Imagine even a Google pixel has a better display that your claimed "pro" phone 😂😂😂 how low apple has fallen
Apple updated the iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max with larger displays this year, increasing the size. The iPhone 16 Pro has a 6.3-inch display, up from 6.1 inches, while the iPhone 16 Pro Max has a 6.9-inch display, up from 6.7 inches.
According to Apple, the iPhone 16 Pro models now have the thinnest borders on any Apple product, thanks to a reduction in bezels. Some of the increase in display size comes from the bezels, but the iPhone 16 Pro models are a little taller and a tiny bit wider than their predecessors.
Though the size has increased, there are actually few other changes to the display technology. Apple is still using its Super Retina XDR Display with ProMotion for the Pro models, and the brightness and peak brightness haven't changed. All models have 1000 nits max brightness, 1600 nits peak HDR brightness, and 2000 nits peak outdoor brightness.
- iPhone 16 Pro Max - 6.42 inches tall, 3.06 inches wide, 8.25mm thick, 227 grams.
- iPhone 15 Pro Max - 6.29 inches tall, 3.02 inches wide, 8.25mm thick, 221 grams.
- iPhone 16 Pro - 5.89 inches tall, 2.81 inches wide, 8.5mm thick, 199 grams.
- iPhone 16 Pro - 5.77 inches tall, 2.78 inches wide, 8.5mm thick, 187 grams.
What is new is a 1 nit minimum brightness. Apple added this to the Apple Watch too, and said on that device that it would allow for a more frequently updated always-on display with a second hand. Some of that same benefit may be available on the iPhone, and it may be one of the reasons why Apple was able to increase battery life.
- iPhone 16 Pro - 2622x1206 resolution at 460 ppi
- iPhone 15 Pro - 2556x1179 resolution at 460 ppi
- iPhone 16 Pro Max - 2868x1220 resolution at 460 ppi
- iPhone 15 Pro Max - 2796x1290 resolution at 460 ppi
While the iPhone 16 display also supports 1 nit minimum brightness, it does not have an always-on display or support for ProMotion.
Both models also have a new second-generation Ceramic Shield coating that Apple says is 50% tougher than the prior-generation Ceramic Shield coating used in the iPhone 15 models.
Article Link: What's New With the iPhone 16 Displays
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.
What's New With the iPhone 16 Displays
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Too bad this color accuracy doesn't apply to anything even remotely connected with the iPhone camera system. Having to take a RAW photo with a color calibration card, then do a good deal of manual software adjustments, to even get close to accurate is a pain the a**.
Last edited:
I will continue dreaming of the day Apple announces a smaller phone again. Bring back the iPhone X size and focus on reducing weight instead of increasing it. I already feel like the 15 Pro is a chonk.
Completely untrue. It is entirely necessary.
I remember thinking why was Apple so proud about the second hand on always on screen. Don’t they have better things to talk about?
I never managed to scratch my 14 or 15, though my wife has a nasty scratch on her 15. I'm extremely careful with mine. She is not. I think in the future I will put screen protectors on hers as she will probably not even notice or care. You should probably do the same if your like to toss your phone into bags of nails.
The people who buy non-Pro don't even know what refresh rate is, nor care. But it's totally fair to say that after existing for so long already, and for $800+, they should have gotten ProMotion by now.
It's fine either way and is neither necessary nor unnecessary... It's just a design choice.
That's a bit condescending..I know plenty of people who buy the non-Pro and know exactly what the specs are, including refresh rate. I might be one of them; the 16 is a lot more appealing than the 16 Pro this year.
Last edited:
This article states:
I’d rather have, in portrait orientation, a wider screen than a taller one so the aspect ratio better matches the video and photo content I view most often.
I know it’s a small difference and most people won’t notice unless comparing the two devices side by side. But for me, the extra height is wasted, and it makes the device, already bulky in the 15PM, a bit bulkier.
- iPhone 16 Pro Max - 2868x1220 resolution at 460 ppi
- iPhone 15 Pro Max - 2796x1290 resolution at 460 ppi
I’d rather have, in portrait orientation, a wider screen than a taller one so the aspect ratio better matches the video and photo content I view most often.
I know it’s a small difference and most people won’t notice unless comparing the two devices side by side. But for me, the extra height is wasted, and it makes the device, already bulky in the 15PM, a bit bulkier.
Sometimes I wonder. Should I just get an iPad m4 pro with its lovely oled and keep my iPhone 14PM instead of upgrading to the 16PM. I did try something similar a few years ago. It didn’t work out for me that well and got rid of the iPad. Other wise on paper it makes better sense .
I've bought and sold six iPads (four regular and two mini) since they were released. I keep trying, but can never find a use for them and they end up collecting dust.
Somewhat agree. At the time Huawei was about to sell devices via the main USA carriers and it got removed, I’m sure Samsung especially had a massive sigh of relief. Since Huawei makes really good Android hardware at a fair price.
Me personally, I’m praying to the OLED gods for a relatively good panel this year. Can’t stand green / pink uneven panels. Fingers crossed.
Yeah what is with that ? I did it twice . I was really hoping that my go to device instead of the iPhone would be the iPad at home. Still couldn’t adapt I just couldn’t. I wish I could have.
Last edited:
- iPhone 16 Pro Max - 6.42 inches tall, 3.06 inches wide, 8.25mm thick, 227 grams.
- iPhone 15 Pro Max - 6.29 inches tall, 3.02 inches wide, 8.25mm thick, 221 grams.
- iPhone 16 Pro - 5.89 inches tall, 2.81 inches wide, 8.5mm thick, 199 grams.
- iPhone 16 Pro - 5.77 inches tall, 2.78 inches wide, 8.5mm thick, 187 grams.
While I realize that this is an international publication, I'm failing to grasp the rationale for the mix of metric and imperial units.
Why not be consistent, and offer the equivalents in parentheses?
This. A $300 samsung has 120hz display and a 2 day battery life. Just so bad.
What's wrong with the dimensions in this article? 2 axis given in Imperial, 1 axis in metric and also the weight in metric?!
I think this rather hilarious and people argue every single year about specifications when majority of consumers either don't know about these differences or nor care. I can tell you that about only 1% or less know about the refresh rate and never had I had a conversation about this with my friends.
And Apple knows this. Changing to 120hz for non-pro Iphone does not move their revenue because if it did, they would do it. It's just business. Samsung and other companies are trying to differentiate their product by providing features at lower prices because every android phone has reached some standard level. Apple's data probably shows that people who are leaving iOS for Android is not related to refresh rates because if it did, you would see a more consorted effort from apple to add this as standard.
Majority of consumers care about two things: Camera and battery.
And Apple knows this. Changing to 120hz for non-pro Iphone does not move their revenue because if it did, they would do it. It's just business. Samsung and other companies are trying to differentiate their product by providing features at lower prices because every android phone has reached some standard level. Apple's data probably shows that people who are leaving iOS for Android is not related to refresh rates because if it did, you would see a more consorted effort from apple to add this as standard.
Majority of consumers care about two things: Camera and battery.
