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.
Two More Studio Display 2 Upgrades Leaked in New Report
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is a stupid argument. Some of us value what Apple Displays bring to the table and are happy to pay the price.
Others are perfectly satisfied with the third-party options and can save a bundle of money in the process.
Don’t yuck someone else’s yum.
Others are perfectly satisfied with the third-party options and can save a bundle of money in the process.
Don’t yuck someone else’s yum.
Vincent Hanna
macrumors regular
chars1ub0w
macrumors 6502a
I have a 57" monitor that's basically two 32" 4K displays glued together with no borders.
i run it at max resolution in my home office.
It's fine for everyday use. And for work, having a 8K wide window is stunning for mathematical objects.
If Apple made it two 32" HDR 6Ks with no borders and super-accurate color that'd would be phenomenal. I could have a 12K wide window. But the price would also be completely unaffordable.
tenthousandthings
Contributor
~
I think there is a near-zero (but not zero) chance of HDMI -- that would only be if they support dual-mode high refresh rates and start promoting it as a gaming display. In other words, not at all likely. Even then, I don't see it. Apple has no incentive to cater to the console industry. I think their attitude is "not my problem" -- consoles can easily support Apple displays with a USB-C output. Not providing that is a choice that Sony and Microsoft make, not Apple.
Daisy chain the best we can hope for. There is a strong argument for that. If you mean a KVM switch between two Thunderbolt inputs, I think they believe a dedicated hub is a better option in that case. Any hub they provide is going to be outdated long before the display itself. Apple learned that lesson long ago.
I think there is a near-zero (but not zero) chance of HDMI -- that would only be if they support dual-mode high refresh rates and start promoting it as a gaming display. In other words, not at all likely. Even then, I don't see it. Apple has no incentive to cater to the console industry. I think their attitude is "not my problem" -- consoles can easily support Apple displays with a USB-C output. Not providing that is a choice that Sony and Microsoft make, not Apple.
Last edited:
boomspot
macrumors regular
Yeah, I have a switch to connect secondary computers to my dual Studio Display setup but being able to toggle inputs on the individual monitors would be helpful when I don’t want a connected laptop to use both displays. You know, how every other monitor on the market operates.
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
That’s not true, and you’re exposing your ignorance of mobile app platforms that expect DPR of 2 for assets thst necessitates and informed Apple’s preferences.
Also Web sites also don’t ship high PPI assets contextually for well over a decade by Web devs conventionally that necessitates the same level of sharpness and more specific PPI and DPR
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
…Those 6K monitors consistently don’t have the build quality and especially don’t match the Pro Display’s HDR capabilities that also are the notable advantages of Apple’s screen devices across device categories by no coincidence:
The *COMPLETE* list of 27" 5K Displays?
[Update 26 May 2026] This list follows the information format used for the 32" 6K and 8K *complete* list WikiPost threads. Specifications are based on the manufacturer's claims. YMMV. The list is divided into six ► sections: Announced (not yet shipping); Available (pre-orders and shipping)...forums.macrumors.com
The *complete* list of 6K 32" monitors
[Update 4 March 2026] Following the format of the 27" 5K and 8K *complete* list WikiPost threads. Specifications are based on the manufacturer's claims. YMMV. Announced: Samsung Odyssey G80HS - 2026 Panel: IPS - 32" - 6144x3456 - 220 ppi - dual mode 165Hz/330Hz (6K/3K) Glass: Matte...
the price has aged like warm milk
let me clarify. it is a macOS specific thing that requires a 27" monitor to be 5k in order to have sharp text and ui elements. other operating systems do not have this limitation. this has nothing to do with the pixel density or the human eye and everything to do with the way macOS renders text and ui elements.
even having said that, running macOS at 2560x2440x2 on a 27" 4k monitor is plenty sharp for most people
that's an interesting use of the word mandatory. besides, desktop monitors and mobile devices don't need to have the same pixel density for reasons that should be obvious, unless your parents never told you not to sit so close to the tv.....
what is an objective fact?
- 1000 sustained nits
- 1600 peak nits
- Dolby Vision and HLG HDR
None of the 6K monitors you list meet that bar and accordingly do not seriously compete with the build quality and performance of the Pro Display XDR.
Also 5K and 6K are the minimum resolutions needed to reach standardized high PPI which is DPR of 2 towards baseline high PPI assets conventionally annoyed as “@2x”.
Objective fact is this and the fact mobile platforms necessitate and expect the levels of sharpness Apple also mandates for their platforms that’s also enforced by all major mobile app platforms for a reason.
This is ubiquitous and objective fact by UXers and app developers. You cannot even submit mobile apps at all or not without severe penalties without conforming to such conventions.
And the difference is very obvious to users of high PPI displays as the raster images would be blurry—especially views of apps with a lot of pictorial content.
You clearly are benignly ignorant of this.
Last edited:
@2x is about pixel density scaling, not total resolution. you’re mixing up resolution with pixel density. you can run @2x on a 1080p phone or a 4k display. 5k/6k just allows retina (~220 ppi) at larger desktop sizes it’s not a requirement, and there’s no app store rule mandating it
I'm not sure you understand what an "objective fact" is
dpr 2 (“@2x”) is a common target, not a requirement. both apple and google support multiple density buckets (1x, 2x, 3x, etc.), and apps aren’t rejected for not being specifically @2x, they just need to render cleanly across densities (vector assets or multiple scales).
on the web, high-dpi support has existed for years (e.g. srcset, css resolution media queries), but again it’s adaptive, not fixed to dpr 2. devices range from 1x up to 3x+.
and none of that implies 5k/6k is required, those resolutions are about maintaining ~220 ppi at larger screen sizes (retina desktop, an ARBITRARY density), not about enforcing @2x as a universal rule
again, mobile is pretty much irrelevant when discussing desktop display resolutions
@2x is a convention, not a requirement
Yeah, that would be obscenely expensive, also taxing to drive a 12K window.
I was thinking something along the lines of a 34" 21:9 ultrawide, instead of a 32" 16:9.
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
…Sharpness is a proportional measure and resolution is an implementation detail.
Pixel density is a measure of sharpness which includes PPI as well as device pixel ratio (DPR). That’s objective fact.
Also you’re again benignly ignorant now CSS media queries and specs like src set are used by web apps in which 2x and so on are annotations to control high PPI assets from being rendered or not. They’re referring to device pixel ratio.
They conditionally control high PPI assets being served or not important for sharpness be achieved for raster images on high PPI devices while not overburdening in bandwidth low PPI devices
This is again objective fact.
Last edited:
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
To avoid app rejection, apps must support high-resolution displays; you cannot do that with raster images only supporting a DPR of 1.
That is explicitly what I’m referring to; vector images are resolution independent and a means to reliably have sharp vector images.
Not all images can be vector-based and accordingly the mandate exists so that mobile platforms with devices primarily high PPI are not inconvenienced by low res raster assets.
I did not say fixed regarding the Web; on the Web you can elect to have a Website full of blurry images if one can get away with it—or deliver a consistently oversized image that waste their end user’s bandwidth (unacceptable and flagged in search results that use performance metrics to lower the results of sites like this as it negatively impact NBU clients)
However to correct this you need assets fit in containers that enables sharpness that is of 2+ DPR quality.
The Web specs you mentioned as well as browser client hints enable Web developers to correct for this as well as JS APIs that explicitly return the user’s device pixel ratio and the image container’s width so that they can manipulate URLs for a image CDN like Imgix to provide true responsive images.
All in all you the use of 2 DPR quality raster images is needed to accommodate high PPi devices with the use of raster images which is what I’m explicitly referring to.
It’s only a good thing and long overdue an increasing amount of monitor sizes have high PPI options that nonetheless will indefinitely be much more expensive just like SSDs vs HDDs.
For the sake of eye health it’s long validated beneficial towards being always more ideal to seek out such monitors over what the average person has settled with so far primarily due to the lack of options and awareness
yes, that’s exactly what dpr and srcset do—they inform the browser which asset to pick based on device pixel ratio. but that doesn’t mean “2x requires 5k/6k displays” or that it’s a submission requirement anywhere. it’s just a way to serve appropriately sized raster images, balancing sharpness vs. bandwidth.
high ppi is about pixels per inch, not absolute resolution, and web/dev conventions have always been adaptive—@2x is a guideline, not a hard mandate.
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
I have been consistent and blunt to point out resolution is merely an implementation detail to reach a certain level of sharpness; I’ve mentioned resolution solely to meet a certain level of sharpness at specific panel sizes for monitors (at ergonomically sound distances)
For a monitor of size 27”, 5K is the minimum and 6K is the minimum for 32” monitors to reach a DPR of 2.
That is explicitly the reason why monitor manufacturers have utilized such resolutions at such specific panel sizes as a DPR of 2 is baseline high PPI
Last edited:
CWallace
macrumors G5
chars1ub0w
macrumors 6502a
Wow. So much for people wanting a 32" 6K display. It has been discontinued! Apple couldn't sell them (I guess). No more 32" from Apple.
turbineseaplane
macrumors Penryn
I think there’s demand for it but not at double or triple the price it should be
chars1ub0w
macrumors 6502a
Perhaps not stupid at all. Apple discontinued the 32" Pro XDR today. Still happy?
@chars1ub0w "Apple discontinued the 32" Pro XDR today."
If there is to be a direct replacement to the 32" Pro XDR Display it's most likely to be announced to users who buy it for what it is - an adjunct to a new Mac Pro, or Ultra Studio LLM cluster or whatever they will announce at WWDC.
If there is to be a direct replacement to the 32" Pro XDR Display it's most likely to be announced to users who buy it for what it is - an adjunct to a new Mac Pro, or Ultra Studio LLM cluster or whatever they will announce at WWDC.
lilkwarrior
macrumors 6502a
The XDR announced today is its little more advanced sibling before the updated one arrives
CWallace
macrumors G5
To my knowledge, no OEM is making a 32" 6K panel with miniLED (especially high-zone-count miniLED) and high refresh rates. So there is currently nothing for Apple to upgrade the Pro Display XDR with.
That being said, there have been rumors for years that LG and Apple have been working on a 32" 6K display with a high-zone-count miniLED backlight and high refresh rates, so maybe they will surprise us at WWDC when they (hopefully) announce the M5 Mac Studio.
chars1ub0w
macrumors 6502a
That reasoning doesn't compute.
If so, doesn't make sense then to discontinue it today. They should discontinue it only when WWDC comes around, and its replacement is announced.