Maybe they’ll bump it up to 600nits with a firmware update like they did when the air went from 350 -> 400
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.
New MacBook Pros only reach 500 Nits on non-HDR content, measured by Notebookcheck
- Thread starter Not-A-Fan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on these forums.
The article published a measurement of SDR content.
They later added a second measurement of peak brightness in HDR content.
That wasn't even a correction, it was just additional information after they've run an additional test measuring a different scenario. Wherein lies the lack of "fact checking" here?
I am still in shock that some people don't know and use notebookcheck.net for their reviews. Like what sites are they using? Notebookcheck is the best.
I do wonder if there's a way to force a bit higher brightness for desktop use via terminal command or otherwise. It's clearly capable of it, and I'd be thrilled for 600-700 nits for outdoor use even if there's a saturation or color accuracy drawback at those levels.
I made a thread about this last night asking if it would be theoretically possible for us to “jailbreak” higher SDR brightness. Would appreciate it if someone who knows macOS very well could weigh in
Because Apple doesn't mention it explicitly, somehow they're responsible for you not looking beyond them for answers to how HDR works? Granted, Apple could offer a lot more information about HDR, but there are numerous sources about HDR and how it works on the internet. Ditto, SDR versus HDR. I'm sure your misunderstanding is anyone's problem but your own, but here we are.
I just tried the auto setting in a sunlit room and it seems to work. I've never used this before. The problem with auto, is it doesn't take into account user preference, obviously. It would be nice to be able to adjust the parameters.
Last edited:
Curious, have you ever actually tried to look at 1000 nits full panel?
It’s uh… Not something you’d ever want to do. It’s akin to staring into the sun.
I feel like you're responding to me but not to what I've actually said.
There's no confusion here about HDR works or what HDR content is, and you're right in that it's not Apple's job to educate me about HDR.
It is their job to communicate to users that the feature they're selling only applies to HDR content.
I would encourage you and anyone else who thinks that Apple should do a better job of communicating that to customers to go here - https://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html and let them know. I don't see any reason why Apple would want to obfuscate that SDR is limited to 500nits versus 1000 sustained for HDR. I certainly wouldn't want do that to customers as SDR content is limited in brightness for a good reason. I still don't think Apple does a good job of educating their users around several things and HDR/SDR is one of them.
For outdoor use, especially direct sunlight, 1000 nits really isn't that much.
It's a user's job to educate him/herself...especially when the product is a "pro" product. It's not Apple's problem.
Not having heard of notebookcheck but being registered on MR since 2008 with 10 different MacBooks in 13 years means a lot :
- you are a random Apple fanboy
- you are not curious about laptop market or laptop products in general
- you are not curious enough about technical details on laptops
It's like being an hardcore fan of TV without knowing Rtings : non sense.
It shows your lack of interest/curiosity and therefore knowledge on the topic.
He can interpret specs correctly though, unlike the others...
This really has you wound up doesn't it? The "others" are simply showing pictures of what literally is there.
OP has clearly understood.
Defending Apple even when they make shady marketing is just stupid.
In the keynote it was clearly not mentionned, if you find fair to have to go on tech specs thereafter to check if conditions where applied to these figures...
For iPhone they just say HDR local peak and SDR sustained peak the same way on keynote as these MBP. It was def misleading. Period.
1. Notebook Check can hardly be called a random site.
2. At the bottom you mention, they say, "We now tested the brightness in HDR mode and can confirm that more than 500 nits are only possible with HDR contents. We can confirm Apple statements in general and the peak brightness was 1607 up to an APL of 50 (50% white/50% black) and dropped to 1163 nits with 100% white (on a 16:9 video)."
This means what OP says and it means what the site says - over 500 nits allowed only for HDR content and that is a bug at best or Tim and Co. lied (not the first time).
Where did Apple lie here?
It's up to 1,000 nits, it reached the 1600 peak and dropped back down to 1163.
HDR/SDR resources on the Internet are okay. Apple used to educate customers on these sorts of things at one time, but that’s been reduced to a marketing blurb during a keynote without real context. Apple doesn’t relate any standards that they follow, well, they finally did with the inclusion of Dolby Vision recording on the iPhone 12, but they don’t specify any percentage of DCI-P3 coverage for their XDR or mention whether or not they support DisplayHDR. Unfortunately, HDR/SDR is a bit of mess and Apple just tried to steam roll through any sort of specifics on the website or marketing items while not offering any clarification of what they are supporting.
Almost everyone here get the technical details perfectly. That is not the issue here since anyone with a viable brain is able to read a web page that explicitly states that the 1000 nits are reserved for HDR use and that in SDR there is a maximum of 500 nits.
What many criticize here, and rightly so, is Apple's way of mentioning figures that necessarily need to be checked in a side page to see which conditions apply. Especially when this way of indicating luminances during keynotes does not correspond to the way of stating it for other products of the same brand.
There was the same problem with for example the "x5 zoom" of the iPhone 12 PM which is indeed true if you go from ultra wide angle to telephoto. But we're really dealing with commercial terms that are factually correct but deliberately obscure that will mechanically trap consumers who are less enthusiast than people who go to sites like MR.
Don't get me wrong 1k nits in SDR display is very uncommon once again that's not the issue. The issue is Apple's way of statings luminances which is shady since most users are watching SDR content most of the time and most users will don't double check luminance conditions if they are not clearly stated on keynote / main page.
The Up to is a generic marketing term, companies use this language in describing an item that is variable.
Apple did not coin "Up to xxx", it is not misleading. It's 'up to you' to figure out why they mentioned Up to 1,000 nits, it must ... wait for it... mean it's not always 1,000 nits of brightness.