Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

so pro motion /120hz still isnt fixed in latest safari ,right?

Mockletoy said:
The difference is the variable refresh rate. My external monitor runs at 144hz flat-out, all the time. The iPhone and iPad are supposed to be smart enough to figure out when they need to be running at full speed, but that's clearly not happening.

What I suspect is that the iPhone and iPad aren't detecting the UFO test as something that needs to run at the full refresh rate, and so it's being displayed at 60hz, not the full 120hz. I just tested it on my iPad Pro and it not only reports that it's running at 60hz, it looks like 60hz to me.

To get a valid comparison, I changed my external monitor to 120hz and ran the test on my Mac and the iPad simultaneously. The difference was readily apparent, even accounting for the sluggish response rate on the iPad compared to the much faster one on my external screen.
Click to expand...

So again, that test isn't going to be valid for any Apple devices because it isn't going to show them running at 120Hz. Its not fixed yet in Safari but looking at that test isn't a benchmark for if its working or not.
 
DMG35 said:
So again, that test isn't going to be valid for any Apple devices because it isn't going to show them running at 120Hz. Its not fixed yet in Safari but looking at that test isn't a benchmark for if its working or not.
Click to expand...
You’re not following what I’m saying. That test is a benchmark for whether you are seeing the expected behavior on an Apple device.

For instance, it correctly shows my Mac driving my external monitor at whatever refresh rate I set it at, up to its maximum (overclock) rate of 165hz.

The desktop and all my apps and browsers except Safari work just fine at that rate, as expected. Even Safari will sometimes work, but it’s a crapshoot.

You would expect that an iPhone or a Mac or an iPad with a 120hz screen would ramp up to the full 120hz when running content that could take advantage of it, such as the UFO test. But that is clearly not happening.

It’s not that the test is returning the wrong refresh rate, it’s that iOS/Safari is choosing to display the test at 60hz rather than 120hz. I don’t know if that’s a bug or whether it’s by design, but it’s certainly not what I, as a user, would expect to happen.

Apple could solve every bit of this silliness if they’d just do what all the other vendors do and put a 120hz-mode toggle on their 120hz devices.

Then we wouldn’t have to guess what’s happening, or why, and we wouldn’t end up with the variable refresh rate algorithms wrongly identifying content such as the UFO test as best displayed at 60hz rather than 120hz. We could flip to 120hz when we knew we needed it and flip back to variable again when we didn’t, to conserve power.
 
Mockletoy said:
You’re not following what I’m saying. That test is a benchmark for whether you are seeing the expected behavior on an Apple device.

For instance, it correctly shows my Mac driving my external monitor at whatever refresh rate I set it at, up to its maximum (overclock) rate of 165hz.

The desktop and all my apps and browsers except Safari work just fine at that rate, as expected. Even Safari will sometimes work, but it’s a crapshoot.

You would expect that an iPhone or a Mac or an iPad with a 120hz screen would ramp up to the full 120hz when running content that could take advantage of it, such as the UFO test. But that is clearly not happening.

It’s not that the test is returning the wrong refresh rate, it’s that iOS/Safari is choosing to display the test at 60hz rather than 120hz. I don’t know if that’s a bug or whether it’s by design, but it’s certainly not what I, as a user, would expect to happen.

Apple could solve every bit of this silliness if they’d just do what all the other vendors do and put a 120hz-mode toggle on their 120hz devices.

Then we wouldn’t have to guess what’s happening, or why, and we wouldn’t end up with the variable refresh rate algorithms wrongly identifying content such as the UFO test as best displayed at 60hz rather than 120hz. We could flip to 120hz when we knew we needed it and flip back to variable again when we didn’t, to conserve power.
Click to expand...

I’m following what you are saying. Again, my point is that that test doesn’t show a 120Hz refresh rate on Apple devices. Whatever the reason, it doesn’t show it even for devices that clearly have it working properly.

If it doesn’t show 120Hz on the iPhone or iPad when those two devices have it working in Safari then it isn’t going to show it on the MBP any time soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRain
DMG35 said:
I’m following what you are saying. Again, my point is that that test doesn’t show a 120Hz refresh rate on Apple devices. Whatever the reason, it doesn’t show it even for devices that clearly have it working properly.

If it doesn’t show 120Hz on the iPhone or iPad when those two devices have it working in Safari then it isn’t going to show it on the MBP any time soon.
Click to expand...
See, that’s where we disagree.

If 120hz was, as you say, “working properly,” then all these tests wouldn’t be running at 60hz instead of 120hz.

The reason it’s not showing 120hz is because it’s not running at 120hz.

Like I said, that’s probably by design, but if so I’d call it a broken design.

My point is, even if they eventually fix Safari to support their implementation of variable refresh rate properly, the content displayed in Safari, such as the UFO test, will still update at 60hz, even if the Safari browser itself is able to refresh more quickly when, say, scrolling through a web page at high speed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moyapilot
Mockletoy said:
See, that’s where we disagree.

If 120hz was, as you say, “working properly,” then all these tests wouldn’t be running at 60hz instead of 120hz.

The reason it’s not showing 120hz is because it’s not running at 120hz.

Like I said, that’s probably by design, but if so I’d call it a broken design.

My point is, even if they eventually fix Safari to support their implementation of variable refresh rate properly, the content displayed in Safari, such as the UFO test, will still update at 60hz, even if the Safari browser itself is able to refresh more quickly when, say, scrolling through a web page at high speed.
Click to expand...
The owner of UFO Test on these same forums specifically stated their test will never run correctly in Safari due to how Safari is built. Let's stop talking about it now.
 
Mockletoy said:
See, that’s where we disagree.

If 120hz was, as you say, “working properly,” then all these tests wouldn’t be running at 60hz instead of 120hz.

The reason it’s not showing 120hz is because it’s not running at 120hz.

Like I said, that’s probably by design, but if so I’d call it a broken design.

My point is, even if they eventually fix Safari to support their implementation of variable refresh rate properly, the content displayed in Safari, such as the UFO test, will still update at 60hz, even if the Safari browser itself is able to refresh more quickly when, say, scrolling through a web page at high speed.
Click to expand...

I can’t make this any clearer for you. You are wrong and its pointless debating with you over it as I don’t think you clearly understand the point being made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRain
DMG35 said:
I can’t make this any clearer for you. You are wrong and its pointless debating with you over it as I don’t think you clearly understand the point being made.
Click to expand...
I understand the point being made quite clearly: you can’t use a browser test designed to display 120hz content on a ProMotion-enabled device because ProMotion in Safari is broken by design and displays the content at less than 120hz even when it’s working “properly.”
 
Mockletoy said:
I understand the point being made quite clearly: you can’t use a browser test designed to display 120hz content on a ProMotion-enabled device because ProMotion in Safari is broken by design and displays the content at less than 120hz even when it’s working “properly.”
Click to expand...

Nope. Promotion in Safari on the iPhone 13 and iPad Pro works perfectly. The browser test shows it as running at 60Hz because the browser test doesn’t work properly with Apple devices.

Safari is definitely not running at 120Hz on the new MacBook Pros but the UFO test isn’t a metric to measure it on because its always going to show 60Hz. Even when Apple updates Safari to run at 120Hz that browser test is going to continue to show it running at 60Hz because it doesn’t work properly with Safari.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRain
DMG35 said:
Nope. Promotion in Safari on the iPhone 13 and iPad Pro works perfectly. The browser test shows it as running at 60Hz because the browser test doesn’t work properly with Apple devices.

Safari is definitely not running at 120Hz on the new MacBook Pros but the UFO test isn’t a metric to measure it on because its always going to show 60Hz. Even when Apple updates Safari to run at 120Hz that browser test is going to continue to show it running at 60Hz because it doesn’t work properly with Safari.
Click to expand...
You’re actually just repeating back what I just said — what I’ve been saying all along — as if you are in disagreement with me.

In any case, I’m inclined to agree with you (although that might cause yet more trouble) that we should just agree to, uh, agree, that for whatever reason, the UFO test and a wide variety of other such things don’t work as they should on ProMotion devices.
 
Sheepish-Lord said:
The owner of UFO Test on these same forums specifically stated their test will never run correctly in Safari due to how Safari is built. Let's stop talking about it now.
Click to expand...
It's not just Safari, it's the nature of any device with a variable refresh rate. The UFO Test or other such tools will never run correctly on any such device, whether it be Android or iOS, simply because the browser displays the test at 60hz even on a "120hz screen."

You can actually see it happen in real time on a 120hz Samsung Galaxy phone, which has a developer setting that displays the current refresh rate onscreen at all times. While you're scrolling around in the browser, it shows 120hz, as it should. As soon as you stop interacting with the page, it settles back to 60hz, regardless of whether the page is showing static text or something like the UFO test. Grab the page and scroll it around and the refresh rate ramps back up to 120, to smooth out the scroll motion, only to drop back to 60 again once you leave it alone.

So, like I said, that's variable refresh rate working as designed. It sees no point in ramping up the refresh rate for a webpage that isn't being scrolled. The only solution would be to somehow allow individual websites to do what games can do and request access to the higher refresh rates on demand.

As it stands, Safari makes no distinction between a webpage full of text and a webpage full of scrolling UFOs and shows both at 60hz. That was the point I was trying to make to the other poster, who flatly refused to accept it, when you decided to butt in and tell me to shut up.
 
Mockletoy said:
You’re actually just repeating back what I just said — what I’ve been saying all along — as if you are in disagreement with me.

In any case, I’m inclined to agree with you (although that might cause yet more trouble) that we should just agree to, uh, agree, that for whatever reason, the UFO test and a wide variety of other such circle don’t work as they should on ProMotion devices.
Click to expand...
I hope you can get your answer to open the apple link.
9to5mac.com

Smooth 120Hz scrolling not currently supported by many Mac apps, including Safari - 9to5Mac

The new 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro are getting rave reviews, and for good reason: industry-leading performance, impressive battery life,...
9to5mac.com 9to5mac.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back