Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Pro Display XDR 2: Rumors, Features, and What to Expect
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it isn’t. Other prosumer monitors have not been able to match it at its price such as the PA32UCG that was priced $5000 owning it and the Pro Display XDR (it could not being 4K@120hz 1600peak nits, 1000 sustained nits vs 6K@60hz; worse its Dolby Vision mode maxed out at 4K@60hz)
It’s to this day still superior to an overwhelming majority of prosumer monitors to this day in core monitor capabilities—and especially so in build quality.
It has actually aged like fine wine validating the price more than anticipated.
Name a better prosumer monitor. I have a hunch you cannot.
It’s disingenuous to focus on reference monitors with prosumer monitors being fundamentally a tier below reference monitors.
It’s among the top prosumer monitors either way. Easily the best I ever had to best compliment reference monitors (especially Sony’s)
Last edited:
The one you compared with has way more dimming zones than XDR Pro Display. Dont forget that there are many monitors with 1000 nit for sustainable max brightness.
And it does not change the fact that Apple COMPARED their own product to Reference monitors with $999 stand which makes it very poor. Blame Apple for that.
Within Apple products, there are already many of them with better specs than XDR Pro Display which is another proof.
XDR Pro Display is a failure and yet, too expensive even today and I wouldn't even use it for terrible QC and blooming.
1000 sustained nits is actually still very rare outside of prosumer monitors, let alone 1600 peak nits with Dolby Vision HDR, HLG HDR and so on.
More importantly doing so with a ~220PPI that needs 6K minimum when done on a 32” display.
Further more its aluminum chassis still today makes it among the lightest, quietest, and thinnest MiniLED monitors to this day.
Name prosumer monitors that are better with that in mind to help enlighten others to make more informed buying decisions like you allegedly.
I’d be pleasantly surprised.
Last edited:
I know what you are talking about but we are talking about in 2025.
Nobody cares about 6K and actually, that's the factor that killed XDR Pro Display due to small amount of dimming zones. More resolution does not mean better.
XDR Pro Display is NOT even mini-LED monitor. 500 dimming zones for 6K is a joke.
Ignoring problems wont gonna solve the problem.
Saying 6K doesn’t matter is laughable. You need 6K at 32” minimum to have standardized high pixel density that is a device pixel ratio of 2 or greater.
Apple, VESA, DCI and others validated the value of high PPI screens over a decade ago and to this day on mobile devices and laptops.
Creatives, devs, and prosumers absolutely care regardless.
Sharpness is one of the core functions of a monitor towards the Pro Display and high PPI displays looking plain better than most monitors in addition to its 1000 sustained brightness on top of 1600 peak brightness.
Pixel density (PPI, DPR, etc) is far more important than resolution from a HCI computer science standpoint always; 4K loses its high PPI capability after 24”.
It is by no coincidence 4K 27” OLED monitors with superior picture quality this year are really 24.5” panels to be significantly better monitors than their 32” counterparts + 5K 27” with bezels removed are launching next year.
Top flagships at CES are 6K+ monitors.
Again, list better prosumer monitors at its price point available today. Note prosumer monitors are $3000 and need to cost even more than than the Pro Display XDR to finally succeed it like Asus’s upcoming
ProArt $8000 Dolby Vision 8K MiniLED monitor.
Considering the Pro Display XDR came out 5 years ago, it’s impressive and sad for future-forward prosumers it hasn’t been clearly surpassed in its segment after all this time.
Other monitor manufacturers have simply not been competitive as prosumers have hoped.
Last edited:
That’s simply not true. Educate yourself on what high PPI is and you’ll quickly realize why they prioritize PPI over resolution.
Samsung and others have full-bleed gaming 5K 27” QDOLED monitors coming up to finally offer high PPI at 27” for a reason.
The top and sharpest 32” monitors are 6K minimum for a reason.
8K is being pursued and required for high PPI sharpness over 32” for a reason.
4K loses its high PPI after 24” and today’s highest rated 4K ‘27”” monitors way sharper and better than their 32” counterparts are really 24.5” for a reason.
Mobile and native apps use “@2x” and even “@3x”+ assets for a reason that necessitate high PPI that again necessitates higher resolutions than 4K.
You’re merely benignly ignorant of the value and characteristics of high PPI panels that is dictated by HCI computer science that developers, creatives, and other prosumers are well-versed in by necessity to maximize the representation of things on panels and to be kind to their eyes
I use a Thunderbolt 4 KVM with mine to connect to several PCs at once, but Thunderbolt 5 natively has KVM tech to technically minimize this.
I wouldn’t mind additional Thunderbolt 5 ports specifically.
I don’t think it needs HDMI nor DisplayPort 2.2 ports with Thunderbolt 5 able to replace and technically faster than both currently.
You can use Thunderbolt to DisplayPort/HDMI cables which I do to connect my Pro Display XDR to PCs when I don’t use my Thunderbolt 4 KVM.
Only main reason I need to use such cables instead of the KVM is to connect the display directly to Nvidia GPUs without a USB-C DisplayPort/HDMI.
Besides pixel shifting and arguably common sense to auto-hide taskbars + screen savers, proximity sensors like many high-end and professional OLED monitors for over 5 years are common mitigations.
My gaming 24.5 (“27” in marketing only to appease conservative gamers) 4K Asus PG27UCDM QD OLED even has one.
Asus pro art portable OLED monitors use proximity sensors as well.
It’s a given on the Vision Pro and other OLED-using spatial computing hardware.
It’s ergonomically superior and more functional for prosumer monitors to omit a stand altogether.
It’s also far more green: Many professionals don’t need one and immediately is metal/plastic immediately thrown away or takes up space in a closet/storage in case some hoard it for selling the monitor some arbitrary/undefined time in the future
Sorry that is not an answer and won't stop burn in from happening. And a games monitor is hardly going to be displaying a static image for hours.
Tell that to professional monitors and it only proves that you know nothing. They are still at 4K for many reasons including blooming. Simply, more is not better.
That is a good recital of the marketing talking points Apple feeds to you. Keep practicing them and you might actually believe them.
If that were truly the reason why Apple omits the stand, they would include VESA mount hardware in the box like every other manufacturer on the planet.
…Professional monitors are available and being made at 8K by the best PC monitor manufacturers in the business such as Asus, Dell, and so on.
What are you talking about?
The primary resolutions VESA, HDMI CEC, and obviously the 8K alliance committees are prioritizing 8K+ primarily with professionals and other prosumers in mind.
How else would 8K+ content be viable for consumers?
HDMI 2.1+ and DisplayPort 2.1+ prioritize high PPI beyond 4K at commercially viable fast rates for several creative professionals and games(120hz).
Again, 4K for monitors is suboptimal for high pixel density after 24”.
To have monitors as sharp and consistently good as mobile devices since over a decade ago (“retina” / high PPI), it’s mandatory to use resolutions higher than 4K after 24”.
This is indisputable fact dictated by human-computer-interaction computer science.
Even your browser would disagree with you by using its console to output the device pixel ratio. Less than ~2 (~218PPI) is not high PPI.
Mobile app assets and so on use “@2x” for this exact very reason for over a decade.
Do you have even experience generating/creating high PPI assets?
They’re most certainly not for non-high-PPI displays such as the use of 4K well behind 24”.
You again need 5K form 27” and 6K minimum for 32”.
Samsung, LG, AU Uptronics, and all other panel suppliers know this.
27” 5K QDOLED were shown behind closed doors at CES by the likes of Samsung because they obliterate the picture quality of existing 4K panels being much sharper:
Samsung teases next-gen 27-inch QD-OLED displays with 5K resolution - VideoCardz.com
4K is not enough? Ultra Clarity displays from Samsung, up to 220 pixels per inch in the future. NVIDIA heavily promoted its GeForce RTX 3090 graphics card as the first 8K-capable gaming GPU, but few people actually had 8K displays, with only a handful of reviewers owning such monitors, and...
videocardz.com
Note I also catch-up with VESA and monitor manufacturer reps, syncing with them every now and then at creative professional conference especially.
Last edited:
No. It’s supported by HCI computer science and ergonomics academia before Apple ever created a monitor.
A VESA mount is far more versatile, functional, takes up less space, and more healthier to use.
Regarding VESA mount hardware: Including and paying for things you don’t need or use instead of the core product is a prosumer-oriented ideal + keeps the monitor chassis thin in a manner that has not need superceded by a monitor of its type/quality for over 5 years now.
Last edited:
…I have them as well as corporate and agency device labs with such OLED monitors in addition having such monitors at a level you probably will never aspire or care to achieve.
I have colleagues who use OLED monitors in the gaming, medical, and hollywood/VFX industries with such features.
I use OLED monitors almost daily when I’m not using my 32” Pro Display XDR or 5K2K LG Thunderbolt monitors.
My newest OLEDs is Asus’s 24.5” (27” for marketing purposes) PG27UCDM and LG’s 45” 5K2K OLED monitor.
The former absolutely leverages a proximity sensor for the exact reasons I mentioned.
The latter validates why higher than 4K is absolutely necessary for larger monitors in order for standardized high pixel density to be achieved.
It’s impossible to achieve high pixel density for a 5K2K monitor aligning with mobile devices and laptops for years without higher resolutions.
…How does literally turning off a display when you’re not around not gonna stop burn-in? 😂
Also note dark mode, auto-hiding panels, and screen savers is not only best practice to maximize real estate (especially on 16:9/16:10) and productivity, but also far more efficient use of energy for monitor use—especially the individually lit pixels of an OLED panel.
OLED isn’t intended nor recommended for dashboard/surveillance computing use cases that would be the core computing cases to worry about burn-in in a fundamentally incompatible manner…
What I’ve mention are thorough robust means of minimizing burn-in for regular use for regular and productive use.
LOL, bringing un-released technology or product to this conversation already prove yourself wrong. Clearly, you know nothing about it especially since OLED monitor is extremely rare for professional versions.…Professional monitors are available and being made at 8K by the best PC monitor manufacturers in the business such as Asus, Dell, and so on.
What are you talking about?
The primary resolutions VESA, HDMI CEC, and obviously the 8K alliance committees are prioritizing 8K+ primarily with professionals and other prosumers in mind.
How else would 8K+ content be viable for consumers?
HDMI 2.1+ and DisplayPort 2.1+ prioritize high PPI beyond 4K at commercially viable fast rates for several creative professionals and games(120hz).
Again, 4K for monitors is suboptimal for high pixel density after 24”.
To have monitors as sharp and consistently good as mobile devices since over a decade ago (“retina” / high PPI), it’s mandatory to use resolutions higher than 4K after 24”.
This is indisputable fact dictated by human-computer-interaction computer science.
Even your browser would disagree with you by using its console to output the device pixel ratio. Less than ~2 (~218PPI) is not high PPI.
Mobile app assets and so on use “@2x” for this exact very reason for over a decade.
Do you have even experience generating/creating high PPI assets?
They’re most certainly not for non-high-PPI displays such as the use of 4K well behind 24”.
You again need 5K form 27” and 6K minimum for 32”.
Samsung, LG, AU Uptronics, and all other panel suppliers know this.
27” 5K QDOLED were shown behind closed doors at CES by the likes of Samsung because they obliterate the picture quality of existing 4K panels being much sharper:
Samsung teases next-gen 27-inch QD-OLED displays with 5K resolution - VideoCardz.com
4K is not enough? Ultra Clarity displays from Samsung, up to 220 pixels per inch in the future. NVIDIA heavily promoted its GeForce RTX 3090 graphics card as the first 8K-capable gaming GPU, but few people actually had 8K displays, with only a handful of reviewers owning such monitors, and...
Note I also catch-up with VESA and monitor manufacturer reps, syncing with them every now and then at creative professional conference especially.
Why are you obsessed with high resolution when it has nothing to do with the quality? You are losing your point since when I said 6K with only 500 dimming zones makes it worse than 4K with 2000 or more dimming zones.
And since when 27 inch needs 5k and 32 inch 6k? High PPI has nothing to do with being professional or not.
You are not following at all.
Last edited:
Again, high pixel density is not necessary. You are wasting too much time on it and tell that to 4K reference monitors.
All you have mentioned are methods that will get in the way of any work flow, annoy people, make them less productive.
I agree with you, here. I'm not disputing the idea that this is a good reason to make the stand an optional accessory, I'm disputing the idea that this is Apple’s motivation for doing so.
The monitor is already exorbitantly priced for what it includes. The idea that you're "not paying for hardware you don't use or need" on a $5,000+ monitor is laughable at best.
"Keeps the monitor chasis thin" is about the only reason that outside of the obvious margin-padding one that can possibly exist for the design of the VESA hardware on the thing, and absolutely nobody who does the kind of work thie monitor was purportedly designed for would care if it were a half centimeter thicker. The entire list of talking points as to why Apple couldn't have followed the same VESA design the entire industry has followed for the past decade are absolute hogwash. All you need to do to see this for yourself is look at what actual professionals use and realize that they all follow the same standard industrial design, save for one brand.
If you’re kind to your eyes and you’re laughably dismissing the core function of a monitor: To see things clearly and sharp.
As a creative professional and developer on visual-related things, you’re flat out wrong.
You NEED high pixel density to read and see visual content optimally; that is why high pixel density is a high priority and key thing that sell mobile phones despite their much higher costs relative to their computing capabilities of larger devices for well over a decade!
A very meaningful amount of people regardless need higher resolutions that necessitate higher PPI on larger displays to have sharpness parity with mobile devices.
This is particularly true for creative professionals and other prosumers who value and need sharpness consistency to do their work.
That necessitates resolutions higher than 4K on large display panels directly across someone’s face (or directly in the case of spatial computing hardware).
Several monitor manufacturers, standard committees, ergonomic experts, and HCI/UX academia vehemently disagree with you.
This is common knowledge in Human-Computer-Interaction (HCI) Computer Science and other fields. That is that.
Using some of the best references monitors in the world for years, reference monitors such as Sony’s are for QAing/referencing very particular aspects of color accuracy, HDR performance, contrast levels, and other aspects of visuals which is different than the everyday needs of people and optimal resolution of a sourced work.
The work is outputted deliberately at FAR higher resolutions than 4K necessary for far better sharpness in the source panels the work will eventually be.
The Pro Display XDR and Apple’s core traditional computing prosumer hardware deliberately does this (outside the Studio Display as far as HDR): They all by no coincidence offer high PPI screens in addition of 1000 sustained nits, 1600 peak nits, Dolby Vision HDR, and HLG HDR.
6K minimum is required for that for 32” panels which the Pro Display XDR and several professional monitors offer by no accident.
5K minimum is required for that for 27” which again several professional monitors offer by no accident.
Modern display standard such as Thunderbolt 5, DisplayPort 2.1+, and so on explicitly were designed to have these resolutions run faster and be prioritized—not 4K.
4K was never intended to be the be-all resolutions for monitors and TVs, but a stepping stone.
High PPI has been commercially viable and functionally superior on mobile devices for years and merely now being viable on larger displays as always intended.
This isn’t changing for the better.
Last edited:
Speak for yourself . What I said are all feature prominently highlighted available on prosumer monitors and productivity-oriented software for years —and the best ones at that.
How the hell does dark mode get in the way of workflows, annoys people, and make
them less productive?
Enlighten me; what you’re saying conflicts with HCI computer science and UX academia—an expertise I’m paid professionally for within major tech cities.
Last edited: