Studio Display XDR Impressions

[couscousboulette]

It depends also on the viewing conditions. I’ve checked them both side by side in store and the very bright neons will ruin the perceived contrast on any screens because of the reflection. I expect the difference to be massive under normal viewing conditions. I was however quite surprised by the refresh rate: the xdr didn’t feel that much smoother than the standard asd (yes I’ve checked all settings), just like my current MBP doesn’t feel that much smoother than my wife’s mba. My guess is that macos doesn’t have as much animations and touch gestures as ios/ipados

 

[TheBigApple2006]

It depends also on the viewing conditions. I’ve checked them both side by side in store and the very bright neons will ruin the perceived contrast on any screens because of the reflection. I expect the difference to be massive under normal viewing conditions. I was however quite surprised by the refresh rate: the xdr didn’t feel that much smoother than the standard asd (yes I’ve checked all settings), just like my current MBP doesn’t feel that much smoother than my wife’s mba. My guess is that macos doesn’t have as much animations and touch gestures as ios/ipados

I agree on all points - I tested both side by side at the Apple Store and the ambient lighting makes the comparison between dark levels and all difficult, although 4K HDR videos from Youtube still shine through on the XDR even in such conditions. But in normal desktop use, if flooding by ambient lighting the difference is minimal.

The 120Hz was a surprise for me too - I too checked all settings, it was running off a Mac Studio, so video grunt was there, yet the difference was not as noticeable as expected. We spent many years complaining about the 60Hz of the original Studio Display yet this upgrade was not really there. Maybe the next MacOS will support it better.

Having said all of this, the Youtube comparison posted earlier in this thread, which is under far better lighting conditions, clearly shows the difference and compelling makes the case for the XDR.

 

[kasakka]

The 120Hz was a surprise for me too - I too checked all settings, it was running off a Mac Studio, so video grunt was there, yet the difference was not as noticeable as expected. We spent many years complaining about the 60Hz of the original Studio Display yet this upgrade was not really there. Maybe the next MacOS will support it better.

120 Hz should feel much more responsive just wiggling a mouse cursor around.

Maybe Apple again has poor pixel response times so it's not any more suited for 120 Hz than the Macbook Pro displays...

 

[Pezimak]

I agree on all points - I tested both side by side at the Apple Store and the ambient lighting makes the comparison between dark levels and all difficult, although 4K HDR videos from Youtube still shine through on the XDR even in such conditions. But in normal desktop use, if flooding by ambient lighting the difference is minimal.

The 120Hz was a surprise for me too - I too checked all settings, it was running off a Mac Studio, so video grunt was there, yet the difference was not as noticeable as expected. We spent many years complaining about the 60Hz of the original Studio Display yet this upgrade was not really there. Maybe the next MacOS will support it better.

Having said all of this, the Youtube comparison posted earlier in this thread, which is under far better lighting conditions, clearly shows the difference and compelling makes the case for the XDR.

I can notice a difference in 60HZ to 120hz on my iPhone screen and iPad screen to an extent, but my Mac is sat next to my monitor and in the day when using Windows to work, I run the monitor at 60HZ, I can then use my Mac next to it at the same time at 120hz and I don’t ever really notice a difference.

With faster FPS it really is in games where you see that difference mainly, not really in day to day tasks on a big screen for me at least.

 

[TheBigApple2006]

120 Hz should feel much more responsive just wiggling a mouse cursor around.

Maybe Apple again has poor pixel response times so it's not any more suited for 120 Hz than the Macbook Pro displays...

Yes, there is something in the MiniLED panels which negatively compensates for the benefits of 120Hz. The OLED panels on my iPhone and iPad M4 clearly benefit more from it, while I too have issues really seeing the benefit on my M1 Pro MBP...

 

[Chancha]

The response time of the 14" 16" have always been critized to be so high, to the point of introducing ghosting under certain high motion scenes. It is particularly noticible when you use a mouse with rather high polling rate, and you are used to seeing how else the cursor was supposed to respond on other high refresh screen. I don't know if the new XDR 27" is the same, but from the tests I have seen so far and also the limited time I had with it in the Apple Store, it does look slow-ish.

Also the macOS Safari default behaviour is to lock screen elements under 60Hz, but that can be easily disengaged by developer tools > feature flags > prefer page rendering updates near 60fps.

 

[kasakka]

The response time of the 14" 16" have always been critized to be so high, to the point of introducing ghosting under certain high motion scenes. It is particularly noticible when you use a mouse with rather high polling rate, and you are used to seeing how else the cursor was supposed to respond on other high refresh screen. I don't know if the new XDR 27" is the same, but from the tests I have seen so far and also the limited time I had with it in the Apple Store, it does look slow-ish.

The Macbook Pros are literally the slowest pixel response time displays you can find on the market. The ghosting on them is massive when any motion is on screen. They aren't blur free even for 30 fps let alone 120.

Despite the blur, you can still feel a responsiveness benefit from 120 Hz and that should be true for the XDR. Personally I can't stand 60 Hz anymore and find it instantly noticeable.

 

[SDAVE]

After thinking a bit, it makes sense that Apple isn't using OLED on the 27" because they have to do tandem OLED to get near the brightness that miniLED gets...and also these displays would cost $6,000-7,000 if they went that route.

They took learnings from the Pro Display XDR and lowered the cost by lowering the size of the display and adding new features. Is $3299 still a lot for most people per display? Sure, but looking at it holistically it's a good deal especially for folks who want a consumer priced display that has decent color accuracy with high NITS HDR ability, not even counting 120Hz feature here. So anyone making HDR content can get these displays and do fine work. Anything above this, actual Pro level work will require $20,000 displays and PCIe cards that output HD-SDI with HDR functionality.

Hopefully next few years we will see tandem OLED within this price range and they can move down miniLED to the regular Studio Displays because having nice blacks and 2304 active spots is a good deal. Hopefully and eventually flat back panel LEDs will go away from Apple's lineup.

I won't be getting this display because I need 2 of them, so it will cost me $7,000 after taxes, but it's nice to see where Apple is going here. I will stick with the original dual Studio Displays they are a workhorse and good enough for what I do.

Bright OLED is still pricey and miniLED is also pricey. I wouldn't be surprised it these panels Apple uses cost $1000+ for them. Seems like a custom panel which I can't seem to find in any other product, hopefully with a teardown we'll get a better idea as to who makes them. There's a part number here but no company named.

 

[Pezimak]

After thinking a bit, it makes sense that Apple isn't using OLED on the 27" because they have to do tandem OLED to get near the brightness that miniLED gets...and also these displays would cost $6,000-7,000 if they went that route.

They took learnings from the Pro Display XDR and lowered the cost by lowering the size of the display and adding new features. Is $3299 still a lot for most people per display? Sure, but looking at it holistically it's a good deal especially for folks who want a consumer priced display that has decent color accuracy with high NITS HDR ability, not even counting 120Hz feature here. So anyone making HDR content can get these displays and do fine work. Anything above this, actual Pro level work will require $20,000 displays and PCIe cards that output HD-SDI with HDR functionality.

Hopefully next few years we will see tandem OLED within this price range and they can move down miniLED to the regular Studio Displays because having nice blacks and 2304 active spots is a good deal. Hopefully and eventually flat back panel LEDs will go away from Apple's lineup.

I won't be getting this display because I need 2 of them, so it will cost me $7,000 after taxes, but it's nice to see where Apple is going here. I will stick with the original dual Studio Displays they are a workhorse and good enough for what I do.

Bright OLED is still pricey and miniLED is also pricey. I wouldn't be surprised it these panels Apple uses cost $1000+ for them. Seems like a custom panel which I can't seem to find in any other product, hopefully with a teardown we'll get a better idea as to who makes them. There's a part number here but no company named.

It would cost even more than that! No one makes a 6K OLED let alone a tandem one with high brightness. It would have to be a totally custom designed and built panel that will sell in low volumes, think closer to 8K probably.

 

[Chancha]

Desktop size OLED displays started shipping with tandem OLED a few months ago at 27" 1440p, and only recently started 27" 4k. There is currently no tandem OLED with retina PPI in any manufacturers roadmap. For non-tandem, Samsung showed in CES for 2 years already their QD-OLED version of 5k 27" 120Hz but it seems they lost interest or had difficulty materializing it.

 

[SDAVE]

It would cost even more than that! No one makes a 6K OLED let alone a tandem one with high brightness. It would have to be a totally custom designed and built panel that will sell in low volumes, think closer to 8K probably.

It seems that Apple abandoned 6k and settled on 5k.

 

[figbash]

Last week, I went to the Apple Store to buy a Studio Display or the Pro Display XDR. I spent around half an hour comparing the standard Studio Display and the XDR version. I’ll mostly be using it for software development. Plus web surfing, YouTube and etc.

When I compare the iPad vs. the iPad Pro, the 120 Hz difference is extremely noticeable. But between the XDR and the regular Studio Display, I honestly couldn’t feel that kind of difference while scrolling on the web or in Word.

Watching 8K HDR videos on the XDR is absolutely stunning—it really pops and looks incredible. But beyond that, I’m not sure how much extra value it adds for me. Instead of paying double, I went with the regular Studio Display, even though 60 Hz feels a bit outdated.

Now I still have about a week left to return it, and since I plan to use it for many years, I’m wondering if I should go back and upgrade. But I’m still not sure if it’s really worth it. I’ve also seen some complaints about the XDR online.

Are there any people who use the regular Studio Display and then switch to the XDR and feel that the difference is worth it? I personally prefer glossy screens.

What would you recommend I do?

I spend probably 80% of my time coding and I far prefer to have great black levels as I code with dark themes and use a dark mode UI. The difference is pretty stark for me, but not everybody cares about it. If I used light mode and didn't play games or watch movies on it I certainly wouldn't care as much.

Personally I also can't stand 60hz on the desktop even when just coding, every time I move my mouse or a window it's very obvious for me and feels choppy. I have met a lot of people that don't notice it at all though.

I would say if neither of those bother you on your ASD then you're set and there's no reason to spend double just to spend it!

 

[jabbr]

@figbash Do you like to code with a pure black background? Once you get above like 5% grey a regular ASD probably looks identical to the XDR, many dark themes would look the same. I doubt you're coding in HDR 🙂

 

[btrach144]

After thinking a bit, it makes sense that Apple isn't using OLED on the 27" because they have to do tandem OLED to get near the brightness that miniLED gets...and also these displays would cost $6,000-7,000 if they went that route.

They took learnings from the Pro Display XDR and lowered the cost by lowering the size of the display and adding new features. Is $3299 still a lot for most people per display? Sure, but looking at it holistically it's a good deal especially for folks who want a consumer priced display that has decent color accuracy with high NITS HDR ability, not even counting 120Hz feature here. So anyone making HDR content can get these displays and do fine work. Anything above this, actual Pro level work will require $20,000 displays and PCIe cards that output HD-SDI with HDR functionality.

Hopefully next few years we will see tandem OLED within this price range and they can move down miniLED to the regular Studio Displays because having nice blacks and 2304 active spots is a good deal. Hopefully and eventually flat back panel LEDs will go away from Apple's lineup.

I won't be getting this display because I need 2 of them, so it will cost me $7,000 after taxes, but it's nice to see where Apple is going here. I will stick with the original dual Studio Displays they are a workhorse and good enough for what I do.

Bright OLED is still pricey and miniLED is also pricey. I wouldn't be surprised it these panels Apple uses cost $1000+ for them. Seems like a custom panel which I can't seem to find in any other product, hopefully with a teardown we'll get a better idea as to who makes them. There's a part number here but no company named.

The problem with oled is that its brightness is a lie. Sure, tandem can get to 2,000nits, but only across 5%-10%.

In HDR photography, my hdr highlights are much more than 5-10% of my picture.

So the Studio XDR reaching its 2,000 nit peak on 40% of the screen is much better.

I am constantly blown away by my Studio XDR with photography

 

[SDAVE]

The problem with oled is that its brightness is a lie. Sure, tandem can get to 2,000nits, but only across 5%-10%.

In HDR photography, my hdr highlights are much more than 5-10% of my picture.

So the Studio XDR reaching its 2,000 nit peak on 40% of the screen is much better.

I am constantly blown away by my Studio XDR with photography

OLED is expensive and miniLED is not that cheap either. Things will get better and hi-res (especially 5k) OLED computer monitors are not super common yet, but that will change. OLED is a superior technology compared to miniLED. The more people buy OLED (especially tandem) the cheaper it will get, consumer scale as they say.

There's a major issue with miniLED and blooming that won't go away.

 

[btrach144]

OLED is expensive and miniLED is not that cheap either. Things will get better and hi-res (especially 5k) OLED computer monitors are not super common yet, but that will change. OLED is a superior technology compared to miniLED. The more people buy OLED (especially tandem) the cheaper it will get, consumer scale as they say.

There's a major issue with miniLED and blooming that won't go away.

Again, that does not address that oled can only do 100% brightness over 5-10 percent of the screen. And also oleds will reduce the brightness depending on things like heat. For color accuracy that’s horrible!

The XDR can do 40% of the screen at 100% brightness. That’s a massive difference. And the mini leds don’t need to be dimmed due to heat.

As a photographer or a video editor, you cannot have any shifting going on your monitor.

So no, oled is not always superior. Sure, blooming exists but it’s way better than FALD. Not everyone benefits from oled with its limited brightness.

This monitor was made for those people in mind.

And microled will be superior to oled well. But that tech is some time away.

 

[SDAVE]

Again, that does not address that oled can only do 100% brightness over 5-10 percent of the screen. And also oleds will reduce the brightness depending on things like heat. For color accuracy that’s horrible!

The XDR can do 40% of the screen at 100% brightness. That’s a massive difference. And the mini leds don’t need to be dimmed due to heat.

As a photographer or a video editor, you cannot have any shifting going on your monitor.

So no, oled is not always superior. Sure, blooming exists but it’s way better than FALD. Not everyone benefits from oled with its limited brightness.

This monitor was made for those people in mind.

And microled will be superior to oled well. But that tech is some time away.

You don't have to explain to me what's a good monitor, I do this as a professional for 20+ years 🙂 (creative field, specifically design/etc).

Tandem OLED actually alleviates the issues you're talking about. Have you tried the tandem OLED iPad? It's really solid.
microLED isn't here yet as a mainstream product so we're not there yet.

 

[djinn]

Dare I ask if 26.4 had any impact on the XDR display?

 

[ascender]

Dare I ask if 26.4 had any impact on the XDR display?

The beta version hasn't resolved the issue whereby the plain M5 chip in a laptop can only drive one of them.

I've no issues with stability or image quality etc so I can't see any differences there. Speakers sounds the same too.

 

[twinpeaks_sf]

It feels the exact same as the iPad Pro M4/M5 and the MacBook Pro M4/M5

Disagree. Feels like an evolution of the Studio Display nano-texture. Easier to clean, perhaps, but not the touch-friendly iMac/MBP/iPad screen.

 

[tothemoonsands]

Has anyone tested the impacts with MacOS 26.4? Perhaps the assumption is any update to the displays would be noted, or that it is too soon for these updates to arrive. Anyways I will be testing 26.4 here momentarily.

Edit: Ah shoot, I missed the previous comments above. Thanks for looking into it.

 

[djinn]

Has anyone tested the impacts with MacOS 26.4? Perhaps the assumption is any update to the displays would be noted, or that it is too soon for these updates to arrive. Anyways I will be testing 26.4 here momentarily.

Edit: Ah shoot, I missed the previous comments above. Thanks for looking into it.

There's a new Firmware Update so curious what that will do.

 

[Pezimak]

The problem with oled is that its brightness is a lie. Sure, tandem can get to 2,000nits, but only across 5%-10%.

In HDR photography, my hdr highlights are much more than 5-10% of my picture.

So the Studio XDR reaching its 2,000 nit peak on 40% of the screen is much better.

I am constantly blown away by my Studio XDR with photography

The Studio Display XDR has the same peak brightness in HDR as the iPad Pro does. And that is according to Apple.

 

[Pezimak]

There's a new Firmware Update so curious what that will do.

Yes I am very keen to know what it does for folks on here..

 

[btrach144]

You don't have to explain to me what's a good monitor, I do this as a professional for 20+ years 🙂 (creative field, specifically design/etc).

Tandem OLED actually alleviates the issues you're talking about. Have you tried the tandem OLED iPad? It's really solid.
microLED isn't here yet as a mainstream product so we're not there yet.

Reviews have put Apple’s tandem oled at 20% APL. That’s still significantly less than the 40% of the Studio XDR.

But I agree with you that it’s moving in the right direction and its exciting technology for sure.