mouse cursor.

And then Windows has serious problems with old apps - blurry as hell with a high DPI display.

Subpixel antialiasing isn't something I miss on macOS because it seems pointless at these resolutions [0]. And I don't think it would work with OLED anyway because the subpixels are arranged differently than a typical conventional LCD.

[0] I remember being excited by ClearType on Windows back in the day, and I did notice a difference. But there's no way I'd be able to discern it on a high DPI display; the conventional antialiasing macOS does is enough.

jonpurdy 4 hours ago||||
This is correct and also increasingly affecting me as my eyes age. I had to give my Studio Display to my wife because my eyes can't focus at a reasonable distance anymore, and if I moved back further the text was too small to read. I ran the 5K Studio Display at 4K scaled for a bit but it was noticeably blurry.

This would've been easily solved with non-integer scaling, if Apple had implemented that.

(I now use a combo of 4K TV 48" from ~1.5-2 metres back as well as a 4K 27" screen from 1 m away, depending on which room I want to work in. Angular resolution works out similarly (115 pixels per degree).)

giobox 3 hours ago|||
All through the 2000s Apple developed non-integer scaling support in various versions of MacOS X under the banner of “resolution independence” - the idea was to use vectors where possible rather than bitmaps so OS UI would look good at any resolution, including non-integer scaling factors.

Some indie Mac developers even started implementing support for it in anticipation of it being officially enabled. The code was present in 10.4 through 10.6 and possibly later, although not enabled by default. Apple gave up on the idea sadly and integer scaling is where we are.

Here’s a developer blog from 2006 playing with it:

> https://redsweater.com/blog/223/resolution-independent-fever

There was even documentation for getting ready to support resolution independence on Apple’s developer portal at one stage, but I sadly can’t find it today.

Here’s a news post from all the way back in 2004 discussing the in development feature in Mac OS tiger:

> https://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/45544/mac-os-x-ti...

Lots of of folks (myself included!) in the Mac software world were really excited for it back then. It would have permitted you to scale the UI to totally arbitrary sizes while maintaining sharpness etc.

jonpurdy 2 hours ago||
Yep, I played with User Interface Resolution app myself back then in uni. The impact of Apple's choice to skip non-integer scaling didn't hit me until a few years ago when my eyes started to fail...
JonathanFly 1 hour ago||||
> This is correct and also increasingly affecting me as my eyes age. I had to give my Studio Display to my wife because my eyes can't focus at a reasonable distance anymore, and if I moved back further the text was too small to read.

> (I now use a combo of 4K TV 48" from ~1.5-2 metres back as well as a 4K 27" screen from 1 m away, depending on which room I want to work in. Angular resolution works out similarly (115 pixels per degree).)

The TV is likely a healthier distance to keep your eyes focused on all day regardless, but were glasses not an option?

Fr0styMatt88 2 hours ago||||
If you can get used to using it (which really just requires some practice), the screen magnifier on Mac is fantastic and most importantly it’s extremely low latency (by this I mean, it reacts pretty much instantly when you want to zoom in or out).

Once you get used to flicking in and out of zoom instead of leaning into the monitor it’s great.

As an aside, Windows and Linux share this property too nowadays. Using the screen magnifiers is equally pleasant on any of these OSes. I game on Linux these days and the magnifier there even works within games.

LatencyKills 3 hours ago|||
Oh man... I'm in the same situation wrt eyesight. Are you coding on the 4K tv? I have enough space to make that configuration work. TIA
jonpurdy 2 hours ago||
Yep, 4K is plenty of resolution for me running Sequoia. But running at simulated 1920x1080@2x, as at native 4K text would be way too small.
Aurornis 2 hours ago||||
> For example, with a 27" 4K display

4K pixels is not enough at 27" for Retina scaling.

Apple uses 5K panels in their 27" displays for this reason.

There are several very good 27" 5K monitors on the market now around $700 to $800. Not as cheap as the 4K monitors but you have to pay for the pixel density.

There are also driver boards that let you convert 27" 5K iMacs into external monitors. I don't recommend this lightly because it's not an easy mod but it's within reason for the motivated Hacker News audience.

presbyterian 6 hours ago||||
> For example, with a 27" 4K display many users will want to use 150% or 175% scaling to get enough real estate, but the image will look blurry

I use a Mac with a monitor with these specs (a Dell of some kind, I don't know the model number off the top of my head), at 150% scaling, and it's not blurry at all.

arndt 3 hours ago||
I also feel it's just fine. Not as amazing as the Apple displays, but I'll have to sit really close to make out the difference for text.
jsheard 5 hours ago|||
Yeah this is correct, I don't know why you're being downvoted. The decisions Apple made when pivoting their software stack to high-DPI resulted in Macs requiring ultra-dense displays for optimal results - that's a limitation of macOS, not an indictment of less dense displays, which Windows and Linux accommodate much better.
tshaddox 7 hours ago|||
I bought that original 5k iMac on release day in 2014. I was thrilled with that display, and stoked to see the entire display industry go the route of true quadruple-resolution just like smartphone displays did.

Sadly, it basically never happened. There was the LG display that came out a couple of years later. It didn't have great reviews, and it was like two thirds the cost of an entire 5k iMac.

It took Apple over 7 years to release their standalone 5k display, and there are a few other true 5k displays (1440p screen real estate with quadruple-resolution, not the ultrawide 2160p displays branded as "5k") on the market now with prices just starting to drop below 1,000 USD.

Unfortunately in that time I've gotten used to the screen real estate of the ultrawide 1440p monitors (which are now ubiquitous, and hitting ridiculous sub-$300 prices). As of now, my perfect display for office work (gaming, video/photo work, or heavy media playback are different topics) would be 21:9 with 1440p screen real estate with quadruple-resolution—essentially just a wider version of that original 5k iMac display.

cloverich 2 hours ago|||
I bought an LG Ultrafine 5k at the time and felt kind of stupid for being spending on it. But nearly 10 years later... its still my daily driver. Best ROI of any tech equipment I've bought. It changed my mind about how to think about it, not just the monitor, but having speaker / camera / mac built in, and all over one cable, its been such a joy when I bounce around the house to be able to plugin / unplug so easily; or when I swap from work to personal laptop. Its such a simple setup. Im definitely considering the Apple one, basically regardless of what it costs, once its time. Its simply been too convenient to have a one-plug solution for the laptop that has everything I need, never breaks (my LG may be exception here lol), and that has somehow taken forever to be super ceded by something better.

Only thing that holds back that thought lately is, I'm suddenly spending more and more time in multi-pane terminals, and my screen real estate needs have dropped. The only two things I greatly miss now on my laptop is keyboard quality and general comfort (monitor height, etc).

bsimpson 3 hours ago||||
The iMac Pro is nearly 9 years old at this point. At the time, there was no other option for a retina-quality 27" display, but you could get a 4k 27" for $400.

A decade later, it boggles my mind that it's so hard to find a retina-class desktop monitor. The successor to the Cinema Display is basically an iMac, and priced like it. There have very recently been releases from ASUS and BenQ, but it still feels like an underserved niche, rather than standard expectation.

All that is to say: hard cosign.

seanmcdirmid 7 hours ago||||
You can get a 27 inch 5k from Asus for $750. A 31.5 inch 6K goes for around $1200. A 28 inch 4K is around $350-$400.
wtallis 6 hours ago||||
It was also really disappointing to see 24" 4k displays disappear from the market instead of becoming the new standard resolution for that size. A few years ago, there were several options including a cheap LG that was usually around $300 or less. Those all seem to be gone, likely for good, even though there are still plenty of 24" displays with 1080p and even a fair number with 1440p.
SupremumLimit 2 hours ago|||
Indeed. I’m holding on to my 24” Dell P2415Q that I got like 10 years ago because it’s the perfect size for my desk and there just isn’t anything in that size to replace it with.
aobdev 5 hours ago|||
I've been very pleased with my ViewSonic VP2488-4K. A little steep for $550, but if you spend any significant time in front of the screen I think it's very much worth it. I'm planning to buy a second one.
jen20 4 hours ago|||
The LG UltraFine's were garbage, but got better over time as either the firmware improved or macOS added drivers that worked around the nonsense. For a while I ran with two of them on an iMac Pro with a 5K itself, but switched to a single Pro Display XDR with a laptop eventually. I'm very sad to see the 6K/32" form disappear, it's by far the best screen I've ever used.
Fr0styMatt88 3 hours ago|||
There’s a solid use case for matte screens. I use an 800R curved monitor and there’s absolutely no way that would work for me if it wasn’t matte. I know this because when I glance over at my coworker’s 1200R glossy screen it’s like looking in a funhouse mirror.

Edge use case I know.

roboror 7 hours ago|||
The Studio Display shares a panel with the MSI MPG 271KRAW16
jdgoesmarching 5 hours ago|||
Worth noting that these (and the LG with the same panel) aren’t shipping yet.
behnamoh 7 hours ago||||
Even the new one in this post?
delta_p_delta_x 6 hours ago||
Yes. That MSI monitor was unveiled at CES 2026, alongside several other monitors that use the same panel, such as the LG 27GM950-B.
nntwozz 5 hours ago||
I just want to know who's naming these things, it's been like this forever.

Why can't it be something simple?

MagicMoonlight 33 minutes ago||
I feel like they do it deliberately, so that you can’t easily research their products and find if they are out of date. They can sell you a monitor from 2012 as if it’s brand new, because you have no idea what it is.
MagicMoonlight 31 minutes ago|||
So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop as a $5000 premium display?
recursive 3 hours ago|||
Does gloss mean reflective? Like where I can see the room lights reflecting off my screen. I never considered the possibility that someone might consider that a good thing.
whalesalad 3 hours ago||
In an environment with little to no reflections, gloss looks so much better. It becomes truly transparent with no distraction. Matte displays always have a little frost to them.
recursive 3 hours ago|||
If you do most of your computing in a prepared or controlled room, I can see the logic in that, although I think I'm not personally nearly sensitive enough to care.

For me though, I am frequently working in different rooms with arbitrary lighting situations. Net effect of the gloss is negative for me unquestionably.

scosman 1 hour ago||
This is a monitor, not a laptop. I pretty much set it down and never moved it again. In my case, a glossy glass screen is ideal.
vladvasiliu 3 hours ago|||
What kind of environment is that? Maybe if you're a black person wearing black clothes, no glasses (maybe contacts are ok?) in a room with closed curtains, no lights and nothing reflective, sure.

I used to daily drive an apple thunderbolt display (the last non-retina one, 2560x1440). That thing was atrocious. I could often see the reflections of my glasses, or a white glare if I was wearing a white shirt. At nigh, in a dark office (lights off, just whatever came in from the street).

I'm typing this on a matte "ips black" dell ultrasharp something-or-other at 10% brightness, wearing glasses, a white t-shirt, with an overhead light, and see no reflection or glare on my screen. There's no way in hell I'd go back to a shiny screen.

I understand "anti-glare" technology has improved. The most recent apple screen I've tested is an m1 mbp. It seems somewhat better than my 2013 mbp, but still a worse experience than my 2015 (or thereabouts) 24"@4k dell, which is pretty old technology. My 2025 lenovo has a screen that's much more confortable to use inside.

Paradoxically, I'd say the one environment where I prefer my macs to my matte screens is in bright sunlight. Sure, there are more reflections than you can shake a stick at, but there's always an angle where you can see the part of the screen you want. You have to move around, which is obviously annoying, but you can see. The matte screens just turn to mush. Luckily for me, I hate being out in the sun, so I never encounter this situation in practice.

I think the "frost" you're talking about depends a lot on the screen implementation. I tested once an HP model, 27"@4k, and it did have such an effect. Anecdotally, it didn't handle reflections all that well, either. So maybe it's just a question of lower quality product?

hatsix 4 hours ago|||
Personally, I can't handle glossy displays, trying to read with reflections gives me a headache. Most other manufacturers offer both glossy and matte, except for Apple, because they know better.
ItsHarper 3 hours ago||
The nano-texture matte finish is available as an option
isqueiros 8 hours ago|||
You should try some of the newer OLED panels. They're all glossy and look really good.
whatever1 7 hours ago||
Text sucks in oled displays. 200 ppi is not enough to make it look decent.

OLED smartphones have much higher ppi to deal with this.

jsheard 6 hours ago|||
Upcoming OLED panels are switching to vertical RGB stripe, similar to LCDs, which should fix the remaining text issues.

https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/lg-display-reveals-wor...

JoshTriplett 3 hours ago||||
> Text sucks in oled displays.

Not anymore, as long as you make sure that any RGB antialiasing is turned off. Linux defaluts to disabling this and doing only grayscale antialiasing, so it looks great on an OLED out of the box. Windows can be configured to do this.

Eric_WVGG 3 hours ago||
Low-res is low-res. Curves on SVGs and vector graphics look terrible.
roboror 5 hours ago||||
WOLED handles text much better than QDOLED, I don't think anyone would say the 27" 4k versions "suck"
aethrum 6 hours ago|||
4k OLED text is great.
derefr 3 hours ago|||
> In the meantime popular and widely sold gaming screens with matte blur filters and mediocre ppi give me headache and eye fatigue after a few hours of use.

I presume you also mean "when used for text heavy work" here, yes? Or do you mean that these displays tire out your eyes even when used "for what they're for", i.e. gaming? (Because that's a very interesting assertion if so, and I'd like to go into depth about it.)

perardi 4 hours ago|||
You are not the only one.

I have an ASUS ProArt Display 27” 5K. And I somewhat regret it.

I love the pixel density. But I don’t love the matte finish. Which is apparently a controversial take. But I really don’t. I like the crisp pop of typography you get with a glossy display. And, for UI design, the matte finish just doesn’t “feel” like the average end-user experience. I am constantly pushing Figma between my laptop display and my monitor to better simulate what a design will look like on an average glossy LCD or OLED display.

paozac 3 hours ago||
I've got that display, too, and quite like it. Matte finish is essential (IMO) if you're annoyed by reflections.
hbn 6 hours ago|||
LG used to with the Ultrafine 5k (I believe it's discontinued now?)

I got a deal on a used one last year and I love it. It's the only monitor I've used plugged into a MacBook that didn't look notably off (worse) compared to the MacBook's display sitting next to it. Only thing a bit jarring is it's 60Hz but I can live with it.

kllrnohj 5 hours ago|||
The $1600 Studio Display is also 60hz, including this "brand new" one (which appears to be the exact same, just with a new web cam?)

Asus has picked up the 5k 27" monitor from LG, it's the $730 PA27JCV

fl0ki 5 hours ago|||
I've been using a work-issued one since 2018, and my only complaint in 2026 is that some of its rear USB ports are failing.
sdn90 5 hours ago|||
Agreed.

I constantly see people saying Apple displays are a terrible value. Last Apple display I had was the Thunderbolt 27 but from now on I'm sticking with Apple.

I've had nothing but issues with non-Apple monitors as well. Customer service ime is non-existent if you need a repair. For something I rely on to get work done, I'm starting to think the premium is worth it.

troupo 8 hours ago||
> Apple is the only company that truly gets HIDPI desktop displays with high quality gloss and 200+ ppi at screen this large.

And somehow they completely forgot how to seamlessly work with displays in general. Connect multiple displays via Thunderbolt? Nope. Keep layouts when switching displays? No. Running any display at more than 60Hz? No. Remember monitor positions? No.

pwthornton 7 hours ago|||
Great news. Apple announced a 120hz display today.
troupo 7 hours ago||
There are other 120Hz displays than Apple's.

There are even 240Hz displays.

IIRC Apple couldn't get above 60Hz even on third-party displays they explicitly advertised.

cosmic_cheese 7 hours ago|||
I have an Alienware AW2721D and my M series Macs have no problem driving it at 240hz. macOS picks up that it’s a GSync display and supports VRR on it too.
troupo 7 hours ago||
I could never get my two ASUS displays work at anything but 60Hz
cosmic_cheese 7 hours ago||
My other setup has an ASUS PA278CGV as a secondary monitor and the MBP hooked up to it drives it at 144hz no problem.

Make sure your dock, dongle, and/or cables aren’t bottlenecks.

troupo 6 hours ago||
> Make sure your dock, dongle, and/or cables aren’t bottlenecks.

I've switched docks, dongles, cables, to no avail.

Support also varies a lot between M chips, and Thunderbolt often doesn't support high refresh rates https://support.apple.com/en-us/101571

I can't remember now the actual setup I had, sadly

jdgoesmarching 5 hours ago||||
How many 27” 5k 120hz+ high PPI are shipping right now? Reddit is particularly clowning on this for the refresh rate and completely ignoring the resolution.
pwthornton 24 minutes ago||
This is a workstation-class monitor for people using these machines to make money. It's not a gamer toy monitor. People on Reddit don't get this. Apple's monitors are fantastic for those of us who use our computers to make money and need high quality. I am not playing video games on the same machine I use to make money.
pwthornton 7 hours ago||||
There are 5k displays at 240hz?
post_break 7 hours ago||||
Driving my LG oled at 120hz over HDMI. What?
izacus 6 hours ago||||
?

Both of my LG ultrawides work at 144Hz?

FireBeyond 1 hour ago|||
(I think) what you are thinking of was something introduced around the Catalina>Big Sur transition, when the Pro Display XDR was introduced.

At the time, people were "marveling" at the magic of Apple, and wondering how they did the math to make that display work within bandwidth constraints.

The simple answer was "by completely fucking with DP 1.4 DSC".

I had at the time a 2019 (cheesegrater) Mac Pro. I had two Asus 27" 4K HDR 144Hz monitors, that the Mac had no problems driving under Catalina.

Install Big Sur. Nope. With the monitors advertising DP 1.4, my options were SDR@95Hz, HDR@60Hz. I wasn't the only one, hundreds of people complaining, different monitors, cards, cables.

I could downgrade to Catalina: HDR@144Hz sprung back to life.

Hell, I could on the monitors tell them to advertise DP 1.2 support, which actually improved performance, and I think I got SDR@120Hz, HDR@95Hz (IIRC).

So you don't deserve downvotes on this. Apple absolutely ignored standards and broke functionality for third party screens just to get the Pro Display XDR (which, ironically, I own, although now it's being driven by an M2 Studio, versus the space heater that was the Xeon cheesegrater).

eklavya 7 hours ago|||
I was using a dell S3225QC with 120 hz and even variable rate with macbook m1 pro. No hdr with 120 or variable rate though, only at 60.
anon7000 5 hours ago||
So the $1600 Studio Display does not have 120hz.

Here’s some monitors you can buy at that price point:

- 6k 32” monitor (similar PPI) (Acer PE320QX)

- most high-end 4k displays (even OLEDs) with 144hz+ refresh rate

32” 4k isn’t great PPI, but it’s still fine PPI, at a reasonable distance. Double the refresh rate is a much more noticeable improvement to me than 40% better pixel density, at a distance where retina matters a bit less than laptops & handhelds. And you can get that for less than half the cost

Plus, you can get it with multiple outputs & KVM to switch between MacBook & PC. And still run it off a single USB C cable.

nicce 22 minutes ago||
> So the $1600 Studio Display does not have 120hz.

Usually these exists only to bump the price of the pro model.

tmp10423288442 5 hours ago||
Do you notice 120Hz and above when doing office tasks? I'd much rather have improved resolution and PPI rather than 120Hz for that use case.
jasomill 3 hours ago|||
120 Hz vs 60 Hz? Night and day. Immediately noticeable just by moving the mouse pointer. Would expect improvements in scrolling to be apparent to even the most casual passers-by.

120 Hz can also noticeably improve frame pacing for 24p video*.

120 Hz vs 144 Hz? Barely noticeable when flipping between the two. Not sure if I'd pass an ABX test with 100% accuracy.

Can't speak for 240 Hz or higher, as I haven't used them.

* Though 119.88 Hz is probably a better default for this since most non-DCI "24p" video is still 23.976 FPS; this is changing, but until browsers and streaming apps support VRR for video, I'm not convinced this is a good thing due to the mountain of legacy 23.976 FPS content.

hbn 2 hours ago||
> 120 Hz vs 60 Hz? Night and day.

It's night and day when you're going back and forth between looking at them and wiggle your mouse around in circle. But after a few seconds of being focused on your work, you're not thinking about it anymore.

Being able to watch 24fps video without non-integer frame weirdness is the only real advantage outside of twitch-reaction gaming.

amarshall 3 hours ago||||
Yes. Even 90 Hz is a noticeable improvement over 60 Hz. I wouldn’t pick it over high-DPI, though.
kristoff_it 3 hours ago||||
100% yes
throawayonthe 4 hours ago||||
Yes, absolutely
archagon 4 hours ago||||
Very obvious when scrolling text and moving windows around, for example.
nstfn 4 hours ago|||
any animation work
data-ottawa 3 hours ago||
I was hoping for OLED or dual-OLED based monitors, especially for this price point but I’d want this slightly lower than the XDR price. Sequoia+Tahoe seems like they’ve been laying the groundwork for OLED macs — removing the menu bar background and making text dynamically change colour, moving/cycling backgrounds, liquid glass reducing the effect of static UI elements, etc.

I personally wouldn’t buy a new LCD based display anymore at this price. There are flaws inherent to the technology that affect all of my recent Apple displays (Studio Display, M1 Pro iPad, M1 Pro MPB, M4 Pro MPB). After using OLED TVs and OLED iPhones for years, it’s very difficult to look past LCD’s issues (edge yellowing+dimming specifically affects all my Apple screens more than I am happy with).

There are no reviews/studies on long-term aging of Apple’s LCD displays, so all of this should be taken with a grain of salt, maybe my devices are just unlucky.

I don’t know if the Pro XDR line is better or how that would carry over to the Studio XDR. I haven’t seen many complains about the Pro XDR, but the Studio Display form factor has a different cooling design which would affect longevity.

I will say I can never go back from retina resolution text, and that alone has made the experience of Studio Display good. If we could get OLED it would be perfection. I think I would have to see the XDR in practice to be convinced, but 120hz requiring a whole new computer does make it a non-starter for me.

craftkiller 3 hours ago|
Along similar lines, there's no way I would buy an OLED at this price point. If I'm dropping $3k on a monitor, it needs to be a technology that lasts, not a technology that wears out over time.
szmarczak 29 minutes ago|||
Current gen OLEDs almost don't wear out (saying this as an OLED owner). To see the wear you need to have a completely black room and the wear is unnoticeable unless you're specifically looking for it. You don't need to spend 3k, 1k is enough.
craftkiller 17 minutes ago||
Ah, you should update wikipedia then: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED#Lifespan
nicce 20 minutes ago||||
> If I'm dropping $3k on a monitor, it needs to be a technology that lasts, not a technology that wears out over time.

I bought my OLED TV when fearmongering was the highest, and it still works perfectly with zero burn-ins. So it is definitely possible. I bought the tv 8 years ago.

film42 3 hours ago|||
I bought an LG 32" 4k OLED for $999 and it's hands down the best display I've ever used. No burn in even with lots of static browser/terminal windows for days and days. The fact that it's $3k and _not_ OLED is insulting.
craftkiller 44 minutes ago||
I believe these monitors are meant for professionals, which means it is going to be used in bright office buildings. That means running the display at high brightness which is the worst case for OLED since they degrade faster at higher brightness. Quoting wikipedia:

> A US Department of Energy paper shows that the expected lifespans of OLED lighting products goes down with increasing brightness, with an expected lifespan of 40,000 hours at 25% brightness, or 10,000 hours at 100% brightness

desideratum 8 hours ago||
It's mind-boggling that Apple is considering the base 27 inch Studio Display with the same 4 year old panel, but with some new accessories slapped on an "upgrade".
kllrnohj 5 hours ago||
The base 27" wasn't even a new display 4 years ago, it's the same thing they were shipping in iMacs before that. It dates back to like 2017?
desideratum 7 hours ago||
Oh, and if you want to utilize 120Hz on the XDR display, you're going to have to replace your perfectly functioning Mac.

> Mac models with M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max, M1 Ultra, M2, and M3 support Studio Display XDR at up to 60Hz. All other Studio Display XDR features are supported.

cosmic_cheese 7 hours ago|||
Almost certainly due to bandwidth limitations on older versions of Thunderbolt. Full bit depth HDR 5k @ 120hz requires some absurd data thoughput.
realityking 6 hours ago||
I don’t think so. My M3 Pro is on the list as supporting 120 hz but it only has Thunderbolt 4.

Also the base M4 doesn’t habe Thunderbolt 5 and it support 120 hz.

strongpigeon 5 hours ago|||
> My M3 Pro is on the list as supporting 120 hz

Can you point me to said list? All I could find was:

> Mac models with M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max, M1 Ultra, M2, and M3 support Studio Display XDR at up to 60Hz. All other Studio Display XDR features are supported.

And The Verge reports:

> There’s also support for adaptive sync that can adjust between 47Hz and 120Hz (if it’s connected to an M4 Mac or later, or the M5 iPad Pro)

I got an M3 Max and was strongly considering upgrading my old monitor, but if I can't do 120hz, I'll just wait until I upgrade my laptop as well.

realityking 21 minutes ago|||
> Can you point me to said list?

There’s no list per-se. The MacBook Pro (2021 and later) is listed as supported. The M3 Pro and M3 Max are not listed as only supporting 60Hz while the M3 and M1 Pro are.

klardotsh 5 hours ago|||
I’ll give you an anecdote: my work laptop is an M3 Pro MBP, and my Dell U4025QW works just fine with it over Thunderbolt at 120Hz VRR
FinnKuhn 3 hours ago|||
That monitor has a noticeable lower pixel count.

Dell U4025QW: 5120 x 2160 = 11,059,200 vs Apple Studio Display XDR: 5120 x 2880 = 14,745,600

So your display has 25% less pixels.

archagon 4 hours ago|||
It’s quite possible this is running with a reduced color space (chroma subsampling). Degradation happens automatically based on available throughput and most people don’t notice.
jasomill 3 hours ago||
For desktop use? Chroma subsampling is obvious. DSC compression, on the other hand, is not. DisplayPort and HDMI support both.
archagon 3 hours ago||
It’s obvious if you use a test pattern and/or know what to look for: https://testufo.com/chroma

I had no idea what it was for the longest time. As it turns out, macOS frequently enables it even when it’s unnecessary, and without any way to override.

radley 5 hours ago|||
They did say M3, not M3 Pro. You're probably okay.

(Notice how they listed the M1 chips individually.)

kubik369 7 hours ago|||
I don't really see your point. The chips mentioned do not have enough bandwidth on display outputs to support the monitor at 6K@120Hz. If anything, I find it surprising that Apple supports running the display in 60Hz mode instead of telling people to go pound sand and buy new Macs.
thiagoperes 8 hours ago||
I got the Kuycon G32P and it’s an incredible alternative. 32in + 6K for less than 2k$

Also works great with other sources like an Xbox

I used a Pro Display XDR as my daily driver at work and the difference is minimal

askonomm 8 hours ago||
I'm really after higher refresh rate than 60, but it seems it would cost me an arm, leg, both kidneys and my newborns to get it at 5k or more resolution.
jryio 3 hours ago|||
I own this as well and while I appreciably the levelized cost, there is simply zero comparison to my gen 1 Studio Display. The gloss and shin on the Kuycon means it only works in dimmly lit rooms.

Nano texture in mixed lighting scenarios is worth every penny even on a lower resolution and lower refresh rate panel.

FinnKuhn 3 hours ago|||
Do you own the matte display version or the default one?
jryio 3 hours ago||
The matte. It's offensive.
atombender 3 hours ago|||
They sell a matte version, the G32X.
zamadatix 7 hours ago|||
That's a hefty premium to pay to not also have high refresh or high nits but the higher density options are so thin there's not really much else to go for if getting the resolution density is the goal.
boxed 8 hours ago||
Hah, the absolute shamelessness of that design and the site is crazy!
microtonal 8 hours ago||
Pretty lame that the Studio Display with a height-adjustable stand is still 400 Euro more. My biggest regret is getting my Gen 1 Studio Display without.

Also the non-XDR is only a small upgrade otherwise, no 120Hz, no HDR, only Thunderbolt 5 and a new camera. Finally a downstream Thunderbolt port though.

This is all after 4 years?

conesus 7 hours ago||
VESA mounts are only a few bucks and give you even better height and tilt adjustment. You also get desk space back. I have a shorter desk (24" vs typical 30" depth) and I have two monitors and a laptop mounted on 3 VESAs and I can extend them so that the monitor edge is inline with the desk edge, giving me the same 24" that a 30" desk would have with a monitor stand.
bibstha 6 hours ago||
Which mount do you have? I've got a 24" as well and I've never imagined I'd fit 2 monitors.
JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago||
Herman Miller's Jarvis [1]. I'm probably paying up for the brand, but I got it installed a few years ago (with the nano-textured Studio display), and it works beautifully.

[1] https://store.hermanmiller.com/home-desk-accessories/jarvis-...

thought_alarm 6 hours ago|||
I just use some old textbooks to raise the height of the display:

- Design Patterns by the Gang of Four

- Modern C++ Design by Andrei Alexandrescu

- Code Complete from the Microsoft Press

That's enough old paper to raise the display height to a comfortable level.

microtonal 2 hours ago||
I do the same, though ideally the height is different between putting my desk in sitting/standing height.
mistersquid 8 hours ago|||
> Also the non-XDR is only a small upgrade otherwise, no 120Hz, no HDR, only Thunderbolt 5 and a new camera. Finally a downstream Thunderbolt port though.

The camera is still 12MP but offers Desk View. Maybe this is a feature unlocked by the improved onboard A-series chip (A19?).

I wouldn't sniff too hard about Thunderbolt 5. Thunderbolt 5 doubles throughput to 80 Gbps from 40.

Would have loved refresh above 60Hz but then who's gonna get the XDR?

AdamN 8 hours ago||
Yeah if they put everything on the lower end device than nobody would buy the higher end device.
dmix 7 hours ago|||
> Pretty lame that the Studio Display with a height-adjustable stand is still 400 Euro more.

just buy a nice one on amazon for $100, it's still VESA mounts

sylens 7 hours ago|||
Insanity that a monitor that expensive is stuck at 60Hz
lifty 6 hours ago||
Super disappointed that the base model doesn't get 120hz. I own the old model and it's great, but I will have to look for an alternative 5k display with 120hz refresh rate. There are a few on the market now, and I won't pay 3.5k for 120hz.
als0 23 minutes ago||
Since the base model is still 60Hz, I'm struggling to pick between the base model or a Kuycon G32P. Can anyone on here help?
simondotau 20 minutes ago|
It shouldn't be a struggle. If you need colour quality (e.g. content creation/consumption) get the Studio Display. If you need real estate (e.g. technical work or programming) get the Kuycon.
lastofthemojito 27 minutes ago||
As sort of a tangent, am I the only one who has had bad experiences doing what the woman in the press release is doing? Ya know, touching the laptop while it's connected to external devices via Thunderbolt and/or USB-C.

Sure, most of the time the cable seems secure enough to maintain connection when I accidentally nudge the laptop. But every once in a while, when I slightly shift the laptop here or there, flicker and everything goes batshit. The monitor loses connection, so maybe (depending on config) the laptop screen changes resolution and then eventually reconnects and flickers and changes back. Or the network drops out (if I'm connected to Ethernet over Thunderbolt). Or a program freaks out because the drive it was using disappeared. Or the laptop really freaks out and kernel panics.

Like I said, it doesn't happen a ton, but it's happened a handful of times over the years, just enough that now I always use an external mouse and keyboard with a docked laptop to avoid such nonsense.

lifty 6 hours ago||
So it seems the new Studio Display XDR is the only display on the market that offers:

- 5k resolution at HIDPI (27inch)

- 120hz refresh rate

- TB5 and single cable connectivity.

There are a couple of other HIDPI displays at 5k with 120hz refresh rate but they don't do TB5.

ErneX 8 hours ago|
I was hoping for a 6k 32inch model.

But even so, these 2 new monitors still don’t support multiple inputs.

kcrwfrd_ 10 minutes ago||
> Still no support for multiple inputs

It looks like a nice display, but that’s a deal killer for me.

vegardx 7 hours ago|||
I'm also a little bummed that they seem to have dropped the Pro Display XDR. I wanted a 32" display as the main display, and then use my existing two Studio Display vertically as secondary on each side.

I guess we're going to see how the support for DP Alt-Mode will be, as I'm not sure how much bandwidth that can provide, so 120Hz might be out of the question. But for now that has been a simple way to get around the lack of multiple display inputs, you just needed a separate KVM switch for it.

asdhtjkujh 7 hours ago|||
I just want to natively hook up a PS5 without capture card latency... I would've bought a Studio Display years ago but can't bring myself to purchase a $2000 device-locked monitor.
stevenpetryk 8 hours ago||
I've been pretty happy with my ASUS ProArt PA32QCV (32", 6k, but only 60Hz). Kinda infuriating that Apple doesn't let you adjust third-party monitor brightness though (and my work disallows apps like BetterDisplay).
ErneX 7 hours ago||
Thank you, that’s exactly the one I’m going to get now, I was just waiting for these from Apple to be announced to make the decision.
More comments...