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

jojolafrite

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 4, 2010
18
1
I am desperate when I notice that the refresh rates of Macbook pro are still 60Hz, this is what we had on PC 20 years ago. 60hz is a refresh rate of entry level laptops nowadays and the macbook pro didn't make the difference.
PC laptops like Lenovo offer screens with high refresh rates.
I hope the M1X will include a higher refresh rate.

60Hz, it is good for productivity applications, but when you scroll down and up a lot like me. It is so much better to watch it on a screen with a high refresh rate. What do you think?
 
This is a little bit of exaggeration here. 60Hz is the refresh rate not only for entry-level laptops but for nearly every laptop around. There are some laptops with a 120Hz refresh rate or even higher, but there are not lots of them around.

I found this comprehensive list of laptops with a high refresh rate: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Compr...isplays-with-high-refresh-rates.522463.0.html. The list appears to have 634 entries, but they are largely variations of the same models. Nearly all of them are gaming laptops. If you look at the competitors of the 16-inch MacBook Pro, you will see that nearly all of them have a 60Hz refresh rate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
Also worth noting is that typically; Not always, but typically, high refresh rate panels are not as high quality in other domains like colour accuracy, gamut, brightness and viewing angles - I'd rather have a gorgeous 60hz IPS panel than a 144hz TN
 
I see that some of you get emotional about it. Nevertheless, A high refresh rate would be expect in a computer whose price tag exceed $2500. I guess you use still Excel spreadsheets, I don't.
I am not a gamer but my eyes appreciate high refresh rates for video editing, scrolling, watching videos and animations. When for instance, you animate a character on a Macbook pro, it is not smooth.

When I look at the competition I see that the PC went ahead of Apple:
Windows 11 will include a Dynamic refresh rate feature so that we can use 60Hz when on battery and 120hz when plugged
Windows 11 will save battery life on laptops with new Dynamic Refresh Rate feature | TechSpot
Here is an interesting article about it on the Intel website:
What Is Refresh Rate and Why Is It Important? - Intel

I think that Lenovo found the right balance, At CES 2021, Lenovo has finally announced a pair of non-gaming laptops that have a refresh rate that breaches 60Hz. The IdeaPad 5i Pro comes in two size variants, 14-inch and 16-inch, but both come with refresh rates over 60Hz. The 14-inch model comes with a 90Hz panel, while the 16-inch comes with a 120Hz panel.

This is EXACTLY what i wished for the Macbook pro 14" and 16". And mayve a dynamic refresh rate feature as I explained above.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Rashy
120hz IPS panels at high resolution are quite hard to find. Yes PC laptops have 120hz and higher, but are often also TN panels, lower colour accuracy, 1080p or 4k and not the resolution Apple have decided is retina. Almost all high end displays are 60hz and Apple's can do 24hz and 48hz for previewing your movie in Final Cut Pro. So Apple have photographers, programmers, and videographers covered. 120hz makes the UI and games smoother, but does not help pros like 24hz does.
 
Also worth noting is that typically; Not always, but typically, high refresh rate panels are not as high quality in other domains like colour accuracy, gamut, brightness and viewing angles - I'd rather have a gorgeous 60hz IPS panel than a 144hz TN

Exactly this. Just because a panel has a higher refresh rate, does not actually mean it has to be a better looking panel. And people who think that need to educate themselves.
 
My own two cents:

I do not want my battery life hampered by the power usage of a higher refresh rate monitor (if the tech matures, I'm all for it)

Edit: Retconned myself out of shame
 
Last edited:
60 hz is not good enough if -- and I mean if -- Apple intends to compete in any degree in the gaming market. Virtually all gaming computers are at least 120 hz. Apple should at minimum provide an option for those users who value gaming performance over high resolution -- and there are many.
 
60 hz is not good enough if -- and I mean if -- Apple intends to compete in any degree in the gaming market. Virtually all gaming computers are at least 120 hz. Apple should at minimum provide an option for those users who value gaming performance over high resolution -- and there are many.
I wholeheartedly agree, but considering apple's current priorities and leadership paradigm. (tim cook became ceo on the premice of lean supply chain) different display options my over-complexify the production of said device (not infeasable, simply expensive)

That said, I can glimpse at the writing on the wall, stating that the ipad will become the defacto gaming peripheral (inclusion of m1 chips inside of ipads, 120hz display, greater interoperablility between macOS and iOS programs and their gaming as a service platform.)

extra two cents: PC gaming has been dead since the rise of behavioural manipulation as a core concept of game design, i'll stick with my family friendly nintendo content from now on.
 
A Fishrrman totally off-the-wall prediction:
5 years from now, Mac laptops will be using 60hz refresh rates as standard.
10 years from now, Mac laptops will STILL be using 60hz refresh rates as standard.
 
A Fishrrman totally off-the-wall prediction:
5 years from now, Mac laptops will be using 60hz refresh rates as standard.
10 years from now, Mac laptops will STILL be using 60hz refresh rates as standard.
get me this man's crystal ball
 
60 hz is not good enough if -- and I mean if -- Apple intends to compete in any degree in the gaming market. Virtually all gaming computers are at least 120 hz.
Remember that around half of all AAA game sales usually go to consoles that run most games at 30 FPS (and competitive ones at 60 FPS) and people enjoy them.

What you're talking about is a niche (high refresh rate gaming) inside a niche (PC gaming) inside a niche (non-casual gaming) and Apple has never even tried to compete in that market and they don't sell any machines targeted at that market.
 
Remember that around half of all AAA game sales usually go to consoles that run most games at 30 FPS (and competitive ones at 60 FPS) and people enjoy them.

What you're talking about is a niche (high refresh rate gaming) inside a niche (PC gaming) inside a niche (non-casual gaming) and Apple has never even tried to compete in that market and they don't sell any machines targeted at that market.

The Xbox Series X can run games at 4K@120hz.
 
The Xbox Series X can run games at 4K@120hz.
Yes, if you can get your hands on one, the latest generation of consoles can drive high refresh rate displays and some titles do support it. But these consoles have been around for less than a year and they're still unavailable in most parts of the world.
 
The Xbox Series X can run games at 4K@120hz.

It can, but doesn't run all games at 4k 120hz. The most demanding games are still run at 30hz and 60hz, same with the PS5. In some of these games you can choose to have smoother frame rates or more visuals. Unless it is a competitive game I'll pick the visuals and 30-60 fps over 120hz. And really, the only games we are getting at 120 just now are Xbox One and PS4 titles. No developer is going to make their game look last gen for the few people that have a 120hz TV.
 
I see that some of you get emotional about it. Nevertheless, A high refresh rate would be expect in a computer whose price tag exceed $2500. I guess you use still Excel spreadsheets, I don't.

What's wrong with Excel?
 
So weird to see people handwaving this away like a non-issue, when the value of higher refresh rate screens has been evident forever, even on other Apple devices. It's clearly one of the top defining features on the iPad Pro, and it's something a lot of people have been hoping to see on iPhones. Because it isn't just about gaming - it makes every single interaction with your device feel smoother. It's a massive difference, even with things as basic as moving your cursor around the screen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JahBoolean
I use a pc desktop for call of duty warzone. Rtx 3080 and 240hz monitor. It matters.
 
I use a pc desktop for call of duty warzone. Rtx 3080 and 240hz monitor. It matters.

In that instance, yes there is an argument absolutely, but for general use there is pretty much no need for high refresh rate for most people. And as others others have said, I would rather take a 60 Hz high quality screen than a 120 Hz lower quality screen any day.
 
Avec you tried the iPad Pro with 120Hz dynamic rate display?
I have not, but having a 144hz on my PC, I do appreciate it even with web browsing.
 
What do you need 120hz on Mac for OP?

You haven't made a convincing argument other than windows laptops have it. High end windows laptops typically are built for gaming for which macs are not built for or have the platform for. For pro video work if anything you want lower refresh rates not higher which the 16" currently does and I'm sure the m1x models will support as well

120hz is great for gaming. Not much else.
 
I use a pc desktop for call of duty warzone. Rtx 3080 and 240hz monitor. It matters.

Macs are not call of duty machines

That's what high end gaming desktops are for ...

War zone isn't exactly a graphical powerhouse to begin with but if someone is craving that on an apple device why not just get an iPad

I just don't see how it defines a macbook pro purchase. Again apple does not make these machines for gamers
 
  • Like
Reactions: StumpyBloke
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.