[HN Gopher] Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR
___________________________________________________________________
Apple Studio Display and Studio Display XDR
Author : victorbjorklund
Score : 200 points
Date : 2026-03-03 14:00 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| sq_ wrote:
| I was curious to see the "Innovative DICOM Medical Imaging"
| section. I wouldn't have thought that Apple would be interested
| in niche applications like viewing radiology imaging, but I guess
| they're probably interested in any cost-insensitive market for
| these since they're so expensive.
| AdamN wrote:
| It's probably an easy win for them. It also might have been a
| good target when they were ideating on specs. Having these pro
| certifications gives the devices a halo of premium quality.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| Regular consumers probably don't buy these displays in bulk,
| when you can get very nice displays for less than half the
| price that are 98% the same on specs.
|
| So targeting checkbox-compliance for places like hospital
| systems is probably an easy win to generating / keeping some
| long term contracts.
| AdamN wrote:
| I don't think you can get a DICOM-certified display at 5K
| and 27" for half the price. Probably like $1k less but
| that's it - and if you're a radiologist making $300k+
| you're not going to want to cheap out on a display.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| No I'm saying regular consumers don't care about DICOM
| certification. They care about the other 98% of the
| specs, and can find a suitable alternative.
| danudey wrote:
| If you're a radiologist making $300k+ you're going to
| want to use certified displays so that you don't get sued
| for using non-approved devices for diagnostic use, and
| that's going to cost you maybe $6k for a 21" monitor.
|
| https://www.monitors.com/products/jvc-
| cl-s500-rn?variant=427...
|
| $3300 for a 27" display is ridiculous in comparison.
|
| (Acknowledging that the link I provided is for a pair of
| monitors, but also those monitors are half price because
| they're refurbished)
| sbrother wrote:
| > you can get very nice displays for less than half the
| price that are 98% the same on specs.
|
| Can you recommend any displays with PPI and brightness
| equivalent to the studio display, with 120Hz+ refresh
| rates? I was waiting for this announcement to buy a studio
| display because I thought they might bring 120Hz to the
| base model, but $3300 is a lot to spend on a single
| display. I have an original studio display and a high
| refresh rate 4K OLED monitor, and they are both compromises
| unfortunately.
| rscrawfo wrote:
| The price point is super painful. 2k would have been bad
| enough but I would have considered it. It's a no go at
| $3,300 for me.
| themacguffinman wrote:
| https://www.bestbuy.com/product/asus-rog-strix-27-dual-
| mode-...
|
| I haven't found a glossy competitor, or even one with the
| same HDR spec, but this is the closest I could find so
| far.
| detourdog wrote:
| This also keeps their development targets at the state of the
| art.
| a2tech wrote:
| At a local hospital the radiologists have been all Mac for a
| long long time. They refused to give it up and resisted all
| attempts to get them to switch. So it doesn't surprise me at
| all.
| sq_ wrote:
| Interesting, I would've guessed that they would've forcibly
| been on Windows since time immemorial.
|
| Entirely unsurprised that someone would refuse to give up
| their workflow, though! I've rarely found a user with
| specific needs who wants to change literally anything else
| about their system, since what they have works for them.
| microtonal wrote:
| 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?
| mistersquid wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| Yeah if they put everything on the lower end device than
| nobody would buy the higher end device.
| sylens wrote:
| Insanity that a monitor that expensive is stuck at 60Hz
| dmix wrote:
| > Pretty lame that the Studio Display with a height-adjustable
| stand is still 400 Euro more.
|
| just buy a nice one on amazon for $100, it's still VESA mounts
| conesus wrote:
| VESA mounts are only a few bucks and give you even better
| height and tilt adjustment. You also get desk space back. I
| have a shorter desk (24" vs typical 30" depth) and I have two
| monitors and a laptop mounted on 3 VESAs and I can extend them
| so that the monitor edge is inline with the desk edge, giving
| me the same 24" that a 30" desk would have with a monitor
| stand.
| bibstha wrote:
| Which mount do you have? I've got a 24" as well and I've
| never imagined I'd fit 2 monitors.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Herman Miller's Jarvis [1]. I'm probably paying up for the
| brand, but I got it installed a few years ago (with the
| nano-textured Studio display), and it works beautifully.
|
| [1] https://store.hermanmiller.com/home-desk-
| accessories/jarvis-...
| lifty wrote:
| Super disappointed that the base model doesn't get 120hz. I own
| the old model and it's great, but I will have to look for an
| alternative 5k display with 120hz refresh rate. There are a few
| on the market now, and I won't pay 3.5k for 120hz.
| thought_alarm wrote:
| I just use some old textbooks to raise the height of the
| display:
|
| - Design Patterns by the Gang of Four
|
| - Modern C++ Design by Andrei Alexandrescu
|
| - Code Complete from the Microsoft Press
|
| That's enough old paper to raise the display height to a
| comfortable level.
| microtonal wrote:
| I do the same, though ideally the height is different between
| putting my desk in sitting/standing height.
| thiagoperes wrote:
| I got the Kuycon G32P and it's an incredible alternative. 32in +
| 6K for less than 2k$
|
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| boxed wrote:
| Hah, the absolute shamelessness of that design and the site is
| crazy!
| zamadatix wrote:
| 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.
| jryio wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Do you own the matte display version or the default one?
| jryio wrote:
| The matte. It's offensive.
| atombender wrote:
| They sell a matte version, the G32X.
| alexarena wrote:
| Sad, but not surprising to see Apple discontinue the Pro Display
| XDR. Hard to go back to 5K once you've used 6K.
| AdamN wrote:
| The pixel density is the same I believe - I guess their theory
| is that 5K is more fungible than a large 6K display since
| people looking for more real estate can daisy chain the 5K
| displays.
| ErneX wrote:
| Same pixel density, but smaller monitor though.
| covercash wrote:
| I vaguely recall an Apple rumor from the last few months about
| 3 new display model numbers, 2 of them being 27" and one of
| them being 32"... so still possible a Pro Display XDR refresh
| is on the horizon.
| jakubadamw wrote:
| "Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR and starts at
| $3,299 (U.S.) and $3,199 (U.S.) for education."
| dawnerd wrote:
| They'd just call it something else or simply add a new size
| option for Studio Display XDR like they do Macbooks.
| densh wrote:
| 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.
| isqueiros wrote:
| You should try some of the newer OLED panels. They're all
| glossy and look really good.
| whatever1 wrote:
| 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.
| aethrum wrote:
| 4k OLED text is great.
| jsheard wrote:
| 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...
| roboror wrote:
| WOLED handles text much better than QDOLED, I don't think
| anyone would say the 27" 4k versions "suck"
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| Low-res is low-res. Curves on SVGs and vector graphics
| look terrible.
| troupo wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| Great news. Apple announced a 120hz display today.
| troupo wrote:
| 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.
| pwthornton wrote:
| There are 5k displays at 240hz?
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| I could never get my two ASUS displays work at anything
| but 60Hz
| cosmic_cheese wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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
| post_break wrote:
| Driving my LG oled at 120hz over HDMI. What?
| izacus wrote:
| ?
|
| Both of my LG ultrawides work at 144Hz?
| jdgoesmarching wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| (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 wrote:
| 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.
| roboror wrote:
| The Studio Display shares a panel with the MSI MPG 271KRAW16
| behnamoh wrote:
| Even the new one in this post?
| delta_p_delta_x wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| I just want to know who's naming these things, it's been
| like this forever.
|
| Why can't it be something simple?
| MagicMoonlight wrote:
| 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.
| jdgoesmarching wrote:
| Worth noting that these (and the LG with the same panel)
| aren't shipping yet.
| MagicMoonlight wrote:
| So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop as a
| $5000 premium display?
| delta_p_delta_x wrote:
| > So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop
|
| There are only ~5 flat-panel manufacturers worldwide: AU
| Optronics, Innolux, LG Display, Samsung Display, Sharp
| Display, and recently BOE Display. Apple has to use one of
| these, even for its bespoke, notched, curved iPhone/iPad
| displays.
|
| This new 5K 2304-zone panel was developed by LG Display,
| and is not 'generic white-labelled slop' by any means. It
| is an extremely good panel in its own right, probably the
| bleeding edge of LCD technology today achieving top-notch
| responsiveness, contrast, and colour depth and accuracy.
|
| That MSI monitor will probably retail for ~$1000 as will
| the Asus and LG equivalents, which is not a trivial amount
| for a monitor. Apple just marked it up 3x, as they are
| prone to do for _anything_.
| tshaddox wrote:
| 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.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| aobdev wrote:
| 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.
| SupremumLimit wrote:
| 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.
| jen20 wrote:
| 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.
| bsimpson wrote:
| 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.
| cloverich wrote:
| 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).
| praseodym wrote:
| 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.
| presbyterian wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| jonpurdy wrote:
| 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).)
| LatencyKills wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| giobox wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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...
| Fr0styMatt88 wrote:
| 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.
| JonathanFly wrote:
| > 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?
| Aurornis wrote:
| > 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.
| badc0ffee wrote:
| 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.
| EnPissant wrote:
| I have a Macbook pro and a Linux machine attached to my
| dual 4k monitors.
|
| Fonts on Linux (KDE Plasma on Wayland) look noticeably
| sharper than the Mac. I don't use subpixel rendering
| either. I hate that I have to use the Mac for work.
| hbn wrote:
| 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.
| fl0ki wrote:
| 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.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| 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
| sdn90 wrote:
| 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.
| hatsix wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| The nano-texture matte finish is available as an option
| perardi wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| I've got that display, too, and quite like it. Matte finish
| is essential (IMO) if you're annoyed by reflections.
| recursive wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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?
| derefr wrote:
| > 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.)
| Fr0styMatt88 wrote:
| 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.
| mark_l_watson wrote:
| wow, the prices have come down. I inherited the old Pro XDR
| display when my father passed away a couple of years ago: I think
| he paid $6K for the display and another $1K for the stand.
|
| Off topic, but Apple seems to be dropping hardware costs /
| capability - relying more in subscription, app store, and cloud
| now? On an impulse buy, I bought the entry level MacBook Air at
| Best Buy about two months ago because it was $200 off list price.
| Amazingly capable laptop for $800.
| stetrain wrote:
| It's cheaper but also 27" 5K instead of 32" 6K.
|
| I think it's kind of weird that they didn't just do two size
| options with similar specs.
| ErneX wrote:
| I was hoping for a 6k 32inch model.
|
| But even so, these 2 new monitors still don't support multiple
| inputs.
| stevenpetryk wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| vegardx wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| kcrwfrd_ wrote:
| > Still no support for multiple inputs
|
| It looks like a nice display, but that's a deal killer for me.
| agys wrote:
| Too small... I got used to my 4K Philips OLED 42" that I hung
| directly on the wall in front of my desk (no stand at all)...
| USB-C cable also charges the MacBook. This size is so good to
| work with; so much screen estate.
| dwayne_dibley wrote:
| 42 inches! thats a lot of viewing area.
| agys wrote:
| Indeed! The big monitor is about 1m from me, the median a bit
| below my eyes. The laptop on which I type on sits in-between
| and the two screens align almost perfectly (optically). This
| setup works well for me and I feel it's very ergonomic.
| That's why I can't go back to tiny (<32") screens anymore.
| whynotminot wrote:
| You could get something smaller but have it closer to your
| face than 1m?
|
| The sort of "visual impact" a screen can have is mostly a
| combination of what percentage of your FOV it consumes.
|
| People think they've got a bunch of screen real estate when
| they buy a big TV to use as a monitor... and then they use
| it a twice or more the distance of a regular monitor.
| bsimpson wrote:
| You're using the pixels for something different than the target
| audience.
|
| People who want a Studio Display want retina crispness. If you
| enjoy a 42" 4k, you're more concerned with real estate than
| image fidelity.
|
| I'm happy with a 65" 4K TV in my living room, but a 4K 27"
| monitor is borderline too low-res for computer work. Same pixel
| count, but different use cases.
| agys wrote:
| I think I'm absolutely the target audience: I'm a designer,
| programmer, animator. Crispness at 4k is still quite good at
| 1m distance from my face. I'd buy it without hesitation if it
| came much, much larger.
| jasomill wrote:
| I agree, and use a 55" LG OLED TV similarly. Got it on sale for
| $1,300.
|
| Especially nice in a small apartment where I use the same
| display for video, gaming, and desktop.
|
| No USB-C, but HDMI works better for long cable runs anyway, so
| I can keep my (non-laptop) computers in the other room and just
| "dock" my wireless input devices to a USB-C charger as needed.
|
| Thunderbolt would be even worse, as even if I could somehow get
| Thunderbolt out of an Nvidia GPU, I'm not aware of any devices
| that would allow switching between multiple Thunderbolt inputs,
| and 4 sufficiently long optical Thunderbolt cables would
| probably cost more than the display itself.
|
| As for crisp text, I'll replace it with a 120 Hz 8K display in
| a few years if the price is right. In the mean time, I value
| screen real estate far higher (and dislike multi-monitor
| setups).
| desideratum wrote:
| 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".
| desideratum wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Almost certainly due to bandwidth limitations on older
| versions of Thunderbolt. Full bit depth HDR 5k @ 120hz
| requires some absurd data thoughput.
| realityking wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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.
| klardotsh wrote:
| 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
| archagon wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| For desktop use? Chroma subsampling is obvious. DSC
| compression, on the other hand, is not. DisplayPort and
| HDMI support both.
| archagon wrote:
| 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.
| FinnKuhn wrote:
| 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.
| realityking wrote:
| > 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.
| radley wrote:
| They did say M3, not M3 Pro. You're probably okay.
|
| (Notice how they listed the M1 chips individually.)
| kubik369 wrote:
| 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.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| 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?
| cubefox wrote:
| XDR = LCD
| zamadatix wrote:
| Of course, even 5 layer tandem OLED would struggle to hit specs
| like 1000 nits sustained full panel brightness.
| cubefox wrote:
| So what? Any LCD also struggles with black levels. They have
| advantages and disadvantages. The point is more that Apple
| tries, like TV manufacturers, to hide the LCD designation by
| instead coming up with a creative but misleading acronym.
| "XDR" in this case. This never happens with OLED. Which shows
| that manufacturers believe that most people care more about
| black level contrast than maximum brightness.
| zamadatix wrote:
| So... it helps you understand that's the main selling point
| of the monitors is the range of brightness? XDR stands for
| "Extreme Dynamic Range" - not sure how that's misleading or
| why sticking "LCD" into the title helps anyone figure out
| what the features of the panel are as most LCDs have awful
| range.
|
| Using OLED directly in names works because OLED panels
| inherently have common features like blacks, contrast, and
| lack of blooming over other panel types. They can have
| other aspects added in (e.g. tandem OLED or the like) but
| by saying it's OLED you include these base things without
| needing a unique term.
|
| Saying other panels are LCD tells you next to nothing as
| there are so many types which can be paired in so many ways
| which can all have completely different characteristics.
| It's not a conspiracy to hide the truth that people must
| only want OLED displays, it's an attempt to say something
| rather than nothing in the name of the monitor so you know
| what it actually is beyond "not an OLED".
|
| If it were about trying to hide something the subhead
| wouldn't say mini-LED.
| testfrequency wrote:
| I've owned my nano-textured XDR since launch (with the stand),
| and I love it.
|
| As the years have gone, the only upgrade I wished to have was 120
| refresh for some very limited design work - but 120 really is
| still not widely adopted in most places anywhere, so it's really
| a non-issue for me.
|
| The new XDR is smaller, has a less ergo stand, and also loses the
| beautiful lattice etchings on the rear which I often admire.
|
| The XDR was overdue for a refresh, it's nice the price dropped
| some, but I won't be upgrading for now.
| tiffanyh wrote:
| So Apple essentially introduce a new (middle) price point in
| their displays: $1,500 Studio Display
| $3,300 Studio Display XDR <-- NEW $6,000 Pro Display
| <-- DISCONTINUED ???
|
| Apple is amazing at "laddering" people up to the next higher
| tier.
|
| EDIT: It appears the Pro Display has been discontinued.
| cptcobalt wrote:
| it seems like the Pro Display XDR is discontinued. The webpage
| for that now redirects to the Studio Displays XDR
| tiffanyh wrote:
| I can't find it either.
|
| Which means they don't have a 32" display option if true.
|
| Maybe it will also be updated, but on a different day this
| week?
| gbjw wrote:
| On the announcement page, they say "Studio Display XDR
| replaces Pro Display XDR" in the footnotes, so doubtful.
| pfannkuchen wrote:
| They could be considering the new high end display a
| different product rather than a refresh (for marketing
| purposes at least).
|
| I recall the XDR being announced alongside the last Mac
| Pro redesign. No new Mac Pro yet, so maybe they'll
| announce the new large display whenever that is
| announced?
| jakubadamw wrote:
| There is a note at the end of the linked announcement:
|
| "Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR and starts at
| $3,299 (U.S.) and $3,199 (U.S.) for education."
| gbjw wrote:
| Do they still sell the Pro Display? https://www.apple.com/pro-
| display-xdr/ redirects to the Studio Display XDR now.
| SirMaster wrote:
| Really, a $3300 Mini-LED display in 2026?
| post_break wrote:
| Show me an HDR display that is 2000 nits peak HDR calibrated
| 27" for under $3,300. Not a gaming monitor. Closest you can
| find is a lilliput UQ31 that has half the nits.
| danudey wrote:
| And which supports DICOM calibration, which normally costs
| you >$5k for a smaller (e.g. 21") display.
|
| It's now vastly cheaper to buy a Mac and a 27" Studio Display
| XDR than it is to buy a single 21" DICOM display for your
| clinic. Heck, it's not much more expensive to buy two SD XDRs
| than to buy one standard DICOM display.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| I feel like if they can profitably sell a Mini-LED in a $1400
| 14" Macbook Pro, they can find a way to sell a larger one in a
| 27" display for under $3300...
|
| I have the last-gen Studio Display, pretty great during the day
| (the nano-texture is astonishing), but just looks like trash at
| night when the backlight overwhelms the blacks.
|
| My guess was that the "Studio Display 2" would introduce Mini-
| LED, and then a "Pro Display 2" would have the high-refresh and
| maybe 32". Wake me up in five years, I guess.
| WilcoKruijer wrote:
| > Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR
|
| How does a 5k display replace a 6k display? Are they giving up on
| 6k? Disappointing.
| iojcde wrote:
| It's a smaller display
| JCharante wrote:
| This is awesome! $3299 is a great price drop. I'm moving
| countries soon and wasn't going to bring my old monitor, so this
| is perfect timing.
| ErneX wrote:
| It's a smaller monitor though, the discontinued one was 32 inch
| 6K resolution, this one is 27 inch 5K resolution.
|
| But it's the same pixel density.
| detourdog wrote:
| I just tried to look up the power usage for XDR and they only
| list voltage no amps or watts.
|
| Did I miss something
| 827a wrote:
| > Studio Display XDR replaces Pro Display XDR and starts at
| $3,299 (U.S.) and $3,199 (U.S.) for education.
|
| My father-in-law is a monitor engineer. He is insanely gifted. We
| were in a Taiwanese factory together years ago and I asked him
| what it would cost to build the Pro Display XDR today. I will
| never forget his answer...
|
| "We can't, we don't know how to do it."
| MountainTheme12 wrote:
| My father-in-law is a monitor engineer. He is insanely gifted.
| We were in a Korean factory together years ago and I asked him
| what it would cost to build the Pro Display XDR today. I will
| never forget his answer...
|
| "A lot less than you paid for it."
| amluto wrote:
| > Featuring extensive connectivity to support a variety of
| workflows, Studio Display XDR includes two Thunderbolt 5 ports
| and two USB-C ports.
|
| That is not extensive connectivity. That's the bare minimum one
| might credibly expect.
|
| If I were to consider buying a display like this, I would want at
| least two and preferably more _inputs_ and at least a DisplayPort
| input. Not everything in the world is USB-C, especially when
| discrete GPUs are involved.
| dmix wrote:
| I might be missing how this differs from the previous model.
| zamadatix wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Studio_Display#Technical...
| has a good table. The short story is the 2nd generation Studio
| Display has some minor noted user facing changes but isn't that
| big of a difference. The Studio Display XDR is a bit of a merge
| of that and the old Pro level feature set.
| massysett wrote:
| Few enough differences so that if I could get an old Studio
| Display at a discount, I would. But right now it seems the
| old one is still full price where it's available.
| sbszllr wrote:
| Daisy chaining finally supported.
| earthnail wrote:
| The only monitor on the market of this size and resolution that I
| am aware of that has really high brightness and works well when I
| work outside on the terrace.
|
| Really glad Apple is building it.
| jhickok wrote:
| Are you being cheeky or do you really drag a monitor outside?
| t1234s wrote:
| anyone else still using their 30" cinema display from 2003?
| BirAdam wrote:
| I was until quite recently. Bought a cheap 4k panel to replace
| it. I was really sick of the number of adapters to keep it
| going, plus it was never particularly bright and had low
| contrast.
| mastercheif wrote:
| I was keeping mine alive on life support until about two years
| ago when I updated to the Samsung 5K display.
|
| Loved the extra screen real estate of the 30" ACD and it's a
| beautifully designed product that I enjoyed having on my desk.
|
| In its last year or two the backlight wear started to result in
| colors to become uneven. Blues were less vibrant and reds had
| tint issues.
|
| Was also difficult to justify the power draw, it had a 150w
| power supply.
| petercooper wrote:
| Not using, but I still have it. I get it running every couple
| of years and it's striking how dim it is compared to modern
| monitors. Yet I just can't bring myself to dispose of it or the
| 2007 Mac Pro it's attached to, despite them having absolutely
| zero utility.
| t1234s wrote:
| This looks like a new iMac Pro minus the computer. Its a shame
| they don't have anything where you can just dock your iPhone Pro
| to one of these to run macOS.
| jasomill wrote:
| Or at the very least pair a Bluetooth mouse or trackpad to an
| iPhone for remote desktop use.
| lifty wrote:
| 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.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| Does this still not support multiple inputs / devices?
| adamesque wrote:
| Nope. Still does not. I have 2 macs on my desk and no simple
| way to connect them to a single Apple display! It's a glaring
| hole that to me suggests they have no idea who their market is
| for these.
| duxup wrote:
| I wish it came in an ultrawide format.
| laksmanv wrote:
| Is buying a used 32" XDR worth it if we want a 32" apple display?
| or is the tech not as good now?
| lgleason wrote:
| The the smaller xdr has better brightness and thunderbolt 5, so
| it depends on what you are looking for.
| lgleason wrote:
| For that base display, it is essentially the same as the previous
| monitor with the addition of Thunderbolt 5.
| anon7000 wrote:
| 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.
| tmp10423288442 wrote:
| 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.
| throawayonthe wrote:
| Yes, absolutely
| nstfn wrote:
| any animation work
| archagon wrote:
| Very obvious when scrolling text and moving windows around,
| for example.
| kristoff_it wrote:
| 100% yes
| amarshall wrote:
| Yes. Even 90 Hz is a noticeable improvement over 60 Hz. I
| wouldn't pick it over high-DPI, though.
| jasomill wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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.
| nicce wrote:
| > So the $1600 Studio Display does not have 120hz.
|
| Usually these exists only to bump the price of the pro model.
| hecifato wrote:
| Is there any details on from whom Apple is sourcing the panel
| from? LG and MSI have both shown off 5K monitors at 165hz and
| 2304 dimming zones recently.
|
| I said about two years back I'd wait to upgrade my 1080p monitor
| until Apple shipped a high refresh rate one. I knew the monkey's
| paw would curl but at nearly $5000 CAD that's a hard no.
| archagon wrote:
| Curious to see if the XDR works at 120Hz on Windows; and if so,
| if there's a KVM switch that would work with it.
|
| Probably not worth the hassle, but I wish there was literally any
| other display manufacturer out there with premium build quality.
| data-ottawa wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| film42 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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
| szmarczak wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Ah, you should update wikipedia then:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED#Lifespan
| nicce wrote:
| > 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.
| bsimpson wrote:
| As long as we're here:
|
| What are people's current favorites for a 5K 27" screen that
| doesn't cost as much as a whole damned computer?
| asimovDev wrote:
| A lot of people are saying nice things about Kuycon displays,
| but no personal experience with those. Otherwise I think Asus
| has good offerings, cannot remember the name though
|
| Also JapanNext offers a 6k screen for <$1000, but it hasn't
| started shipping yet to my knowledge
| dabeeeenster wrote:
| I got this https://www.samsung.com/uk/monitors/high-
| resolution/viewfini... and am pretty happy with it. I got it
| fairly cheap with a student voucher (I think ~650 GBP).
|
| It had some coil whine initially but that has gone. There's a
| load of nonsense software in it but I just have it disconnected
| from the internet and only use it as a monitor. The web cam is
| not useful but I don't use that either.
|
| This was a couple of years ago - I think that there are a lot
| more options available now?
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| I have been using 3 VP2788-5K for 6 months. Much better than
| 1440p or 4k monitors IMO. I spend most of the day on teams
| meetings and looking at code.
|
| Text is very crisp at this DPI. The built in thunderbolt dock
| works reliably.
|
| It is annoying how the cables stick down on the bottom of the
| monitors. A few right angle adapters helps with that.
| paozac wrote:
| Asus ProArt
| Analemma_ wrote:
| I can second this. I bought two of the 5K 27" ProArt monitors
| plus a Thunderbolt hub to be my home setup, all for less than
| the price of one Studio Display, and it has been working
| perfectly.
| bsimpson wrote:
| That was the one I'd heard of, but I was shocked to see how
| low the Amazon reviews are (3.8). A highly-rated review
| said it had horrible clarity, like a greasy phone screen.
|
| You haven't had problems, and would buy it again?
| Analemma_ wrote:
| The clarity seems fine to me, and I bought it
| specifically because I want crisp text. Maybe those
| people had defective units, I'm not sure.
| matthoiland wrote:
| I've tried the LG UltraFine and LG UltraGear (w/144hz) ...
| still went with the Studio Display. Expensive, but my previous
| Thunderbolt display gave me 12 solid years - hoping the SD does
| the same.
|
| Edit: Also consider the price of speakers, camera, hub, power,
| and the "it just works" factor.
| bsimpson wrote:
| Ultimately, I'm beholden to whatever I can get work to pay
| for, unless I want to pay out of pocket to subsidize the
| capex of a multi-trillion dollar conglomerate.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| > power
|
| Most modern usb-c / tb seem to come in an integrated "dock"
| which provides power. But many provide a laughably low
| number.
|
| Also, for some reason, many come with external power bricks
| for some reason, which are a special kind of PITA with their
| short, permanently attached cords.
| tristor wrote:
| I've been using an LG Ultrafine 27MD5KL-B for years, and it
| works pretty flawlessly once I set up BetterDisplay with it.
| This is my primary work setup, and I think I paid around a
| grand for at MicroCenter some time back. It has worked great.
| jibbers wrote:
| Get a broken 27" iMac, rip out the guts, and slap in a
| converter board that adds a bunch of inputs. It's not nearly as
| difficult to build as most of the blogs make it out to be.
| sberens wrote:
| As someone who likes bright monitors, I'm excited to try the 2000
| nit peak brightness! Are there any comparable monitors to the XDR
| brightness wise?
| zamadatix wrote:
| If you can put up with wide curved panels the 49" variant of
| the Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 from 2021 offered HDR2000 as a
| 5120x1440 display (basically 2x27" 2560x1440).
|
| I was heartbroken all of the flat panel normal aspect monitors
| in that family since have had other severe tradeoffs and it's
| only the curved ultrawides that were given the better specs.
| mackopes wrote:
| 32" when?
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| Apple just doesn't seem to be hitting on all cylinders anymore.
| The price for this thing is outrageous compared to the
| competition, and the competition isn't lagging very far behind.
| It's certainly pretty and I'm sure it's an incredible piece of
| tech, but $1,600 on the low end and $3,600 on the high end is
| just not going to sell in this environment. While the competition
| has always started with the minimum viable product for a low
| price and iterated on the product, Apple's approach has been the
| opposite - maximum possible product and then try to iterate the
| price point down. The problem is that the competition is now
| encroaching on their product quality territory, and the offer
| doesn't seem as tempting. For example, see the ASUS Pro Art,
| which has arguably better specs with the addition of HDR10 for
| $799. Or the BenQ MA270S, which you can buy two of for $1,800.
| dcchambers wrote:
| A $1600 60hz display in 2026 just feels extortionate.
|
| The Studio Display XDR seems nice, but I wish they would have
| kept a 32" option.
| jpsimons wrote:
| I keep hoping someone will release a nice monitor that's monitor
| shaped (16:10) instead of TV shaped (16:9). That's part of why
| early 2000s Cinema Displays are so great. Not to mention the last
| great Mac laptop before it all went south -- the 2015 MBP
| bdcravens wrote:
| I may (think that I) have a 29 year old mind, but my eyes are at
| least their true 49 years of age, so I don't feel like I could do
| anything less than a 32 inch monitor, especially if I'm paying a
| premium.
| maz1b wrote:
| I really can't believe they discontinued the Pro Display XDR..
| what is wrong with them? A company the size of Apple, surely must
| have the resources to update it every couple of years.
| m132 wrote:
| DisplayPort 2.1 cannot reliably drive 6K at 120hz
| veber-alex wrote:
| With DSC it can drive even 8k@120Hz.
| lastofthemojito wrote:
| 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.
| als0 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-03-03 23:01 UTC)