New MacBook Pros only reach 500 Nits on non-HDR content, measured by Notebookcheck

[Spidder]

Another video that shows how Apple has created so much confusion over this. Right at the start the guy notices the PC appears brighter than the MBP and says he doesn’t know why when the MBP should do 1000 nits as he double checks the brightness level

The difference between 600 and 500 nits should not be that noticeable. Tomb Raider on the Windows machine has HDR enabled, just look at how the highlights pop on the Windows machine, but anyway...

500 nits SDR brightness confirmed.

I'm disappointed.

Edit: Just rewatched the video to look for the settings. In-game HDR setting is disabled on the MBP, but disabled and greyed out on the Windows machine. If HDR is in fact disabled on the Windows machine, then the new Liquid Retina XDR display just got pwned by a friggin Lenovo Thinkpad display. Embarrassing.

 

[HardBall]

The difference between 600 and 500 nits should not be that noticeable. Tomb Raider on the Windows machine has HDR enabled, just look at how the highlights pop on the Windows machine, but anyway...

500 nits SDR brightness confirmed.

I'm disappointed.

It's disappointing, but I can't see this being a huge deal to a large number of people.

For outdoor use on regular applications (e.g. terminal), 500 nits is still quite usable, unless you are directly fighting sunlight reflection on screen. In those cases, displays tailored for outdoor uses (advertising, public info, store front, etc), are generally in the 1000 - 2500 range, depending on specific usage, more toward the upper end of that range if you are talking about direct noon-time sunlight. That's just going to bring too many sacrifices in other places.

Hopefully they would be able to find a profile to push up the sustained for SDR a bit, and make the outdoor experience (still not direct opposite the sun on a cloudless day) even more enjoyable.

 

[bill-p]

It’s not going to be clear until Apple lists it on their own site for SDR

No, it is clear that indoors, Apple limits the backlight to 500 nits.

Here's the output if you try to calibrate the XDR Display in the new MacBook Pro. Note that SDR Maximum Luminance is 500 and cannot be increased past that amount (the number will revert to 500 if you try to set anything higher).

What is important is that despite this hard-coded limit, the screen does actually get a lot brighter than 500 nits if you shine a flashlight on to the camera or... if you are outdoors.

The new 14/16 MacBook Pro do indeed get very bright outdoors and are much more visible in direct sunlight than the older M1 13" Pro that I have. I don't think anyone should worry too much about this limit. We know the screen can go up higher. Apple is just not letting it go brighter indoors.

Hopefully they would be able to find a profile to push up the sustained for SDR a bit, and make the outdoor experience (still not direct opposite the sun on a cloudless day) even more enjoyable.

As above: it does get much brighter outdoors to me despite the 500 nits limit written in the calibration profile. It's honestly not that hard for these Youtube reviewers to just take the devices outdoors in direct sunlight and do a comparison.

 

[TimothyB]

These updates are interesting. Will have to try the flashlight test.

Though, someone deciding to purchase these laptops with outdoor use will have no idea about this screen behavior and will mainly react to the more common 500 nit discussions, or mistakenly think they do operate at 1000nits during regular use and luckily find it does work better outdoors.

That screenshot does help confirm it at least, and we now have something to reference. Hopefully Apple will add this to the specs online soon, so people don’t have to search forums to find this answer.

 

[Moyapilot]

Andreas from Notebookcheck already tried the shine the light on the ambient sensor or put it in sunlight method, and confirmed that it still did not go above 500 nits. Its in the comments of the article.

It could be placebo, or maybe a truetone adjustment to blue light or something, I'm not sure why it does that. Maybe someone will post of picture of the previous MBP vs the new MBP laptops in the sun with max backlight and we can get a better comparison.

 

[TimothyB]

Andreas from Notebookcheck already tried the shine the light on the ambient sensor or put it in sunlight method, and confirmed that it still did not go above 500 nits. Its in the comments of the article.

It could be placebo, or maybe a truetone adjustment to blue light or something, I'm not sure why it does that.

Ah, so, it seems we can at least say with confidence now 500 nits for SDR thanks to the display profile as a source, but we should refrain from confirming the bright light changing brightness until we have a similar confirmed source. Still going to test it with True Tone on and off, and auto brightness on and off.

 

[Sanpete]

Andreas from Notebookcheck already tried the shine the light on the ambient sensor or put it in sunlight method, and confirmed that it still did not go above 500 nits. Its in the comments of the article.

It could be placebo, or maybe a truetone adjustment to blue light or something, I'm not sure why it does that. Maybe someone will post of picture of the previous MBP vs the new MBP laptops in the sun with max backlight and we can get a better comparison.

Not a placebo, it's shown in video. What isn't shown is how bright the screen is when turned all the way up before the light is shined on it. I suspect it's well below 500 nits before.

 

[EnderTW]

You and I have VERY different views of slaughtered. Also, it's ONE compatible game...choose a game where the Mac has to emulate. Since that is most of them.

LOL

What are you talking about, this is under emulation from Rosetta 2. Imagine what it would be if it was pure Metal.

 

[Love-hate 🍏 relationship]

They didn't lie, they just hid the truth and knew what customers would look at. No one reads the fine print but that's not an excuse to drive up sales.

-Lied about display brightness
-Lied about contrast ratio

Feel kinda bummed but oh well, it's apple.

what is up with contrast ratio?

 

[tastylemon]

Some ideas if you want lots of brightness because you want to use the mac outdoors:

1. Get a matte screen "protector". Looks like there's already a matte screen protector on Amazon. I've never bought these before but I might give it a shot.
2. Wait for someone to "jailbreak" the display to make it brighter. I'm not sure how doable this is since I'm not aware of anyone doing this for Apple's Pro Display XDR.
3. Get another device (sadly, non-Apple) with a higher brightness.
4. Get the 16" and scale up the UI in the display settings (The 16" is $500 more than the 14" so it's a pricy "solution").

 

[tastylemon]

what is up with contrast ratio?

If the max brightness isn't available for SDR, then this means the advertised contrast ration wouldn't be available either.

With mini-LED I think we might need new specs for contrast ratios since 1,000,000:1 is achieved at the expense of local contrast. They can say the difference between the brightest and darkest spot on the screen can reach that ratio, however, this doesn't mean you can get this contrast between two pixels right next to each other. I wonder what that contrast ratio is.

 

[Love-hate 🍏 relationship]

If the max brightness isn't available for SDR, then this means the advertised contrast ration wouldn't be available either.

With mini-LED I think we might need new specs for contrast ratios since 1,000,000:1 is achieved at the expense of local contrast. They can say the difference between the brightest and darkest spot on the screen can reach that ratio, however, this doesn't mean you can get this contrast between two pixels right next to each other. I wonder what that contrast ratio is.

the contrast ratio would still be excellent given the 0 dividing factor (black=off ).many oled panels have 700nits max brightness you know

oh yes i agree,especially since there are as many leds and dimming zones on the huge 16" screen than there is on the ipad 12.9 lol .(same goes for the 14' which has way less leds and zones)

 

[Spidder]

It's disappointing, but I can't see this being a huge deal to a large number of people.

For outdoor use on regular applications (e.g. terminal), 500 nits is still quite usable, unless you are directly fighting sunlight reflection on screen. In those cases, displays tailored for outdoor uses (advertising, public info, store front, etc), are generally in the 1000 - 2500 range, depending on specific usage, more toward the upper end of that range if you are talking about direct noon-time sunlight. That's just going to bring too many sacrifices in other places.

Hopefully they would be able to find a profile to push up the sustained for SDR a bit, and make the outdoor experience (still not direct opposite the sun on a cloudless day) even more enjoyable.

I don't expect any Macbook ever having 2500 nits, but having a brand new MBP that doesn't get any brighter than the previous one, despite having the potential is a real bummer.

No, it is clear that indoors, Apple limits the backlight to 500 nits.

Here's the output if you try to calibrate the XDR Display in the new MacBook Pro. Note that SDR Maximum Luminance is 500 and cannot be increased past that amount (the number will revert to 500 if you try to set anything higher).

View attachment 1885492

What is important is that despite this hard-coded limit, the screen does actually get a lot brighter than 500 nits if you shine a flashlight on to the camera or... if you are outdoors.

The new 14/16 MacBook Pro do indeed get very bright outdoors and are much more visible in direct sunlight than the older M1 13" Pro that I have. I don't think anyone should worry too much about this limit. We know the screen can go up higher. Apple is just not letting it go brighter indoors.



As above: it does get much brighter outdoors to me despite the 500 nits limit written in the calibration profile. It's honestly not that hard for these Youtube reviewers to just take the devices outdoors in direct sunlight and do a comparison.

No, the backlight itself doesn't get any brighter. When triggering the light sensor, the content itself is made brighter, like adjusting the brightness slider in a video player. That can actually help with visibility, but the picture quality degrades to trash.

 

[tastylemon]

the contrast ratio would still be excellent given the 0 dividing factor (black=off ).many oled panels have 700nits max brightness you know

oh yes i agree,especially since there are as many leds and dimming zones on the huge 16" screen than there is on the ipad 12.9 lol .(same goes for the 14' which has way less leds and zones)

It's probably closest to zero in a dark room, but then then there's blooming. I thought people were exaggerating (and many are) but I do see it on my 16" MBP. 10,000 dimming zones sounds like a lot until you realize that's how many would fit in a 100 by 100 unit square.

It's weird that my MBP display is better than Apple's stand-alone XDR display. Mine has more dimming zones, a higher refresh rate, and it's thinner. Imagine if Apple starts selling a super thin XDR display with 120hz relatively cheaply. Maybe $3000 for a 6K display

 

[Spidder]

It's probably closest to zero in a dark room, but then then there's blooming. I thought people were exaggerating (and many are) but I do see it on my 16" MBP. 10,000 dimming zones sounds like a lot until you realize that's how many would fit in a 100 by 100 unit square.

It's weird that my MBP display is better than Apple's stand-alone XDR display. Mine has more dimming zones, a higher refresh rate, and it's thinner. Imagine if Apple starts selling a super thin XDR display with 120hz relatively cheaply. Maybe $3000 for a 6K display

Heres an interesting video I've found:

The MBP and iPad are almost identical, but the blooming on the Pro Display XDR is hardcore and more zones clearly help, but its not just the number of zones.

The LCD panel on top of the backlight plays a big role in how pronounced blooming is going to be. Samsung Mini Led TVs have a VA panel, those are much better at blocking backlight and blooming with this combination is basically a non-issue. IPS panels on the other hand are weak at blocking backlight, which means, no matter how many zones you have, if there are considerably less zones than pixels, then there will be blooming.

 

[bluegt]

Heres an interesting video I've found:

The MBP and iPad are almost identical, but the blooming on the Pro Display XDR is hardcore and more zones clearly help, but its not just the number of zones.

The LCD panel on top of the backlight plays a big role in how pronounced blooming is going to be. Samsung Mini Led TVs have a VA panel, those are much better at blocking backlight and blooming with this combination is basically a non-issue. IPS panels on the other hand are weak at blocking backlight, which means, no matter how many zones you have, if there are considerably less zones than pixels, then there will be blooming.

Cool video, thanks for sharing.

I tried the "flashlight" test and there was no impact on brightness (ensure True Tone is off...). Also as mentioned before, putting both my 2017 MBP 13" and 2021 MBP 14" in the sun, the new 14" was marginally brighter if you look closely but to a casual observer, the same.

HDR content at 1600 nits burns my eyes though... so bright!!!

 

[Love-hate 🍏 relationship]

It's probably closest to zero in a dark room, but then then there's blooming. I thought people were exaggerating (and many are) but I do see it on my 16" MBP. 10,000 dimming zones sounds like a lot until you realize that's how many would fit in a 100 by 100 unit square.

It's weird that my MBP display is better than Apple's stand-alone XDR display. Mine has more dimming zones, a higher refresh rate, and it's thinner. Imagine if Apple starts selling a super thin XDR display with 120hz relatively cheaply. Maybe $3000 for a 6K display

Buddy,you won't like that but there aren't 10k dimming zones...there are 2500 .and on the 14" there are 2000

 

[Netsurfer]

Guys, anyway...
In this moment I've been using a Macbook Air mid 2013 and I'm outside.
I work with graphs and charts with a lot of internet pages together.
This is the main reason for my upgrade... I need to see WELL and BIGGER with a faster thing.
If some of you have already bought the new MBP, can you tell me if the condition is better than this one in the pic?
Thanks

P.s. of course I have a desktop pc too

 

[Spidder]

Yes, it will be better, much better. Not just because the new MBP has 200 more nits to beginn with (300 nits on your MBA vs 500 nits), but also because the LEDs in your MBA have degraded in the last 8 years. I would be surprised if your MBA can get 250 nits. On top of that, the anti reflective coating on the new MBP is also much better.

The difference will be huge.

 

[Moyapilot]

Well said Spidder. Honestly nothing can fight the sun in a brightness war, but in a bit of a shade like your picture, the recent Macbooks will all serve you well. The AR filter like was mentioned is going to make a huge difference, and Apple has one of the best implementations.

 

[Love-hate 🍏 relationship]

Yes, it will be better, much better. Not just because the new MBP has 200 more nits to beginn with (300 nits on your MBA vs 500 nits), but also because the LEDs in your MBA have degraded in the last 8 years. I would be surprised if your MBA can get 250 nits. On top of that, the anti reflective coating on the new MBP is also much better.

The difference will be huge.

Wow do led really degrade ? I thought it's the difference between LEDs and oled ,the former doesn't degrade quite at all.
But then how fast will these mini lee will degrade for those watching a lot of HDR movies at 1600nits (or just watching pictures in photos.app at 1000 nits sustained...)

 

[Spidder]

Wow do led really degrade ? I thought it's the difference between LEDs and oled ,the former doesn't degrade quite at all.
But then how fast will these mini lee will degrade for those watching a lot of HDR movies at 1600nits (or just watching pictures in photos.app at 1000 nits sustained...)

Everything degrades. Organic stuff just happens to degrade a lot faster. Mini LEDs are not organic like OLEDs, so its going to take a while. Depending on how you're using your MBP, it'll take 6-8 years for your display to have noticeable degradation in brightness. If you're watching HDR movies for hours on end on full brightness, like every single day, it'll be more like 6 years or even less in this extreme scenario. If you're not doing that, it'll be more like 8 years, but it'll happen.

 

[TBoneMac]

Unboxed my 16” yesterday. Advertised 1000 nits was a lie. Would have helped with working in the field. Look at the official website - there is no stipulation about SDR/HDR limits - just “1000 nits sustained brightness”.

GPU performance is also meh. Only at the level of a 3050/3060 at best.

Never seen such overpromising and underdevilery from Apple. But you can always rely on sheep defending this crap.

So you're upset that the GPU performance in your notebook/laptop is on par with recent top of the line DESKTOP gpus?

 

[alkaest2002]

"Up to 1600" nits is a true statement, not a lie.

I am willing to pay up to the price tag to get the new macbook pro

 

[Netsurfer]

This morning I saw the mbp at a store (no hdr content).
There was a glass that allowed the external light to come inside.
It was not even outside, just near the glass... and it was a cloudy day... non even sunny.
Well... I'm disappointed.
Do you think a software update is gonna come and solve the problem?